Talk:Myki/Archive 1

notability tag

Lincalinca: Hi, just wondering on what basis you nominate the myki page for notability. If you visit the public transport page, you'll see that a range of electronic fare card systems have a page; the myki page covers a shortly to be introduced variant - I see it as no less deserving than any other. While it may not be as 'complete' as one would like as yet, this will shortly change when the system is introduced. I see no point deleting the page only to have it rewritten later in the year. Natronomonas 00:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation of myki

I have capitalised myki (as Myki) at the start of sentences as per Wikipedia's Manual of Style:

Trademarks which begin with a lowercase letter

Trademarks which officially begin with a lowercase letter raise several problems because they break the normal capitalization rules of English that trademarks, as proper nouns, are written with initial capital letters, both in the middle of a sentence, like other proper nouns, but also at the beginning of a sentence, like any word. The following guidelines represent a consensus compromise between respecting the preferred treatment of the trademark owner and respecting the rules of standard written English.

Lowercased trademarks with no internal capitals should always be capitalized:

avoid: thirtysomething is a television show that may have been sponsored by adidas, but not by craigslist, because it was over before craigslist existed.
instead, use: Thirtysomething is a television show that may have been sponsored by Adidas, but not by Craigslist, because it was over before Craigslist existed.

I deliberately left the first use (bolded) as all lowercase.
Philip J. Rayment 02:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4 January 2013 I have reviewed this page and replaced references to 'myki' with 'Myki', as is consistent with the Wikipedia's Manual of Style (see above). Citations referring to 'myki' have not been updated. Axdya (talk) 06:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All you proved there is that Wikipedia has a really dumb policy in this area. What arrogance says we should capitalise such terms? HiLo48 (talk) 11:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've got it the wrong way around -- surely the arrogance is on Myki's part in expecting the world to bend the rules of the English language in accordance with their marketing whims? Jpatokal (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our job is to describe the world as it is, not the way we think it should be. HiLo48 (talk) 05:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article is already decorated with the official Myki logo in its lowercase glory. But we're veering offtopic here, you're welcome to bring this up at WP:MOS (for about the zillionth time...) Jpatokal (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a look there, and can see there's no point in trying to change this stupid policy. Doesn't stop it being stupid though. My justification for using the lower case form is the way the word is written in the most reliable independent secondary source, The Age newspaper. It's the quality broadsheet newspaper for the city that's the home of myki. Apart from where "myki" is used at the start of a sentence, it never capitalises the word. An example is here. There are naturally many more. You (and the MOS) are insisting that we ignore the best possible source on this. Weird. Oh well, as our best known local bushranger is alleged to have said just before he was hanged, "Such is life". HiLo48 (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the aspects of the Wikipedia Manual of Style which relate to capitalisation of trademarks could be viewed as contentious by some. However, as this is the current policy, I have applied it as it presently exists to ensure consistency with other articles on Wikipedia. How "myki" is capitalised (or not capitalised) is simply reflective of different style guides used by various media outlets. The trademark owner's preference for lowercase "myki" remains in the article and is supported by the graphic. I agree with the intent of the Wikipedia's Manual of Style. That is, that the use of standard English capitalisation rules should override the preference of trademark owners. Axdya (talk) 09:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you indented that post as if it was a response to mine. In saying "the use of standard English capitalisation rules should override the preference of trademark owners" you've completely ignored my basic point about usage by an excellent, independent, reliable source, something we are quite rightly and constantly told to pay a lot of attention to. Why should the use of "standard" English capitalisation rules override the preference of such a quality source? HiLo48 (talk) 13:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My post was in response to your own and I have responded your point about the use of sources. The point which I have sought to make are that different secondary sources have different style preferences. Given that other quality sources may have a different preference (such as The Australian, which has been known to sometimes capitalise "myki", on example is [here], who decides which takes precedence?. I believe it is more important that style across be Wikipedia be applied consistently, without outsourcing style preferences to external sources. My post was an attempt to explain the logic which was applied when making this edit, given that it became the subject of some disagreement, I think that was reasonable. Axdya (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The home base of The Australian is Sydney. myki is in Melbourne. The Australian's editorial staff have probably never even seen a myki card. I've already highlighted that aspect of The Age. You either missed that point,or ignored that too. HiLo48 (talk) 22:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My point regarding different style preferences across media outlets remains valid. If you want to change the policy, raise it at WP:MOS. Axdya (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they vary. But we constantly judge sources on their quality and reliability, which varies according to the topic. I have made my point on that. You have ignored it. Your speciality. HiLo48 (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The simple fact that I have followed Wikipedia's Manual of Style. If you want to change it, please raise it at WP:MOS. I have simply attempted to explain the reasoning behind this edit. Your personal remarks are not helpful. Axdya (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You see my comments as not helpful because they don't agree with your position. Where is the policy that tells us what to do when the best possible source, something we are required to follow, conflicts with the MOS? HiLo48 (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I view comments such as those about my "speciality" as unhelpful because they don't add any value to this discussion. I understand your position and see its merit, but I reiterate that I have simply followed the policy as it currently stands. MOS is very clear: "Trademarks rendered without any capitals are always capitalized". That statement is absolute - it overrides the preference of the trademark owner or other sources. Therefore there is no conflict as the policy currently stands. If you would like it to be changed, then raise it at WP:MOS. I don't see value in discussing it further here because it seems your underlying concern is with the policy itself. Axdya (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I happen to have a deep, long standing concern about people anywhere in society who become obsessed with particular rules, and insist on following them even when they make no sense. HiLo48 (talk) 01:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping in to add another voice to this debate. I must say I agree with Axdya. Wikipedia has policies for good reason, and in this case to remove any ambiguity or bias towards casing of trademarks, and providing consistency. HiLo48, Whether you agree with these policies or not (as they stand) is irrelevant. Unless the policies are changed through the proper process, they should be applied here as they currently stand without exception. Your personal concerns about people being "obsessed with particular rules" is almost bordering on an obsession itself. Much the same as society having laws for a reason, you don't get to pick and choose which ones you obey (even if you disagree with them) without consequence. Xiphias88 (talk) 06:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

