Talk:Schuylkill River Trail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Philadelphia
Philadelphia Portal
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage and content of articles relating to Philadelphia, its people, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
This article is also supported by WikiProject Pennsylvania.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Pennsylvania Portal
Schuylkill River Trail is part of WikiProject Pennsylvania, which is building a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit the attached article, join or discuss the project.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents


[edit] "Multi-use trail" redirected to an article only about bicycling (Fixed)

The recent headwaters-toward-confluence overhaul by Krimpet was a good idea.

Here is a minor thing that I should look at more later. Multi-use trail currently redirects to Segregated cycle facilities, which (upon scanning) seems to be all about bicycling and not about walking, jogging, hiking, rollerblading, and other trail uses. (I lack time to read it line-by-line at the moment.) I may reinsert the line here about all the things "multi-use" entails (not just bicycling). But for now I really need to stop indulging my WP habit and get back to work! Lumbercutter 14:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I figured it would be good to go west-east, following the standard of highway articles and also providing more opportunity for expansion as the remainder of the segments are completed. You made a good point about multi-use trail redirecting to segregated cycle facilities; I edited the redirect to point to Trail#Multi-use trails, which while sparse right now gives a better description of the multi-use nature and could be expanded. Krimpet 14:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

  • Support the article merge. --evrik 16:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, Schuylkill Banks and the Schuylkill River Trail are one in the same south of the Art Museum. Krimpet 16:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support merge. —Lumbercutter 17:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support merge. 1312020Wikicop 23:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The Schuykill Banks article does not capture the entire developement project topic (see the external link there). If the article were expanded, it would not be a merge candidate. Unless there is an SRDC article. --J Clear 13:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trail nomenclature variations

I just added the following: "On many maps and street atlases, and on some of the trail's signage, the segment between Philadelphia and Valley Forge is still identified by the name Philadelphia–Valley Forge Trail." This is notable. I know that some editors are going to want to delete this because it's an outdated name. But it's important to realize that people who are unfamiliar with the trail and the area (which is a big reason for reading this article in the first place) are going to see the name "Philadelphia–Valley Forge Trail" on maps and even on some of the trail's signage itself, and it's a good idea to clarify for them that yes, it's the same trail. — Lumbercutter 17:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. But you forgot to dot the i and create this redirect Philadelphia–Valley Forge Trail, which is SOP when an article covers a topic with multiple names.--J Clear 18:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Good idea. Thanks. — Lumbercutter 22:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
While it's notable, and I can personally confirm that I've seen this name is in use, it's important to find a reliable source that confirms this. Krimpet (talk) 22:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Good idea. Done. Thanks. — Lumbercutter 23:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)