Talk:List of Sydney Trains railway stations

Number of stations
Does the number of 301 include the intercity or greater metropolitan stations? I assume it does. It would be nice to have a number for just the suburban stations, as if it is still high enough, it could be added to the list of world's largest networks by station number on List of metro systems. (The justification being that only metro station counts can go on that list by definition). Hypernovean 14:09, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * 168 in what CityRail defines as the 'Sydney Suburban Area', 133 in outer suburban areas (2 of those are closed). Doesn't quite make it into the 'Top 10 rail systems in terms of number of stations' list if counting by suburban stations alone; but would be #3 if counting the entire CityRail network. (Unsure if CityRail qualifies for that list anyway, as it's not a Metro - does that page only cover Metros?) -Spiky Sharkie 12:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

"World's biggest city by area" - does anyone have proof of this? I'll gladly put it back if there is. Hypernovean 14:16, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm having a bit of trouble finding out where Sydney ends, as such - where to go from BlahBlah station, Sydney, to BlahBlah station, New South Wales. It's not so hard with the eastern lines, which are somewhat self-evident, but I'm quite confused with some of the the southern lines. Anyone able to help? Ambivalenthysteria 14:06, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Are the intercity lines electrified? I would say that only electric stations should be counted as suburban, and the intercity as greater metropolitan, along the lines of Melbourne's setup. If they are electrified though, it doesn't help. Hypernovean 14:38, 13 May 2004 (UTC)


 * They're mostly electrified. The electrification does stop before the end of some lines; but it's not like Melbourne, where it's one line to the end of the electrified system, and then a greater metropolitan line. That's what makes things messy. Ambivalenthysteria 13:11, 14 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Although probably moot now that most (if not all) station lists have the correct Sydney/NSW designation, CityRail distinguishes between their Sydney suburban network - bounded by Macarthur, Emu Plains, Berowra, and Waterfall - and their outer suburban network. This should guide you as to whether a station should be listed under Sydney or New South Wales. (Unfortunately CityRail only offer a map covering the entire network on their web site, but only the suburban network is shown on posters in most trains - although some now have entire-network maps - and in suburban line timetable booklets.) -Spiky Sharkie 12:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

banners
Should the coloured bars be left out altogether? I think, considering that Sydney's train lines have specific colours, as opposed to a lot of the other Australian networks, they are useful to have. TPK 23:52, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * If we're going to use the coloured bars, then IMHO, they need to be linked themselves (so we don't have two headings saying exactly the same thing), and we also need a map of the network - otherwise having the colours there is pointless. Ambivalenthysteria 00:01, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * i think they are useful. a solution to avoid having the duplication of titles (which is a valid point) and headings here would be to use them on the individual line pages, see what I have done with: North Shore Line, Sydney.  i have copied all banners from the main page below so they aren't forgotten and can be copied to the individual pages as they are created clarkk 00:02, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * That's better, but it's still redundant. It's obvious that it's that line from the title, and it's even more redundant due to the Template box with lines having the line colour marked next to it. Ambivalenthysteria 00:08, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * but the links in the template box don't have the arial font which is the distinctive part of the signage, and the original heading "List of stations of North Shore Line" is somewhat redundant anyway, so i think it's no worse than it was before. clarkk 00:14, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * If you want to replicate the signage, why not go take a photo of one of the signs? (as the London Metro article has done), rather than trying to replicate them with HTML tags. Ambivalenthysteria 00:18, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The signage being described has been deprecated since about 2000 (in favour of signage in CityRail corporate colours of navy/gold/white). I would think that the Lines of Sydney CityRail sidebox is enough of an indication of line colours. -Spiky Sharkie 12:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

banner source
banners below so they aren't forgotten.

"Mt" vs "Mount" in station names
I recently moved the page for Mount Kuring-gai station to correct the spelling of the station name to CityRail's naming convention (particularly 'Kuring-gai'; which is now correctly spelt with only one hyphen, as opposed to 'Ku-ring-gai'). However I also expanded the word 'Mount', also as per current CityRail conventions.

The reason I bring the latter up is that there's some disagreement among the station/line lists as to which form of 'Mount' should be used - this article uses 'Mount Druitt' but the Western Line article uses 'Mt Druitt', for example. (The article is currently at 'Mt Druitt', leading to a broken link at this article.) This article also uses 'Mt Colah' and 'Mt Ku-ring-gai' [sic] under the North Shore heading but 'Mount' for the Northern line. (Whether they should be under Northern Line at all is debatable as it now only officially extends to Hornsby, but I digress.)