28 February 2015 I have again reverted the style of 'myki' to 'Myki' in accrdance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style, as discussed extensively in this section. I believe that the MOS is clear and unambiguous, that is, "proper names, are written with initial capital letters wherever they occur in a sentence." This was discussed extensively between myself and other used (see discussion thread starting 4 January 2013, however, there is still no cause shown to disregard the rules for capitalisation according to the MOS. If there are any compelling reasons to modify this approach, please discuss here before making any changes. Axdya (talk) 10:46, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More capitalisation

I found the guidelines above when I went looking for guidelines on such things specifically at the beginning of sentences. But rereading it, I now realise that it applies to use within a sentence also. So I have capitalised it in two more places, but still left it lower-cased when not in a grammatical sentence, such as headings, captions, and lists. Philip J. Rayment 05:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best Fare

Thanks Evan C for the clarification about periodicals. I had previously contacted myki about it without response...

No problem. Everything that's been published is really a bit ambiguous - I had to go to the show to find that out. --Evan C (Talk) 04:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ansett's edits

Ansett has made changes [1] that I reverted and he has reinstated. Although a little of the information he changed was out of date (i.e. the starting date of the system), I disagree with his changes for the following reasons:

He changed the starting date to 2008, which I don't believe to be correct, except to the extent that 2008 might be when the system is fully implemented. A trial of the system in Geelong is going to start shortly (i.e. 2007). I changed it to 2007/08, but he reverted that.
His edits incorporate too much detail for an encyclopedia entry.
Some of this unnecessary detail uses a pull quote, which is not recommended for articles and certainly seems out of place here.
Some of this unnecessary detail amounts to advertising (the opening times of the "discovery centre" display).
His changes include wording that time-based (i.e. "currently") which is best avoided as it is bound to be incorrect, and misleadingly so, at some time in the future. Such wording is not always avoidable, but in this case replaced wording that was better in this regard.

