Talk:One Rail Australia

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.railway-technology.com/news/news87581.html

  Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 12:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 21:30, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Photos needed

Photos of two missing loco classes are needed in the big table -- DE/1300 and ALF/AL class.

Lower in priority, replacing some of the existing photos with new ones in GWA livery would improve the list.-- SCHolar44 (talk) 09:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC

Future structure of One Rail and Aurizon articles

I have been working in recent weeks on the One Rail Australia article, mindful of the sale to Aurizon that has just gone through, subject to post-sale, ACC-mandated divestment. Among other things, I have increased the corporate history content.

As everyone here knows, GWA et al. was bought and sold by various companies between 1997 and July this year. For all but the Aurizon purchase it was "business as usual" and the outward sign was a change of logos, if that. The article changed its title and appropriate words were added.

The difference with the sale to Aurizon is that it won't be "business as usual": One Rail's assets are being blended with Aurizon assets. The One Rail website shows some of the changes, e.g. number of employees today is 230, down from 628 last week; locos 52/113; wagons 1530/2296; maintenance facilities 2/8. Under "Our presence",

We operate in South Australia, the Northern Territory, which includes the Tarcoola-to-Darwin rail line, Queensland and New South Wales, including the Hunter Valley.

is now

We operate in Queensland and New South Wales, including the Hunter Valley.

There will be further changes when another company buys the east-coast coal lines.

This situation has consequences for how we treat the One Rail article.

I believe the best way to treat it will be to close off the One Rail article, subject to describing the upcoming east-coast coal haulage changes, and adding appropriate text to the Aurizon article. The loco fleet list, perhaps after adding annotations of which loco went where post-sale (to Aurizon and the east-coast coal operations owner) to finish off as a historical record. I expect someone will add the relevant locos to the lists in these two companies' article.

I'll flag my suggestion on the Talk:Aurizon page. Looking forward to your comments – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬  at 01:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Upgrade completed; proposal for deletion of One Rail (East Coast) article

Dear colleagues, I have just uploaded a substantial update of the article on One Rail Australia. I had wanted to increase the amount of corporate content to properly describe the machinations within the company since 1997. Then when the sale came through, with the ACCC requirement for separate divestiture of the east coast bulk haulage business, it added an unusual amount of complexity, which is why it has taken three weeks...

I've closed off the article at the 29 July sale date, which has still allowed me to include the future requirements for divestment. The only further coverage I can foresee in this article is to describe the result of the divestment whenever that occurs, whether by sale or demerger.

I have made a small amendment to the Aurizon article to align the text more closely with the ACCC text.

I have not included a link in the lede to MatthewH01's new One Rail Australia (East Coast) article, for several reasons:

• Contrary to the first sentence, there is no evidence – either in the undertaking, on the Australian Government's Business Name website or the purchaser or seller's websites – of a company running the divestment project, much less a company named "One Rail Australia (East Coast)". I haven't been able to find this name in any of the documentation I've discovered.
• In theory it is possible that a company of that name has been registered but this is unlikely because incorporation would have occurred a few months ago.
• The undertaking refers to a "Divestiture Business" without specifying its corporate structure. I expect that's because the Divestiture Business will last only until its assets are spun off or purchased by a company – so it doesn't need to be a company itself.
• As what I suspect is only a business unit within Aurizon (but totally independent, as laid down in the undertaking), the entity is not sufficiently notable to justify its own article.
• When the divestiture is completed, either an expansion to an existing company's article or an article about a new company will be needed. In the latter case, the One Rail Australia (East Coast) article should not be changed to cover a new company because there will be no link between their respective scopes (which is the point of the divestment mandate).
• The divested locomotives and other assets are now detailed in the One Rail Australia article – in fact there is no information in the One Rail Australia (East Coast) article that isn't in the One Rail Australia article, except the unreferenced addition of the ORN class locos – which can wait for the new/amended article, giving time for someone to acquire a good reference and a photo.

Speaking of photos, it would be very good to have the missing 3 loco photos (2250, GWB and XRN) added to the fleet list, if anyone knows/is a railway enthusiast who has any. I'd be happy to arrange the copyright consent etc.

