Talk:Ararat railway line

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sennecaster (Chat) 00:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Serviceton railway line → Ararat railway line – Edited article a while ago to reflect that the Serviceton line hasn't existed since 1995, when it was truncated to Ararat; the section past Ararat through to Serviceton was converted to standard gauge in 1995 and connected to other lines to form today's Western standard gauge railway line. Current Ararat railway line page is a redirect to Ballarat V/Line rail service (which covers the Ballarat and Ararat passenger services running on the line). I requested a move back when I first edited the article, however the request was removed as it was never completed. Граймс (talk) 08:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 2pou (talk) 17:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 01:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Previous RM/TR comments removed when not completed in Special:Diff/1233382029:

• Serviceton railway line (currently a redirect to Ararat railway line) → Ararat railway line – Revamped the article as the line has not been known as the "Serviceton railway line" since 1995, when the line past Ararat was converted to standard gauge and reopened as part of the then-new Western standard gauge line. Граймс (talk) 14:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Looking at the official V/Line maps, I can't find evidence of individual V/Lines having official names, do you have sources for "Ararat railway line" being the WP:COMMONNAME? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  This article is about the physical rail line, not the V/Line service which runs on it. Both terminate at Ararat, since the rest of physical rail line was converted to standard gauge and connected to other lines to form the Western standard gauge railway line. As for V/Line, they treat their passenger service to Ararat as an extension of the Ballarat V/Line rail service (you can see that on the map you've linked, and the fact Ararat services share the Ballarat V/Line twitter account, or the fact vline.com.au only shows Ararat services after you click Ballarat, etc), so it's documented on that page instead. Граймс (talk) 11:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

• @Граймс: I have opened a full RM since the technical request languished last time. It will get more eyes here, and if it goes unopposed, it can be completed per WP:RMNOMIN. -2pou (talk) 17:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you! Граймс (talk) 03:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I suppose it can be moved now? It's been over a week :) Граймс (talk) 07:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Oppose - using this same arrgument...

  • South Gippsland railway line should then change to Cranbourne line
  • Whittlesea railway line should then change to Mernda line
  • Robinvale railway line to rename as "Manangatang railway line"
  • Kulwin railway line to rename as "Sea Lake railway line"

  Possibly also under the same argument...

  • Outer Circle railway line would then become Alamein line
  • Port Melbourne railway line would then become Melbourne tram route 109
  • St Kilda railway line would then become Melbourne tram route 96

  Those are just in Victoria. Are we then to change the article names anytime a section of a line is booked in or out of service? What about the Balranald railway line, should it be changed to "Moulamein railway line" (the limit from 1986 to 2006)? or "Caldwell railway line" (the limit from 2006 to 2008)? and if it reopens in the future only to Wakool do we change the name again? -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Two wrongs don't make a right. Some other articles having incorrect titles doesn't mean this one should remain incorrect too. A lot of your arguments are just strawmans, including cherry-picked articles that describe historic or partly-dismantled railway lines; and irrelevant whataboutisms.

  I want this article renamed because of WP:COMMONNAME - there is no official or otherwise reliable source that still calls this line the "Serviceton line". The closest thing I can find is the "Serviceton corridor", which is what the Australian Rail Track Corporation website uses in reference to the Western standard gauge line ([1]), because of the fact that, in 1995, the "Serviceton" line past Ararat was converted to standard gauge and joined with other lines to become the Western standard gauge line - this historic fact is documented on both articles. The broad gauge track, the entire length of which is still in use today, ends at Ararat; and the standard-gauge track past Ararat, the entire length of which is also still in use today, and was connected with other lines to run through to Geelong and Melbourne, is called the Western standard gauge line.

