Talk:History of rail transport in Australia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) | ||||
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance within the Trains WikiProject. | ||||
 |
This article is within the scope of the By country series task force. |
 |
History of rail transport in Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] Organisation of material
I am thinking of moving the detailed stuff on each state to an appropriate state page, as it nears completion (particularlyRail transport in South Australia and Rail transport in New South Wales, and putting a summary of key events (probably a timeline) in this page for each state. Any objections? Grahamec 00:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's called summary style, and is how large articles are supposed to be broken down. Use the {{details}} template at the beginning of each summary section to point readers off to the detail. I think some of the material you've added to this article came from those daughter articles anyway. Are you planning to eventually propose this for a Featured Article? --Scott Davis Talk 14:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template:History of rail transport in Oceania
I am not sure that the template down the bottom of links to articles in other oceanic countries is very useful. I am not sure there is much rail in any of those countries - they are all red linked at present and I can't see that changing - happy to take on board other views. I can imagine on the other hand, perhaps one article that discusses what has happened across the whole of Oceania, perhaps in the context of history of transport in the region generally.--A Y Arktos\talk 21:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree.--Grahamec 15:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- As far as I can see from the Transport in ... series, New Zealand, Fiji and Nauru are the only others that have railways. --Scott Davis Talk 23:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Railway disasters in timelines
At the moment there seems to be no mention of railway disasters. Through my work on days and years in Australia, I have come across a couple. They are all in Category:Railway accidents in Australia. Would a separate section be bettter or incorporating them in the timeline? Some had national significance, others state significance. So not sure where they should go. Reviews of causes of the accidents of course influenced rail developments.--A Y Arktos\talk 21:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mining Railways
Sadly lacking, what about private lines in the 1890's - ? and beyond. Considering the amount of space that Light Rail, and the old ARHS mags used to have about obscure narrow gauge mining lines - Mt Lyell, Singleton Tram - obviously needs a summary, but needs doing! SatuSuro 01:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RFR in Victoria
"Regional Fast Rail upgrades speeds on four interurban line, but single tracks and fails to include gauge convertible sleepers."
Ahem, whats the Geelong line?
As for 'failing' to have gauge convertable sleepers, none of the four lines is planned for conversion to standard - http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/Doi/Internet/Freight.nsf/AllDocs/9D34AAC64459BE5BCA256E0500052305?OpenDocument - keeping in mind any conversion to standard on these mainly passenger lines would cause pain in a lot of areas - V/Line, Connex Melbourne, Pacific National and its big BG engine fleet, preservation groups etc.
Comments? I'll alter the the quoted line above sometime, perhaps including gauge issues into the victorian rail article.
--Mcbridematt 10:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- It appears that all mention of the RFR project has been removed for some reason, which has made the Victoria section horribly out of date. It is after all pretty much the only major work done on the Victorian network for decades and has actually contributed to reversing the decline in patronage, which runs counter to the current statement. invincible (talk) 02:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
