Talk:Dobova–Ljubljana Railway

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ljubljana-Zagreb railway → Ljubljana–Zagreb Railway – Per User talk:Doremo: Correct punctuation and capitalisation. Eleassar my talk 06:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support for reasons and discussion mentioned by Eleassar. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Why are you putting this through this procedure? Why would this be a priori contentious? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but there is no established way of naming rail lines currently, so perhaps someone else will see it as contentious. It's better to ask first rather than simply move the article and then have to move it back. --Eleassar my talk 19:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Move (minor correction)
I've moved the page to Ljubljana–Zagreb Railway (with an en dash instead of a hyphen) as in the proposal. Doremo (talk) 17:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Original research
Hi all! Scope of this article appears to have been selected completely arbitrarily. One cannot but wonder why choose Ljubljana and Zagreb as endpoints - the tracks extend to Istanbul and Paris after all. :) The Ljubljana-Zagreb railway is not classified as such in any piece of national or European legislation, it is not operated as a unit nor was it built as a single railway line (portion east of Zidani Most was built as a separate line after the remainder was built as a part of a completely different line). I assume the portion in Slovenia is currently classified as one or more railways (don't know for sure), while the Savski Marof-Zagreb section is classified as the M101 railway in Croatia. In order to avoid WP:OR it is necessary to split the article into two or more covering individual railway lines existing in the real world.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In Slovenia, it is usually named Dobova–Ljubljana Railway (or officially d. m.–Dobova–Ljubljana, the abbreviation d. m. refering to 'državna meja', state border), though the name Ljubljana–Zagreb Railway does appear in the Official Gazette. In any case, the naming convention should be preserved. --Eleassar my talk 11:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What do you refer to as the "naming convention"? Is there a wiki policy (convention) requiring the railway names to be presented in the "X-Y railway" format? I had a look at the WikiProject Trains/Manual of style and found no preference there between X-Y railway and eg. M101 railway there, so I assume WP:COMMONNAME applies and it seems to me like a split of this article is needed. If "X-Y railway" format is chosen, then I suppose the way to refer to the line(s) in this case are the Ljubljana–Dobova railway and Savski Marof–Zagreb railway. The latter conforms to the slo-zeleznice.si document linked above and corresponding Croatian legislation while avoiding arbitrarily defining scope of each article (and thus OR).--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The convention (agreement) not in the sense of an official wikipolicy, but the one that we've arrived at through the discussion at Doremo's talk page and here (see above). --Eleassar my talk 09:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A link to the discussion mentioned above (now archived). Doremo (talk) 09:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. While fully respecting the naming convention adopted for Slovene railways, I'd like to propose a change of this article title to Ljubljana-Dobova Railway and a corresponding shrinking of the article's scope. A somewhat different naming convention has been hammered out for the Croatian railways using official designations of individual railways. For instance the Savski Marof-Zagreb railway is now covered by the M101 railway (Croatia) article. The proposed change, if adopted, would negate any arbitrariness in terms of article scope (and thus any hint of OR in that respect) because the scope would then correspond to "d. m.–Dobova–Ljubljana" specified by the document linked above. Thoughts?--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tomobe03 for starting the M101 railway (Croatia) article! As we have naming conventions for both the croatian and the slovenian part now it will most likely truely be the best to move and shrink this article into Dobova–Ljubljana Railway. Different than Zagreb–Belgrade railway we can't even turn it into a historical article (in order to fill Category:Railway lines in Yugoslavia), as far as I know JŽ had classified this line only as part of line 49 Zagreb GK–Ljubljana–Sežana meja/DG (at least as of May, 1 1977). Regards, Kleeblatt187 (talk) 22:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I fully support shrinking this article to Dobova–Ljubljana Railway, per the above arguments. --Eleassar my talk 07:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)