I'm not exactly aware of any Wikipedia naming convention for this, but I would like to suggest that we follow CityRail's naming convention of spelling out 'Mount' in full for the other 'Mt' station articles (Mt Druitt and Mt Colah). -Spiky Sharkie 12:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC) (apologies for the lack of pithiness of this comment! :-)

Olympic Park
Currently says "Special Events Only" This is not correct as the Olympic Park Sprint (and limited services from Central) run every day of the year. Olympic Park station caters not only for visitors to the Olympic Park precinct but also for the residents of Newington and workers in Homebush Bay.

Pictures
Is there a list of those stations that still need a picture ? --Marc pasquin 01:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Just look at any of these and see if they don't - if there's been one taken it should have a picture uploaded and on the page. Any picture for any station would be good. Make sure it adequately depicts the station correctly. (JROBBO 13:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC))


 * Just to be sure, what do you mean by "adequately depicts the station correctly" ? do you mean specific local landmark and such or do you mean it should include as much as possible ? --Marc pasquin 02:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Just butting in here... I had the opportunity to provide photos for all the Melbourne railway station articles, and in most cases I tried to find a shot that would give a good idea of what the station building(s) looked like from a reasonable distance, usually from either the station platform or from a pedestrian overpass. In some articles I also added a photo of the station's main entrance, particularly if the building design was unique and interesting.  Moreland railway station, Melbourne is probably a good example. --ozzmosis 06:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Marc - ozzmosis has the right idea. Just something that captures the platforms in the best way it can. A shot of the street level is ideal too, but not completely necessary. Thanks for your offers anyway. (JROBBO 14:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC))


 * - and it would be nice to get photos of special features (like wrought iron work at Stanmore for example). --Mike 09:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * All stations on the Cronulla Branch line will have pictures by tomorrow, if not then Thursday. - Vicer 10:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you get a better picture of Caringbah railway station? It looks like it was taken from a moving train that didn't stop there... The colours on the camera are pretty bad too - I'm not blaming you, but WP does have pretty high standards for photographic inclusions. A photo of the quality more like your Cronulla shots would be more appropriate for Wikipedia. Have a look at stations in Sydney Train stations in Sydney for the sort of photos that Wikipedia has for its railway stations here. (JROBBO 13:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC))

LU comparrission
Why the comparison with London Underground ???

"In contrast, the London Underground has a total distance of only 408km, and has 275 stations"

A brief look at the Sydney system and the tube shows your not comparing the same thing, surely you would have to add the tube and other stuff in London (DLR, tramlink, etc) to the extensive commuter rail network (that is hard to define in places, with the added confusion of parts having metro frequency so are in effect "tube" lines) to get a number .... 81.79.147.5 21:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Static pixel sizes
I note that my removal of static pixel sizes has been reverted, so I'm back to seeing miniscule photos with about 45mm of blank space between them and the table. Not a good look in my opinion.

I'm assuming that someone is trying to tune this to the specific combination of browser and screen resolution that they are running. That is not the correct way of doing it, since obviously not everybody is running that same combination. Some people may be running lower resolution, some may be running higher. I choose to run a thumbnail size of 300px in my preferences, and would go bigger if the option existed. I don't believe that deliberately forcibly shrinking the images to about half that size is appropriate, and apparently neither did the editors who wrote this in WP:XIMG:


 * From MediaWiki 1.5 the default thumbnail width can be set in the preferences, so it is recommended not to specify "px", in order to respect the users' preferences (unless, for a special reason, a specific size is required regardless of preferences, or a size is specified outside the range of widths 120–300px that can be set in the preferences).

