Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian Transport/Naming convention and guidelines

Proposal for tram/light rail naming

I propose tram/light rail naming in Aus/NZ to be:

Rail service	Name	Example	Short-form template
Light rail	[NAME] light rail station	Middle Park light rail station, Parkwood East light rail station	{{lrt}} or {{lrts}}
Tram*	[NAME] tram stop	St Vincent's Plaza tram stop, Clarendon Street Junction tram stop	{{Trams}}

• For Melbourne, stations on the former Port Melbourne/St Kilda rail line are considered light rail (Beacon Cove-Southbank tram depot and St Kilda station-City Rd)

Sydney, Gold Coast, Newcastle, Canberra are light rail not tram systems. Not sure how to classify Adelaide. Purin128AL (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I haven't changed anything in the Stations section yet from what was in the original proposal Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations) -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Light Rail vs Tram vs Streetcar is generally used as a marketing term, but personally I prefer to use "tram" as the vehicle type, and either "streetcar" or "light rail" depending on operating characteristics, the latter being primarily segregated. I incorporated this definition into the 09 BRT/LRT Standard (section 3.1). I tend to think of the difference as similar to, say, on-street buses vs the Adelaide O-Bahn.Anothersignalman (talk) 12:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

About this page

I'm using this as a place to sort out all the various naming formats and work out how best to summarise name formats before actually proposing the new additions to this page. I really appreciate insight into the other states systems of naming as I'm only familiar with Victoria, I currently have a limited knowledge on the other states and no idea on New Zealand. I'm looking forward to researching up how these other locations named their lines and services. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Review before I submit this

@NotOrrio, @HoHo3143, @Purin128AL
As users involved in updating articles relating to both railway station and railway line, I wanted to run this by you for your feedback before I update Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations).
I think I have this mostly sorted now, so that it covers both station and line names. Although we just decide on a better naming system for Melbourne Metro services and I still need to double check on other state's services.-- ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I've been creating all track layout diagrams throughout Melbourne for two years, and I would like to create a section to formalise the format of the diagrams, including what to include/exclude/which highway icon to be used/if state routes should be included, etc. That is because a Canadian editor made several edits to the Richmond station track layout template, where they insist that "Punt Road" must be included. With the station convention including that it would keep consistency throughout all layout diagrams. Purin128AL (talk) 04:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

That is a good idea. I'll look at adding a sub-standard to cover this. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter I agree with this structure, however, shouldn't Sydney metro stations just be called 'Tullawong station' (for example) rather than Tullawong railway station. HoHo3143 (talk) 07:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

That was the part of the previous proposal, I'll have a look at updating it. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@HoHo3143, I've also started adding a section for the order of connecting service icons. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 09:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure for the order of NSW for the Regional train and Coach. The regional train comes somewhere after the Sydney train and the coach comes somewhere after the bus. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 09:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter order should be Metro, train, bus, ferry, light rail, coach. The file Syd Trains Logo.svg is only used on your sandbox and no other page. It should be deleted. Transport for NSW uses the darker orange for all train services HoHo3143 (talk) 10:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

The Syd Trains Logo.svg is the correct logo according to the transportnsw website (see [1] - Transport news dated 5 April 2022) there are 2 different coloured T icons. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter Right ok. The one that is on wikipedia is too yellow and would need changing. I (and all other users) haven't noticed a difference so I think it would be best if it was left alone. HoHo3143 (talk) 10:37, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Upon a submission of this proposal, I'll put in a suggestion of updating that logo and updating it's use on pages. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 11:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Diagram section suggestions

