Talk:Airport Link, Sydney

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Fork99 in topic Criticism section

Merge of the Airport station sections edit

Have to agree with the merge, the information is already covered in their station pages. No need to duplicate the information. --Arnzy (talk contribs) 04:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

The individual pages would likely fail a source or notability test. In their current form, they resemble a travel guide, something Wikipedia is not. At present, the Airport Link page is not too long that it needs breaking up. Joestella 13:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Airport Link name edit

Though it doesn't fit the convention chosen by Wikipedians, this railway line was named the Airport Link and continues to be referred to as such by its station operators. Neither CityRail nor the ALC refer to it as the "Airport railway line". TransitPolice 09:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I really wish you'd discuss this JRG. The line's website refers to it as "Airport Link" ... CityRail calls it both Airport Line and Airport Link ... but never "Airport Railway Line". TransitPolice 10:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
The "railway line, Sydney" suffix is a convention used in Wikipedia - "railway line" is used Wikipedia-wide and "railway line, city" or "railway line, state" is used Australia-wide. JRG 10:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes I can see the convention Wikipedians chose. I am saying that the name used by its operators is more valid. TransitPolice 16:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
TransitPolice is completely correct. We don't name things here, we write about what's in the real world. Mqst north (talk) 01:47, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Merge proposal edit

Oppose. I think this article deserves its own page. I will expand the article significantly in the near future.The Fulch 06:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Airport Link, Sydney. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:48, 6 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Airport Link, Sydney. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Criticism section edit

I think the ideas are presented in an ok fashion, I think it should be rewritten to sound more neutral. Not sure how though. Fork99 (talk) 09:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply