Talk:Mernda line

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mernda line article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Mernda line has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 26, 2023. (Reviewed version).

Australia: Melbourne / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Mernda line 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Trains: Passenger trains Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

Transport Low‑importance

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 17 July 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Mernda railway line to Mernda line. The result of the discussion was moved.

Early text

I have some conflicting opening dates of this line - 1889 and 1891. Does anybody know the truth? Cnwb 22:37, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

According The Whittlesea Railway by Robert Aquilina, the Reservoir to Whittlesea section was opened on December 20, 1889. Lokicarbis 11:28, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Which is the branch?

Why is Epping considered to be a branch off the Hurstbridge line and not the other way around? • Le on 01:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps because Hurstbridge is the longer line? I would usually go for the branch being the later one to open, but in this case, the first sections of both lines opened on the same day, so the choice would be arbitrary. Philip J. Rayment 02:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Double track

The line is now double track to Epping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herestoree (talk • contribs) 23:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in South Morang railway line

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of South Morang railway line's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "railpage.com.au":

From Proposed Melbourne rail extensions: "Railpage Australia Forums - Discussion on the 1979 Melway street directory". Retrieved 2007-07-30.
From Victorian Goldfields Railway: http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11351359-s525.htm

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

with services beyond this point to Whittlesea discontinued, and the line closed.

However, services continued on the Whittlesea line by road bus. The bus remained a Vic Rail tendered (Rather than MMBT tendered) private service until bus and rail re-organisation many years later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.200.27.15 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 July 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Sourcing appears in support of the originally proposed move. (closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 ^(talk) 05:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mernda railway line → Mernda line – WP:COMMONNAME swap with redirect ThylacineHunter (talk) 07:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: redirects are ineligible to be current titles in move requests, and there is no need to list the redirect, Mernda line, to be swapped. A title swap will happen automatically if the Mernda railway line article is moved as proposed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 19:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No opinion on whether it should be moved, but it would be a good idea also to nominate similarly titled pages in Category:Railway lines in Melbourne for consistency. Also there is no need to separately list the redirect as if the move request is successful, it would automatically be swapped. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 08:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, convention for Australian railway line articles where both the physical railway line and the services that operate on it are covered in one article, is to use the Foo railway line format, with the service a redirect. Bagufleat (talk) 03:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mernda line, oppose Mernda line service as per WP:COMMONNAME. Mernda line is the common name, as shown by [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. Is "Mernda line service" a name that is used anywhere? Steelkamp (talk) 04:45, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mernda line/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Keresluna (talk · contribs) 18:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll review this article, although it might take me some time as I might be busy for the next few days. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 18:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna thank you for beginning to review the article! I am available to complete this during the week so I'm ready for the feedback. If I get a bit busy (with school or something else) I'll let you know. Currently there are 2 articles ahead of you in the queue for me to act on their feedback. This should be quick however, so I'll make my way to this article relatively soon. Recently, two of my articles that I've nominated have been invalidly quick-failed. I am ready and willing to act on all feedback, even if it is extensive. Thank you for taking the time to review the article. HoHo3143 (talk) 22:20, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna just wanted to provide you with an update regarding the placement of this article in the queue. This article is now second in the queue due to another article being promoted, so I'm ready to receive additional feedback. The user reviewed the article ahead in the queue is on holiday, so this article effectively takes priority for feedback. HoHo3143 (talk) 10:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna added comments for the two most recent points you made. HoHo3143 (talk) 08:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna acted on additional feedback. HoHo3143 (talk) 12:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna all changes should now have been implemented and the article should be ready to pass. Let me know if there are any more changes you need making. HoHo3143 (talk) 06:59, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	~~Until the comments are fixed.~~
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Check.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig didn't find anything.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Looks fine.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass.