Note that, in the case of a non-logged-in person looking at this page, they'll default to an image size of 180px, which will give comparable results to the static size that has been imposed on these images. In general, the higher your screen resolution, the higher you'll set your preference. The images will only usually cause a problem if you have your preference disproportionately large for your screen resolution. --Athol Mullen 13:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Athol - I did put a comment as to why I undid your edit - you can discuss these things with me, you know. I am not just "someone". I have tried the page on several different computers, and without the set pixel size there are problems with the images overlapping the table. This has been done elsewhere where a specific size was set for the picture so as to fit it in with the table properly. Without the pixel size limitation, there seems to be a consistent problem with overlap. If I could set the pictures to take up a specific percentage of the page (as opposed to a fixed width), that might solve the problem. JRG 23:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. It was about midnight, I wasn't in a good mood and I didn't actually notice who had done the reversion. Okay, I've just done some experimenting. I tried this on 3 different computers here including an ancient win98 box and all had a wide band of space between the text boxes and the image frames when the browser was full screen. It appears that, even with the current image size, this wikimedia rendering bug still occurs at horizontal resolutions less than about 900px, in firefox at least. That suggests to me, as I originally noted, that you are tuning for a specific combination of browser and screen resolution (WP:MOS says somewhere not to do that) and that for smaller browser windows, the rendering will still be screwed up even at the current pixel size. I'm totally exhausted right now and not really up to trying to find a better solution except to suggest putting the images either left or centred at the top of each section, rather than alongside. That way, you avoid the rendering bug and can avoid having static pixel sizes. For example:

A



 * This works correctly all the way down to about 800px frame width, at which the table gains a horizontal scrollbar. --Athol Mullen 07:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Athol. Apology accepted. Your suggestion is ok - as long as the pictures are on the left, and not centred. I notice List of London Underground stations, a Featured Article has done this and it looks acceptable; so I'd be happy to change it, except that will mean the tables all need to be changed so that they don't only cover 75% of the page as they do now. My ideal would be a photo of every station, but it will take me years to get every station in the network, despite the efforts of people like J Bar, yourself, myself and others who have given us lots of photos (it would also make the page way too big). So I think that's a good solution for the page as we have it now. Feel free to go ahead and change things. JRG 12:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Had to make the image position "none", not "left". Otherwise, the tables were to the right of the images. :-) --Athol Mullen 14:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Distance From Central
I noticed a fair few of the distances in this table no longer agree with the CityRail "fare calculator" distance, especially out two (?) of the long distance lines. Possibly distances were previously calculated down a longer loop option to reach an outer interchange station. I also noticed a handful of stations are on the CityRail list but not here. Anyway, I went through all the stations on the fare calculator and made a new note of their nominal distance from Central (many trivial changes plus a few non trivial ones) with the following caveats. (1) East Richmond and Richmond show the same distance. (2) Campbelltown and Macarthur show the same distance. (3) The city loop stations plus Kings Cross all show a nominal distance of 3.21 kms on the CityRail site, so I retained the old distances (I think). I don't know how to massage this data into the existing table without a huge more effort... perhaps someone can check my data and update the main article appropriately...

