Talk:List of Metro Trains Melbourne railway stations

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Craigieburn line

message: 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)
thread_title:  Table format 

message: 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)
replies: text: They all are, and there was/is a notice above them to that end. T.P.K. 06:07, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  City Loop - 'premium'? 

message: 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)
replies: text: I like it. Somebody in the WWW 04:20, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: What do you think of how I've got it now? Somebody in the WWW 05:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, but I still think only 2 colours looks better, sorry :P T.PK 06:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Using template would be less cumbersome than directly including  tags and would make it easy to change/update the scheme later on.  e.g. ,  etc. Pimlottc 01:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zone colouring 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Destaffing

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Reference Quality 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  I think it needs a map of some sort, showing the stations and railway lines visualy 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Caulfield Group 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Short workings 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:   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)
thread_title:  Greater metropolitan lines 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Date Opened 

message: The Network Map section is missing the Hurstbridge line. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Took me a while to figure out why it didn't look correct. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 08:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Network Map 

message: 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)
thread_title:  new table 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Final Comments 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Clean-ups