Talk:City Loop

message: Should this page be moved to City Loop? It's already a redirect to here. Hypernovean 12:52, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's good as it is. City Loop is a general term; it should really be a disambig, but no one's created the related pages yet. Ambivalenthysteria 13:01, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now decided that the ", Melbourne" suffix (or any place name really) on this page and all the others that have it is too useful to cull. Hypernovean 06:18, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled

message: I recall in the news some years ago a power outage in the Loop caused train passengers to be stranded in darkness for considerable time (an hour or more?), and/or having to walk along the train line in the darkness to the nearest station.  There were reports of train drivers not having any torches to assist passengers in such an event.  I don't think this should be listed in the article, but maybe a bit of interesting trivia nonetheless.  Perhaps someone has some more info on this. ozzmosis 18:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Power outage

message: "The reason for the ban was due to the use of mobile telephones to take pictures of (mostly female) passengers - usually for sexual purposes." - I'm wondering how one could take a photo "for sexual purposes" on a railway platform. And if that indeed was the reason, why has photography only been banned at the three underground stations? Are perverts more prolific when they're underground? invincible 17:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That didn't make much sense to me either.  I've removed the offending sentence.  Maybe someone can put it back when it is verifiable. --ozzmosis 19:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 'For sexual purposes' doesn't make sense either. People aren't going to stand on the concourse looking down womens tops on the escalators withe their cameras. Maybe the open air stairs are more likely but wasn't the photography ban for security reasons so people that would want to 'you know' to our underground tunnels can't without being told by Connex 'Sorry sir, you can't take pictures here' I agree with the confusing aspect of this. Lakeyboy 04:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photography ban

message: I know people writing to the press like to repeat that Melbourne's PT network is a failure, but this edit isn't exactly neutral. I mean, most people would agree that we're better off with the City Loop and reduction in service levels are probably more likely to be caused by increased car ownership than improved infrastructure. What does the City Loop have to do with V/Line services anyway? There's also a subtle edit changing the reason for the failure to expand the loop from a lack of demand to a reference to government attitudes - while that might be right today, policies and governments do change, especially in the 20-30 years that the section mentions. Since I'm meant to be writing a report that's due tomorrow, I'll leave it to someone else to fix the article up. invincible 13:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the section because it consisted mainly of unencyclopedic criticism.  The few facts mentioned may have a place somewhere else in the article (number of travellers, or trains through the city loop per day).  Someone may want to reinsert those if they think it is really worthwhile. --ozzmosis 16:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failure 

message: How much did this cost to build? Josh Parris#: 01:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost of construction 

message: Hi all. I've started working on a line guide for the city loop in my user area/sandbox, whatever you want to call it. I've seen a few of this style of line guide around the place and thought I'd whip one up and put it up for review. Let know what you think. If there are no serious objections within a couple of weeks or so I might put it in the article. Although I must admit the exising diagram looks pretty good. -- Rick69p 14:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  City Loop Line Guide 

message: I think it might be worthwhile stating that there is now a AM/FM radio re-broadcast system was installed in the cityloop to override normal AM/FM transmission in the event of an emergency
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/security-boost-on-city-loop/story-e6frf7kx-1111112387300
http://www.safeguardingaustralia.org.au/index.php?view=print&getp=284
http://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/CA25713E0002EF43/WebObj/PEBUAppA/$File/PEBUAppA.pdf
http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/CA256D800027B102/Lookup/protectingourcoummunitynewinitiativestocombatterriorism/$file/Protecting%20our%20Community%20New%20Initiatives%20to%20Combat%20Terrorism.pdf
I can't seem to find any articles confirming the installation of the re-broadcast system and the date. The only article I found was the Herald Sun article talking about the planned installation, and a whole bunch of government articles showing the system in the budget. I can however confirm that there is actual FM reception underground for the major FM stations only.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerox (talk • contribs) 10:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radio Reception underground 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on City Loop. 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/20080721025337/http://rtsa.com.au/assets/2008/03/rapid-transit-by-l-fouvy.pdf to http://rtsa.com.au/assets/2008/03/rapid-transit-by-l-fouvy.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050718073039/http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/doi/doielect.nsf/2a6bd98dee287482ca256915001cff0c/44507f9d12a4406cca25700c0012fe36/$FILE/MURL%20booklet.pdf to http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/doi/doielect.nsf/2a6bd98dee287482ca256915001cff0c/44507f9d12a4406cca25700c0012fe36/$FILE/MURL%20booklet.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on City Loop. 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 http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20090520044857/http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/DOI/Internet/transport.nsf/AllDocs/74164766E0CEAF95CA25700500122952?OpenDocument to http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/Doi/Internet/transport.nsf/AllDocs/74164766E0CEAF95CA25700500122952?OpenDocument
*Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20090520044857/http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/DOI/Internet/transport.nsf/AllDocs/74164766E0CEAF95CA25700500122952?OpenDocument to http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/DOI/Internet/transport.nsf/AllDocs/74164766E0CEAF95CA25700500122952?OpenDocument
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) 08:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Current Progress
*Rewrite History- No yet
*Future -Not started yet
*Service Patterns- Clifton Hill, Dandenong and Burnley still need grammar checking & Nothern Group not started yet
*Infrastructure not started yet
Planned road map
1.Finish seperating service patterns to their respective groups
2.Seperate Future expansion into sections
3.Write Infrastructure section
4.Rewrite History section
5.Rewrite Lead section
6.Grammar checking and fixing 
7.GA-Submission NotOrrio (talk) 09:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Rework Progress so far 

message: * I will be going out for a bit tommorrow so I should be able to take plenty of photos for this article
*I suggest that you dont edit this article feel free to suggestions in the talk page which I may take action opon, the exception to this is fixing grammar and punctuation on sections ive put a clean up tag on
NotOrrio (talk) 11:57, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few things to note 

message: I think the summary table should be returned to "Services and direction of travel"
Platform number   	1                          	2                                                                            	3                                                              	4
Lines             	Clifton Hill group &  lines	Caulfield group &  lines                                                     	Northern group,  &  lines                                      	Burnley group, ,  &  lines
Weekday mornings  	Clockwise                  	Anti-clockwise                                                               	Clockwise                                                      	Anti-clockwise
Weekday afternoons	Clockwise                  	Anti-clockwise                                                               	Anti-clockwise                                                 	Clockwise
Weekends          	Clockwise                  	Anti-clockwise                                                               	Clockwise                                                      	Clockwise
Notes             	                           	In 2025, Cranbourne & Pakenham services will cease operation in the City Loop	In 2025, Sunbury services will cease operation in the City Loop	Alamein only during weekday peak
It makes it clear and easy to see how services run through the loop. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This could even be made as a template so it can also be included on the Flagstaff, Melbourne Central & Parliament pages ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direction of travel table