Please feel free to make comments, especially on the proposal for deleting the One Rail Australia (East Coast) article. SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬  at 10:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Support deletion per nom. "One Rail Australia (East Coast)" appears to be a fabrication. Evidence indicates 1Rail continues to exist (now under Aurizon ownership), just without the SA/NT operations which were transferred directly to Aurizon. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 13:13, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

It is hard to find a concrete answer about it. It's very weird 2402:B801:187D:8400:20FE:9B82:68C8:1282 (talk) 13:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the whole history of the company is convoluted and weird, User:[ISP number deleted -- it would be an advantage for communication if you could create a Talk page that doesn't contain your ISP number], but that's the story of many companies nowadays. It's why it took me quite a long time to dig out some of the historical details. But as far as the article about the divestiture business is concerned, I have changed the name from "One Rail Australia (East Coast)" to "One Rail Australia east coast divestiture business" because, as Nick Mitchell 98 said above, the name was a fabrication. Also, all the content – except for unreferenced details of a locomotive purchase not covered by the enforceable undertaking, which ought not to be in it – is included in the One Rail Australia article. When a new company, or demerger, gets involved I expect we'll create a new article or add to an existing one, respectively. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 13:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi sorry, I meant to sign in but didn't. Please feel free to contact me.

Your maps on the ORA page are great, but they fail to specify the Mallee branch lines (Apamurra, Loxton and Pinnaroo) as SG, not BG.

Thanks

Lachlan Aulj7 (talk) 07:26, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks, Lachlan -- I hadn't known that. Much appreciated. Amended version uploaded. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 07:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Not a problem at all :) Aulj7 (talk) 13:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, the reason I created the One Rail Australia (East Coast) page was that I thought it best that the existing One Rail Australia page covered the period between 1997 (when ASR was formed and bought the remnants of AN) & 29 July 2022 (the day Aurizon acquired ORA). The One Rail Australia (East Coast) page was meant to be a stop-gap page for the east coast business (which is still trading as ORA) until it is sold, at which point it would be either re-named or merged to a different page.

As for the name, I got that from the Signed Undertaking on the ACCC website, section 2.5:

"2.5 One Rail Australia Pty Ltd (One Rail) is a rail freight company consisting of:

(a) One Rail East Coast: which provides coal rail haulage services in the Hunter Valley coal system in NSW to the Port of Newcastle. It also provides coal haulage services in the Mackay region of Queensland on the Central Queensland Coal Network (Divestiture Business); and

(b) One Rail SA/NT: which provides intermodal and bulk rail haulage services principally in the Northern Territory and South Australia..." (The SA/NT part of ORA has been renamed to Aurizon Bulk Central as of 13 August 2022.)

The undertaking document lists several others in Schedule 4, Section 1:

"Divestiture Business

The Divestiture Business shall comprise the following entities and all assets, contracts, personnel, and goodwill held by these entities:

(a) NHK Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Aurizon and the entity which will hold the interests in the Divestiture Business from the Control Date and will be demerged in the event the Divestiture Business is divested by way of demerger;

(b) One Rail Australia (NSW) Pty Limited;

(c) One Rail Australia (Queensland) Pty Limited; and

(d) One Rail Australia (FLA) Pty Limited which wholly owns:

(i) One Rail Australia (FLAGS) Pty Limited; and

(ii) One Rail Australia (FLACH) Pty Limited"

The current ORA website references One Rail Australia (FLA) Pty Ltd (formerly Freightliner Australia).

Personally, I don't think we will be able to fix this entirely until the Divestiture Business is sold, but happy to continue discussing it.

In better news, finally found sources & photos of the ORN Class: North Queensland Bulk Ports Corporation on Facebook

I'm assuming that these are the 4 GT46C ACe's referenced in the undertaking, and not the GWA/GWBs. MatthewH01 (talk) 08:16, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thinking about this more, we could merge/keep the east coast business in this page under its own heading for the time being, adding a note that this section would be transferred/removed once the Divestiture Business has been sold/de-merged. MatthewH01 (talk) 08:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

In accordance with Wikipedia guidance I have opened Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Rail Australia east coast divestiture business to discuss the deletion proposal. Please add SUPPORT/OPPOSE comment there. (Nick, could you add your above vote there, please? Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 (talk) 13:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC))

Merge suggestion

While there is a requirement by Aurizon to dispose of the Hunter Valley division included in the One Rail Australia purchase, this was included in the sale and for the moment, remains part of Aurizon. It most likely is being operated through a separate legal entity to comply with the ACCC’s Chinese wall requirement, but as it stands, we are not sure what that is. That legal entity will still be a subsidiary of Aurizon who will be the sole shareholder until the division is sold.