  So, TL;DR, With all the sources I can find, the consensus is clear - there is no such thing as the "Serviceton line", but there is the Ararat line; and there is the Western standard gauge line. Per WP:COMMONNAME, the article should be renamed to "Ararat railway line". It's in the same spirit as the naming of the Warrnambool railway line (formerly Port Fairy, actually ends at Dennington) and Mildura railway line (actually ends at Yelta) articles. It's all about the WP:COMMONNAME. Граймс (talk) 01:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  there is no official or otherwise reliable source that still calls this line the "Serviceton line" - That is because, as the Serviceton BG line is closed it's not referenced as often. As with all closed lines or closed sections of lines they tend to not get talked about or mentioned by things that fall under WP:RS.

  the Australian Rail Track Corporation website uses in reference to the Western standard gauge line - The Australian Rail Track Corporation only refer to the rail "corridor" as the Western standard gauge line because they are responsible for the SG track that was laid in 1995, in comparison, the Servicton line was built in 1887. "Western standard gauge line" is the common name for the "Western standard gauge rail corridor", being made up of several smaller lines.

  The other issue that is causing confusion here is "Ararat (physical) line" and "Ararat service". Most mentions of the "Ararat line" are actually referring to the "Ararat V/Line rail service". In Victoria, we tend to call the services "such-and-such Line" as in Craigieburn line and Sunbury line, there is no such "railway lines" as those. This is untrue for 7 (Belgrave, Flemington Racecourse, Glen Waverley, Hurstbridge, Sandringham, Upfield, Williamstown lines) which are both a service and physical line, then there's Frankston/Stony Point make things a bit more confusing by both technically being on the "Stony Point (physical) line" (although I am happy to keep treating both lines as a line & service to help clear confusion). The V/Line network is the same (there is no "Bendigo (physical) line" but there is is a "Bendigo line" (service), with Albury (the original BG line) being the only one that was both a service and physical line.

  Sure, if you want to use you argument of WP:COMMONNAME to rename Serviceton to Ararat, then please change "Piangil railway line" to "Swan Hill railway line" and "Tocumwal railway line" to "Shepparton railway line" as these are the more common names known by the general public that use these lines. Ask anyone on these "lines" what it is called and they will give a common name of where the service terminates. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  It's due to these confusing names there was a draft of an updated naming convention for Australian transport covering names of lines, services and stations in the works. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  "That is because, as the Serviceton BG line is closed it's not referenced as often. As with all closed lines or closed sections of lines they tend to not get talked about or mentioned by things that fall under WP:RS." - The problem right here is that the "Serviceton BG line" is not "closed", it literally doesn't exist anymore, because it was converted to standard gauge, and is now called the Western standard gauge line.

  "The other issue that is causing confusion here is "Ararat (physical) line" and "Ararat service". Most mentions of the "Ararat line" are actually referring to the "Ararat V/Line rail service"." - Not necessarily. Here, this article refers to the physical track, which ends at Ararat.

  "Sure, if you want to use you argument of WP:COMMONNAME to rename Serviceton to Ararat, then please change "Piangil railway line" to "Swan Hill railway line" and "Tocumwal railway line" to "Shepparton railway line" as these are the more common names known by the general public that use these lines." - This is a strawman. The difference between Pinagil and Tocumwal, and Serviceton, is the former two actually still exist all the way to Piangil and Tocumwal, they're just not used for passenger services past Swan Hill and Shepparton respectively, but they are used for freight services beyond the passenger termini. The general public is not relevant here. All rail infrastructure sources still call them Piangil and Tocumwal, so yes, the common names of those lines are in fact still Piangil and Tocumwal. The "Serviceton line" on the other hand was truncated back to Ararat three decades ago, with the line past Ararat converted to standard gauge and integrated with other lines to become the Western standard gauge line. No infrastructure source calls the Ararat line the “Serviceton line”. That is my entire argument. Граймс (talk) 06:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  @Граймс you have to be careful when doing a Google search to see which is the common name. All references to "Ararat Line" on V/Line, PTV, and even Big Build websites use "Ararat Line" when referring to the service (evidenced by them also saying "Bendigo Line" etc) most of their pages don't specifically mention any physical track names. If you want to use this as the reason for renaming, then it can be justifiable to also change the other lines to their common name of the end passenger stations (Swan Hill, Echuca, Shepparton, etc) and even split them at places like Bendigo and Ballarat, because that is how these official companies refer to their "SERVICES" or "Lines".

