Talk:New South Wales A and B sets

Issue with references

G'day mates, I've just recently tagged Reference 57 of this page as dead. Multiple times, I've tried to open it on my phone and laptop, but every time, X says there's an issue. I'm guessing that because this post was uploaded during the Twitter times, there must've been an issue when Twit was converted to X. So, it's possible to find an archive of this page. Please let me know on this talk page if you've installed the archive or if you have any questions. MrActiniuM (talk) 08:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 28 July 2025

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved without prejudice against a separate discussion proposing move to some variation of "Waratah". * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:04, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

---

Sydney Trains A & B sets → Sydney Trains A and B setsSydney Trains A and B sets – The fact that this article's title contains a direct violation of MOS:AMPERSAND sticks out very prominently to me. The ampersand (&) symbol is difficult to type on your keyboard as you have to reach over to a different row of keys, as opposed to the letter rows that most people frequently use. The ampersand is not a traditional part of the English language that is used in spoken prose. As per WP:TITLESPECIALCHARACTERS an ampersand should not be included in an article's title at all. Qwerty123M (talk) 04:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Ivey (talk - contribs) 14:04, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Honestly, the status quo isn't ideal as the set letters ("A set" for the original series of Waratah, "B set" for Waratah Series 2) might not be the WP:COMMONNAME used outside of the industry. For example, the only news article I could find from a quick Google search that used "B set" to refer to the Series 2 of Waratah trains was this Sydney Morning Herald article: . Whereas these articles don't mention the set letters at all and use "Waratah" instead: , .

However there are multiple issues with my proposed alternative of Waratah (train) per WP:COMMONNAME. Disambiguation needed due to the primary topic of Waratah currently being the plant/flower.

1. This title would not be WP:CONSISTENT with other articles for other sets/classes of train in Category:Electric multiple units of New South Wales currently following the convention of "New South Wales X set" or "Sydney Trains X set". Either a new RM would be needed for the rest or someone could move the rest without discussion.

2. Other articles in that category following a similar naming convention to this article don't always have an official alternative name to the set letters or even a significantly widely known colloquial name, unlike the A & B sets ("Waratah"). For example, in the last article linked above, "S-Set" (and its nickname "Sweat Set") is used in the source, but "Waratah Series 2" is used exclusively instead of "B set". Also see this Wayback Machine archive of the same page including the sets that have been retired from passenger service. The inclusion or omission of the hyphen and capitalisation of "set" is also an issue.

From the category, the other relevant articles in alphabetical order of their set letter are (I have put the official alternative name in brackets if there is one): New South Wales C set, New South Wales D set ("Mariyung"), New South Wales H set ("Oscar"), Sydney Trains K set, Sydney Trains M set ("Millennium"), New South Wales R set, New South Wales S set, Sydney Trains T set ("Tangara"), New South Wales U set, New South Wales V set. Fork99 (talk) 08:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I've had a further think about dot point 2 I made above. The non-named trains are either all retired (C, S, U sets), about to be retired (K, V sets) or likely have a placeholder name as they are yet to enter passenger service (R set). A little bit WP:CRYSTALBALL for the R sets but this is based on recent precedent from the history of the name for the New South Wales D set (so for now just leave that one aside until further information comes to light).

This would leave the rest as all having official alternative names in addition to their set letters. Possibly we could just leave the retired and soon-to-be-retired ones as is at their current names, but move the rest of the operational train types to their WP:COMMONNAME? Again, this would likely require a separate RM though.

Also note that there is precedent for using the common names for New South Wales XPT, New South Wales Xplorer, New South Wales Hunter railcar and New South Wales Endeavour railcar. However, these are in different subcategories of Category:Rolling stock of New South Wales to above. Fork99 (talk) 03:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Rapid transit, WikiProject Australian Transport, WikiProject Trains, and WikiProject Sydney have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 05:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

• Support per nom. I suspect the title is somewhat descriptive not a proper noun, that groups the two train sets, so should use the preferred "and" rather than "&", per WP:AMPERSAND. No opinion concerning the use of "Waratah". DankJae 20:23, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose as suggested, propose splitting the article as explained below. Mounstreip (talk) 05:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• Comment Without wanting to muddy the live RM and therefore think the current discussion should be left to run its course, when done consideration should perhaps be given to splitting into separate articles. While there is a fair amount in common between the two, there are distinct differences. Initially there was a separate Sydney Trains B set article that was merged in 2018 from what I can see without a formal merge discussion.

Again a separate discussion for another day, but consideration should be given to renaming the remaining Sydney Trains x set articles to the more generic New South Wales x set which will future proof the articles when the government agency is next renamed, something that historically has occurred every 10 to 20 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mounstreip (talk • contribs) 05:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Support per MOS:&. The Manual of Style has a clear preference for spelling out the word rather than using an ampersand unless there is a good reason otherwise. I can't see such a reason here. Tomiĉo (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

• Weak support for renaming per MOS regarding amperstands, however, the proposed title still is not ideal as it does not appear that the commonname is either variant of the article title. Without looking much into it, it does seem like having the article at Waratah trains would be an improvement. TiggerJay (talk) 03:27, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

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.

