Talk:Sydney–Perth rail corridor

Proposed merger with Trans-Australian Railway
I can't see how the "east–west rail corridor" is essentially different from Trans-Australian Railway. That article has existed since 2005, while this stub was created in 2008. Grant &#124;  Talk  06:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose - Very different - 3 different things -
 * the Trans went between Kal and Ceduna - the railway - physical track within wa and sa
 * the train - the same
 * east west corridor goes through 4 states

JarrahTree 06:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * If there is no consensus I will drop it.


 * However, I think that argument flies in the face of Use Common Names:


 * in common usage, to Jo/Joe Blow, the "Trans line" is the whole track between Sydney and Perth;


 * while the track between Ceduna and Kalgoorlie is very long and historically significant, it is physically a trans-Nullarbor line, not a transcontinental one and;


 * "East–west rail corridor" is jargon rather than a common name.


 * Grant &#124;  Talk  07:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh dear this feels like the nullarbor thing all over again, (qualifying the usage against the reality). I do not think jo blow thinks of the trans beyond nullarbor any more, the existence of the great southern service and other influences have changed what you are claiming... but hey lets see who else turns up.  JarrahTree 07:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullarbor_Plain#Limits - I would strongly disagree with the assertion that the trans as the whole track between 'sydney and perth' - over 30 years of post fact of the older 'trans' being re-invented in terms of other brands and labels. JarrahTree 09:09, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Issue of conflation
In the Nullarbor article - the same issue of conflation occurs, claims are made for the term to stretch much further than it is, and some effort - as this is an online encyclopedia, is to pull the claims into a reality closer to actual usage and understandings.

For example - in the Indian_Pacific article is there no claim for the east west rail corridor being in total either known as or used as the 'trans', in fact in the article there is mention of the 'trans line' being only a part of the whole.

Like the claims that regularly occur in 'Bush', 'Outback' and 'remote western australia' (expanding well beyond the 'real boundary') - any claims for the whole of the continent being covered by the 'trans' is an misunderstanding of the original 'Trans' article details and ignoring the very specific explanation in the Indian Pacific article. JarrahTree 09:29, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * For me at least – WA born, bred and a resident for all but two years, as well as a former journalist and a bookworm:


 * "the Indian-Pacific" implies a train.
 * whereas the track has always been the Trans-Australian ("Trans line" for short).
 * I had never, ever heard the term "east west rail corridor" until I stumbled upon the Wikipedia article.
 * Grant &#124;  Talk  03:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Indian Pacific implies the 'trip' between Perth and Sydney, all the current articles concerning the 'Trans' identify a very specific part of the larger length, not the whole length. If you dont like (sic) 'East West rail corridor' - that is no problem, there are possibly other names that can be picked/chosen, but it is not in its entirety - 'the trans' by any means JarrahTree 07:07, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * "Indian Pacific implies the 'trip' between Perth and Sydney" — Do you have a citation to support that claim? Mitch Ames (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Take your pick Mitch - there is a whole range of different media and points of reference over with very specific refs in the first parts of most sections of the page JarrahTree 14:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)



JarrahTree 15:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Adding "Australian" to article title
Every time I see this article (during researches for a [very] peripherally related article) I find myself asking, "Who would think of searching for this article title? It could be any east-west rail corridor." This touches on elements of the discussion above.

I think it would be beneficial to expand the article title to provide context: "Australian east-west rail corridor".

Thoughts, anyone? SCHolar44 (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for comment on terminologies
Please comment on some proposals potentially affecting this article »» here. Cheers, SCHolar44 🇦🇺 &#128172; at 23:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)