Talk:Holdfast Bay railway line

Railway?
Shouldnt the title of the article have some sign of what it is - per railway branches in other Australian cities? SatuSuro 06:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Birkalla
It seems the Plympton Coursing Track station was once called "Birkalla" (see this advt. for 'Mornington' subdivision ). Any idea when the name changed? Doug butler (talk) 07:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Terrace – Glenelg railway line. 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/20110706122737/http://webcat.wtcc.sa.gov.au/hipres/images/lhimages/407-1.pdf to http://webcat.wtcc.sa.gov.au/hipres/images/lhimages/407-1.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Terrace – Glenelg railway line. 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/20071109060013/http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/personal_transport/bike_direct/bikemap8.pdf to http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/personal_transport/bike_direct/bikemap8.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 18 January 2018

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: MOVED (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

North Terrace – Glenelg railway line → Holdfast Bay railway line – See below – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 12:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

As evident from some of the many newspaper articles and referenced names of parliamentary bills of the time (see below), the names Holdfast Bay Railway (also the name of the original owners) and Holdfast Bay line appear to be the accepted WP:COMMONNAMES of the time for the railway, distinguishing it from the then-named Glenelg Railway (the present-day tram). Usage of the above names can also be found in one such article dated long after the line's closure.


 * The Register, Jul 1883
 * The Express and Telegraph, 23 Dec 1879
 * The Register, Nov 1907
 * Daily Herald, 6 Feb 1914
 * The Advertiser, 23 Mar 1914
 * The Journal, 6 Nov 1914
 * The Advertiser, 6 Jun 1929
 * The News, 13 Dec 1951

In addition, one of the heritage plaques located at the former Plympton station identifies the line as the Holdfast Bay railway line. The present article name appears to have been formed at-random using the two terminus locations, with no evident historical usage of such a name. The proposed name also follows the convention of railway lines named after their terminating locales or stations. – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 12:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree. You make a good case. Seems uncontroversial to me. Donama (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree. Good catch! The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree this looks like it should have been done years ago - the first reference used in the article has the title "The Holdfast Bay Railway". --Scott Davis Talk 06:22, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support since that seems to fit the Aussie convention and commonname. Dicklyon (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

A consolidated article about both Adelaide–Glenelg railways?
Dear people, I'd like to present a further view on the naming surrounding this article – without disagreeing with your decision to rename the article "the Holdfast Bay railway line", which made abundant sense.

My main thought, when I came across the article yesterday while researching the Glenelg tram's early days and predecessors, was: “What about the Adelaide, Glenelg, and Suburban Railway Company and the Glenelg Railway Company?" There is a fascinating story to be told about the two Adelaide–Glenelg railway lines, of which the Holdfast Bay railway line was the second venture, with their convoluted history:

1. the Adelaide, Glenelg, and Suburban Railway Company Limited, 1873 to 1882

2. the Holdfast Bay Railway Company Limited, 1880 to 1882

3. the Glenelg Railway Company Limited, resulting from the amalgamation of the two companies, 1882 to 1892

4. the South Australian Railways from 1899 to 1929 (I haven't yet resolved why the parliament decided to exercise the right to purchase the "South Terrace line" in 1892 but the transfer (this is tentative) apparently not occurring until 1899)

5. in the case of the "South Terrace line", the Municipal Tramways Trust from 1929.

The Holdfast Bay company was therefore involved for 5% of the 56-year timeline.

What I'd like to suggest is that a consolidated article dealing with (1) to (4) above be written (I'd be happy to do the first cut since I have some good refs and some beaut old photos) with the title "The Adelaide–Glenelg railways", and that the Holdfast Bay railway line title – plus titles for the companies (1) and (3) above – be a redirect to the consolidated article. "The Adelaide–Glenelg railways" follows the convention of railway lines named after their terminating locales or stations, which Nick mentioned.

One huge advantage of a consolidated article would be that aspects like the raw-capitalist competition between companies (1) and (2), and another, could be covered more simply, as would the arrangements of the amalgamated company (3), the oddities of the post-company machinations, and others. Essentially it makes for a simpler iteration of the subject to have start and end dates and tell everything in between, free of being convoluted.

I wouldn’t envisage changing anything in the present article other than shifting content around – except for the text about (5) being passed to the Glenelg tram article, with appropriate mention.

One reason for asking for your views now is that I'm well into writing about the Glenelg tram's early (post-1929) days and it would help if I knew the likely coverage of the description of its predecessors, ie just the Holdfast Bay Railway Company article or an article about both railways during the whole 56-year period.

Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 (talk) 10:38, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Not keen on this. Wikipedia generally has a separate article for every railway line, and mashing together two already-easily-confused railway lines in one article because of some overlapping ownership seems unhelpful to me. Not opposed to breaking out articles on the companies if there is sufficient content. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I welcome you wanting to contribute content which is lacking. I would suggest keeping the articles about each line, which primarily focus on the track, its history and route (infrastructure), with mentions of its operators. We already have articles about the Municipal Tramways Trust and South Australian Railways so it would be reasonable to create new article(s) about the other organisation(s) involved, and add any appropriate content to the existing organisation articles. There is also an overview Rail transport in South Australia article, which last time I looked was a dogs breakfast, but I didn't have the enthusiasm to sort it out. It does not seem to cover metropolitan trams either. I assume you are already familiar with the wider discussion about reorganising the Adelaide tram articles, since I think you contributed to it already. --Scott Davis Talk 14:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you both; I take your points. So I'll contribute to the Holdfast Bay line article in due course and for now I'll draft appropriate material about the "South Terrace line" under ownership of the other two companies, which I'll place before the "early MTT" material I've drafted for the Glenelg tram line article. I'll put a note on the Glenelg tram Talk page to that effect unless I hear from you in the next few days. Cheers, and thanks again. Simon.  SCHolar44 (talk) 08:16, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Upgrade to various Adelaide tramways articles
As forecast above last May, I've been working on some upgrades to articles about trams in Adelaide. As part of this I have finished researching the earlier history of the Glenelg / South Terrace line, and as a result have included several mentions of the Holdfast Bay line and a prominent link to the article. In the process I have come across some photos and references relating to the Holdfast Bay line, which I will add when the trams project has finished. In keeping with the advice given above I have also proposed the addition of "line" to the present "Glenelg tram" article title. I expect to upload the upgraded Glenelg line article into the Draftspace by the end of March. I'm not sure yet when I'll have the additions to the Holdfast Bay line article ready for comment but when the time comes I'll mention it here.

Just to keep you in the picture. :-) Details of the upgrades and two new articles are at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Adelaide. Comments welcome. SCHolar44 (talk) 00:08, 20 February 2019 (UTC)