His reversion also undid a change to the format of "myki" that has already been discussed on this talk page.

I will revert his change again if nobody objects.

Philip J. Rayment 06:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your reversion. Natronomonas 07:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technology

Does anyone have information on the technical details of a myki card? The Smart Rider (Wikipedia) page for Perth's contactless ticketing system has a technical details section, and I was looking to add similar information to the myki page, however I am unable to find any information online to add. Matthew kokai 04:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a fair idea of what the equipment and technologies being used are, but to add it to the article at this stage would be speculation. We'll need to wait a bit. --Evan C (Talk) 12:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G&D confirm that it's another Mifare / Mifare Ultralite at http://www.gdaus.com.au/transit.html and there's a note that the central systems are using Axapta and .NET at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_zd2970/is_200507/ai_n14715806 121.44.194.14 (talk) 02:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a myki technology section, it would be interesting reading in light of the information on system constraints currently being reported in the news. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.6.223.18 (talk) 05:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

I have removed the following:

Furthermore, current Metcard validating equipment has built-in support for a contact-less validating mechanism (the yellow circle on the front of all Metcard machines).

because I'm sure I've read somewhere that the system is totally unsuitable for use by regular passengers due to the high cost of issuing those cards. Similarly, the cost of myki has been branded as high but it needs to be compared with the cost of retaining Metcard.

On another note, it's worth noting that the entire second part of the section is in no way an issue only affecting myki - those are issues that concern all Smart Card systems in place in the world (and for that matter, hasn't prevented any of them from being successful). A lot of the criticisms can be debunked, it's probably important to mention them but there isn't much of a place to do it given that the section is already quite long and the article shouldn't be trying to simply weigh the pros and cons of whether to implement the system or not. invincible (talk) 11:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added note on the old Metcard touchcard equipment. Wongm (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The last, recently added, item in the Criticism section re "Strict 2 hour fare enforcement" is poorly worded. I'm not even sure what it means, so I'm not game to edit it. The biggest problem is "several minutes off from the 2 hour mark". If the author is watching, please have another go. HiLo48 (talk) 06:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roll out section

I'm changing the entire roll out section - the citations linked to unrelated information (well, one did at least) and it severely needs to be updated. The information here was more specific than the myki website, so I'd guess *anyway* that the information here wasn't reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.1.119.225 (talk) 04:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Myki looks like being canned, its rollout becomes one of a planned rollout that was cancelled. <WhatDoctor>

Please hold back on the fortune telling. No need to rush. HiLo48 (talk) 10:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Train Operator

Currently the article does not mention a train operator, as it is unsure if Connex or Metro Trains Melbourne will be running the trains when Myki is intoduced. Should we assume, using the 2010 rollout date, that it'll be MTM who will be running the trains, and thus a user of Myki? And should we be putting the new tram operator in as well? -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 04:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Jargon

I am only an occasional user of public transport in Melbourne and came here hoping to get a plain English perspective on the system, so I don't get into trouble using it when I need to. I found this article very frustrating to read. It has several examples of expressions that seem to come directly from public service, transport industry or marketing language, such as:

"front office" computer software

end-to-end data transaction flows

"myki money" (Could this not just, or in addition, say "credit", assuming that's what it means?)

touch on / touch off

tag on/tag off (Are these last two the same thing?)

discovery centre

Some of these are in quotation marks or italics, meaning the writer knows they are jargon, but few are explained elsewhere in the text. They are not helpful in an encyclopaedic publication.

