Jump to content

Talk:Upper Darling Range railway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge proposal

[edit]

It seems like Kalamunda Zig Zag is tackling exactly the same subject as this one. Can anyone see a reason to have them separated? Nomadtales 04:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - the actual zig zag formation is only a part of the full length of the track - and is also a local festival site, and a very badly burnt national park, a quarry and a proposed resurrection of the rail line in that narrow section. If these have not been detailed and expanded upon yet - then they would not sit well with a merge
The upper darling range railway is concerning the line from the midland junction railway station and connected with pre 1900 timber lines to karragullen and even towards mount dale -
I would prefer not to amalgmate two separate subjects - cheers SatuSuro 05:39, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK upon closer inspection the Zig Zag article does explain that it is all of the above, but only after it talks about the fact that it was part of the Upper Darling railway. The article as it stands is not clear enough to make it separate from this article. Could you please have a crack at rewriting it so a layman like me does not become easily confused, as is the case. Nomadtales 07:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose but could be swayed. As a general rule I am a mergeist, as these types of articles are generally destined to stay forever as stubs. Combining often creates a more reasonable size and sometimes a critical mass which encourages expansion. However, in this case the zig-zag portion of the route is quite significant in its own right. —Moondyne 05:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merger. The Zig Zag deserves an article of its own as it is prolific in the community. I didn't actually know it was called the UDRR - I thought it was the Zig Zag line! Auroranorth 13:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]