Discussion for diagram standards...
I will probably end up submitting the rest of this naming standard for approval before this section is finished. When we get a consensus on this section, I'll then add it to the naming standard proposal. --ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I may look at updating {{BS-AUSgauge}} to include a 2nd narrow gauge option, an option for dual gauge, and even have the current narrow gauge easily changeable to the Victorian 2ft 6in instead of the other states 3ft 6in. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I am glad this was suggested as I realised in made some inconsistencies between the first few diagrams (light blue group) and the recent ones (dark blue group). -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 07:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I would like to be rail-focused instead of road-focused for the rail icons, hence I suggest using the same icon for both tollways and freeways. Also the term "highway" is vague, as some are considered unimportant. Think "Maroondah Highway" for example, even a tram runs on a section of it. Also, better use RBq instead of RAq as RBq is originally designed for British motorways and RAq for German autobahns. Purin128AL (talk) 01:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

There is a difference between Freeways and Highways. The Calder Freeway only goes as far north as Harcourt, while it continues further north to Mildura as the Calder Highway. Most regional areas only have Highways.

Freeways are major roads with more than one lane of traffic in each direction designed for higher speed operation (usually 110km/h). They have barriers or wide median strips separating traffic travelling in opposite directions, and grade-separated intersections without roundabouts or traffic lights in the main route.

— Road transport in Australia#Roads and highways

Highways are also major roads, most are just one lane of traffic in each direction, not as higher speed as freeways (usually 80-100km/h), and tend to not have grade-separated intersections but they do have roundabouts or traffic lights. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:03, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

We do also need to define the icons to use on tram routes/light rails, probably under a separate heading due to extra notes about their complex interaction with roads. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

So I would just get rid of the term highway completely, as in all states it is either freeway or motorway that has a complete right of ways. Highways in metro areas are insignificant, so probably I would say only include freeways/motorways in metro areas, and in regional areas roads with an "A" prefix should be included and use RA icons.

I reckon track layout would only ever be created for Geelong/Newcastle/Gold Coast lines in regional areas, as for example Bacchus Marsh - Ballan have 15 level crossings in between which would be tedious to include all of them. Right now the rule is to include what is halfway between the current and adjacent stations so I have to reconsider what is a good distance to include in regional areas, as definitely if stations are 100km apart covering what's in 50km is unrealistic.

Melbourne is the only system in Australia that has track layouts currently, and I seem to be the only person in Australia making them right now (as it's a pain in the _ like for Flinders Street I spent 2 weeks making it). So not too sure what can be improved, but the convention I've created is basically what my format for the 100+ stations in Melbourne where I have made a layout.

For trams I have not considered how to make intersections like complex ones (e.g. Haymarket roundabout). So I would make normal road intersections using RP1/RP2 sets if I would make them. Someone has completed the Melbourne University tram stop route map but with a completely different format so not sure if I should reformat it. Recently I also modified the adjacent stations module for Yarra Trams so a style can be applied, changed all former St Kilda/Port Melbourne station articles from AU closed stations and added service infobox.

PS I'm not really a rail enthusiast but rather an infrastructure/city planning focused person, and I like creating technical wikipedia stuff. So that's why I'm mainly creating the track layouts, BSicons, svg diagrams here and are unsure about many things. Purin128AL (talk) 08:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

For regional stations, I'd look at the sort of area usually covered by signal diagrams. This usually is the assortment of siding and points close to the platform (and station yard if there is one). Occasionally there may also be a level crossing close by that would have provided access to the other side of the railway line. I would start at the end of the platform and go about 1km away (call this section a), if there are any features (points or siding) in section a then look at the next 1km from the last feature in section a. Repeat as necessary, until there is a 1km section with no features.

Eg:

1. Castlemaine - north end would continue past Parker Street to the end of the siding (siding goes over Parker St and Parker St crossing was originally covered by the signal box, so it should be included). While the south end would include to the points just to the north of Forest Street (no more points or sidings after that, so Forest Street doesn't need to be included). Also the fact that the Victorian Goldfields Railway depot area was called the Castlemaine Yard give a clue that it should be included.
2. Bendigo - would be the section between Thistle and Williamson Street (do not including those streets as they are not station access streets and there are no features after them). Note that south of Thistle Street there are more points within 1km, but they are part of Golden Square station.

