The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 22:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Seymour railway line, Victoria → Seymour V/Line rail service — 1. dab Victoria removed per nearly unanimous decision at Talk:Ballarat to Daylesford railway line; 2. V/Line as article about service not the line which is longer and has an article); 3. rail to be included in titles as V/Line also operate coach services Crusoe8181 ( talk) 10:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC) reply

• Warrnambool railway line → Warrnambool V/Line rail service
• Traralgon railway line → Traralgon V/Line rail service
• Geelong railway line, Victoria → Geelong V/Line rail service
• Bairnsdale railway line → Bairnsdale V/Line rail service
• Ballarat railway line, Victoria → Ballarat V/Line rail service
• Ararat railway line, Victoria → Ararat V/Line rail service
• Albury-Wodonga railway line, Victoria → Albury-Wodonga V/Line rail service
• Support all Much less confusing and much more accurate. Allows for clear separation between the physical lines and the services operating on the line. Great idea and I hope the same concept is adopted elsewhere in Australia. -- Mattinbgn ( talk) 10:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC) reply
• Support makes more sense to have the service article under the name of the service, especially as the actual lines are under a seperate article title anyway. Also as the lines can/do have multiple services operating on them. Gnan garra 11:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC) reply
• Support all, articles are about services, not about lines.-- Grahame ( talk) 00:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.