Talk:Green lane (road)

Opening heading

Resources

CROW & NERC - legal guide for PROW committees by west sussex council - http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:NrFUjoL1lm8J:www2.westsussex.gov.uk/leisureandtourism/prow/pdfs/Guide_to_the-Law_August06.pdf+%22PROW%22+site:westsussex.gov.uk&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=11

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

The result of the move request was: Move to Green lane (road). No consensus among three participants, but also no evidence or even indication that the type of road is the primary topic for "green lane"; anyone looking for any of the "Green Lane" topics listed on the dab page is highly likely to enter just "green lane" into the Search box, and they should be taken to the dab page, not here. PC78 seemed to have a good point, but Powers' rebuttal was better. Born2cycle (talk) 06:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

---

Requested move

Green lane → Green lane (road) — Green lane is Green Lane the disambiguation page. 75.142.152.104 (talk) 04:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is the only use of the uncapitalised green lane and hence the primary topic, distinct from the capitalised Green Lane per WP:PRECISION. PC78 (talk) 06:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
• Support. I can sometimes support having the uncapitalized term be a disambiguation page while the capitalized version goes to a specific usage, because the user must specifically type the capitals to get the specific usage. But the reverse is no good; too many people don't bother with the shift key when typing search terms. Green lane should redirect to, or be, the disambiguation page. Powers ^T 12:18, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Why is it "no good"? This article has a hatnote directing people to Green Lane. There's no provision in the guideline for lazy shift keys. PC78 (talk) 16:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
    • So, because the guideline doesn't make specific provision for it, I can't opine that it's the better move? I don't want people looking for one of the proper-noun "Green Lanes" to have to click through to the disambiguation page; they should be taken straight to it. Powers ^T 17:11, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
      • I'm not disregarding your opinion, merely pointing out that it seems contrary to the relevant naming convention (which is actually a policy rather than a guideline). PC78 (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
        • The policy merely indicates that disambiguating by capitalization is acceptable, not that it's obligatory. In my opinion, the specific examples mentioned therein are tolerable because the disambiguation page is at the uncapitalized title; the proposal here reverses that and I think it will disservice our readers. That doesn't contradict the policy in any way. Powers ^T 19:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Green lane (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/20120515060330/http://bywaymap.com/ to http://bywaymap.com/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 13:52, 23 October 2017 (UTC)