Talk:List of Metro Trains Melbourne railway stations

Craigieburn line
Is the Craigieburn 'stub' really a line? I see it as more of a subsection of the Albury-Wodonga/Shepparton regional lines, and not a line in itself - it does only have one station. Of course, once the Broad line gets extended, it will be the Craigieburn line, but as it stands, is there anything to write about it that would merit an article? Same goes for the Sunbury and Melton lines, although they have a longer greater-metro service, so they could have articles, but aren't they really subsections of their respective regional lines? T.P.K. 14:13, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Somewhat - but they are part of the MetCard system. Like the Stony Point line - which is a better example because it's not a stub. Ambi 21:54, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Table format
It looks like the new colourful format isn't going to work. If you look at the temp page, it's already 31 kb, but only less than half of the lines have been tabulated. The wikicode is just going to be far too long, so I'm going to have to drop it, unless there's some way of significantly reducing the table code, however, I don't see how that could be possible. Nice idea while it lasted. T.P.K. 07:56, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

City Loop - 'premium'?
Does anyone know if the Flagstaff, Melborune Central and Parliament stations are 'premium' stations? The page doesn't list them as premium, though SSS and FSS were both listed as non-premium which I corrected.
 * I'm not sure whether they're officially so, but they have all the hallmarks of one - so I'd imagine they would be. Ambi 05:40, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * They all are, and there was/is a notice above them to that end. T.P.K. 06:07, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Zone colouring
What does everyone think of this?


 *  Zone 1 & City Saver area 


 * Richmond (RMD)
 *  Zone 1 


 * South Yarra (SYR) - Sandringham line branches
 * Hawksburn (HKN)
 * Toorak (TOR)
 * Armadale (ARM) *
 * Malvern (MAL) *
 * Caulfield (CFD) - Pakenham line branches
 * Glenhuntly (GHY) *
 *  Zones 1 & 2 overlap 


 * Ormond (OMD) *
 * McKinnon (MCK)
 * Bentleigh (BEN)
 *  Zone 2 


 * Patterson (PAT)
 * Moorabbin (MRN)
 * Highett (HIG)
 * Cheltenham (CTM)
 * Mentone (MEN) *
 * Parkdale (PKD)
 * Mordialloc (MOR) - Shuttle service to Frankston station
 * Aspendale (ASP)
 * Edithvale (EDI)
 *  Zones 2 & 3 overlap 


 * Chelsea (CSA)
 * Bonbeach (BON)
 * Carrum (CAR) - Shuttle service to Frankston station
 *  Zone 3 


 * Seaford (SEA)
 * Kananook (KAN)
 * Frankston (FKN)

I'm using tags, though I think style tags are more efficient but don't know how to use them. Either way. Also, I've used Goldenrod instead of Yellow for ease of reading.