Requested move 5 May 2026

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 05:43, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

---

• Sydney Trains A and B sets → New South Wales A and B sets
• Sydney Trains H set → New South Wales H set
• Sydney Trains K set → New South Wales K set
• Sydney Trains M set → New South Wales M set
• Sydney Trains T set → New South Wales T set

– Align with other member of Category:Electric multiple units of New South Wales. Will avoid the renaming of articles when agencies change or they are withdrawn as happened with New South Wales S set and New South Wales V set articles. Donrownski (talk) 23:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 02:44, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Disapprove. "Sydney Trains" means it operates suburban lines. "New South Wales" means it's retired, or operates intercity and regional lines. MrActiniuMtalk 23:34, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Sydney, Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board, WikiProject Australian Transport, WikiProject Trains, and WikiProject Rapid transit have been notified of this discussion. Qwerty123M (talk) 02:22, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. These trains are not operated by NSW TrainLink on intercity or regional lines so this title has the potential to confuse readers, making this title incompatible with WP:PLA.

A better proposal I came up with is to move this article to Sydney Trains Waratah fleet, we can work on the format of that title but I would like you to withdraw this discussion so we can discuss this more WP:COMMONNAME, references support the use of this name as well as when people are saying the names of these trains in conversation, in addition to set names being an excessively technical name, WP:MTAU supports the use of widening the audience of this article by saying Wikipedia articles should be written for the widest possible general audience. If this discussion is not withdrawn, there is a high likelihood that it will result in a no consensus closure. I have also thought we could use terms like New South Wales Oscar trains, Sydney Trains Millennium fleet, Sydney Trains Tangara fleet and New South Wales Mariyung trains for their respective articles. The closer of the previous move discussion held in July 2025 said without prejudice against a separate discussion proposing move to some variation of "Waratah", I take this to mean that a discussion of a WP:COMMONNAME for this page's title is encouraged by other editors. Qwerty123M (talk) 02:52, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

• Support per consistency. All of these articles relate to classes of trains which operated in New South Wales before Sydney Trains existed, and continue to operate in New South Wales today. The alphabetical naming scheme for passenger train classes used in New South Wales extends beyond the Sydney Trains suburban network, to other classes such as the New South Wales D sets and New South Wales R sets. And Sydney Trains is a part of Transport for New South Wales, a NSW Government agency. I see no reason not to use New South Wales consistently as the disambiguator across the lot.

Also, oppose the alternative suggestion floated. Tomiĉo (talk) 08:35, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Tomiĉo the B sets came into service in 2018, after Sydney Trains was founded. MrActiniuMtalk 09:43, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Indeed. There is no separate article for the B Sets, however. Tomiĉo (talk) 21:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

• Support per WP:CONSISTENT with other members of Category:Multiple units of New South Wales. Don't really understand the logic in having Sydney Trains or NSW TrainLink as the prefix until the trains are withdrawn and then replacing with New South Wales as the prefix when withdrawn, as suggested above to be why the S and V set articles were renamed, and presumably will happen when the last K sets are retired shortly. JCN217 (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

  The D set isn't prefixed with NSW TrainLink, rather "New South Wales", further highlighting inconsistent brand names used in these titles.

  If we were to retain the Sydney Trains brand name, then it would be appropriate to move intercity and regional trains to NSW TrainLink naming schemes. Qwerty123M (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

  I guess we have "New South Wales" prefixed on some of these articles because the trains were run by multiple operators. Qwerty123M (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Australian Transport, WikiProject Rapid transit, WikiProject Sydney, Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board, and WikiProject Trains have been notified of this discussion. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Tankgoldgirl (talk) 01:20, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Notes

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.

Lead section issues

Multiple users have reverted edits for removing "New South Wales" and "Sydney Trains" in the lead sentence. In accordance to WP:CONSENSUS, I'll bring up the idea to avoid edit warring.

I say we shouldn't add it because it already says it in the title and further down in the lead section. Plus, we should keep consistency with other articles, as there is no prefixes in the Tangara, S set, K set, C set, U set, W set etc.

Let me know if we shall remove or not remove.