  One of the only real mentions of the physical line itself comes from the fan site VicSig who call it Ararat (although they have a habit of split off closed line sections and not every line is listed on their site). -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 08:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Also, by using your own arguments, you will need to change "Mildura railway line" to "Dunolly railway line" and "Merbein railway line"...

  ... fact that, in 2017, the" Mildura "line past Dunolly was converted to standard gauge ... The broad gauge track, the entire length of which is still in use today, ends at Dunolly; and the standard-gauge track past Dunolly, the entire length of which is also still in use today, and was connected with other lines to run through to Avoca and Ararat ... there is no such thing as the" Mildura "line", but there is the Dunolly line (BG); and there is the Merbein line (SG).

  ...the"Mildura BG line" is not "closed", it literally doesn't exist anymore, because it was converted to standard gauge...

  ..this article refers to the physical track, which ends at Dunolly.

  ...The "Mildura line" on the other hand was truncated back to Dunolly 7 years ago, with the line past Dunolly converted to standard gauge and integrated with other lines to become part of the Murray Basin Rail Project. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 08:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  The difference is that “Mildura line” is still the common name for that line. Let’s stop the cherry-picking and strawman-ing and talking about other lines. The one and only thing I’m arguing about is the common name . Граймс (talk) 22:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Are you able to show a WP:RS that supports this as the common name (and not a reference to the service with the same name)?

  I am all for changing the article names to their common name. I would then also suggest all the "xxx V/Line rail service" ( Ballarat V/Line rail service) also be renamed to their common names as "xxx line" (eg Ballarat line) as is the way Metro Trains Melbourne services are named (eg its Sunbury line and not "Sunbury Metro Trains rail service"). -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  This document discussing temporary speed restrictions refers to it as the "Ballarat - Ararat line" (page 8) [2] - perhaps to avoid confusion with the standard gauge Maryborough - Ararat line

  This Victorian Government Department of Planning page calls it the "Melbourne-Ararat line" [3]

  A speech in 1998 to the House of Representatives concerning rail freight in Victoria calls it the "Melbourne to Ararat track" [4]

  But really, this is all beside the point. My main point this entire time has been more about the fact there is nowhere that calls it the "Serviceton line" because, again, the broad gauge line was truncated to Ararat 3 decades ago, and the standard gauge part is now called the Western standard gauge line. The only current reference to Serviceton I can dig around and find is, again, the Australian Rail Track Corporation calling the Western standard gauge line the "Serviceton corridor".[5]

  The current broad gauge line is called the Ararat line, the consensus is more than clear.

  Why are you talking about renaming other articles again? Whilst I do agree we should simplify the V/Line article service names, can I be any more clear that I am not interested in discussing other articles in this move request? If you want to discuss other articles, please go to those articles' talk pages instead of constantly trying to derail this conversation here.

  . Граймс (talk) 07:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  1. This document discussing temporary speed restrictions refers to it as the "Ballarat - Ararat line" (page 8)... - Also on page 10 it mentions a "Dunolly-Mildura Line" (see above mentioned: ...by using your own arguments, you will need to change "Mildura railway line" to "Dunolly railway line" and "Merbein railway line"...). It also lists various parts of lines (for example on on pages 8, 10, & 11; "Sunbury–Bendigo Line", "Bendigo-Echuca Line", and "Echuca-Deniliquin Line" which most other sources just call the "Deniliquin Line") - result not valid argument, is is just listing line "segments".
  2. Victorian Government Department of Planning page... - A brief search on the sites other EES projects and referrals reveals Shepparton line upgrade - result not valid argument, is is just listing passenger "services" as lines.
  3. Speech in 1998 to the House of Representatives... - Hard to tell - result potentially valid argument.

