This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That employees figure is totally wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.30.199 ( talk) 10:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Correct number added —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dub1968 ( talk • contribs) 13:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
An editor keen to add coordinates across Wikipedia (he tells us this on his user page) has just done so for this article. I'm not sure it's a sensible approach for this topic. The location of the VicRoads head office is otherwise very well defined by its address in the info box, with even more detail in the text. It could not be more precisely defined. In addition, VicRoads is a body that operates and has other offices all over the state of Victoria. What is the point of listing precise coordinates for just one of these offices? It seems to place undo importance on one not terribly relevant fact.
HiLo48 ( talk) 18:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
VicRoads. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:21, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
This section has a neutrality issue.
"Arguing that the reform would go "one step beyond" the formation of Transport for Victoria, Andrews said that merging the two agencies would lead to planning of an integrated and mode-agnostic transport network. However, the announcement was criticised by the state Opposition as a cynical exercise to obfuscate the planning failures of existing agencies. Although the Rail, Tram and Bus Union supported the government's decision, the Australian Services Union, representing a large number of VicRoads administrative staff, opposed the merger."
State Oppositions and unions always oppose any restructures, so it is hardly noteworthy. The article should reflect what is planned will happen in a neutral tone, without the opinions of vested interests. Fishaharris ( talk) 10:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)