Talk:Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail

Project or trail?
Is the focus of the article the project or the trail? Should the article be named Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail? What about Category:Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail - should it's name be the same as this article? Mitch Ames (talk) 06:37, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell at this stage, with the article being a stub. It might make more sense to the structure the article as being about the trail, with a route description section (that can be sourced to maps/the archived website), and with info about the project's other aspects, and the project as a whole, in a "History" section. Another option to consider is merging the Kep Track article here, and covering the track, heritage trail, and other project aspects in this article, with the current "Golden Pipeline Project" title. - Evad37 &#91;talk] 09:38, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail
Category:Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail has been nominated for. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. Peter James (talk) 21:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Strongly object - expressed at Cfd page re this. JarrahTree 04:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Why 7 sections?
Some text explaining why the trail is segmented (into seven sections) would be helpful. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:48, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The website, and possibly other publications, divided the trail into seven sections. See http://web.archive.org/web/20130409125638/http://www.goldenpipeline.com.au/trail/index.html (use the navigation sybmols under "Explore the Golden Pipeline Heritage Trail" in the top left to go through the sections). Once this article is more developed those sections could be made into ===sub-headings=== - Evad37 &#91;talk] 15:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)