T.PK 10:55, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I like it. Somebody in the WWW 04:20, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I've added this to Pakenham railway line, Melbourne as an experiment to see what others think. I've also noticed that a lot of the Zone information is inaccurate - I'mc correcting that as I go (esp. relating to overlaps). Somebody in the WWW 05:41, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * A minor issue: I think having just 2 colours looks better, i.e.  Zones 2 & 3 overlap  instead of  Zones 2 and 3 overlap, just so there is less visual clutter, and so the second zone's colour is easier to spot. T.PK 07:28, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * What do you think of how I've got it now? Somebody in the WWW 05:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Better, but I still think only 2 colours looks better, sorry :P T.PK 06:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Fine, have it your way. I'll just stay out of the stations for a while Somebody in the WWW 07:34, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not trying to stop you from doing what you're doing, it's just my opinion on a (minor) matter. Don't take it the wrong way. T.PK 09:53, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I realize I'm stumbling on this an era late, so my apologies. I first ran across this coloured text system in Ashburton railway station, Melbourne.  There, the application of goldenrod is in normal Roman type, as opposed to bold, and I find the light colour a little difficult to distinguish.  This is exacerbated by the fact that the coloured text dangles by itself at the end of the paragraph (at the window size I happen to be using), so it gets further lost in the space between paragraphs.  Furthermore, at least to me, it seems that the use of red and blue text is somewhat confusing with the default link colours I'm using.  By comparison, the Paris Métro articles use simple coloured images to identify rail lines.  Perhaps such a system could work well here? ENeville 00:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree the goldenrod on the Ashburton article does sit alone and is alittle hard to read. Those little graphics do look good on the Paris metro articles, a similar graphic could work on these articles, plus it would make it easier to change if we need to. good idea though im not sure how much support it will get. --Dan027 11:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Using template would be less cumbersome than directly including tags and would make it easy to change/update the scheme later on. e.g. metlink-zone1, metlink-zone1&2 etc. Pimlottc 01:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Destaffing
Does anyone know exactly when most of Melbourne's stations were destaffed? I'm assuming '90s, but I don't know exactly when they were destaffed. Somebody in the WWW 07:23, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Presumably during privatization, so mid-90s sounds right. But is it possible that some stations were never staffed? I know some newer ones, like Keilor Plains never were, but that station was built post-privatization anyway. Maybe some older ones, out in the boondocks, weren't staffed even when most others were? Will have to find out. T.PK 07:33, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Officer is another one that has never been staffed; no physical building (opened '75). I've asked on Railpage at (scroll down), but replys are varied. I'd like to get (rough) destaffing dates for most stations in Melbourne to add to the Wiki. Somebody in the WWW 08:14, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The big push on removal of staff was when Metcard was introduced in the mid-90s, ahead of privatisation in August 1999. But it had been many years since there was fulltime staffing of stations, let alone on every platform. By the early-90s, well before Metcard, many stations were only staffed for a single shift each day. Danielbowen (talk) 08:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Reference Quality
I can't find any example station entries that give an idea of the kind of level of detail, or even layout, expected from a station entry. I've had a stab at a decent article at Essendon railway station, Melbourne, but it leaves a lot to be desired. Can anyone point me at an appropriate quality article, or can we work together to bring the Essendon railway station, Melbourne article to a point where it can be held to be the 'gold standard'? Josh Parris ✉ 03:04, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Ashburton railway station, Melbourne is one of our better examples at the moment. We've still got quite a way to go. Ambi 14:02, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think that Essendon railway station, Melbourne has now surpassed Ashburton railway station, Melbourne in article quality, and I'm thinking I like the layout too. I'd like to start flushing the format throughout the network. Josh Parris ✉ 07:51, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * See my comments on your talk page. Please don't spread that sectioning system - it looks awful, and makes the article flow terribly. Ambi 11:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think it needs a map of some sort, showing the stations and railway lines visualy
I think it needs a map of some sort, showing the stations and railway lines visualy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adammw (talk • contribs)