  I had bought up the renaming because, if renaming this under WP:COMMONNAME to "Ararat railway line", and assuming WP:COMMONNAME is ALWAYS the best practice, and the "Ararat V/Line rail service" is also changed be "Ararat line" (although currently merged into Ballarat V/Line rail service), this has a potential to cause some confusion, as there is with Warrnambool and Gippsland both having a "xx railway line" and "xx line". -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 13:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  1. Indeed, but did you notice there is no "Ararat-Serviceton" section? In fact the only mention of Serviceton at all in that document is in reference to a section of ARTC's Western standard gauge line, because, as I have been arguing the entire time, it is treated as a completely separate line from the broad gauge Ararat line. The Mildura article is not relevant here because "Midura line" is still the common name, as already discussed before.
  2. That's not the "gotcha" you think it is. That website lists other projects because it's the Victorian Government Planning website, so of course just about all projects in the state are listed there. The Beaufort Bypass project page is not talking about the V/Line passenger service, it's very clearly talking about a grade separation of the road from the rail tracks. Read the individual page instead of immediately pointing at other pages and jumping to conclusions.

  Once again you seem to have missed the entire point. It's not so much about "everywhere else calls it Ararat" as much as it is about "nowhere else calls it Serviceton", because the standard gauge track is now called the "Western standard gauge line", and it is treated as a completely separate line by all sources. "Serviceton line" is a historic name that does not reflect the reality of the line today, just like "Orbost" for the Gippsland line or "Port Fairy" for the Warrnambool line. This discussion with you is becoming pointless because it keeps going in circles and on tangents. Let's stick to the facts.

  If two articles have similar titles, a hatnote is placed at the top of the article stating "This article is about (thing), see (other article) for the (other thing)". But once again, please discuss other articles' titles on their own talk pages, not here. Граймс (talk) 00:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  1a. True, there is no mention of the Ararat-Serviceton section, but then there is also no mention of any closed sections. This would then indicate "South Gippsland railway line" should be renamed "Cranbourne line".

  1b. the only mention of Serviceton at all in that document is in reference to a section of ARTC's Western standard gauge line, that is because they are the operator of that section not V/Line (for the same reason Melbourne-Sunbury and Sunbury-Bendigo "lines" are listed separately under Metro and V/Line respectively)

  1c. "Mildura line" - the current line CAN NOT run via the Melbourne-Ballarat-Maryborough section. The current Mildura can only run to Melbourne via Maryborough-Ararat and the Western SG. This is fairly on par with this Servicton/Ararat discussion.

  2. Shepparton reasons for decision pdf clearly states in the first sentence of the description of the project ... upgrade the existing Shepperton railway line..., yet "Tocumwal railway line" is the correct common name of this line. I am sure if anyone was to check all other "lines" on this website then there will be more examples from the Victorian Government Planning of mix-ups between service and physical line. I think we will have to disagree on if this one counts.

  I merely want to present the correct evidence as to what the common name actually is. We have both presented our cases both for and against, and both have included examples of other page names that match our arguments. It appears that this will have to be deferred to the Wikipedia Gods for the final decision. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 02:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

• Support: @Граймс rightly states that renaming every truncated or altered railway line isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. Each line, including the Serviceton/Ararat line, should be considered separately based on the common and current name in reliable sources. It might technically be a misnomer, but we should go by the WP:COMMONNAME.

A while ago, @ThylacineHunter opened an RM from Gippsland railway line to Orbost railway line, which was a proposed move to a historical name which had consensus to not move (see Talk:Gippsland railway line#Requested move 11 July 2023). Another example in Australia of which is technically a misnomer (just that the name is technically incorrect from a physical line point of view) is the Adelaide–Darwin railway line, which if we were being very technical, would be called the Tarcoola–Darwin railway line as it actually doesn't go anywhere near Adelaide; Tarcoola is a junction connecting that line to the state capital of Adelaide via a completely separate line. An RM was opened a while ago proposing the Tarcoola name which closed with no consensus to move (see Talk:Adelaide–Darwin railway line#Requested move 9 August 2022). Fork99 (talk) 21:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply