Talk:A46 road: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 11:42, 5 June 2024

Warwickshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Highways: United Kingdom Low‑importance

	Roads portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways 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.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the United Kingdom Roads Task Force.

Somerset Low‑importance

	Somerset portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Coventry (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coventry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CoventryWikipedia:WikiProject CoventryTemplate:WikiProject CoventryCoventry articles

Lincolnshire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gloucestershire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gloucestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gloucestershire 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.GloucestershireWikipedia:WikiProject GloucestershireTemplate:WikiProject GloucestershireWikiProject Gloucestershire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

Strictly speaking, the A46 does not start at Cleethorpes but ends there. The first digit of GB road numbers indicates the zone they start in: Bath is in the 4-zone and Cleethorpes in the 1-zone. -- Picapica 20:41, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree but sometimes it's easier to write in a way that's most familiar with you. I've added the original route the "right" way round though. Maybe we could re-write the main article the other way, it needs doing anyway. Chavster01 12:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GSJ?

There are a number of references to GSJ without explanation of the term. Could someone enlighten us please? --Yendor1958 09:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's short for grade separated junction. It's basically a high-capacity motorway-style junction where the mainline of the major road does not have to stop at a roundabout/traffic lights etc. but has a flyover/underpass and is separated by grade (height) from the minor road that it meets at the junction. The minor road then has slip-roads to join the mainline of the major road. More elaborate GSJs are found at motorway to motorway or motorway to other major road connections where both roads have flyovers/underpasses to eliminate the need for traffic to stop on both roads. Richard B 21:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this case I do think it may be being over/misused - e.g. at one point, where it merges into the M1, it's described as having a GSJ with the B5380... where there is no junction with this road either from the A46, M1 OR M69, but it does meet with the A47 shortly before the latter has a simple bridge crossing over the M1 (and there is a two-way (not south-only) GSJ roundabout as the first A46 junction north of the M1 with a set of unclassified roads that ultimately, but not directly, connect to the B5380). Can anyone explain *that* one?

Article Style

This article is a bit too wordy for me, which is why I've added the {{essay-entry}} template. See A1 and A66 for good examples of how a roads article should be laid out, and not simply a narrative of all its waypoints, which is not useful for an encyclopedia. See wp:mos. — superbfc [ talk | cont ] — 21:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have started the tidy up on the section local to me. It would be useful if someone else could do the sections North of Leicester as I don't know them too well. Be careful, I noted many incorrect facts in the sections I have tidied up, it may be the same in the Northern sections. I will have a go at the Northern sections after a couple of weeks if nobody steps forward. Jenuk1985 (talk) 12:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: A46

I've added a few of the roads joined to the list (not a definitive list though) as there was nothing there previously. The article still seems to be written in the style of an essay, maybe this could be tidied up and reworded? SteveMcSherry 11:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A46 road. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A46 road. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016102923/http://lincs.police.uk/Contact-Us/HQ-Map-and-Directions.pdf to http://www.lincs.police.uk/Contact-Us/HQ-Map-and-Directions.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uk-roads.org.uk/roadlists/f99/46.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:06, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It opened in 1974?

It is misleading to suggest that the A46 opened in 1974 - that is only true of the Warwick/Kenilworth bypass. Mdrb55 (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Major junctions

Hello fellow Wikipedians, BTW I have reduced the amount of major junctions on this article from 22 to 6 by moving termini junctions to terminus area and making it only motorways in the major junctions area. Roads4117 (talk) 08:29, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Must say this is not very useful as major junctions should have A-roads as well as motorways. If you are removing from infobox should replace it by a junction list in the body of the article. Keith D (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Keith D, just saw your message - in theory, then yes, I should, however I am really busy at the moment. But at the same time, the article description of the route is very descriptive (for example, It meets the B1213 from the right, then crosses the A16 Peaks Parkway where it gains primary status.) Roads4117 (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May be a good idea to revert all removals until there are a full junction listing table in the articles, which prevents loss and easily scannable rather than just in the text. Keith D (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D The reason why I did that is because in December on Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Highways, a number of people, including John Maynard Friedman, Imzadi1979, Dave, Rschen7754 and Floydian, who all came to a final agreement, and said that there should be no more than 10 roads in the infobox (excluding the terminus areas), so basically I am applying this to all road articles in the UK. Also, it makes the infobox be much easier to read - on this article beforehand there were 22 roads in the infobox, now its only 6. Another example is the A38, where there used to be 58 roads in the infobox, now its only 7. Hope that makes more sense for where I am coming from. Roads4117 (talk) 07:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D:, the context is WP:INFOBOX: like the wp:LEAD, it should be a concise summary of the key data points of the article, not try to reproduce it. The consensus at wp:wph was that a cap of ten is appropriate.

It would be fairly trivial to replicate the original comprehensive list as a new body section, if people were content with such simple solutions. To my mind, that is all that is necessary and sufficient. But see A5 road (Great Britain)#Junction list where somebody has gone into it in a big way (OTT to me but consensus at wp:wph/uk was keep). --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking that before deleting the information from the infobox that a section be placed in the article body with something like the one you pointed to at A5 road (Great Britain)#Junction list. Though that looks rather unhelpful, ones with the junction in the middle column and notes left & right of this to cover north/west and south/east bound carriageways is much more user friendly. See A1 road (Great Britain)#Junctions as an example of a much more user friendly format. Keith D (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"The perfect is the enemy of the good": it seems to me that a section [well down the article!] called "Important junctions" that looks something like this:

A4;

M4;

A417;

A435;

M5;

A44;

M40;

M5;

A45;

M69;

M6;

M1;

A50;

A6;

A52;

A1;

A17;

A15;

A631;

A18;

A16;

A180

would be good enough to be getting on with. Someone keen can come back and tart it up later. If you disagree, it really needs escalating to WP:wph/uk.

(I am not a roads fan. I only got dragged into this because the A5 goes through my home city so I have a watch on it. When the huge table got added – complete with errors – the BRD discussion got escalated to wp:wph/uk. This discussion is way outside my comfort zone, I am aware that there are strongly held views, so I'm bowing out now.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC) list reformatted --11:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even though thatbis better, that still has 23 major junctions, which is way over the requested amount... Roads4117 (talk) 07:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it is not in the infobox. Sorry, I just did a copy/paste retaining all the forced line breaks. I have reformatted so that it doesn't look quite so silly. It is still no oil painting! Perhaps if each had a short description? Like "A4 (London–Bath)"? And maybe the section title might be better as "Complete list of motorway and A-road intersections". Anyway, that's definitely my last word. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JMF But say you did put that on to the infobox though, then you are adding major junctions, and exceeding the maximum of ten, which is basically defeating the whole point of what WT:WPH want to enforce across the whole network of road articles.

PS: sorry to keep dragging you back here, JMF - I know you said that you wouldn't comment on here again :) Roads4117 (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D We could always make one together, if that's OK with you? Roads4117 (talk) 17:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds OK, but may take time. Probably start with the list made in to a table. Keith D (talk) 17:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, great. Will make a page for us now :). Roads4117 (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
-{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
-{{WikiProject Warwickshire|class=C|importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Warwickshire|importance=Low}}
-{{WPUKroads|class=C|importance=low}}
+{{WikiProject Highways|UK=yes|importance=low}}
-{{WikiProject Somerset|class=C|importance=low}}
+{{WikiProject Somerset|importance=low}}
-{{WikiProject Coventry|class=C|importance=low}}
+{{WikiProject Coventry|importance=low}}
-{{WikiProject Lincolnshire|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Lincolnshire|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject Gloucestershire|class=C|importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Gloucestershire|importance=Low}}
 }}
@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 ::Hello [[User:Keith D|Keith D]], just saw your message - in theory, then yes, I should, however I am really busy at the moment. But at the same time, the article description of the route is very descriptive (for example,  {{tq|It meets the B1213 from the right, then crosses the [[A16 road (Great Britain)|A16]] ''Peaks Parkway'' where it gains primary status.}}) [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 20:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 :::May be a good idea to revert all removals until there are a full junction listing table in the articles, which prevents loss and easily scannable rather than just in the text. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
-::::[[User:Keith D|@Keith D]] The reason why I did that is because in December on [[Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Highways]], a number of people, including [[User:John Maynard Friedman|John Maynard Friedman]] and [[User:Imzadi1979|Imzadi1979]], said that there should be no more than '''10 roads in the infobox (excluding the terminus areas)''', so basically I am applying this to all road articles in the UK. Also, it makes the infobox be much easier to read - on this article beforehand there were 22 roads in the infobox, now its only 6. Another example is the A38, where there used to be 58 roads in the infobox, now its only 7. Hope that makes more sense for where I am coming from. [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 07:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::[[User:Keith D|@Keith D]] The reason why I did that is because in December on [[Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Highways]], a number of people, including [[User:John Maynard Friedman|John Maynard Friedman]], [[User:Imzadi1979|Imzadi1979]], [[User:Moabdave|Dave]], [[User:Rschen7754|Rschen7754]] and [[User:Floydian|Floydian]], who all came to a final agreement, and said that there should be no more than '''10 roads in the infobox (excluding the terminus areas)''', so basically I am applying this to all road articles in the UK. Also, it makes the infobox be much easier to read - on this article beforehand there were 22 roads in the infobox, now its only 6. Another example is the A38, where there used to be 58 roads in the infobox, now its only 7. Hope that makes more sense for where I am coming from. [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 07:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
+:::::{{rto|Keith D}}, the context is [[WP:INFOBOX]]: like the [[wp:LEAD]], it should be a concise summary of the key data points of the article, not try to reproduce it. The consensus at wp:wph was that a cap of ten is appropriate.
+:::::It would be fairly trivial to replicate the original comprehensive list as a new body section, if people were content with such simple solutions. To my mind, that is all that is necessary and sufficient. But see [[A5 road (Great Britain)#Junction list]] where somebody has gone into it in a big way (OTT to me but consensus at wp:wph/uk was keep). --[[User:John Maynard Friedman|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:John Maynard Friedman|talk]]) 10:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::::I was thinking that before deleting the information from the infobox that a section be placed in the article body with something like the one you pointed to at [[A5 road (Great Britain)#Junction list]]. Though that looks rather unhelpful, ones with the junction in the middle column and notes left & right of this to cover north/west and south/east bound carriageways is much more user friendly. See [[A1 road (Great Britain)#Junctions]] as an example of a much more user friendly format. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 16:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
+:::::::"The perfect is the enemy of the good": it seems to me that a section [well down the article!] called "Important junctions" that looks something like this:
+:::::::{{jct|country=GBR|A|4|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|4|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|417|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|435|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|5|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|44|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|40|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|5|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|45|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|69|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|6|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|M|1|dab1=Great Britain}}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|50|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|6|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|52|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|1|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|17|name1= }};  {{jct|country=GBR|A|15|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|631|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|18|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|16|name1= }}; {{jct|country=GBR|A|180|name1= }}
+:::::::would be good enough to be getting on with. Someone keen can come back and tart it up later. If you disagree, it really needs escalating to WP:wph/uk.
+:::::::(I am not a roads fan. I only got dragged into this because the A5 goes through my home city so I have a watch on it. When the huge table got added{{snd}}complete with errors{{snd}} the BRD discussion got escalated to wp:wph/uk. This discussion is way outside my comfort zone, I am aware that there are strongly held views, so I'm bowing out now.) --[[User:John Maynard Friedman|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:John Maynard Friedman|talk]]) 17:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC) list reformatted --11:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::::::Even though thatbis better, that still has 23 major junctions, which is way over the requested amount...  [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 07:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
+:::::::::Yes, but it is not in the infobox. Sorry, I just did a copy/paste retaining all the forced line breaks. I have reformatted so that it doesn't look quite so silly. It is still no oil painting! Perhaps if each had a short description? Like "A4 (London{{ndash}}Bath)"? And maybe the section title might be better as "Complete list of motorway and A-road intersections". Anyway, that's definitely my last word. --[[User:John Maynard Friedman|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:John Maynard Friedman|talk]]) 11:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::::::::[[User:John Maynard Friedman|@JMF]] But say you did put that on to the infobox though, then you are adding major junctions, and exceeding the maximum of ten, which is basically defeating the whole point of what WT:WPH want to enforce across the whole network of road articles.
+::::::::::PS: sorry to keep dragging you back here, JMF - I know you said that you wouldn't comment on here again :) [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 17:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
+[[User:Keith D|@Keith D]] We could always make one together, if that's OK with you? [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 17:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
+:Sounds OK, but may take time. Probably start with the list made in to a table. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 17:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
+::OK, great. Will make a page for us now :). [[User:Roads4117|Roads4117]] ([[User talk:Roads4117|talk]]) 17:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)