Talk:Western Australian Government Railways

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

earlier comments[edit]

Ideally it would be good to get the Branch/named lines opening and closing dates where applicable.

If anyone is lurking around this article, it would be good to see some bits and pieces added or any possible links to the various enthusiasts websites would be great!User:SatuSuro 12:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am keen to research and add more details of branch lines, sidings, stations, yards, locos etc but a bit unsure of the naming standards to keep the article police at bay. I also think a tighter category would be useful, something like 'Rail transport in Western Australia' or 'Railways of Western Australia' cheers Nachoman-au 05:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Good suggestion - the title of this art was known by most in the old days as 'the wagr', but for off-shoot arts would be good with something like 'Rail Transport of Western Australia' - as the dominant 'railroad' moniker supporters cannot come and do edits if we dont carry the 'railway' word! User:Satusuro 09:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments Satusuro. While poking around google I can across this good reference for Named Passenger trains in the WAGR era [1] Nachoman-au 13:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Incorporattion of non wagr info into this art[edit]

I have sent a personal message to grahamerec about the non wagr info - I am assuming thaat this art was not started as 'the history of rail transport in wa" but specifically the wagr - I would suggest a separate l;inked art for that title and the editing/moving of some of the stuff inserted here to an art with thaat broader picture. also I really hadnt intended - on the creation of this article to include post wagr info either - the wagr existed within a particular window of time - I would suggest more recent incarnations deserve separate arts. Comments from other editors would be appreciated. User:SatuSuro 12:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Public Transport Authority = Western Australian Government Railways[edit]

In the lead the article suggests that Public Transport Authority == Western Australian Government Railways. Is this actually true, or has someone added it because they were both government authorities and both ran railways? Wongm (talk) 13:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Article[edit]

Hello all! I have now just about completed an entirely new article for this page. It is currently offline and I just wanted to state my intentions and get some feedback before I go ahead with the upload. I have restructured and rewritten almost everything, but have preserved other users contributions, editing only where necessary to maintain continuity &c. I think that this article will bring the WAGR page in line with other railway company articles, such as that on the Great Western Railway. I have included sections on Geography, Engineering, Passenger and Freight services, Ancillary services, advertising, services to patrons, operational centres, preservation and more!

Please feel free to scrutinise my other Wikipedia articles. The WAGR P and Pr Classes article was written by me in entirey, and I think it is of a high standard.

I am currently working on revisions, images and references, but hope to have it complete within the week. Regards! Corporal29 (talk) 10:31, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kalgoorlie services[edit]

I have rearranged the named services into a sortable table (sort by destination, date or name). I started out just fixing a simple indentation issue and it escalated. I was careful to only use data that was already on Wikipedia but I'm not entirely sure that the Kalgoorlie services are correct. Possibly the remark for the Kalgoorlie Express should be shifted to The Kalgoorlie. Anybody know? Which ever one is correct, the big long remark would be better in that (currently non-existent) article.  Stepho  talk  09:27, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dual gauge?[edit]

I understand that the lines mentioned in history of operations were made dual gauge rather than being converted outright and that as such the statement is inaccurate. Peter Horn User talk 01:15, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only the line from East Perth / Kwinana to Northam is dual gauge, most of it on new alignments. East of Northam, the 3ft 6 in track was converted to standard gauge and partially realigned. Bahnfrend (talk) 12:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To merge Westrail into Western Australian Government Railways, on the grounds that rebranding doesn't designate distinct entities; short text, context, overlap. Klbrain (talk) 09:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I originally attempted to make this merge WP:BOLDLY. However, following its reversion I am opening this discussion.

I propose that the article Westrail be merged into this article based on the following:

  • Both articles share overlapping content due to them being written about the same topic.
  • "Westrail" was not a separate company or organisation from WAGR, it was the public-facing brand of WAGR from 1975 to December 2000.
  • State Records Office of WA show that the final incarnation of WAGR (following earlier renames) existed from 22 April 1949 through to 17 December 2000.[2] This covers the entire history of its time branded as Westrail, indicating that the name change to "Westrail" was only a brand name and made no change to WAGR's existence as a government entity.
    • The State Records Office also states that following the sale of WAGR's freight division, WAGR continued to exist: "WAGR continued to operate as the Western Australian Government Railways Commission".[3] If Westrail had been a replacement entity for WAGR, then WAGR could not have continued to exist from 1975 to 2000.
  • The articles in question and the State Records Office state that when WAGR's freight division was privatised, the Westrail "name and logo" was included in the sale.[4] Further indication of "Westrail" being simply a brand name of WAGR that was able to be sold to another group.

