Talk:Left- and right-hand traffic/Archive 5

Road death table
Hi DeFacto. You have deleted the road accidents table (below, data from 2013) because you state that it is not the same data as used by Leemington (1969). You are obviously correct, but using your same argument, anybody could delete most photos and maps in this article because they are likewise not directly cited by the sources in the article. The table is meant only as an illustration of the topic discussed by the cited authors Leeming, by Watson (and by Kincaid and others). Please comment.86.158.154.23 (talk) 17:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No. The data is cherry-picked to make a point rather than having been described by a reliable source to illustrate their point. What makes these sets of data comparable in the context of LHT/RHT? Why not pick Swedish or Dutch data to represent RHT? -- DeFacto (talk). 17:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Assume good faith, please. Here are the data for Sweden and Holland. Holland as expected is similar to neighbouring Germany. Sweden is different, however Sweden is a much less densely populated country (about 5 times lower density) and in addition Swedish law requires drivers to keep their headlights switched on all day, summer and winter, which reduces accidents. So Sweden is not really comparable to Germany or to Britain or to the Netherlands. I did not include the Netherlands because of the smaller sample size. Germany and Britain are more similar not only in population density but also in terms of latitude (and hence light levels). The best comparison would be to compare left-handed drivers' accidents with right-handed drivers' accidents, but Watson (1999) tells us that research has no been done yet, except on a very small scale in Canada. Hence my modest matter-of-fact table to illustrate Leeming's classical approach. The table is not my own but an excerpt from the Wikipedia Road Deaths page (which you have not yet deleted, fortunately...). Is it now all right to put the table back? 86.158.154.23 (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Your answer reflects exactly the problem with original research. You are making assumptions about relevance and comparability based on your personal opinions. We cannot just dismiss or include data because we personally think population density, population size, headlamp use, or whatever, are/aren't important. This is why we need to source the selection of the data to compare. Without reliable sources that support the choice of countries to compare we cannot include them. Why not compare Ireland to Denmark or Switzerland? -- DeFacto (talk). 18:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Your peace of mind is important to Wikipedia. What selection of countries would you be happy with, to illustrate Leeming's approach? It is easy to cut and paste. Let me know. 86.158.154.23 (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy with a selection of countries that is supported - in the context of LHT/RHT and with reference to Leeming - by reliable sources. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:00, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Fine. Are you in principle happy with an update? So for example if Leeming compared Ireland 1969 with Denmark 1969, would you be happy with a comparison Ireland 2013 with Denmark 2013? Or does it need to be precisely his (outdated) 1969 values? 86.158.154.23 (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Whatever we add needs to be supported by reliable sources. If there's an RS that says 2013 data illustrates Leeming's point, then fine, but otherwise just summarise Leeming's point, but don't try to prove it yourself with your own research. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Road Deaths
In right-hand traffic, the dominant (usually right) hand of the driver is on the gearstick instead of on the steering wheel. Conversely, in left-hand traffic the dominant (right) hand is on the steering wheel. The eyes are also affected differently: in one study, researchers concluded that left-hand traffic may be safer for elderly drivers, since humans are more commonly right-eye dominant than left-eye dominant. Comparing accident statistics between countries operating either LHT or RHT, Leeming concluded that LHT is superior. However, Watson has critcised the small sample size and dismisses the notion. The following table shows road death statistics in comparable pairs of European countries.

Sweden, later the government ordered a conversion
should be "later the parliament on the suggestion of the government ordered a conversion"

