User talk:LachlanTansey

Welcome!

Hi, LachlanTansey. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. JarrahTree 10:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perth railway stations

Hi, I've reverted your edits to a number of articles on Perth railway stations, where you have inserted erroneous information. Please refer to the line timetables already referenced in each article - you'll see, for example, that City West railway station is not on the Joondaup Line, etc. regards John beta (talk) 08:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sunshine railway station, Melbourne, you may be blocked from editing. as well as three other stations St Albans railway station, Melbourne, Watergardens railway station‎ and Sunbury railway station, Melbourne Fleet Lists (talk) 06:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

LachlanTansey (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Still interested in sharing my insight LachlanTansey (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Accept reason:

With the consent of the blocking admin and with a restriction that all your edits must be made via this account, you are now unblocked. Welcome back and happy editing. Yamla (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since May of 2020 I have been blocked for several things 2 major things being vandalism and sock puppetry. This first account was created for the purpose of "vandalism" in March of 2020 with my later 2 accounts being for genuine although "unnecessary" contribution to Perth railway stations and some London stations. My 2nd sockpuppet account was blocked in march of 2023 and after that I stopped attempting to make new sockpuppet accounts other then one short lived one Lachlan2009 and stayed on this account. I now write this in an attempt to prove that i have changed and wish to show it by my helpful and insightful edits which do not cause any unnecessary work or undoing by other editors such as my previous accounts. I have also read the appeal guides and am willing to accept the restrictions placed on this account if my appeal is accepted. LachlanTansey (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please exactly list all of your sockpuppet accounts. Which restrictions do you plan to accept if unblocked? --Yamla (talk) 10:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From memory sockpuppet accounts I have used are Lachlan2009, Lachlan298383829283 and Lachlan928292942887. And as for restrictions I am referring to making any significant edits for a large period of time LachlanTansey (talk) 11:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to commit to sticking to a single account (and no logged-out editing). --Yamla (talk) 11:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will commit to sticking to this account and not to edit while logged out LachlanTansey (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I'm inclined to unblock here. Any objections? I have verified there's been no recent block evasion visible to the CU tools. --Yamla (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, go for it. Drmies (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. I appreciate you taking the time reviewing my appeal! LachlanTansey (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A clear

Understanding of what WP:OR and WP:RS are needed this time around... JarrahTree 04:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Victoria Park railway station, Perth. --Yamla (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, for now i will stick to editing my sandbox for practice. LachlanTansey (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding express services to Melbourne railway station articles

Hi there, thanks for your edits to some of the railway station articles in Melbourne.

I see that you've started adding express services into the infoboxes. Please don't add these in, as per the reversion from Box Hill, as these are all on the same line. Many thanks. Takerlamar (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brunswick Junction railway station has been accepted

Brunswick Junction railway station, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Future services infobox changes

Hi there, I noticed you've been adding future services to the infoboxes of various station articles in Perth and Melbourne. In future, could you please write the section header as Future services and not Future Services as to align with using sentence case capitalisation for section headings per MOS:SECTIONCAPS. Cheers, Fork99 (talk) 05:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles also use Under construction instead. For consistency, I would check a few other articles on stations in the same city and see what it might already be using. Fork99 (talk) 05:26, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of City Loop service pattern for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article City Loop service pattern is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City Loop service pattern until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 06:26, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Platform tables

Gottta say, I disagree with adding the platform tables for most stations. They are redundant to prose and are more detail than is needed. I only see the need on stations with many platforms, such as Perth or Stadium stations. Steelkamp (talk) 23:51, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thank your for the feedback on my changes, I do appreciate it. Based on your feedback, I will remove the platform tables from all minor stations outside of the Perth CBD. While I can agree with your opinions I still think that it may be value to keep/add a table like this as you've suggested to major stations such as Perth and Perth Stadium. I also think that hub stations like Mclver, Claisebrook and Bayswater could use a table like this. Please reply if you disagree. LachlanTansey (talk) 01:56, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that larger stations could do with a table. I don't think the Stop ID should be used though. Steelkamp (talk) 15:14, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. I only included a row for the stop ID because the table in which I was replacing included it. LachlanTansey (talk) 18:43, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stopping pattern tables

FYI, the stopping patterns you added here are not sources (original research), and the fare zones given are just wrong. I don't think a table is a good idea for this anyway, when any stopping patterns can be explained in prose (the ones that are sourced and given in the timetable of course). Steelkamp (talk) 00:10, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks once again for this feedback. I can confirm that the stopped patterns that I listed were based off what I witnessed at stations instead of proper sourcing. With that, I will remove them. LachlanTansey (talk) 01:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]