– Nick Mitchell 98 talk 08:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

excellent explanation Nick - I am not as focused on the legal issues and the entities under law - I am explaining from my understanding of the operational changes that occutred - in the short time of the specific entity - I believe that there were sufficient activities on track and in the rolling stock that actually are worth explaining (if only the gonzoes would ediit wikipedia rather than slagging it) under the banner of the new name. Operationally things were happening that did not happen under the banner of the wagr, but I am unable to dig up the evidence in the short term.
One small problem with these sort of discussions is the low level of other eyes with adequate knowledge - the shrinking editor cohort means in many situations no one in some discussions knows anything apart from the superficial evidence of online materials. Short of spending considerable time accessing the materials that I have in part already alluded to in the other editors talk page (affleck being one, which outlines the process by which the modernising of the operations in the westrail period which saw many of the wagr era changes eventuate), I have very limited time (due to real life) and resources to answer the claim of a merge. I disagree with the merge, and am unlikely able to access materials due to the current plague and its absurdities, so whatever happens, at least I am on the record to say its a lot more than what archivists and others might claim. I must thank Nick Mitchell for such a well laid out explanation from what he has been able to access, if only the average editor was as polite, and thorough. As to whether I am able to access materials to raise suspicion about archivists overviews, it is very unlikely in the short term. But who knows no one ever abides by the old era adage anymore - Wikipedia:There_is_no_deadline but I suspect I probably misread it in the first place. JarrahTree 08:50, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, while there is some overlap and a bit of editing needed to remove the post 1976 text from the WAGR article, and pre 1976 text from the Westrail article, they are clearly distinct irrespective of the legal entity underpinning. By way of a similar example, in New South Wales the State Rail Authority was the legal entity from 1980 until 2003, but was only the brand name until 1989 when the CityRail and CountryLink brands were introduced. Joondam (talk) 07:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't follow - why would we remove the post-1976 text from the WAGR article, when WAGR continued for many years thereafter? In what ways would you suggest that they're distinct? What distinct content would they have? The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Because one is (or should be) about WAGR that traded from 1890 until 1976, the other about Westrail that traded from 1976 until 2000, at the moment there is a bit of crossover between the two. They are distinct in that until 1976 Western Australian Government Railways was the trading name. It was dropped in 1976 when the Westrail brand was introduced. Joondam (talk) 07:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • This seems to make a distinction that doesn't exist: WAGR "traded" for many years after 1976 with different branding. I don't think I've ever seen someone argue that we should stop an article on an organisation 20 years before it ceased to exist before. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on the above basis - but open to changing my mind if my questions to Joondam above can be answered. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - while I don't have an opinion on the merge itself, just want to point out that there is no notice of the merge discussion on Western Australian Government Railways Commission. Onel5969 TT me 12:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: In law, "Westrail" was no more than a trading name of the Western Australian Government Railways, which, as far as I am aware, was, at the time, nothing more than a Department of the WA government. (By contrast, the Western Australian Government Railways Commission (2000–2003) was an incorporated entity separate from the WA government.) However, that does not mean that the two articles should be merged. Although the article British Rail covers the period 1948 to 1997, including the period before 1965, when the state-owned company started trading under that name, it does not follow that Wikipedia's coverage of the WA equivalent of that company must be similarly contained in one article. There's no hard and fast rule about these things, and an Australian example of the opposite approach can be found not only in the State Rail Authority, CityRail and CountryLink articles, but also in the two articles Bank of New South Wales (before it was renamed) and Westpac (since it was renamed). In the British case, the change of name was minor: from British Railways to British Rail. In the WA case, the change of name was substantial, and accompanied by a complete change of corporate image that, as the Westrail article confirms, was intended to represent a clean break from the past. Similar comments apply to State Rail Authority / CityRail / CountryLink, and to Bank of New South Wales / Westpac. That being so, it seems to me, as a person who resided in WA prior to, during, and since, the Westrail era, the present approach of having separate articles makes much more sense. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Bahnfrend: You argue that the WAGR/Westrail change was "accompanied by a complete change of corporate image that was intended to represent a clean break from the past" and contrast it to British Railways/British Rail which apparently was not. But wasn't the rebrand of British Rail also a complete change of corporate image and a clean break from the past? The UK network and its branding was massively overhauled in the rebrand to "British Rail", but it was still the same organisation at the helm. – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 13:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Westrail into Western Australian Government Railways, given that the former is a trading name of the latter (used for the part of its history). So, for reasons of overlap and context. The Westrail article is also short, and the combined length would be a comfortable read. My view is that the encyclopaedia should be about the reality of corporate structures rather than corporate gloss or rebranding. Klbrain (talk) 05:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  checkY Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 09:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Western Australian Government Railways Commission into Western Australian Government Railways[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was merge. Steelkamp (talk) 04:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Western Australian Government Railways Commission is just a rename of Western Australian Government Railways/Westrail and not a separate entity. See the Westrail 2000 annual report, which indicates it was known as the "Western Australian Government Railways Commission" some time before 18 December 2000. Also see the State Records Office, which says "On 17 December 2000, the Western Australian Government Railways (WAGR) freight division was sold to the Australian Railway Group along with the Westrail name and logo. The WAGR continued to operate as the Western Australian Government Railways Commission." This indicates that the Western Australian Government Railways Commission is not a separate entity to Westrail. Steelkamp (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection, having created the article(s), my response is restrained due to agf. Short lived variations also included the variant names in the earlier years, maybe not separate articles, as this merge and argument insist. JarrahTree 12:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, there were a whole bunch of different names in the first half of the 20th century as shown here. Steelkamp (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sigh, you are quoting the item to me from what I utilised some years ago in the wagr article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Australian_Government_Railways#Name. There were significant issues in aspects of the name changes, and others very insignificant JarrahTree 00:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Western_Australian_Government_Railways&oldid=1214309145"