ThylacineHunter (talk) 09:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I have created a route diagram for Burrumbeet station due to a user making multiple low standard diagrams on Wikipedia, including Burrumbeet station, St Albans station and the Yarra Valley Railway route map. I have reviewed many of his edits to make it up to standard or reverting it. The Burrumbeet station track layout could be how a regional station track layout should be made(?) Which is only including river/creeks with wikipedia articles, listing all level crossings halfway between itself and adjacent stations, and keep it collasped as it would be long. Purin128AL (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

1. Why is Windermere included?
2. You missed Kal Kal between Cockpit Lagoon Road and Black Bottom Road.
3. My proposal would only include Burrumbeet Road and the 4 rows after it. While that would work well for other station that have more infrastructure, I agree, it is very limited with stations like this. On the other hand, this may be a little too long (this would be improved with separating for Windermere and Kal Kal).
4. We need to figure out what to do with former junctions. Burrumbeet Park Racecourse Junction is between Western Highway and Avenue Road.

ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Also refrain from editing the old Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations) page for the moment. If we start editing both versions at the same time, we will start making mistakes and some points may get missed. We are nearly sorted with the final wording of the page and it should be finished in the next 2 weeks, We are just waiting on:

1.  Done Final discussion about a potential reworking of station page name formats re V/Line, Metro, and other operators - We have mostly come to the conclusion to NOT change this and NOT have a special format using operator names for the stations (as per here).
2.  Partly done Need to decide on a format for how the show a service as being different to a physical line - XXX V/Line rail service (how V/Line do it), XXX railway line (how Metro do it), XX railway line (how physical line do it)
3.  Partly done Final checks to do with diagrams section - check everything is covered, format section is not confusing (I'll add better sample rows)
4. Final checks for wording

ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I didn't include Kal Kal as I check via satallite imagary and there is no structure still intact, and it is also closed 50+ years before Burrumbeet station closed. So for same reason I would not include former junctions. Yeah I agree the diagram would be too long, but to be honest I would not create diagrams for stations after Waurn Ponds, Ballarat, Bendigo, Traralgon and Seymour to Shepparton in 5 years time, and never for regional closed stations.

For naming format, I agree with your proposal. We can probably merge all V/Line rail services to only the main 5 as in the V/Line page. Metro and physical lines can keep the status quo. The diagram ones are pretty complicated so I'll find a way to simplify it. Purin128AL (talk) 10:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I would possibly disagree on including Burrumbeet Park Racecourse Junction on Burrumbeet as info about Burrumbeet Park Racecourse station should probably be merged into that article. This may be a form of exception for similar 1 station small branches, where the branch station doesn't meet the criteria for a separate article. (I know of a small number where this sort of thing is the case) -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

@Purin128AL, For platforms I've changed it to "6-car trains or less, place two rows of platform BSicons" and "7-cars or more, place three rows of icons". This is in relation to most states using 6-cars or less for their sets and in Victoria, the new HCMTs being 7-car sets while the previous Melbourne EMUs and VLocity DMUs are 6-car sets. (Note: Although older Melbourne EMUs were sometimes 7 or 8-car sets, they were shorter cars) -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

This is actually an issue and I didn't take into account that Sydney uses 8-car sets (but similar length as HCMT). So probably change it to if the platform is more than 180 m long/more than 8 cars? I think platform length would be a better measurement than train cars. Purin128AL (talk) 15:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Using a length may be an issue, as I don't know where to find lengths of all platforms. I can get current Metro Trains Melbourne and V/Line stations fine, but not former stations that still exist (eg Malmsbury platform 1 or any station on the Geelong-Ballarat line). I haven't tried to find info on the other states platform lengths yet. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 01:32, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

We will also need a colour for triple gauge (Gladstone, Peterborough, Port Pirie Junction, Port Pirie South)--ThylacineHunter (talk) 10:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Terrain/grade