 * Do we have anyone around who can make one of these? We can't use the official one due to copyright, so I wonder if we can find a map-making Wikipedian. Rebecca 01:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * are you after map similar to how the offical map depicts the lines(a straight line with stations dotted along it) or a more close to scale map with bends, bridges and other stuff included? --Dan027 10:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the page should have a map, but currently even the link in the references is dead. A link to the current PTV map is follows, http://ptv.vic.gov.au/assets/Images/maps/Network-maps/Train-Network-Map-updatedNovember2012.gif, but judging by the name it's subject to change. (Like when RRL is finished) Ensign R (talk) 04:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Caulfield Group
Quick Question! Why does the caulfield group included the sandringham line which doesn't go through caulfield station? Shouldn't it be called the South Yarra Group then? What is the history behind this name? and should it be changed? 58.111.113.166 (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The groups were devised in conjunction with the City Loop. There were the four groups we have today; and a fifth group with the Sandringham, St Kilda, and Port Melbourne lines that didn't go though the loop. St Kilda and Port Melbourne were closed in the 1980s, so Sandringham was tossed in with the Caulfield group. Wongm (talk) 14:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Short workings
Re this edit - Blackburn services are 'almost' another line during peak time as the all stoppers, with expresses going beyond. However, we can't go listing every stopping pattern or we will end up with 10 stations lists all exactly the same. So - how do we deal with them? In this page bold the names of the usual termini and make a note of them in a paragraph at the top, and do the same in the line article? Wongm (talk) 12:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a list of stations, not a list of rail services. That material can go in the line article, although it can't hurt to bold them here. Rebecca (talk) 07:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Greater metropolitan lines
I've edited the 'Greater metropolitan lines' section to only included lines featured in the current suburban network diagram, and removed the Regional Rail Link stations of Tarneit and Wyndham Vale because they don't. Since the full introduction of Myki to V/Line, the old 'V/Line is country and Metcard is metropolitan' split used by this article no longer exists. A country vs metropolitan split based on myki zones won't work, as zone 2 heads all the way out to Lara, Clarkefield, Wandong, etc. Wongm (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I think it's time to reintroduce the stations in the Deer Park–West Werribee railway line back into this list as PTV no longer publishes a Melbourne-only suburban network map and that VLine runs suburban-only services during peak now. What other criteria would we have to consider what is Melbourne and what is not? Fauzi (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * That's a hard one. Only official groupings appear to be by operator: Metro vs V/Line. Wongm (talk) 01:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Date Opened
We seem to have a mix of original opening date (eg Flinders Street, 1854), and the date the current station building/structure opened (eg. Bentleigh, 2016). I'd suggest it should be one or the other, or an additional column created. Danielbowen (talk) 08:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I just noticed the same thing, but luckily someone has added an extra column for 'rebuilt'. Now moving dates into the relevant column. Wongm (talk) 14:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Eventual rework table designs
Although this is not my top priorty right now I do have plans improve this list so it can reach FL status, as part of it I may create a new table and I want to make sure there is a conseus on what format I should use for the tables I have proposed some designs based on a few other FL status station articles at User:NotOrrio/sandbox2 feel free to add new designs and comment on existing ones NotOrrio (talk) 08:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I like design 2, here are a few extra comments:
 * Station Code - not really needed
 * Image - I like this
 * Usage - probably needs a definition (looks like a random number)
 * Connections - I like the idea of showing this. Should have it linked eg:
 * Area (design 4) - out of all designs, this is the best way to show it, although Locality and Suburb could be swapped
 * I've made an 8th design to incorporate these comments. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 12:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I like design 2 and 4 as well. My thoughts: The image is great and I think station code is worth including. For distance from Southern Cross, it doesn't need two separate columns for km and miles because it is the same information (i.e. will sort the same). I don't think group is necessary to include, as it is shown by the line colours. I also don't think the zone is very important. But rebuilt is an interesting inclusion. Gracchus250 (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Gracchus250 I agree with your comment on distance not needing 2 columns, but with it in 2 it aligns the values better.
 * Station codes can be found on individual station pages, is there any benefit for having them in this sortable table?
 * I see this table is useful as an easy way to sort data relating to the stations, you sort them by... opening dates, zones, distance, usage, etc. It also needs to serve as a quick guide to the station... where it is located (what suburb/line), connections, other names, etc.
 * I guess locality is probably not too important, also most are named after the suburb they are in and not too many share a suburb, so these could be left off if needed to reduce the size. I've had a friend comment that there could be a notes column and to put other names into that. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 22:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I've started work on also getting List of regional railway stations in Victoria into a table (currently just bullet point list of stations per line) so it can be made to a similar format as the Melbourne one. See User:ThylacineHunter/sandbox2. At the moment it's focused on getting together basic potential information that will probably appear on the final table from each of the station pages. The final table design will be dependant on what is selected for here. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 00:55, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Network Map
The Network Map section is missing the Hurstbridge line. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 06:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)