Zzalpha (talk) 04:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

LHD in LHT territories like the BVI
In the BVI, the large majority of cars are unmodified American imports and thus LHD, even though, as a British territory, the rule of the road is LHT. This is pretty disorienting when traveling there. It is pretty easy to source. Is this sort of thing common enough to include? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.77.115 (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Rail traffic in the Netherlands - is it really RHT?
According to the article, the Netherlands have RHT on their railroads. Is that really correct? The logo of the Dutch railways (shown here on the right) indicates traffic running on the left, and according to the Wikipedia article on the railways, "The two arrows in the logo represent the train's movement." --Oz1cz (talk) 17:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Rail traffic in Alsace-Lorraine, France (classic vs high speed lines)
Since I first read this article sometime before April 2012 I paid attention especially while travelling by train within the boundaries of Alsace-Lorraine, which according to the article had its railway lines use right-hand running, on one DB International and two TGV services. The first journey had a flyover where Phase One of LGV Est met the lignes classique with right-hand running between there and Strasbourg. I took my second trip in 2017 after Phase Two opened and I am sure the high-speed line used left-hand running throughout with a flyover where it meets the classic line which I think I have found on the current Google satellite view north of Vendemheim. As for LGV Rhin-Rhône I did not pay as much attention partly because I had never traveled that route before but I am sure the newer looking line used left-hand running throughout. I have found the Google satellite view of the junction at Petit-Croix but unlike at Vendemheim there does not appear to be a flyover though there appear to be points to allow eastbound trains to change sides but I cannot see how it works westbound unless the classic line uses left-hand running at that point. Tk420 (talk) 21:39, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Tk420. I'm not sure "classic lines" is the right term relative to TGV, and I just rm'd that phrase before I read thru your revision comments, oops. But like I said in my comment the light rail info already has a place in the table. Maybe you could move it there and find some references. I'm thinking TGV vs. "conventional" trains? --Cornellier (talk) 01:09, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I am not sure if there is a universally accepted name for lignes classiques in English as I have seen different names for them across related articles in the English Wikipedia. I have started a discussion on this in the talk page for Rail transport in France (see Talk:Rail transport in France). Back to the subject of this article I have found an example of right-hand running in Alsace-Lorraine and left-hand running on LGV Est in the You Tube trailer for Video 125's 2011 production Strasbourg to Paris which could be cited but this was made before Phase Two opened. Tk420 (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Since I started the discussion on Rail transport in France User:Cornellier pointed out that the High-speed rail article uses the terms conventional, regular, and traditional though it uses classic in the context of France. Tk420 (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Right Hand Trafic
Dear Wikipedia, In Pakistan there is a RHT instead of LHT, for Wikipedia's information. If i'm wrong correct me otherwise congrats me. Thanks Have a Good day.58.27.217.8 (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I think you are confused between the difference between RHD (Right Hand Drive) and RHT (Right Hand Traffic). 10:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC) Noel Ellis

World map showing the driving directions
[[File:Driving standards historic.svg|thumb|upright=1.8|World map showing the driving directions for all countries and any changes that have occurred in the past starting with Finland's change in 1858.

{{legend|#cc0000|Has always driven on the right (RHT).}} {{legend|#f57900|Originally drove on the left, but now drives on the right side of the road.}} {{legend|#204a87|Has always driven on the left side of the road (LHT).}} {{legend|#5c3566|Originally drove on the right, but now drives on the left.}} {{legend|#4e9a06|Once had different rules of the road (depending on one's location), but now drives on the right.}} ]]

This map needs updating. Its original creator seems no longer to be active in WP. I've moved it here from the article page for consideration. The following is inaccurate and/or inconsistent with the article: --Cornellier (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Some countries in South America drove on the left and switched, e.g. Brazil.
 * China and America are marked in the table as RHT/LHT, the map has them RHT. By the same definition, the UK is mixed, because of Gibraltar.
 * Not sure it's documented that parts of America were ever LHT
 * There's a missing category for switched from right to left, for Samoa.
 * I agree with you. A map like this, a different one, was the only content unique to "List of countries with left-hand traffic", so it was the only thing I saved when I just merged that list into this article. I will admit I didn't check the map for accuracy; want to give it a look and see if it's better? Pogorrhœa (talk) 19:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Gibraltar is a colony, not part of the UK 10:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC) Noel Ellis

traffic rules and units of measurement
Per WP:NOTMANUAL and WP:OFFTOPIC just reverted 90.202.194.206's "traffic rules and units of measurement for distance and speed for each country alongside driving side". I don't think any discussion is needed about whether the units of measurement are off-topic. And the traffic rules content is just unnecessary. Thoughts? --Cornellier (talk) 02:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with that removal. Pogorrhœa (talk) 19:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I note that someone has written a claim that Russia changed to driving on the right in 1917. This can be disproved by photos from the time, and contradicts the change in Finland in 1858. Kincaid has a reference that driving on the right was adopted 5 February 1752 by the decree of Empress Elisaveta Petrovna Also there is no evidence that Belgium drove on the left until 1898. That is just the date the drive on the right became the law. 10:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC)~ Noel Ellis