Aberdeen=293.59, Adamstown=153.71, Albion Park=103.32, Allawah=13.68, Arncliffe=8.43, Artarmon=11.5, Ashfield=8.4, Asquith=28.3, Auburn=18.65, Austinmer=68.58, Awaba=129.89, Balmoral=96.8, Banksia=9.6, Bankstown=18.71, Bardwell Park=10.1, Bargo=94.8, Bathurst=230.78, Beecroft=26.9, Bell=137.14, Bellambi=75.52, Belmore=13.26, Berala=18.35, Beresfield=172.31, Berowra=37.25, Berry=140.84, Beverly Hills=14.65, Bexley North=11.37, Birrong=21.35, Blackalls Park=137.05, Blackheath=120.68, Blacktown=34.8, Blaxland=71.48, Bomaderry (Nowra)=153.37, Bombo=117.54, Bondi Junction=6.61, Booragul=138.98, Bowral=127.8, Branxton=208.05, Broadmeadow=155.5, Bullaburra=97.69, Bulli=72.14, Bundanoon=153.8, Burradoo=138.8, Burwood=10.62, Buxton=90.8, Cabramatta=28.45, Camellia=22.91, Campbelltown=45.9, Campsie=11.69, Canley Vale=29.48, Canterbury=10.16, Cardiff=147.67, Caringbah=31.5, Carlingford=27.86, Carlton=12.73, Carramar=25.9, Casula=35.27, Central=0, Chatswood=12.85, Cheltenham=25.39, Chester Hill=22.31, Circular Quay=2.97, Civic=160.71, Clarendon=57.27, Clyde=20.64, Coalcliff=59.24, Cockle Creek=143.33, Coledale=66.22, Como=20.36, Concord West=14.55, Coniston=84.11, Corrimal=76.99, Couridjah=87.8, Cowan=41.39, Cringila=87.51, Cronulla=34.8, Croydon=9.44, Dapto=95.07, Denistone=20.16, Domestic=6.7, Doonside=38.55, Dora Creek=119.79, Douglas Park=64.55, Dulwich Hill=7.87, Dundas=24.82, Dungog=237.59, Dunmore=110.66, East Hills=24.02, East Maitland=181.34, East Richmond=60.67, Eastwood=21.42, Edgecliff=4.63, Emu Plains=57.47, Engadine=30.72, Epping=23.32, Erskineville=2.88, Exeter=147.8, Fairfield=28.97, Fairy Meadow=79.38, Fassifern=134.92, Faulconbridge=82.96, Flemington=14.32, Gerringong=128.53, Glenbrook=67.09, Glenfield=33.12, Gordon=18.3, Gosford=73.5, Goulburn=216.8, Granville=21.38, Green Square=2.65, Greta=203.3, Guildford=25.71, Gymea=27.92, Hamilton=157.21, Harris Park=22.54, Hawkesbury River=49.96, Hazelbrook=93.44, Heathcote=33.13, Helensburgh=46.39, Hexham=168.04, High Street=183.91, Hilldale=218.59, Holsworthy=26.84, Homebush=12.74, Hornsby=26.45, Hurlstone Park=8.79, Hurstville=14.81, Ingleburn=36.9, International=8.2, Jannali=22.71, Katoomba=109.92, Kembla Grange Racecourse=91.59, Kiama=119.17, Killara=17.07, Kings Cross=3.41, Kingsgrove=12.63, Kingswood=52.67, Kirrawee=26.62, Kogarah=11.61, Koolewong=67.42, Kotara=151.52, Lakemba=14.48, Lapstone=63.61, Lawson=96.02, Leightonfield=23.66, Leumeah=43.82, Leura=107.59, Lewisham=6.26, Lidcombe=16.58, Linden=86.8, Lindfield=15.78, Lisarow=80.32, Lithgow=155.78, Liverpool=32.09, Lochinvar=195.1, Loftus=26.27, Lysaghts=86.26, Macarthur=45.9, Macdonaldtown=2.48, Macquarie Fields=35.07, Macquarie Park=20.8, Macquarie University=22.07, Maitland=185.04, Marayong=37.38, Marrickville=6.58, Martin Place=2.1, Martins Creek=211.59, Marulan=184.8, Mascot=5.15, Meadow Flat=194.78, Meadowbank=18.19, Medlow Bath=115.83, Menangle=56.56, Menangle Park=54.08, Merrylands=23.5, Metford=177.67, Milsons Point=5.6, Mindaribba=195.96, Minnamurra=113.4, Minto=40.95, Miranda=29.49, Mittagong=123.8, Morisset=116.01, Mortdale=17.04, Moss Vale=137.8, Mount Colah=30.27, Mount Druitt=43.9, Mount Kuring-gai=33.27, Mount Victoria=126.74, Mulgrave=52.59, Museum=4.99, Muswellbrook=237.59, Narara=77.18, Narwee=15.79, Newcastle=160.71, Newtown=3.12, Niagara Park=78.79, Normanhurst=28.57, North Ryde=19.39, North Strathfield=13.4, North Sydney=6.31, North Wollongong=81.31, Oak Flats=105.19, Oatley=18.27, Olympic Park=16.72, Otford=52.65, Ourimbah=83.2, Padstow=19.33, Panania=22.55, Parramatta=23.2, Paterson=205.72, Pendle Hill=28.26, Pennant Hills=28.57, Penrith=55.1, Penrose=162.8, Penshurst=16.11, Petersham=5.49, Picton=76.47, Point Clare=70.64, Port Kembla=90.28, Port Kembla North=88.9, Punchbowl=16.46, Pymble=20.07, Quakers Hill=40.09, Raglan=221.78, Redfern=1.31, Regents Park=19.88, Revesby=20.96, Rhodes=16.56, Richmond=60.67, Riverstone=45.95, Riverwood=17.5, Robertson=128, Rockdale=10.42, Rooty Hill=40.94, Rosehill=22.37, Roseville=14.48, Rydalmere=24.02, Sandgate=163.03, Scarborough=62.52, Schofields=43.79, Scone=307.59, Sefton=21.18, Seven Hills=32.09, Singleton=231.59, Springwood=79.7, St James=4.4, St Leonards=9.59, St Marys=47.48, St Peters=3.82, Stanmore=4.67, Stanwell Park=55.95, Strathfield=11.73, Summer Hill=7.05, Sutherland=24.72, Sydenham=5.33, Tahmoor=85.8, Tallong=176.8, Tarro=170.68, Tascott=69.5, Telarah=187.23, Telopea=26.33, Tempe=6.84, Teralba=140.15, Thirlmere=83.8, Thirroul=70.23, Thornleigh=29.41, Thornton=174.7, Toongabbie=29.93, Town Hall=1.18, Towradgi=78.03, Tuggerah=91.12, Turramurra=22, Turrella=8.63, Unanderra=88.31, Valley Heights=77.41, Victoria Street=180.41, Villawood=24.48, Vineyard=49.33, Wahroonga=23.95, Waitara=25.38, Wallerawang=169.78, Wallarobba=224.59, Warabrook=161.19, Waratah=158.46, Warnervale=98.49, Warrawee=23.07, Warrimoo=74.29, Warwick Farm=30.54, Waterfall=38.74, Waverton=7.31, Wentworth Falls=102.62, Wentworthville=26.72, Werrington=49.15, West Ryde=19.19, Westmead=25.11, Wickham=158.54, Wiley Park=15.35, Windsor=54.98, Wingello=168.8, Wirragulla=224.59, Wolli Creek=7.39, Wollongong=82.92, Wollstonecraft=8.34, Wombarra=64.29, Wondabyne=57.75, Woodford=90.32, Woolooware=33.59, Woonona=73.93, Woy Woy=65.19, Wyee=107.46, Wynyard=2.05, Wyong=93.64, Yagoona=20.56, Yennora=27.44, Yerrinbool=107.8, Yetholme=203.78, Zig Zag=150.68 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.53.218.20 (talk) 04:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Moving/Renaming article to a more correct title

