Talk:Driving etiquette

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Driving etiquette. 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/20111211023148/http://library.thinkquest.org:80/2993/drivin.htm to http://library.thinkquest.org/2993/drivin.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023064936/http://www.mpi.mb.ca:80/english/dr_tips/Etiquette.html to http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/dr_tips/Etiquette.html
 * Added tag to http://trb.metapress.com/content/r0244435v40lr5wq/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426011735/http://www.cablevisioneditorials.com/content/LI/2009/LI_2009-08-04.html to http://www.cablevisioneditorials.com/content/LI/2009/LI_2009-08-04.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405031941/http://carpoolwithbill.com/driving-etiquette-refresher to http://carpoolwithbill.com/driving-etiquette-refresher
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111202183329/http://unews.utah.edu:80/old/p/062206-1.html to http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Pet peeves
Just finding random WP:PRIMARY sources -- one of which is a random poem -- isn't sufficient for providing a laundry list of so-called pet peeves. The one remaining source is from a 1981 random article, which also is on thin ice. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 02:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

reinstatement of Pet Peeves section
I reverted a series of 3 edits on November 11-12, 2023, in which the removal of one valid source was the basis of subsequent removals by different editors. I made some minor edits in this process.

Removal of content based on the apparently unintentional removal of a source is inappropriate. Nobody had objected to the entirety of the content per se, but I will presume that other editors will leave in that content for which there is no valid basis for objection. Fabrickator (talk) 02:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * See my edit summaries - these are random WP:PRIMARY sources -- even just a poem -- and not WP:RS. The last one I removed was just a personal opinion piece in a magazine; also not a reliable source regarding what consitutes pet peeves, let alone how they are directly connected to etiquette. -- Zim Zala Bim talk 02:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)


 * As well as being poorly reference, the vast majority of them are not peeves but are actually dangerous practices that are against the law in most first world countries. If a police officer in Australia saw you do any of those practices then they would pull you over and give you a ticket or at least a stern warning.  Stepho  talk 03:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

PoV
It's troubling that most of the "by country" subsections are cited to only one source each, and those sources are very old - in some cases almost a quarter of a century. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yeh, a lot of the sources are oudated and some of them don't seem very credible. Qqiumax (talk) 02:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I removed the entire by-country section!!! David notMD (talk) 12:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)