Template talk:Metlink rail lines

Proposals

Why does this template have a section for proposals? This may give the misleading impression that it is proposed to run Metlink commuter services on these lines, or that the lines were or are in some way proposed to become part of the Metlink network. Both projects were dead and buried long before the Metlink brand was created, and in the case of the Plimmerton–Haywards line it was proposed as a shortcut for freight trains. I don't see how they are related to Metlink? — Matthew25187 (talk) 10:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the Queensland Rail template, which had a proposals piece - just cut and pasted in the potential proposals. That said the Plimmerton-Haywards line proposals weren't just for freight; the 20th century proposals were to connect a new city being built near Pauatahanui - there's actually a display about this I believe at the "Made in Porirua" exhibition currently on in Porirua.--LJ Holden 21:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still, this template implies an association between these proposals and the Metlink brand currently used by the regional council's public transport operations. There has never, to my knowledge, been any suggestion of actually building these lines for the use of Metlink-operated trains, or any predecessor public transport operation run by the regional council. I doubt even a spendthrift Labour government with Wainuiomata fan Trevor Mallard could justify spending $100s of millions these days on a railway line to Wainuiomata!

To me, a Metlink-related proposal would be something that is planned or expected to occur sometime in the future, e.g. double-tracking Trentham-Upper Hutt, or extending electrification north of Upper Hutt or Waikanae. — Matthew25187 (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, will remove them. --LJ Holden 09:34, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]