 * i've replaced it with a temporary map now the interactive map ive used wasn't properley displaying the hurstbridge line ill re add the interactive one back in once the problem is ressolved NotOrrio (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Took me a while to figure out why it didn't look correct. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 08:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This one is good for both this and the list of closed stations pages, and it also covers the proposed lines. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 08:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

new table
I finished S as of right now and I am expecting to complete the new table and import it here by the end of the day NotOrrio (talk) 07:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Final Check
I will give the list a final check by grading it on the featured list criteria. I will nominate it for FL status once all criteria have been addresssed


 * 1) Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
 * 2) Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
 * 3) Comprehensiveness.
 * 4) * (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items.
 * 5) * (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations.
 * 6) * (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article.
 * 7) Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
 * 8) Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
 * 9) * (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked.
 * 10) * (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly.
 * 11) Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.

Legend

✅- Mostly/Fully addressed

🟡- Working on fixing it

🔴- Does not fullfill yet

⚪-Not Checked Yet

Featured List Check List

- Scope: ✅ - Sources: 🔴 - Lenght: ✅
 * Prose 🟡
 * Lead ✅
 * Comperhensiveness 🔴
 * Structure ✅
 * Style ✅
 * Stability ✅

NotOrrio (talk) 09:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Some recommendations from me:
 * The table is too wide. You can make it less wide by removing the bullet points from the line(s) column and using Template:Br instead, reducing the images to 100px, and merging the connections column and the rebuilt dates column into the notes column.
 * You might want to consider having a separate table for future stations, like at List of Transperth railway stations.
 * Every image will require alt text.
 * You need better sourcing for the date that each station opened.
 * Steelkamp (talk) 08:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * what do you mean by alt text but anyways ive began taking action on the recommendations you have given NotOrrio (talk) 10:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Click on the link to find out. Steelkamp (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * personally i dont think the images in the table should have alt text especially since the table is too wide as you have mentioned however i will try make sure the images outside of the table have alt text NotOrrio (talk) 22:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Alt text isn't the same as the caption text. Alt text only displays when the image doesn't load for some reason. It is useful to people using screen readers. I guarantee reviewers at FLC will ask you to add alt text to all the images. You can see how I've done it at List of Transperth railway stations. Steelkamp (talk) 02:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I like how there is a difference with special events stations, may be good to do similar for Flemington line station.
 * Also consider the following, it both reduces the width and cuts down on amount of excess text (instead of typing )
 * to show
 * ThylacineHunter  (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This works ok for  but not for  . TrainLink will still need to use   . -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have now updated this. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 04:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * at first i didn't understand the different but now I agree I also agree with Thylacinehunter's feedback on how the table width can be reduced by shrinking line names when possible NotOrrio (talk) 03:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * at first i didn't understand the different but now I agree I also agree with Thylacinehunter's feedback on how the table width can be reduced by shrinking line names when possible NotOrrio (talk) 03:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Final Comments
I'm going to nominiate this soon but I want to make sure if there are any other problems that need to be addressed. If not I will nominate the article for FL status NotOrrio (talk) 06:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I suggest changing the column "Line(s)" to "Service(s)" as these are technically services not individual railways lines. -- ThylacineHunter  (talk) 04:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Clean-ups
I will be making some clean ups and fixing issues that were brought up in the original FL-Nomination, I will not be renominating this article atleast for now especially since the source for the distances has questionable reliability,

I will also make a spot check on this article as I have identified an issue that was not discussed earlier where a bunch of rints led to Anstey station NotOrrio (talk) 13:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 7 November 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  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 14:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

List of railway stations in Melbourne → List of Metro Trains Melbourne railway stations – The list as it currently stands is not actually about all the railway stations in Melbourne. It excludes V/Line-only stations within Melbourne, such as Ardeer railway station or Deer Park railway station. I propose that this page be refocused on just Metro Trains Melbourne stations, which would also exclude the heritage stations and the Suburban Rail Loop-only stations.