We should be explaining things, not just spreading ugly jargon even further. HiLo48 (talk) 21:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Order of page

According to press reports myki will be operational in Melbourne by the end of 2009. It has already been operating in regional Victoria for several months. I therefore propose to reorder the main myki page by moving the lengthy 'History' section further down. People will want to know what myki is and how to use it. The story of how it came about is now of secondary interest.

Has anyone got a better photo of the discovery centre at Southern Cross station? The newspapers covering the windows suggest it must have been taken when the centre was being set up (now 2.5 years ago). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myki-insider (talk • contribs) 09:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Neutral Language" from Myki-insider?

I'm not comfortable with Myki-insider's approach to editing the myki article. He/she claims to be rewriting sections in "neutral language" when in fact he/she is really completely removing seemingly valid criticism of transport policy. He/she does so under the guise of keeping the myki article unbiased by saying that the areas being criticised are policies of the Transport Ticketing Authority, but he/she is just deleting the criticisms, not moving them to the TTA article. That's NOT showing a neutral point of view. That's censorship. HiLo48 (talk) 06:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised this at the CoI Noticeboard — Deon ^talk 03:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Myki-insier has been indefinitely blocked. — Deon ^talk 14:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

Dwell time is a technical term that WP has a definition for, but it defines a different one (US military term). Dwell time ought to be linked in the article, and there ought to be an explanation for it. There's nothing in wiktionary.

number of mykis were sent to deceased war veterans (who are eligible for free travel)

This reads like deceased war veterans are eligible for free travel. Unfortunately I don't have a suggestion for re-phrasing. Josh Parris 06:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

POV language from Kendo 66

We have a little problem with a seemingly inexperienced editor - Kendo 66. Wikipedia prohibits the use of language such as he has used in recent edits at the end of the Criticisms section. I won't revert them again now because that would be approaching a breach of the Three Revert Rule, something Kendo 66 has actually now done. If they are quotes from a person, they need to be rewritten as such. If they are Kendo 66's words, they need rephrasing.

I actually strongly agree with the sentiment he expressing. I too think myki is a disaster, but here we have to use objective language. Language such as ""The State Government is obviously frustrated" and "The Victorian public remains bemused and dissatisfied" really is unacceptable. It's journalistic language, not encyclopaedic.

Kendo 66 (and others) - Please respond with your thoughts on the content, and between us all we can try to work out some acceptable wording.

HiLo48 (talk) 11:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Yes, I inadvertently breached the 3RR rule, so have removed the last edit. I've been around WP for a while and not done this before, so maybe I'll be forgiven. Two of my reverts did include soem additional info or refs, thos, but fair enough, I'll be careful. As for POV statements, they are not mine, but reported or stated by others, including State Ministers, so I guess they may be seen as journalistic. Some of the facts remain tho. Budgetary blowout of massive proportion for example.Kendo 66 11:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I would be happy to explain why I challenged this info also: The phrases "The State Government is obviously frustrated that the contractor has not met its contractual requirements to deliver myki", and "The Victorian public remains bemused and dissatisfied with what many of them see as a debacle" are points of view. If they are contained within a source as claimed, then they need to be attributed to the person or publisher who expressed those views. Also, these are not criticism - these are someone's opinion. It is similar to asking someone "Why is ice cream bad?", and receiving the answer "Because my friend says it is bad" - it doesn't really impart a real reason. Jwoodger (talk) 23:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Real world length of two-hour fare

