Talk:Super Pit gold mine

Australia: Western Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Super Pit gold mine is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Mining Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Western Australia Goldfields-Esperance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Western Australia Goldfields-Esperance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Goldfields-Esperance on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Western Australia Goldfields-EsperanceWikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Goldfields-EsperanceTemplate:WikiProject Western Australia Goldfields-EsperanceWestern Australia Goldfields-Esperance articles

Super Pit gold mine[edit]

It is now 2006, and the super pit is now producing 'at least' 900,000 ounces of gold per year. Just thought that you might like to know :)

- Me :P

Change name[edit]

This article should, really, be changed to Fimiston Open Pit or Fimiston Open Cut and Super Pit gold mine the redirect to there. Fimiston is the official name, after all. Rolinator 12:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC). No it shouldn't. Its the Super Pit. Much more better sounding.[reply]

Sorry guys but I must agree with the first comment. As I have worked there for the last decade, I can assure you that the correct name is the Fimiston Open Pit Operation. Although the SuperPit (only one word in the official merchandise) may sound catchier for the tourists, it is not the correct name.Rfur72 (talk) 13:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pit Depth[edit]

Misinformation I am furious as I edited (just a few minutes ago) the details on the Superpit to be more up to date and I was told that I was lying - I work there!!! The pit now reaches a depth of 510m in the stores cutback, Chaffers is at 330 bench and Trafalgar and Brownhill are at 240-250 bench. The person who edited it back saying I was making a false claim or hoax obviously hasn't done their homework because the information was correct as of today when I left work at 3:30pm as the mine geologist. And for the record I am a female - contrary to what the Kalgoorlie - Boulder page says - that women are only employed as truckies.Burge 83 (talk) 12:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

while I dont doubt the accuracy of the information you provided, Wikipedia requires that information is published so as to ensure that it can be verified. As for the other issue I'll have a look at it now. Gnan garra 13:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move as proposed. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super Pit gold mine → Super Pit – I listed this for speedy. CharlieEchoTango was kind enough to move it but someone moaned about it at his talk page on the basis that the Super Pit, in fact, consists of multiple pits. That does not strike me as a valid objection to WP:COMMONNAME, but here's a move discussion anyway. The pit's official website calls itself "The Super Pit" in its title and "Super Pit" in the body. Google produces lots of hits calling it "Super Pit" or "The Super Pit". "The Super Pit" is invalid per WP:THE, leaving only "Super Pit", which AFAICT is overwhelmingly the most common name.

The only other objection I can think of is the fact that nearly all of the entries in Category:Gold mines in Western Australia have "Gold Mine" in their title, but that's because "Gold Mine" is part of their common names. Miracle Pen (talk) 06:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Super Pit would be the proper name if the article is just about the pit, which it is not, its about the whole mine. A gold mine consists of much more then just a pit, it has a process facility, maintenance facitlities and so on, depending on size. Moving the article to just Super Pit would be misleading. For more information, see this part of the KCGM website, which staes: Ore delivered from the Superpit is processed through two treatment plants at KCGM called the Fimiston Plant and Gidji Roaster. The current name, Super Pit gold mine, is not a perfect match either, possibly, KCGM Gold Mine or Kalgoorlie Super Pit Gold Mine might be more appropriate to eliminate confusion. Calistemon (talk) 10:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've listed the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Western Australia for a wider impute and, possibly, some alternative ideas. Calistemon (talk) 10:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The term "Super Pit" has come to be synonymous with the facility (an example of metonymy, I suppose). That is just what the entire thing is most commonly called, so by WP:COMMONNAME, that's where the article should be. Miracle Pen (talk) 13:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super Pit also redirects to a completely different article. I think we need to first see what Super Pit is more commonly referred to since if the other article has the strongest connection to that name because depending on that we may need to use something lik Super Pit (mine) or something.--199.91.207.3 (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Google news favors the Texas sports stadium over the gold mine. 76.65.128.198 (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super Pit might have to become a disambiguation page to link to both if no agreement can be found. Calistemon (talk) 13:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be in favour of a disambiguation. I just googled for super pit then (looking to find the mine), and the first results link info on the mine in Australia, rather than a stadium. In fact the first result for UNT stadium is on page 4, and then it continues on with more mine related links.

On a related note, the gold mine page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Pit_gold_mine still claims that Super_Pit redirects there, with a separate link to the UNT stadium. The UNT stadium page mentions nothing about "For the gold mine.... see"

131.217.6.9 (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

tours[edit]

removed section added only promotional content about the tours and flowery language. 173.171.192.180 (talk) 01:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC) Almost forgot- source for removed material was the tour company webpage, thus not independent source for info.173.171.192.180 (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Volume removed per year.[edit]

The dimensions of the superpit indicate a volume of safely more than one cubic kilometre, which translates to more than 2gtons of material. At an extraction rate of 15mtons per year less than a quarter of that could have been removed (the tons/tonnes doesn't matter - it won't appear in the article and I like imperial). My figures are conservative so the discrepancy could be a lot bigger.106.68.146.79 (talk) 00:34, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]