Propose that One Rail Australia (East Coast) be redirected to One Rail Australia. Valeinmose (talk) 05:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Please see the above discussion for further contributions. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 13:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

No evidence of a separate legal entity to handle the divestiture business has come to light. Until it does (if), it will be best to avoid the question and stick to the words of the undertaking and the ACCC.

I had preferred to delete the article because of the lack of this evidence and because I couldn't see the point of merging since it will literally add nothing to the content of the One Rail Australia article. I therefore oppose merging unless you can point out something I'm missing.

Since the process may take a while to resolve I have edited the article to address some of the concerns I raised above and to change the name from an unverifiable company to that of the terminology used in the undertaking.Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 13:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussion closed, as no longer relevant as One Rail Australia (East Coast) article has been deleted after an AfD. Valeinmose (talk) 03:29, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggest rename

the ORA/GWA business is well and truely an Aurizon business. indeed it is trading as Aurizon Bulk Central, suggest it be renamed as such, with cleanups to the text to make it flow better.

ECR (now One Rail Australia (FLA)) is its own business, and for clarity, should absorb some info from the Freightliner page. the sale of ECR from AZJ is due to be completed by end Feb or so

Vale GWI ownership. Sulzer55 (talk) 08:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, Sulzer55 -- have been unwell.

I see from ABN Lookup that both One Rail Australia (FLA) Pty Ltd and Aurizon Bulk Central are names registered since 2006 and 2000 respectively, just hanging around until picked up.  :-)

I'm a bit mystified, and would appreciate knowing the source you are using right now -- it sounds much more current than the two companies' websites. I can't see anything relevant yet on the Aurizon website and a search for "Aurizon Bulk Central" doesn't show anything. Ditto ORA (their "By the numbers" and route map have been updated, although their map and Aurizon's overlap in coverage of Queensland). Aurizon still states, for example: "Owning and operating one of the world’s largest coal rail networks...".

If you have Wikipedia-compliant refs, by all means go ahead. However, I do believe we need to be absolutely certain that Aurizon Bulk Central (Pty Ltd) is going to be the company+brand before the article name is changed -- so I'd expect to wait till the ASX announcement. My 2c worth.

I'll wait for the east coast business sale to take place before updating the "ORA facilities and serviced lines" map and the "Progression of corporate structures to 2022" chart. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 08:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose, article does not require renaming. ORA ceased trading in July 2022 with its assets transferred to Aurizon or East Coast Rail. Any activities relating to Aurizon Bulk Central or any other former ORA subsidiary post July 2022, should be included in the Aurizon or East Coast Rail articles, not this one. Valeinmose (talk) 03:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree, Valeinmose talk -- with the proviso that the modification of the articles should wait until the ASX announcement of the finalisation of the sale is made as expected in February, and the relevance (or irrelevance) of the Term "East Coast Rail" becomes evident. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 04:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

East Coast Rail is a stand alone entity. It may well be renamed after the sale has been completed and obviously that article can be renamed to reflect. Valeinmose (talk) 04:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Changes to caption -- infobox photo

An anonymous user has twice changed the caption to the infobox photo from "In May 2019, just after the company's final rebranding as One Rail Australia, locomotives heading a grain train bear the logos of its previous brands" to "In January 2019, just before the company's final rebranding as One Rail Australia, locomotives heading a grain train to Tailem Bend." I have just changed it back again. In the absence of an explanation or a User Talk page, here are the relevant factors (which I alluded to earlier in the edit summary):

• the image is dated 15 May 2019 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GWAClassOnSouthlineGrain.png)
• the image shows five categories related to May 2019 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GWAClassOnSouthlineGrain.png)
• the article is about the company, not the locomotives; the key point is the photo illustrates the variety of branding that the company employed, and it doesn't matter one whit in this context where the train was going – that can easily be found on its Wikipedia or Commons page for anyone busting to find out.

If it's changed again I will seek comments/mediation. Or pull the photo altogether (though it's an excellent shot). In the meantime: crikey, what a waste of time... Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 11:54, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

For your information: new ORA-relevant article on Magnetic Rail Group

Dear colleagues, This is to let you know that I have prepared a new article on Magnetic Rail Group, the purchasers of Aurizon's divested assets emanating from One Rail Australia. It replaces the interim article named "East Coast Rail". Discussion is here. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 06:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)