MrActiniuMtalk 22:59, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Comment, As I notice that the same topic has been initiated on two other similar articles, suggest one centralised discussion be held at Talk:New South Wales V set. A note has been placed on the project page. Donrownski (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 1 June 2026

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. It has been pointed out to me that I actually relisted this (I was just going to leave a comment but I suppose I did it as a relist comment, using Move+, out of reflex). The proposal has no support. (closed by non-admin page mover) ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 04:31, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

---

• New South Wales A and B sets → New South Wales Waratah trains
• New South Wales H set → New South Wales Oscar trains
• New South Wales M set → New South Wales Millennium trains
• New South Wales T set → New South Wales Tangara trains
• New South Wales D set → New South Wales Mariyung trains

– The closure statement for the move discussion held in 2025 said Moved without prejudice against a separate discussion proposing move to some variation of "Waratah"., the first comment in that discussion also pointed out that more sources use a version of Waratah so is a vastly more WP:COMMONNAME than "A set", "B set" or any other type of train currently operating. Transport for NSW does not use A set and similar names, rather they use Waratah on a public-facing website for types of trains. A set or similar technical names are not commonly used in regular conversation with people that are not train enthusiasts. Qwerty123M (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 15:26, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Rapid transit, WikiProject Australian Transport, WikiProject Trains, Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board, and WikiProject Sydney have been notified of this discussion. Qwerty123M (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have to oppose with this one. It's a bit hard to keep consistent because the K sets, S sets, V sets and C sets don't have common names and are referred to in their technical names. MrActiniuMtalk 21:45, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I have notified every user that has participated in previous move discussions except for @MrActiniuM as he has already replied to the nomination. Qwerty123M (talk) 23:45, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

• Alternative proposal of Waratah (train), Oscar (train), Millennium (train), Tangara (train) and Mariyung, respectively. "New South Wales" is an unnecessary disambiguation per WP:PRECISE/WP:CONCISE and plural "trains" per WP:PLURAL should be singular. Disambiguation "(train)" would be necessary as Waratah, Oscar, Millennium and Tangara are already occupied and would also be consistent with articles in the similar Category:Electric multiple units of Victoria (state).

I did present evidence that "Waratah" is the WP:COMMONNAME in independent sources in the previous RM mentioned above. The following are some sources I've found for the other train types which don't use the format of "X set" at all: Transport for NSW Future Fleet Program (Tangara, Millennium, Oscar), SMH news article (Millennium), ABC News article (Millennium), 9 News article (Tangara), Timeout article (Tangara), SMH news article (Tangara).

I do see MrActiniuM's point about being WP:CONSISTENT with other entries in Category:Electric multiple units of New South Wales, although I would argue that the articles being proposed to be moved are all train types that are still in regular revenue passenger service, whereas all other articles are about train types that are historic/retired/about to be retired or are irrelevant as they are operated by Sydney Metro instead of Sydney Trains, the latter's trains the subject of discussion here. That would leave the operational train type articles consistent with each other and same for the non-operational types. Fork99 (talk) 01:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I support this proposal as a modification of the most common name. If you think this has a better chance of success, I would consider withdrawing this nomination and proposing these options instead, however I am conflicted as to whether I should do that because the previous move request this year established a consensus in favour of using "New South Wales" to prefix these titles. Qwerty123M (talk) 02:53, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. Two points. Firstly, of the 11 articles on electric multiple units in New South Wales which currently use the format "New South Wales {LETTER} set", this proposal seeks to shift five from letters to nicknames and from "set" to "trains" while leaving six articles for the W, U, V, S, K, and C sets unchanged. That seems to substantially degrade consistency to me. I'm not sure about the argument that this is justified by a divide between operational and non-operational stock—would we move the articles back to the current format as each class is retired to maintain this distinction?

Secondly, using nicknames where there is a broader consistent naming scheme available sits uncomfortably with related examples on Wikipedia. We have South Australia's 2000 class railcar rather than Jumbos. New Zealand DM class electric multiple unit rather than English Electrics. British Rail Class 55 rather than Deltics, or British Rail Class 800 rather than Azumas for a more recent example. This practice of following consistent patterns rather than nicknames is not restricted to rolling stock classes either; the examples of China women's national football team rather than the Steel Roses or USS Constitution rather than Old Ironsides come to mind. Tomiĉo (talk) 10:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

My point about the distinction between operational and non-operational classes is more about what seems like Transport for NSW abandoning the use of "X set" over time.

With the examples provided above, not all articles in their respective categories have alternative names (formal or informal), whereas all articles in this RM do. As stated by Qwerty123M above, these aren't unofficial nicknames and are officially used as well as being what I believe is the WP:COMMONNAME. Fork99 (talk) 11:17, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, both original nomination and alternative proposal. Current name convention is WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSISTENT. Noritplere (talk) 01:09, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose on the grounds of WP:CONSISTENT; perhaps WP:MOVEPROTECTION should be applied especially to the Waratahs, as this article has been moved twice already, thus likely fall under "Pages subject to a page-name dispute". EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 09:58, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose per WP:CONSISTENT. I concur with a temporary move protection on this article. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 04:27, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Just going to also note that protection isn't for when a page is repeatedly moved by requested moves. It doesn't do anything to stop requested moves happening. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 15:26, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

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.