@ThylacineHunter @Purin128AL we also need to add a section on the terrain or grade that a station is built at. I use underground, ground level, lowered, and elevated however I have seen other articles in the past use below ground or some other word. We should come to a consensus and add a section in. HoHo3143 (talk) 10:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure this comes under the guidance of the naming convention. We are already pushing the limits of this convention by adding the "Transport symbols" and "Route / Service / Station diagrams" (although it does make sense to have these both defined in relation to Aus/NZ articles). The usage of underground, lowered, ground level, and elevated should already fall under a standard defined by WP:STATIONS. If we ever do get a WikiProject started for Australian Transport, this would be the type of thing it would be responsible for. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 03:13, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok that's understandable- thanks for letting me know. HoHo3143 (talk) 02:49, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

NZ lines are a major issue

If we define how to name articles for NZ lines and services, this will cause lots of renaming as there is too many variations. I am unsure how to proceeded with NZ, any ideas @Purin128AL, @HoHo3143? -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:07, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely no idea- I have little knowledge about NZ. Maybe just do ... Line similar to how Metro trains does. Otherwise I wouldn't know. HoHo3143 (talk) 06:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I'll refer this to the WP:NZR. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 07:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Last items todo checklist

•  Done Final discussion about a potential reworking of station page name formats re V/Line, Metro, and other operators.

We have come to the conclusion to NOT change this and NOT have a special format using operator names for the stations (as per here).

•  Partly done Need to decide on a format for how the show a service as being different to a physical line.

XXX V/Line rail service (how V/Line do it), XXX railway line (how Metro do it), XX railway line (how physical line do it) - this has a potential of causing confusion.

With basing these on the operator's name for the service, there now are a lot different variations.

•  Partly done Final checks to do with diagrams section - check everything is covered, format section is not confusing (I'll add better sample rows)
•  Pending Get WP:NZR to add about NZ lines.
•  Pending Get WP:NZR to add about NZ services.
•  Started Final checks for wording

ThylacineHunter (talk) 10:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter don't both metro trains and PTV refer to metropolitan lines as xxx Line (eg Frankston Line). They do it how Sydney does it. HoHo3143 (talk) 12:20, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

I hadn't seen any discussion on my proposal to change this above, so I kept it how it was:

2. Need to decide on a format for how the show a service as being different to a physical line - XXX V/Line rail service (how V/Line do it), XXX railway line (how Metro do it), XX railway line (how physical line do it)

— 05:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter right ok. Sorry I didn't say anything- could we change it to xxx Line for metropolitan rail services in Melbourne? (like Sydney) HoHo3143 (talk) 12:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Splitting Australia from New Zealand

As this now is basically just waiting on the information about New Zealand lines, I'll be waiting until the end of April 2023, if there hasn't been any update by then, I'll split this proposed naming convention into separate Australia and New Zealand proposals. While it would be nice to cover both, there are enough differences to justify this split (as is done with Canada and USA). New Zealand is also in a better position to create this sort of proposal as, unlike Australia, there is a dedicated WikiProject New Zealand Railways. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 08:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

As the deadline of the end of April has passed and there is no update from the WP:NZR, I'll go ahead with changing this to just an "Australian Station and Line Naming Convention" proposal.

When I get a chance:

• I'll redo the Services section to change most of them to a standard "[NAME] line" (reducing it from 10 to 7 different name types, & to remove any confusion to physical tack).
  • OK exceptions due to system type:
    • NSW/QLD - Light Rail ("[NAME] Light Rail")
    • NSW - Metro ("Sydney Metro [NAME]")
    • VIC - Tram ("Melbourne tram route [NUMBER]")
  • OK exceptions due to multiple destinations:
    • NSW - Regional services ("[NAME] Region")
  • To change:
    • NSW - Sydney trains, Intercity rail ("[NAME] Line")
    • QLD, SA, Vic - Metro ("[NAME] railway line")
    • Vic - V/Line ("[NAME] V/Line rail service")
• Y Final updates to Template:BS-AUSgauge to remove need to show all three (broad, standard, & narrow gauges) when only 1 or 2 of them are needed.
• Y Remove New Zealand from this proposal
• Remove country from "Disambiguation - lines" - Was for NZ. Only example in Australia I know is Wensleydale railway line (Australia) which should be renamed "Wensleydale railway line, Victoria"
• I'll read through for final checks for wording.
• Publish this as "Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian stations and lines)"
• Change the old proposal Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations) to "Wikipedia:Naming conventions (New Zealand stations)" and remove Australian sections.
• Submit the new proposal for acceptance.

