Talk:Sheffield Inner Ring Road

Sheffield Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sheffield, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sheffield 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.SheffieldWikipedia:WikiProject SheffieldTemplate:WikiProject SheffieldSheffield articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Sheffield Inner Ring Road is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Highways: United Kingdom Stub‑class Mid‑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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the project's quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the United Kingdom Roads Task Force.

Red links[edit]

Why there are so many links that are red here? unsigned comment left by Balikem 09:08, 1 February 2007

Because the articles linked do not exist. Remaining is to see where ever these articles are wqorth an article each. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed some I feel unworthy. L.J.Skinner_WOT?|^CONTRIBS 14:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New image[edit]

Made a new image, by superimposing the city council's map over the maps added 29th Jan 2007. It's not very good, so if anyone feels they want to clean it up, or make a new edit from the original by Captain Scarlet, please do so.

File:Sheffield inner ring road.png

L.J.Skinner_WOT?|^CONTRIBS 14:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel slightly offended by the quality of the replacement. If changes must be made, contact me... I try and maintain a consistent style in my diagrams, and seeing doesn't make me want to do many more. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been polite to ask
It is customary to link to original document
diagrams i create specifically have no background (such as a copy pasted grey River Don)
Upload your documents on the Commons

I have reuploaded a copy of the document in an original and untarnished version. Feel free to comment but please query me befor emaking changes yourself! Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this pettiness. If you don't like it, say so - don't claim offence. I said it wasn't the best and asked for help in cleaning it up, but my diagram more accurately represents the route and roundabout styles of the new northern section. Indeed, I asked on your talk page if you could help with the IRR and ORR route maps. I'm beginning to feel you have a personal problem with me, and I hope this isn't the case. In answer to your points:

I did ask - that's why I made the change but said so on the article talk page! I also left a message on your talk page.
A link to original was made on this article talk page
Well, my diagram did have a background. I'm not saying you're shit and I'm great, I just felt it may be useful for orientation purposes. Discussion is the mother of progress.
What difference does it make where they are uploaded?

So, if you would like to implement the changes I have mentioned, that would be great. If you are so bloody-minded as to not wish to listen to the suggestions of others, that's great too, but please leave attacks on others and their work out of article talk pages. L.J.Skinner^{WOT?|I did} 16:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If your replies must contain swearing then you will have no answer. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 18:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

Captain, again, would you mind having a look at the image and seeing if you can edit the new northern section to better reflect the route? You are obviously much better at this than I am! I map of the route my be found here.
Incidentally, they are also changing the layout of the Granville Square Gyratory, so I don;t know if maybe the map needs a tweak here also? The plan, again, is here (see also). L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 16:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't view any third party document if it is a PDF, please link to a web page that does not require third party software WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided as I follow this in my day-to-day life as well as on Wikipedia. Changes to Granville Road seem not to have any incidence on lanes or direction of travel that the 2004 mess made (oh yes I love driving around No Frills for the fun of it). Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not sure if you are saying that you cannot view .pdf files at all, or just that you do not like to view them from wiki. If the latter is true, they arelocated here. If the former is true, let me know and I can screen-cap and email it/upload it for you. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 23:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I made an effort to view them PDFs, had to install then uninstall Acrobat... The road layout is the same as last time, so I'll leave te map as it is. I already updated the inner ring road map to reflect the new construction work. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 08:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But your map is geographically incorrect, and also fails to show one of the jnctions. The IRR when complete will have ten named and numbered junctions. Your map only shows nine. This may be a little confusing no? L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 15:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What like, with Gibraltar Rd? Fair dooes. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 12:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I notice Upper Hannover Street is labelled B6070, whereas it should be A61. As mentioned in the text, the remaining bits of the B6070 are just Rutland Road at the north end and Granville Road at the east end.

Morpeth Street[edit]

Are you sure there's a junction with Morpeth Street? I've gone up and down that part of Netherthorpe Road and have never noticed one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgharston (talk • contribs) 19:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an exit and entrance to Morpeth Street on the anti-clockwise carriageway of the ring road Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 15:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sheffield Inner Ring 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/20071009124019/http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/whats-new/connecting-sheffield/connect-sheffield/enlarged-map to http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/whats-new/connecting-sheffield/connect-sheffield/enlarged-map

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) 05:13, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]