Flags in table helpful or just decorations?
Per WP:FLAGCRUFT, User:DeFacto removed flags a year and a half ago and now they have been restored by User:Darranc. I think the flags actually interfere with reading the article since I don't know most of them and have to skip past to the actual name. I think this is a case of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should". If they don't directly add info about Left- and right-hand traffic, they shouldn't be there. Thoughts? --Cornellier (talk) 14:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * @Cornellier, I was not aware of the edit 1.5 years ago. I'm a visual person and I just saw the list of countries and I always look for flags to help me. Thus I added the flags. I've no problem removing them, sorry for the confusion. ~ Ablaze (talk) 08:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:FLAGCRUFT notwithstanding, I can't really see that an alphabetised, sortable list is that difficult to read, and if it helps someone more visual than literary then that's to the benefit. "skip past to the actual name" - are you reading Wikipedia on ticker tape? Captainllama (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. My question was "are they useful to someone or are they just decorative?". They're not useful to me personally and in fact they're slightly distracting since like i said i don't know most of them. Random sample: scanning down the alphabetically-sorted list, the first one I can positively identify is Brazil, in 24th position. Australia could be NZ; Belgium could be ... a lot of places. (Apologies to anyone concerned). But, if it can be argued they're useful to some folks, then that's a reason to keep them... . --Cornellier (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

The 2009 change in Samoa was the first country to change in 40 years
I have changed the nonsense reference from Reuters that the change in Samoa "was the first territory to change in 40 years". If we disregard the temporary change in the Falklands in 1982 when the Argentinians imposed RHT for two months until LHT was restored, then it is the first change (in a developed transport system) since Okinawa in 1978. Then we have the issue that technically Okinawa is not a "country" but part of Japan. the last change before that was South Yemen in 1977, which was a country at the time, although now it is now part of unified Yemen. the idea that Samoa was the first to change since Iceland in 1968 is an ignorant piece of racist nonsense, which only makes sense if you only count "white" or European countries. Which does not make sense as Samoa is not a European country! I have also tried to point out that the reference to East Timor changing to LHT in 1976 is nonsense. I think the origin of this is Kincaid who would have us believe that the Indonesians who invaded East Timor in December 1975 respected the local road rules until 17 July 1976 when Indonesia annexed East Timor as a province. There is no contemporary reference to Indonesia making such a change. Kincaid based his claim on the fact that East Timor changed to RHT in 1928 when Portugal changed. This is not disputed. What is of concern is that Kincaid ignores what happened during World War II when Timor was invaded, first by the Allies and then by the Japanese. 09:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noel Ellis (talk • contribs)
 * "the idea that Samoa was the first to change since Iceland in 1968 is an ignorant piece of racist nonsense, which only makes sense if you only count "white" or European countries. Which does not make sense as Samoa is not a European country!"
 * You yourself note that Samoa is not a European country, so where does the racist angle come from? Please remain civil and give reliable sources for what you wish to address or change. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 01:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

It is nonsense because it is clearly wrong. It is racist because it ignores all the changes in non-European countries since 1968. 10:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC) Noel Ellis
 * If it were "racist because it ignores all changes in non-European countries since 1968", then it would also not have mentioned Samoa, as it is also not a European country. Is it possible that the Reuters writer was simply misinformed? Racism happens. So does people being misinformed. Largoplazo (talk) 10:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

trouble on Italy section
In the Europe-Italy section, i think there is some problem that require fix; this is what is actualy present:


 * "In Italy, the countryside was RHT while cities were LHT until 1927.[15] Rome changed to RHT in 1924 and Milan in 1926. Alfa Romeo and Lancia produced RHD cars to special order until 1950 and 1953 respectively; many drivers preferred RHD even in RHT, as it offered the driver a clearer view of the edges of mountain roads that lacked barriers.[16]"

The wrong is:


 * Not explained what appenned in italy after 1927 (whole RHT or whole LHT? i know "whole RHT" is the answer, but there is not official source on the article about this): i think explanation with source is required.


 * It was reported unrelevant specification about Rome and Milan LHT to RHT change before 1927, and without sorce: i think this need to be removed - (and that it was wrong all the rollback previously about this)


 * It was reported about Alfa Romeo and Lancia (italian cars maker) RHD production after 1927 (until '50 years), and reported this related as "many drivers preferred RHD even in RHT" (in italy); this is with a source that cannot be easily checked by internet (a book), and i think this is a speculation, that probably the book report the RHD production in relaction to export market (for the country where rule RHD on LHT system), with also - in secondary way - reporting about some (few) italian people who like to get the RHD car on RHT system. *Note* that years ago this fact was here quoted in different way: "Italian car makers Alfa Romeo and Lancia did not produce LHD cars until as late as 1950 and 1953, respectively." ; i think this source need to be checked, reporting here on talk what is really present on the book, the whole sentences about, and - meanwhile - can be good idea to remove this strange fact from the article, 'cause is not well checked/well exposed.

please excuse my bad english, i hope you can understand what i think, what i've tried to explain.