-- ThylacineHunter (talk) 10:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Track layout check

I recently created a track layout for North Melbourne station here (Template:North Melbourne railway station). Please help me check if I miss any crossovers or if there're errors as it is a very complicated one. Thanks! Purin128AL (talk) 14:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Made some small comments on the other page, the actual tracks look correct (well as correct as you can get with BSicons). I like the elec icon and updated text on the legend at the bottom, I'll look at getting it eventually added to Template:BS-AUSgauge. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 14:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Now that all track layout diagrams for Metro stations (except Southern Cross) are completed, I'm actually thinking of how much detail we should include in the station track layout diagram. For example, should we include all directions the trains can run on? Or just normal operational direction (currently). Should we include all roads? Currently only freeways and level crossings are included.

In some early diagrams I made in 2021 like Belgrave and Burnley I included the siding arrow, and in Heyington I included the name for the siding. These are not continued in newer diagrams. Should these be the norm? Purin128AL (talk) 16:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't like the siding arrow that is on Belgrave and Burnley, but it could be useful on the more complex ones like North Melbourne (need to add something like: "if the diagram isn't clear as to the location of a certain feature, it can be pointed out with  (POINTERg@gq)...").

As for stating just "siding", I don't believe it is necessary, while named ones like "Burnley Stabling Sidings" are.

I think roads are ok how they are defined. The road in question on North Melbourne is Dudley St (state route 55) which are included as  (RAq)

Arrows - normal operational direction sounds good. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I'd suggest separating out some of the crossovers a bit more to avoid confusion, i.e. 2nd, 3rd from bottom left of the North Melbourne diagram, or at the down end of Burnley, facing vs trailing from No.3 road. Also, suggest making the Citylink bridge transparent at least over Spion Kop on the North Melb diagram, so the junction underneath is visible, and add notes or text identifying track pairs i.e. ES, MS, TS, BS for east, main, through and Broadmeadows suburban lines. Or alternatively, we could auto-link to the most recent diagram in Vicsig? Anothersignalman (talk) 12:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Future of this

With now being associated with a WikiProject, and then with possibly expanding this to also cover more transport types (eg bus), I feel we may need to split this into multiple sections:

• Naming convention for stations/stops, lines/routes/services, & rolling stock/vehicles
• Policy for route/service/station diagrams & transport symbols

ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@Fork99, I know you have been dealing with naming of articles of rolling stock. Would you be able to help with adding a section to this naming convention for rolling stock & vehicles? -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@ThylacineHunter: Sure, but I’ll be a little busy in real life the next few weeks. Whenever I have time I’ll try to help out. So I think a rough plan of how to do it would be to section it by original state government operator or original private operator of said rolling stock. And, also, to use the manufacturer’s name + model/contract number or whatever for things like UGL Rail C44aci, which have multiple operators. Each section should have a brief description of how to name a particular thing, plus an example.

• Descriptions of what words to capitalise.
• ’Set’ vs ‘stock’ vs ‘class’ vs whatever.
• Links to Wikipedia’s policy at WP:ARTICLETITLE.
• If an operator has/d an ‘X class’ diesel locomotive, but also operates/d an ‘X class’ steam locomotive, need to explain how to disambiguate that too.
• Brief mention of terminology differences between railcars, multiple units, railmotors, carriages, locomotives, whatever.
• Probably encourage editors to create redirects for article titles with notable subsequent operator names just for accessibility. E.g. VicRail N type carriage should have a redirect from V/Line N type carriage.