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page moved per request. - GTBacchus(talk) 01:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

List of Sydney railway stations → List of Cityrail railway stations – The network consist of stations that are also located in Newcastle, Woolongong, Katoomba and Goulburn which are all not part of the Sydney metropolitan area. These stations would come under Cityrail stations rather than Sydney railway station as it is more accurate. YuMaNuMa talk 11:41, 28 August 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Another request to move :(

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

List of Cityrail railway stations → List of CityRail railway stations – - Correct titling of the article. Network operates as CityRail as oppose to Cityrail which I initially thought was also correct. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Presumably, you want to retain plural "stations" in the changed title, no? Deor (talk) 12:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Not in my right state of mind today. Hopefully it will work if I change the template and request page.YuMaNuMa (talk) 13:06, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Should be consistent with parent article, which is at CityRail. Jenks24 (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Feature List Goal
I am more than certain we can get this article to feature lists by the end of this year. From what I can see after adding the column for images, there are about 5 or 6 stations that are missing an image. If anyone has time to go out to these stations and take a few photos of the stations and upload it onto Wikicommons, that would be great! I believe that is the only thing we're missing. If not add your input somewhere on this page, I'm very keen in the help of promoting my first page to feature list status. :D YuMaNuMa (talk) 10:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Where can I see a list of those stations ? Marc pasquin (talk) 16:55, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review Comment
(Copied from Peer Review) Brianboulton comments: This is a very impressive list, and with at least 95% of the stations represented photographically I can imagine the amount of work that has gone in to putting it together. A few suggestions and/or queries:-
 * Is it "Cityrail" per the article's title, or "CityRail" per the captions to the maps? Both forms occur in the lead text.
 * It is meant to be CityRail. Unfortunately when I first requested the article to be moved, I didn't take in account the specific capitialisation of each letter. In the process of another request to move the article and the lead has also been edited to reflect this. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm slightly concerned that the article's title doesn't give any indication as to the location of this railway system. It may be that those familiar with worldwide rail networks will immediately recognise that "CityRail" means Sydney, Australia, but most of us have no idea. As there are similarly-named systems based in other cities and regions, maybe the title should be more geographically specific.
 * Whatever happens with the title, the first sentence of the lead should state clearly where this network is to be found. The words "centred on Sydney, Australia", or similar phrasing, should be inserted after "commuter-based network"
 * Unfortunately the network serves multiple areas with stations in areas hundreds of kilometres away from Sydney metro so it would be unfair to title the article "List of Sydney Railway Stations" as it initially did. I have however added the location in the first sentence of the lead as you said. :) YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * If possible, avoid the close repetition of "network" in the first sentence. ✅
 * Why have you downsized the lead maps to 150px? This has the effect of making them look small and insignificant. I also don't think it is necessary to include the instruction "click to enlarge", as this is a generally known procedure for all thumbnail images.
 * It looked a bit messy and cramped up the table but you do have a point about it looking insignificant. I have up'd to the 250px.YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * In the "Lines" column of the table, individual lines are accompanied by unexplained coloured dots. What do these signify? Some kind of key is necessary.
 * The colour dots are the line's respective colour scheme. The name of the line is respectively next to each dot. I don't know if a key would still be appropriate. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I notice that most of the mileages in the lower part of the table are cited to sources, hough none of those in the upper part of the table are. Is there a reason?
 * I have added reference in the column header. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Who is the publisher of the Rolfe Bozier websites?
 * Be consistent in formats of access dates ("retrieved" versus "Accessed") ✅
 * I am unsure how the two external links actually assist this article.
 * I have removed 1 external link but the other has each station listed with facilities that are available on each station. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The toolbox identifies a single dead link. I can't spot where this is in the article, but it should be investigated.

That's about it. As I have said, a pretty impressive piece of work. Brianboulton (talk) 18:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your time in reviewing this article. :D YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

3 More images

 * After the addition of the 3 images this article will be nominated for Featured List status. The 3 stations stations are located on the Blue Mountains Line, Hunter Line and South Coast Line. YuMaNuMa Talk Contributions 07:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * For clarity, the stations without photos are Lochinvar (Hunter Line) and Lysaughts (Souch Coast Line). In my opinion, Lysaughts may be difficult as it is part of the steelworks i.e. employees only. Hohohob (talk) 01:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge of List of New South Wales railway station codes
I propose we should merge List of New South Wales railway station codes into this main list page.

The codes are more useful to a reader in this context, as other vital information about the station is presented alongside. That being said, the codes are lacking sources, so that may not sit well with some people. Note, that an AfD was conducted a while ago with result: keep. Hohohob (talk) 01:11, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Some/most of the List of New South Wales railway station codes aren't correct, if you want to refer to the list then at least make them accurate as per RailCorp standards.

Secondly, consider the fact that RailCorp will split into two separate companies come July 1, 2013 - Sydney Trains and NSW Trains. That's how they should be defined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.9.52 (talk) 09:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * While I support elimination of the codes as a separate article, the codes provide no useful information to the reader and are better off deleted. Mqst north (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Why is light rail?
Can someone tell me why the light rail is included when the light rail is NOT part of the Cityrail network. Marcnut1996 (talk) 04:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Most likely because the light rail is included on the CityRail network map. Harryboyles 07:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Removal of station codes
I propose to delete the column "Codes" on the grounds that (1.) it isn't referenced and (2.) it isn't encyclopaedic. While it is certainly true that the rail operators have long had a series of internal abbreviations for each station (and, indeed, lines, fleet types, and other facilities), it has never been explained why this is significant metadata for an encyclopaedia article. The lack of references – enough in itself to delete – reinforces the contention that it isn't encyclopaedic. In most cases, the codes are nothing more than a three-letter contraction of the station's name. The only public-facing use of these codes is for certain terminal stations, and then only in printed timetables. These codes (which could, at a stretch, be considered encyclopaedic) could simply be incorporated into the text of the relevant terminal's article. Mqst north (talk) 05:53, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Disagree Cite has been located and will be added once verifyed. JCN217 (talk) 05:59, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Even if a reference has been located, that doesn't address the non-notability issue. Mqst north (talk) 06:08, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Sydney Trains railway stations. 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/20060924231147/http://www.cityrail.info/aboutus/content/au_content_6.jsp to http://www.cityrail.info/aboutus/content/au_content_6.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080323105513/http://www.cityrail.info/facilities/facilities.jsp to http://cityrail.info/facilities/facilities.jsp

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) 13:47, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Coordinates


I needed to get a list of coordinates of the Sydney train stations; I used this page's list as my source list of stations.

Would it be helpful to add columns with lat and lon to the table, now that I have them? Even if not, here they are if anyone else finds them useful:

Ben.doherty (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)