--5.170.47.117 (talk) 07:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I hope in some opinion, contribution, also from user that only do rollback without giving reason.. something else than only threatening "I will make a complaint of harrassment" after deleting from here just a wikilink to other talkpage (see the history of this talkpage, please), maybe because it show that they still don't reply, having in first forced in "edit war", with just rollback, only rollback, just rollback... but no answers on the questions, no reply on the facts: not previously, not elsewhere before, not here now. I think there is something wrong in some wiki-user ways. --5.170.44.186 (talk) 17:07, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * See WP:Dispute resolution for next steps if no agreement is being reached here. Largoplazo (talk) 20:11, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * It's true that the passage cited above is problematic.
 * It contradicts itself with "cities were LHT until 1927. Rome changed to RHT in 1924"
 * The statement "Rome changed to RHT in 1924 and Milan in 1926." is not referenced.
 * The Daily Telegraph advice column cited is vague: "only regularised in 1927". What was regularized?
 * The statement about Alfa and Lancia is tangential to whether traffic was RHT or LHT and might be misleading. It is common to see RHD cars in RHT jurisdictions in old photos. --Cornellier (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * In really, it seems that rule to keep RHT on whole italy was made on 31 december 1923 (By Mussolini, signed by the King), but leaving 2 year to became law everywhere. You can find something about this in italian language looking the internet for "Quando l' Italia si buttò a destra" on ricerca.repubblica.it Probably official change end late with Milano on august 1926 (but you can be sure that on remote roads a lot of people still drive at libido for many years more). I don't know why here is reported 1927 as end of "Road Hand Confusion" in italy, maybe 'cause is the year of first car with LHD from Fiat, the Fiat 520, or maybe (this really i don't know) for some rule about hand to take globally in europe in 1926 at Paris convention, that become applied by 1927 (??.. i've found this "Nell’Europa continentale la guida a destra fu codificata nel 1927 in una convenzione internazionale firmata a Parigi" from rsi.ch "La gran sterzata da sinistra a destra", but i don't know more.). --5.170.44.11 (talk) 23:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Page updated with new ref'd information from the la Repubblica article mentioned above. --Cornellier (talk) 12:02, 4 November 2019 (UTC)


 * maybe can be good add a last sentence, something like this: "..and in the end, the 1927 was the first year starting with all italy roads set in RHT." just for leave an official date-year of RHT ruling in italy, instead than only the date-year when the full change as started (1924), city after city. --5.170.9.132 (talk) 22:28, 4 November 2019 (UTC)


 * That's a good suggestion, but I can't find any reference that states what year Italians no long drove on the left. "Nell’Europa continentale la guida a destra fu codificata nel 1927 in una convenzione internazionale firmata a Parigi." That is just a statement of intention. It took Austria from 1921 to 1938 to sort it out, and we don't know how long it took in Italy. --Cornellier (talk) 01:11, 5 November 2019 (UTC)


