This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a redirector to Gippsland Railway, another page I have classified for deletion. The page it redirects to is confusing and is not in the same format as all the other "[line name] railway line, [Melbourne/Victoria]" pages. I vote it should be deleted. Somebody in the WWW 23:33, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Do H sets need to be referred to as operating on the line, as they are not usually scheduled and only run during shortages? Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 16:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Also another thing - a line table like the Bairnsdale line article has would be good :). I might work on that when it is not almost 3am. Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 16:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Would anybody oppose merging Traralgon railway line, Victoria with Bairnsdale railway line, Victoria, or both into the Orbost railway line, Victoria article? The one railway line doesn't need five articles (including the Pakenham and Dandenong triplification ones), and the Traralgon/Bairnsdale articles are just a basic list of stations which passenger services run to and some basic details. -- Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 09:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Seymour railway line, Victoria which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 10:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
It has been more than 10 years since this merger was last proposed. In the meantime, Ararat V/Line rail service has been successfully merged into [[Ballarat V/Line rail service, meaning that Bairnsdale and Warrnambool are the only two long-distance destinations with distinct articles from their "parent" line.
There is significant overlap between the two articles as it stands. In this particular case, there are regular services scheduled to terminate at the intermediate Sale, which is confusing in the current structure, and indicates that the decision to treat these as separate "services" is inappropriate original research.
In that spirit, what reliable sources we do have on this issue favour the "five line" approach. V/Line themselves describe patronage statistics in five lines only and incorporate long-distance services into their "parent" lines. See page 12. Similarly, the Victorian Auditor-General describes the network as being made up of five "corridors" with multiple destinations on each. See page 4.
In my view, merging these articles is a step towards adhering to the principle of least astonishment and making our articles on this topic as informative and navigable as possible. Triptothecottage ( talk) 09:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
It's probably worth noting that in the case of Geelong, Ballarat, and Bendigo, even these "line names" no longer the actual terminus of many commuter services – as they go beyond to Waurn Ponds, Wendouree, Eaglehawk and so on – lending weight to the argument that these major towns are conventional designations for the services rather than simply arbitrary. Triptothecottage ( talk) 04:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
This isn't an official merge proposal but i believe that there isn't much of a reason for the services and line article to remain as seperate article. I suggest putting the main content in this article at the services section of the railway line article. If there is a conseus to potentially move i will start an official merge discussion NotOrrio ( talk) 11:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a redirector to Gippsland Railway, another page I have classified for deletion. The page it redirects to is confusing and is not in the same format as all the other "[line name] railway line, [Melbourne/Victoria]" pages. I vote it should be deleted. Somebody in the WWW 23:33, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Do H sets need to be referred to as operating on the line, as they are not usually scheduled and only run during shortages? Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 16:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Also another thing - a line table like the Bairnsdale line article has would be good :). I might work on that when it is not almost 3am. Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 16:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Would anybody oppose merging Traralgon railway line, Victoria with Bairnsdale railway line, Victoria, or both into the Orbost railway line, Victoria article? The one railway line doesn't need five articles (including the Pakenham and Dandenong triplification ones), and the Traralgon/Bairnsdale articles are just a basic list of stations which passenger services run to and some basic details. -- Somebody in the WWW ( talk) 09:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Seymour railway line, Victoria which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 10:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
It has been more than 10 years since this merger was last proposed. In the meantime, Ararat V/Line rail service has been successfully merged into [[Ballarat V/Line rail service, meaning that Bairnsdale and Warrnambool are the only two long-distance destinations with distinct articles from their "parent" line.
There is significant overlap between the two articles as it stands. In this particular case, there are regular services scheduled to terminate at the intermediate Sale, which is confusing in the current structure, and indicates that the decision to treat these as separate "services" is inappropriate original research.
In that spirit, what reliable sources we do have on this issue favour the "five line" approach. V/Line themselves describe patronage statistics in five lines only and incorporate long-distance services into their "parent" lines. See page 12. Similarly, the Victorian Auditor-General describes the network as being made up of five "corridors" with multiple destinations on each. See page 4.
In my view, merging these articles is a step towards adhering to the principle of least astonishment and making our articles on this topic as informative and navigable as possible. Triptothecottage ( talk) 09:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
It's probably worth noting that in the case of Geelong, Ballarat, and Bendigo, even these "line names" no longer the actual terminus of many commuter services – as they go beyond to Waurn Ponds, Wendouree, Eaglehawk and so on – lending weight to the argument that these major towns are conventional designations for the services rather than simply arbitrary. Triptothecottage ( talk) 04:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
This isn't an official merge proposal but i believe that there isn't much of a reason for the services and line article to remain as seperate article. I suggest putting the main content in this article at the services section of the railway line article. If there is a conseus to potentially move i will start an official merge discussion NotOrrio ( talk) 11:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)