Talk:Padstow railway station, Sydney

Australia: Sydney / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Padstow railway station, Sydney is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Trains: Stations Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.

Requested move 22 August 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is that the Sydney station is not the primary topic. Jenks24 (talk) 14:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Padstow railway station, Sydney → Padstow railway station – Clear primary topic. The Sydney station is operational, the Cornish one is not. – Mqst north (talk) 05:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mqst north and Lamberhurst: Queried by User:Lamberhurst. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Sydney station is the clear primary topic because it is the only one of the two stations to be in present-day operation. (The 'what links here' and traffic tests can't be used fairly at this stage because the Cornish station has only just been moved to its own unique article name. Mqst north (talk) 04:42, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC requires that the article is more likely to be associated with the title than other similarly-named articles, either because of usage and/or long-term significance. This is not the case with the Padstow station in Sydney, which is a suburban facility on a commuter route with no particular history or sentiment attached to it. On the other hand, the English Padstow station was open for a much longer period and has acquired a certain legend due to its association with the holiday expresses which served the station for much of its existence. Its significance is borne out by a search on Google books where the results for "padstow railway station" are almost exclusively for the Cornish station and not for the Australian one. The page views for the Cornish station are also higher than those for the Australian one. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:31, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose neither is significantly more than the other, hence a disambiguation should be established. Pointtwo (talk) 12:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Lamberhurst, no need or benefit, Padstow railway station is a dab.Pincrete (talk) 08:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No clear primary topic. It's irrelevant that one is operational and the other is not. The station in Sydney is not particularly important, large or well-known. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:50, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The city is extremely important information for the title of transport utilities, if the context of the city is not already established, as it is not for an article title. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.