Resolved

Under the Metcard system, a two hour ticket would actually be valid for the time to the next clock hour plus two hours; e.g. a ticket purchased at 12:15 PM would be valid until 3:00 PM (165 minutes; or 2 hours 45 minutes). I've read conflicting reports about whether Myki uses this same system or is a literal two-hour fare, valid until 120 minutes after purchase. If anyone has a concrete source for which it is, it might be useful information to have in the article either as simply informational content or criticism if it is the 120 minute case (and has been criticised publicly in a reliable source). - Vague | Rant 13:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an occasional user of the system, I too have wondered the same thing. It would be nice to have it in the article. Another controversy surrounding such tickets in the past has been the passenger's liability when they exceed their "two hour" limit due to services running late. Clarification of that would be nice too. HiLo48 (talk) 01:23, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add some clarification in, as in my use of the system in the Latrobe Valley (on buses) I was able to get a short term ticket at about 12:20, and was able to get back (on the same Myki) at 2:40 (or something like that). Here is a concrete source for that infomation, this page states "Allows unlimited train, tram and bus travel for at least two hours within the selected zone(s). The ticket expires two hours from the start of the next full hour after it was activated." -- sk8er5000 ^yeah? 01:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done added into article, please feel free to rephrase me. -- sk8er5000 ^yeah? 01:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for security section

It looks like the other two references in the Security section also link to a primary source, which in this case is a Wordpress blog. I'm fairly certain we don't allow primary sources as references, but maybe someone knows better than I. -- Fyrefly (talk) 15:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right. Being both a blog AND the primary source should automatically rule it those references out. Dunno where to go with this. I'm no fan of the process that has (almost) brought us myki, but we cannot fill the article with inappropriate, negative content. HiLo48 (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

myki is still being rolled out despite government saying it's halted

The History section tells me "On 28 December 2010, the newly elected state government announced that it would halt any further rollout of myki". We have heard lots of political hype, mostly about how bad the previous government was, but no public announcement about myki's future. Yesterday I received in the mail my Seniors' myki. This tells me that the rollout is obviously continuing. The article is therefore inaccurate, but is my new myki card a reliable source to demonstrate this? (I think I know the answer, but how do we make sense of this?) HiLo48 (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source for sentence about the Transport Department survey

There are two versions of the newspaper article I used as a source for this sentence. The Age website[2] is as follows:

All passengers consistently rated system information and swiping problems with the cards as its biggest drawbacks.

The ProQuest newspaper database[3] is as follows:

All passengers consistently rated the provision of information about the myki system and the ease with which they could swipe the cards as its biggest problems. The ease of validating tickets was rated as Metcard's best feature.

I'm going by the ProQuest version. I think that's how the article originally appeared in the print edition of the newspaper. Ottre 04:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I'm having a dumb day, but I simply don't understand the second version. We have "...the ease with which they could swipe the cards as its biggest problems" and "The ease of validating tickets was rated as Metcard's best feature." I thought swiping and validating would be related (the same?) functions, in which case those two statements contradict one another. HiLo48 (talk) 06:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. That extract doesn't make sense. The rest of the article makes it clear the "biggest problem" is that machines are slow to scan cards (ie, there is no ease of use). The "best feature" is the method itself - swiping a card to validate. Ottre 12:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Capitalisation

Why does this Talk page use a capital M for myki when the Article page correctly uses lower case? I tried moving this article to the lower case form, and was told that source and destination were the same. That's obviously wrong. Does Wikipedia not recognise lower case for article names on Talk pages? HiLo48 (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The {{lowercase}} template has been added to make the name display in lowercase. – ukexpat (talk) 14:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. HiLo48 (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No Touch-Off On Trams not an improvement over previous system

The article includes: "Benefits...The system currently has the following benefits:...Touch-off is not necessary at all on the tram network for..." How is this a benefit of the myki system? No previous ticketing system in victoria has required touch-off on trams; moreover, for the 5% of tram users who are required to touch off, myki is less convenient than previous systems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.253.56.104 (talk) 04:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right. It's gone. HiLo48 (talk) 05:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.ptua.org.au/2009/11/18/myki-qa/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. sandgemADDICT ^yeah? 02:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

diff of addition of content - note it's been there since August 2013. I'm surprised I hadn't picked it up sooner. -- sandgemADDICT ^yeah? 02:18, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Myki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Myki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Myki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:31, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Myki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Myki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seniors myki scandal

[[4]]