Fork99 (talk) 21:59, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

This is a mere pin prick on the larger task of establishing the components of the wider scope, as infrastructure items (tunnels, bridges, other structures) need to have a n established and clear determination - as the long term arguments between US and UK variations of vocabulary about things on rail is one thing, there are also variants in the truck/bus terminologies, as well as the shipping/ferry/modal transport areas as well, as editors come on board with varied interests and experiences hopefully we will benefit from the involvement! JarrahTree 09:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Hopefully this proposal can form a basis for naming all these things. It stated as just updating the old station name proposal that had never been officially accepted, and expanding it to also cover rail lines. Then with the discussions on rolling stock naming that past month, I realised this may need to be expanded to cover more things. It will probably need to eventually split into various separate naming conventions as it grows. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 01:40, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Station naming question

I'm not sure of the status of this or if it's been submitted, and good work to you folks for updating this. I just wanted to ask what the editors here thought about the station naming convention and share my thoughts. I personally think we should continue naming Sydney Metro and other "metro/rapid transit" systems as "X railway station", for a few reasons.

First, as per the definitions on wikipedia itself a metro/rapid transit system is still a type of railway and in Australia's case they're all heavy rail, so it makes more sense to be consistent. The opening sentence of the station naming section makes this mistake as Sydney Metro is still heavy rail, as well as being rapid transit.

Second, changing it to "X metro station" means all stations that serve both systems, for example Chatswood railway station, would have to be changed to just "Chatswood station" (this is the practice in some countries with lots of systems). I think this is needlessly confusing and means changing a lot of articles, and ideally all stations would have some indication they are train stations in the title.

Third, as more hybrid systems that resemble metros come online in Australia it means wikipedia has to decide what is and isn't a rapid transit/metro system, which verges on original research. Will the SRL be a metro, will cross river rail or the Metro Tunnel corridor? I think it sets editors up for unnecessary terminology debates, when they're all railways anyway. And it's fine for the type of system to be labelled in the opening sentence like most Sydney Metro stations currently are. The only exception will be when stations share a name with an existing station but are not physically connected, i.e. Parramatta and maybe some SRL stations, when is makes sense to describe as the X Metro station (probably capitalised) or X Metro railway station. Gracchus250 (talk) 00:11, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I agree with keeping it as “X railway station”. Regarding the separate Parramatta metro station, not sure why “Metro” needs to be capitalised? But other than that, yeah seems fine to me.

To be honest just as a side note (completely irrelevant, but if they do this, we wouldn’t have to worry about this convention): I’m kinda hoping that when the Sydney Metro West finally opens, the government decides to rename it to something else like Parramatta Square railway station just because it’d be quite confusing to have to somehow explain to the entirety of Sydney’s population that Parramatta metro station and Parramatta railway station aren’t the same thing. Fork99 (talk) 00:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah you're right, I hope they go with a separate name because at the least people will assume they're connected underground. The opening is a long way away so things will probably change. I've always assumed with SRL the names are placeholders, e.g. there's already a Burwood station so they will probably go with Deakin Burwood or something. Gracchus250 (talk) 00:38, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

@Gracchus250, nothing has been submitted, as there wasn't any consensus on service names yet. Also as this project was in the process of being started, I thought I'd wait until we were up and running with a few members before trying to push this. We are now getting to a point where we should continue with this proposal now.

As for the Metro things, I'm not to familiar with things in other states so I deferred to how articles were mostly already named (hence why I have removed NZ from this as there was no consistency in line names). A similar thing with Tram and Light rail. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 01:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks. I will put my name down to contribute to the project in the future, when I have a little more time to help out. Gracchus250 (talk) 01:31, 4 July 2023 (UTC)