Moving to this proposed title would be in line with List of Sydney Trains railway stations, List of Sydney Metro stations and List of Transperth railway stations. This move would be accompanied by a move of List of regional railway stations in Victoria to List of V/Line railway stations. Steelkamp (talk) 03:57, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Support: For consistency and accuracy per nom, I wouldn't mind also adding redirects from the previous operators' names, such as List of Connex Melbourne railway stations. Easily can be moved to a new name if the Metro branding is dropped for another name in the future. Just as a little side note, we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves regarding a decision about the Suburban Rail Loop stations, we have no idea how it'll be organised/branded to the public yet, assuming that the whole project as proposed even finishes construction in any of our lifetimes. When the time comes, if it's considered a separate travel mode, then we'll cross that bridge later. Fork99 (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Support- I suggest moving the list of heritage and tourist railway stations lists to their respective articles
 * Suburban Rail Loop could stay here for now as there is no greater system that the project would be part of NotOrrio (talk) 09:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Deleting certain stations (particularly the Puffing Billy) from this list seems quite unhelpful; a list of all metropolitan stations (whether or not they're part of the electrified system) seems much better than a list by current operator.  Unless there's a separate article carrying a list of former stations in Melbourne (e.g. Albert Park light rail station, on the St Kilda railway line; or General Motors railway station), we ought to expand this article with a list of them.  And if this list is missing some V/Line stations, just add the missing ones.  Nyttend (talk) 04:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * What do the Puffing Billy stations have in common with the Metro Trains stations? The only thing holding these stations together is an arbitrary city border. What will happen if the Metro Trains network is extended beyond Melbourne? Where even are the borders of Melbourne? Is Melton part of Melbourne? Steelkamp (talk) 05:06, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I edit-conflicted with you. Had it been five more minutes, my second sentence would have become Deleting the heritage stations from this list seems quite unhelpful; a list of all metropolitan stations, whether or not they're currently operated as part of the electrified system, seems much better than a list by current operator.  Nyttend (talk) 05:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I would argue that for consistency's sake (as all other cities in Australia do the same for their station lists) that the move occur, and that a new list for heritage, closed and former stations be created unless one already exists. Or the main Metro section be at the top of this list, and a section at the bottom for heritage stations, but still maintaining the Metro name? It might be confusing though. A hatnote could be added to direct to the list for V/Line stations if necessary. I do agree that Australian city boundaries are both legally and in common everyday situations fairly arbitrary or outright weird. In Sydney for example, the Central Coast is legally considered to be part of Sydney, however most people normally consider it to be its own thing as a “peri-urban” part of Sydney. Ditto for the Blue Mountains. I'm not 100% familiar with the Melbourne railway network, however there is the possibility that Metro already does or will serve in the future areas outside of the legally defined Greater Melbourne area, which may make this list confusing and/or inconsistent. Fork99 (talk) 19:22, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Support: I have thought about it and agree that the move should happen, the heritage stations really don't belong on this list and should just be in their respective articles. Also this list doesn't currently show, for example, Melton or Wyndham Vale, which are stations in Melbourne but aren't metropolitan/Metro Trains stations. So dividing the V/Line and Metro lists by operator makes sense. You could use the terms "metropolitan" and "regional" like the government does to label the two networks, but Metro Trains Melbourne and V/Line are probably the more common names among the public. It's a shame that "List of Metro Trains Melbourne railway stations" is a bit of a mouthful, you could almost drop the "railway", but for consistency with the other articles I think it's fine.
 * I'd add that I think SRL stations should remain for now because for all we know it's likely to be the same operator or at least branded as part of Metro, and if it's not then a separate list article can be created (in about a decade). Gracchus250 (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

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.