Sourcing

Just a quick glance for now. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 18:27, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'The Epping line was electrified to Reservoir in 1921, with an AEC railmotor providing a shuttle service between Reservoir and the terminus at Whittlesea. Preston-Reservoir station was renamed Reservoir in 1909.' in the 20th century section is unsourced.
- Y
'The line to Epping itself was reopened and electrified in 1964, with the remaining line dismantled in the 1970s. However, the right-of-way beyond Epping was retained to allow future expansion of the rail corridor.' in the 20th century section is unsourced.
- Y
The list of the 'Major construction commenced in October 2010, with works including:' is largely unsourced.
- Y
'Prior to the lines official opening, a community open day was held to promote the new stations to the local residents.' in the Mernda extension section is unsourced.
- Y
'At the end of these works, the Mernda line will have 12 remaining crossings on the corridor that are not proposed for removal.' in the Future section is unsourced.
- Y
'From 2025, Keon Park station will be elevated as part of level crossing removal works.' in the Stations section is unsourced.
- Y
How is the chart in the Station section sourced? I don't see any source for the Terrain, Train Connections, and Other Connections column.
- Y Unfortunately its very hard to reference these three columns. For terrain, I just looked at photos of the stations and then assigned it a level. For train connections, I looked at the linked wikipedia page to see a summary and then verified it by looking at the PTV website. Finally, for other connections I also viewed the wikipedia page and then verified it by looking at the PTV website, associated coach maps, and the skybus website. On all other promoted GA articles, there hasn't been the need for any sourcing. If you firmly believe in sourcing being required, I am open for suggestions on how to implement it
  - It is fine then, as I'm not familiar with these articles. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 15:19, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Y thank you!
Same comment above for chart in the 'Operations' section.
- Another user created this table so I'll ask them for the source that they used and add it in.
Ref 64 needs to be properly formatted.
- Y fixed. info is hard to access due to the paywall
Random ref checks:
- 60: Y Checks out.
  - - Y acknowledged
- 29: Y
  - - Y acknowledged
- 63: Y
  - - Y acknowledged
- 8: Y
  - - Y acknowledged

Dead link: 1, 21

- Y done

Grammar

@HoHo3143: Sorry for taking so long to review the article. I will try to finish in a few days. Meanwhile, here are some grammar comments; feel free to reject them as you see fit. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 20:32, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keresluna thank you for this. Just to give you the heads up, I've got a busy few days coming up so I'll be getting to this towards the end of the week. Feel free to complete the review in the mean time and I'll get to it shortly. HoHo3143 (talk) 11:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will put it on hold for now, as I am done with the comments. The comments that needs to be addressed are the grammar and the dead link. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 14:51, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'with 24 hour service available' to 'with 24-hour service available'
- Y
'Mernda line run with a two three-car formations' to 'Mernda line run with two three-car formations'
- Y
'on the now closed Inner Circle line' to 'on the now-closed Inner Circle line'
- Y
'in addition to duplication of the line' to ' in addition to the duplication of the line'
- Y
'work on the four kilometre extension, in addition to design work' to 'work on the four-kilometre extension, in addition, to design work'
- Y
'on the new section of track' to 'on the new section of the track'
- Y
'statewide developers contribution fund. Since the 2017 acquisitions, there has been little planning' to 'statewide developers' contribution fund. Since the 2017 acquisitions, there have been little planning'
- Y
'Mernda line operates from approximately' to 'Mernda line operate from approximately'
- Y
'with 60 minute frequencies' to 'with 60-minute frequencies'
- Y
'throughout the duration of works for affected' to 'throughout the duration of work for affected'
- Y
'history have been government run: from' to 'history have been government-run: from'
- Y
'and ground level designs' to 'and ground-level designs'
- Y
'carriage and can accommodate of up to 432 seated passengers in each six car configuration' to 'carriage, and can accommodate up to 432 seated passengers in each six-car configuration'
- Y
'however, there are some stations that haven't been' to 'however, some stations haven't been'
- Y
'three position signalling which is widely used across the Melbourne train network. Three position' to 'three-position signalling which is widely used across the Melbourne train network. Three-position'
- Y

Sourcing

@ThylacineHunter could you please add references to the operators table? This has been mentioned as something needed in the GA review. HoHo3143 (talk) 08:49, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]