Talk:Melba Line

Trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	June 27, 2018

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 articles

Low

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

Australia: Tasmania / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Melba Line 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (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, or the State Library of Tasmania.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Emu Bay Railway Line.

Original track gauge 912 mm?[edit]

The article now states: "On 1 February 1878 a 71 kilometre, 912 mm (2 ft 11 29⁄32 in) gauge horse drawn wooden tramway opened". Source is James Fenton (1884). The History of Tasmania From its Discovery in 1642 to the Present Time. p. 391.

Some questions. Is it likely that the gauge in Australia, 1878, would be defined in metric units? I'd expect ft, in units. Second, is this peculiar size of (2 ft 11 29⁄32 in) realistic? For a wooden track even? I want to test the hypothesis that it was laid at plain 3 feet.

Can someone open the source, and check what is actually written there? -DePiep (talk) 11:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is available in pdf. Page 391 (print) does not mention a gauge. The footnote does mention the change from wood to iron tracks. -DePiep (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove this gauge mentioning. -DePiep (talk) 12:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]