Talk:Metronet (British infrastructure company)

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London 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.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Rapid transit / in UK Mid‑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

Mid

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

On 17 November 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Metronet (British infrastructure company) to Metronet (British infrastructure company). The result of the discussion was moved.

talk page begun[edit]

hi folks - thought i'd make a note here of my edit - the article smelt a little of company PR - this company is not the shining light of PPP - indeed seems to have performed rather poorly according to independant analysis - so I removed a little material, and added the recent criticism.... there you go! Petesmiles 09:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The company is now out of administration as of May 27th 00:01 hrs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.41.100 (talk) 09:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Metronet URLs don't work anymore and should be removed. Paulikxp (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Metronet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100818012053/http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2258786/dot-should-watched-metronet to http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2258786/dot-should-watched-metronet

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:16, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 November 2022[edit]

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. Also moved Metronet (disambiguation) to Metronet. (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 10:34, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

– The British Metronet railway infrastructure company went into administration in 2007 & has been defunct since 2009, after running out of money. London Underground no longer uses 'infrastructure companies' to maintain its trains and tracks, the other company Tube Lines was subsumed into Transport for London in 2010. The Metronet article is stable, and I cannot foresee any major changes happening in future to that article.

I therefore propose a name swap with Metronet (Western Australian government agency). Founded in 2017, Metronet (WA gov agency) is building out Perth's rail network. As of 2022, I considered that it's more relevant than the British Metronet article name wise. However, they're roughly equal on page views. Thoughts? Turini2 (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also welcome any proposed names that are better than Metronet (British infrastructure company) - it's barely 8am here and I'm not firing on all cylinders today. Turini2 (talk) 08:07, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support moving Metronet to Metronet (British infrastructure company). Oppose moving Metronet (Western Australian government agency) to Metronet. The two pages receive a similar amount of pageviews and I don't think either is the primary topic. I think that Metronet should be a disambiguation page. That being said, Metronet (Western Australian government agency) needs a better name, as it is not actually an agency as shown here. Something such as Metronet (Perth) might be best. Steelkamp (talk) 09:47, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the London infrastructure company is not primary topic, but the Australian organisation isn't either. Disambiguators should not be longer than needed to uniquely identify each topic, so move to Metronet (London) and Metronet (Australia) respectively. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support moving out, but oppose moving Australian company in to base position - the two existing articles are second and third in importance now compared to Metronet (fibre optics), which doesn't have a standalone article but per WP:MENTION is mentioned in articles linked on Metronet (disambiguation), which should be at base position. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi I can't see any of the mentions regarding Metronet (the fibre optic one) that you refer to? Can you provide an example? Turini2 (talk) 10:51, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support 1st, oppose 2nd, the British one has 545 views but the Australian one has 480[[1]] so there is likely no primary topic but its unlikely to be the Australian one with less views so the DAB should go to the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support 1st, agree with others that the Metronet disambiguation page is best. Looks like METRONET in Perth is an office that works across multiple government agencies "METRONET Office brings together a team from across WA Government", so perhaps Metronet (Western Australia) or Metronet (Western Australian transport project)? Turini2 (talk) 10:57, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think simplest is best. Metronet (Perth) a la East West Link (Melbourne). Steelkamp (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support moving Metronet to Metronet (British company). Oppose 2nd, but move to Metronet (Australian agency). -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dab it! (Support 1st, oppose 2nd). No clear primary for English speakers/readers. Steel1943 (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2022 (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.