Talk:Seymour V/Line rail service

Requested 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: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Seymour railway line, Victoria → Seymour V/Line rail service — 1. dab Victoria removed per nearly unanimous decision atTalk:Ballarat to Daylesford railway line; 2. V/Line as article about service not the line which is longer and has an article); 3. rail to be included in titles as V/Line also operate coach services Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Warrnambool railway line → Warrnambool V/Line rail service
 * Traralgon railway line → Traralgon V/Line rail service
 * Geelong railway line, Victoria → Geelong V/Line rail service
 * Bairnsdale railway line → Bairnsdale V/Line rail service
 * Ballarat railway line, Victoria → Ballarat V/Line rail service
 * Ararat railway line, Victoria → Ararat V/Line rail service
 * Albury-Wodonga railway line, Victoria → Albury-Wodonga V/Line rail service
 * Support all Much less confusing and much more accurate. Allows for clear separation between the physical lines and the services operating on the line. Great idea and I hope the same concept is adopted elsewhere in Australia. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Support makes more sense to have the service article under the name of the service, especially as the actual lines are under a seperate article title anyway. Also as the lines can/do have multiple services operating on them. Gnangarra 11:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Support all, articles are about services, not about lines.--Grahame (talk) 00:41, 7 December 2010 (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.