 * There is some other relevant fact, from this other reference (one in english, about Lancia and RHD on RHT):
 * * anticacredenzasantambrogiomilano.org "Guida a destra o a sinistra?"
 * * it.motor1.com "La circolazione, dai Romani al primo CdS, passando per la Rivoluzione e Napoleone"
 * * museoauto.it "DESTRA E SINISTRA PER ME PARI SON…" pdf
 * * brianlucas.ca "Which side of the road do they drive on?"
 * So, it seems that on 1912 in italy was made a RHT law, but leaving city with tramways (that already go on LHT) free to keep LHT; then this still until Mussolini on ending of 1923 force all the country to go RHT fast as possible (maybe at great on 6 months), except for the 4 last city Milano, Roma, Genova e Torino, that required more time. In the end, Milano was the last city with LHT, ended on august 1926. About Lancia and RHD, probably they really do only RHD cars until middle '60, as (other probably that for export - i think) on italy, in running up and down the mountains along the "stivale" and through the alps, with small mountain roads, this was very appreciate by some driver (surely some of they that had started driving in LHT system).. and on trucks more than on a cars: when no much vehicles was existing like today, it seems a lot of trucks/camion producer, also in spain, do RHD on RHT for better safety-view on heavvy loads driving on small/fragile dangerous/mountais roads: this surely rule for cars like old trucks on old fragile/small roads, that they didn't need too much to overtake or to cross each other (difficult with RHD on RHT), but they require more to see perfectly the right road side. --5.170.44.229 (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * So, it seems that on 1912 in italy was made a RHT law, but leaving city with tramways (that already go on LHT) free to keep LHT; then this still until Mussolini on ending of 1923 force all the country to go RHT fast as possible (maybe at great on 6 months), except for the 4 last city Milano, Roma, Genova e Torino, that required more time. In the end, Milano was the last city with LHT, ended on august 1926. About Lancia and RHD, probably they really do only RHD cars until middle '60, as (other probably that for export - i think) on italy, in running up and down the mountains along the "stivale" and through the alps, with small mountain roads, this was very appreciate by some driver (surely some of they that had started driving in LHT system).. and on trucks more than on a cars: when no much vehicles was existing like today, it seems a lot of trucks/camion producer, also in spain, do RHD on RHT for better safety-view on heavvy loads driving on small/fragile dangerous/mountais roads: this surely rule for cars like old trucks on old fragile/small roads, that they didn't need too much to overtake or to cross each other (difficult with RHD on RHT), but they require more to see perfectly the right road side. --5.170.44.229 (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * So, it seems that on 1912 in italy was made a RHT law, but leaving city with tramways (that already go on LHT) free to keep LHT; then this still until Mussolini on ending of 1923 force all the country to go RHT fast as possible (maybe at great on 6 months), except for the 4 last city Milano, Roma, Genova e Torino, that required more time. In the end, Milano was the last city with LHT, ended on august 1926. About Lancia and RHD, probably they really do only RHD cars until middle '60, as (other probably that for export - i think) on italy, in running up and down the mountains along the "stivale" and through the alps, with small mountain roads, this was very appreciate by some driver (surely some of they that had started driving in LHT system).. and on trucks more than on a cars: when no much vehicles was existing like today, it seems a lot of trucks/camion producer, also in spain, do RHD on RHT for better safety-view on heavvy loads driving on small/fragile dangerous/mountais roads: this surely rule for cars like old trucks on old fragile/small roads, that they didn't need too much to overtake or to cross each other (difficult with RHD on RHT), but they require more to see perfectly the right road side. --5.170.44.229 (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Accident stats for people switching sides?
Do any accident statistics exist for visitors from, say, an LHT country driving RHT, particularly in the case of people renting vehicles? Due to muscle memory, training, etc., I have heard of people nearly causing accidents due to either the reversed road rules (i.e. "left of way" rather than "right of way" in roundabouts, or shoulder-checking the wrong side) or reversed vehicle controls (someone used to a right-hand stickshift using a left-hand one). Related to this, are there jurisdictions that require some level of training in "reversed" driving before allowing someone from an opposite standard to rent a vehicle or obtain a licence? 70.73.90.119 (talk) 15:53, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You've highlighted the difficulty in collecting such statistics by observing that far more than just the side of the road is involved. Language is an issue. On my first time drive in the US, as an Australian I had no idea what a beltway was, and I found myself jetlagged, driving a strange car on the the wrong side of the road, in the dark, in a city I didn't know, wondering if I should drive towards a beltway. (Even "stickshift" is a term almost never used in my country.) And this was all in English! If all the signage is in a language unknown to the driver, it can only be worse. Then I struggled to get used to traffic lights in the sky. Lights above lanes are very rare in Australia. Missed them a few times. Differences between miles and kilometres are another one, both for distances and speed limits. Too many factors to measure I suspect. HiLo48 (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Potential future shifts
While it is useful to note countries in which the majority of vehicles are configured for the opposite side of the road, grouping them under "Potential future shifts" is WP:OR. --Cornellier (talk) 11:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What other section should the list be in? Also, if there are secondary sources, is it still OR? --Numberguy6 (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I call it all WP:SPECULATION, which we should not do. HiLo48 (talk) 02:52, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Cleanup needed
This article could use some improvement: --Cornellier (talk) 13:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * per WP:SIZE it's too long
 * much WP:REFBLOAT, alongside entirely unreferenced sections and WP:OR.
 * much WP:OVERLINK as flagged already
 * per WP:BECONCISE much repetition of content, e.g. between the specific jurisdictions section and the rest of the article
 * per WP:NOTHOWTO long unreferenced section on rules of the road
 * per WP:EXT excessive external links which should be converted to refs if useful or removed if not.


