Talk:List of Melbourne railway stations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
Archive 1


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains.
See also: WikiProject to do list and the Trains Portal
List Quality: list-Class. (assessment comments)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rapid transit.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains.
See also: WikiProject to do list and the Trains Portal
List Quality: list-Class. (assessment comments)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Stations.
Flag
Portal
 List of Melbourne railway stations is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
List Quality: rating not applicable
NA Importance: rating not applicable
This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne.

Contents

See List of Melbourne railway stations/temp for an archived graphic redesign of this list.

[edit] Craigieburn line

Is the Craigieburn 'stub' really a line? I see it as more of a subsection of the Albury-Wodonga/Shepparton regional lines, and not a line in itself - it does only have one station. Of course, once the Broad line gets extended, it will be the Craigieburn line, but as it stands, is there anything to write about it that would merit an article? Same goes for the Sunbury and Melton lines, although they have a longer greater-metro service, so they could have articles, but aren't they really subsections of their respective regional lines? T.P.K. 14:13, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Somewhat - but they are part of the MetCard system. Like the Stony Point line - which is a better example because it's not a stub. Ambi 21:54, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Table format

It looks like the new colourful format isn't going to work. If you look at the temp page, it's already 31 kb, but only less than half of the lines have been tabulated. The wikicode is just going to be far too long, so I'm going to have to drop it, unless there's some way of significantly reducing the table code, however, I don't see how that could be possible. Nice idea while it lasted. T.P.K. 07:56, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] City Loop - 'premium'?

Does anyone know if the Flagstaff, Melborune Central and Parliament stations are 'premium' stations? The page doesn't list them as premium, though SSS and FSS were both listed as non-premium which I corrected.

I'm not sure whether they're officially so, but they have all the hallmarks of one - so I'd imagine they would be. Ambi 05:40, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
They all are, and there was/is a notice above them to that end. T.P.K. 06:07, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Zone colouring

What does everyone think of this?

Zone 1 & City Saver area
Zone 1
Zones 1 & 2 overlap
Zone 2
Zones 2 & 3 overlap
Zone 3

I'm using <font color=xx></font> tags, though I think style tags are more efficient but don't know how to use them. Either way. Also, I've used Goldenrod instead of Yellow for ease of reading.

T.PK 10:55, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I like it. Somebody in the WWW 04:20, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've added this to Pakenham railway line, Melbourne as an experiment to see what others think. I've also noticed that a lot of the Zone information is inaccurate - I'mc correcting that as I go (esp. relating to overlaps). Somebody in the WWW 05:41, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
A minor issue: I think having just 2 colours looks better, i.e. Zones 2 & 3 overlap instead of Zones 2 and 3 overlap, just so there is less visual clutter, and so the second zone's colour is easier to spot. T.PK 07:28, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
What do you think of how I've got it now? Somebody in the WWW 05:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Better, but I still think only 2 colours looks better, sorry :P T.PK 06:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Fine, have it your way. I'll just stay out of the stations for a while Somebody in the WWW 07:34, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm not trying to stop you from doing what you're doing, it's just my opinion on a (minor) matter. Don't take it the wrong way. T.PK 09:53, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I realize I'm stumbling on this an era late, so my apologies. I first ran across this coloured text system in Ashburton railway station, Melbourne. There, the application of goldenrod is in normal Roman type, as opposed to bold, and I find the light colour a little difficult to distinguish. This is exacerbated by the fact that the coloured text dangles by itself at the end of the paragraph (at the window size I happen to be using), so it gets further lost in the space between paragraphs. Furthermore, at least to me, it seems that the use of red and blue text is somewhat confusing with the default link colours I'm using. By comparison, the Paris Métro articles use simple coloured images to identify rail lines. Perhaps such a system could work well here? ENeville 00:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree the goldenrod on the Ashburton article does sit alone and is alittle hard to read. Those little graphics do look good on the Paris metro articles, a similar graphic could work on these articles, plus it would make it easier to change if we need to. good idea though im not sure how much support it will get. --Dan027 11:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Using template would be less cumbersome than directly including tags and would make it easy to change/update the scheme later on. e.g. {{metlink-zone1}}, {{metlink-zone1&2}} etc. Pimlottc 01:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Destaffing

Does anyone know exactly when most of Melbourne's stations were destaffed? I'm assuming '90s, but I don't know exactly when they were destaffed. Somebody in the WWW 07:23, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Presumably during privatization, so mid-90s sounds right. But is it possible that some stations were never staffed? I know some newer ones, like Keilor Plains never were, but that station was built post-privatization anyway. Maybe some older ones, out in the boondocks, weren't staffed even when most others were? Will have to find out. T.PK 07:33, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Officer is another one that has never been staffed; no physical building (opened '75). I've asked on Railpage at [1] (scroll down), but replys are varied. I'd like to get (rough) destaffing dates for most stations in Melbourne to add to the Wiki. Somebody in the WWW 08:14, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Reference Quality

I can't find any example station entries that give an idea of the kind of level of detail, or even layout, expected from a station entry. I've had a stab at a decent article at Essendon railway station, Melbourne, but it leaves a lot to be desired. Can anyone point me at an appropriate quality article, or can we work together to bring the Essendon railway station, Melbourne article to a point where it can be held to be the 'gold standard'? Josh Parris ✉ 03:04, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ashburton railway station, Melbourne is one of our better examples at the moment. We've still got quite a way to go. Ambi 14:02, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think that Essendon railway station, Melbourne has now surpassed Ashburton railway station, Melbourne in article quality, and I'm thinking I like the layout too. I'd like to start flushing the format throughout the network. Josh Parris ✉ 07:51, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See my comments on your talk page. Please don't spread that sectioning system - it looks awful, and makes the article flow terribly. Ambi 11:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I think it needs a map of some sort, showing the stations and railway lines visualy

I think it needs a map of some sort, showing the stations and railway lines visualy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adammw (talk • contribs)

Do we have anyone around who can make one of these? We can't use the official one due to copyright, so I wonder if we can find a map-making Wikipedian. Rebecca 01:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
are you after map similar to how the offical map depicts the lines(a straight line with stations dotted along it) or a more close to scale map with bends, bridges and other stuff included? --Dan027 10:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caulfield Group

Quick Question! Why does the caulfield group included the sandringham line which doesn't go through caulfield station? Shouldn't it be called the South Yarra Group then? What is the history behind this name? and should it be changed? 58.111.113.166 (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

The groups were devised in conjunction with the City Loop. There were the four groups we have today; and a fifth group with the Sandringham, St Kilda, and Port Melbourne lines that didn't go though the loop. St Kilda and Port Melbourne were closed in the 1980s, so Sandringham was tossed in with the Caulfield group. Wongm (talk) 14:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Short workings

Re this edit - Blackburn services are 'almost' another line during peak time as the all stoppers, with expresses going beyond. However, we can't go listing every stopping pattern or we will end up with 10 stations lists all exactly the same. So - how do we deal with them? In this page bold the names of the usual termini and make a note of them in a paragraph at the top, and do the same in the line article? Wongm (talk) 12:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a list of stations, not a list of rail services. That material can go in the line article, although it can't hurt to bold them here. Rebecca (talk) 07:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)