 * The problem with the article being too long could be solved by concentrating on road traffic. Driving on the left or right track on double track railways could be moved to another article, as it is quite another issue. --Andhanq (talk) 15:14, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, perhaps here Double-track_railway. --Cornellier (talk) 15:49, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done --Cornellier (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose moving more content to Double-track_railway. Currently this article contains information such as: "The Brussels Metro is nominally RHT, with LHT on the circle line west of Halle Gate. This was done to enable unidirectional vehicles to use island platforms." This would be more appropriate to the Double-track_railway article and as such should be moved there. The "Multi-track rail traffic" column could be removed and replaced with a paragraph along the lines of "most rail traffic has the same handedness as road traffic except where road traffic switched sides after railways were built, as in several countries in Western Europe and South America. for more details see Double-track_railway." This article should be focused on directionality used in general, rather than being a place to catalogue every exception and detail. Furthermore, a surprising number of the countries in the table have no rail infrastructure, e.g. many island states, the Arabian Peninsula, etc.  --Cornellier (talk) 17:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Retrospect – 1½ years on from these changes & much of the obliterated detail still hasn't been moved to Double-track_railway. I comment that the page before edit oldid=890557178 has become a useful resource for me.Dr. British12 (talk) 20:45, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Propose removing the cleanup & too many links flags on the top of the article. --Cornellier (talk) 15:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * done --Cornellier (talk) 12:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Afghanistan
The colour of Afghanistan should be changed. Now according to the article, many roads were LHT. 103.246.39.1 (talk) 05:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

History of RHT in the US
The written history of North America suggests that RHT has always been the prevailing form in teh US, but the map of history labels the US as fomerly LHT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:B041:5C00:24EF:B8BB:5AC7:4C9F (talk) 11:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The map is wrong and should be changed; the US was always RHT. One source (Hayes 2005) claims that from 1811 "until 1850 [the Cumberland Highway] mandated driving on the left, long after the rest of the country had settled on the keep-right convention." (Maybe apocryphal, I don't find another source that confirms it.) Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:09, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Russia
The colour of Russia should be changed. This is because Sakhalin was a Japanese territory and then it became a part of Russia.103.246.39.1 (talk) 07:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * South parth of Sakhalin (and only this) was a Japanese territory only from 1905 to 1945 (40 years), when Japan captured after Russo-Japanese War. Before 1905, Sakhalin was Russian, see, f.e., Treaty of Saint Petersburg (1875). So all time except 40 years Sakhalin was a Russian territory and therefore has RHT. Like Moscow, SPb and other parts of my country, Sakhalin has the same traffic (if it has any roads). P.S. If you are from Japan, you should take the same logic, cause Okinava has RHT when it was american. Eh? -- Brateevsky ( talk to me ) 13:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Ah!! So Russia took back what was it's own territory. It wasn't Japanese to begin with. And no, I am not Japanese or American, hehe. Just because I brought up the topic doesn't mean that I'm from these countries. Speaking of America. The colour of America should be changed too. Parts of it were under the British. And the other parts were French, Dutch and Spanish. Also, the US virgin islands are Left hand drive.

103.246.39.1 (talk) 05:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Not unless "all time" began in 1845, when Japan and Russia both formally claimed the island for the first time at the same time. Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Croatia during Austro-Hungarian rule
I inserted a statement in the notes, to clarify that some regions of Croatia drove on the left, while other drove on the right during the time of Austro-Hungarian rule. This is based on the Karl Baedeker publication "Austria, including Hungary, Transylvania, Dalmatia and Bosnia", 9th ed. 1900, at pp xiii-xiv: "In Styria, Upper and Lower Austria, Salzburg, Carniola, Croatia, and Hungary we keep to the left, and pass to the right in overtaking; in Carinthia, Tyrol, and the Austrian Littoral (Adriatic coast: Trieste, Gorizia and Gradisca, Istria and Dalmatia) we keep to the right and overtake to the left. Troops on the march always keep to the right side of the road, so in whatever part of the Empire you meet them, keep to the left."

Unfortunately I do not currently have any information on when the left hand driving regions switched to the right, but it is probably after the end of World War I.

== clarification: All of Austria Hungary adopted driving on the left from 1915 (source Kincaid). The change to drive on the right was probably 1926 as that is the year given elsewhere for former Yugoslavia Noel Ellis 01:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC) Noel Ellis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noel Ellis (talk • contribs)

Walking on the left or right side
In my country, Denmark, if you are walking on a street with no sidewalk (typically, outside towns) you are required by law to walk on the left side of the street, so you will meet oncoming traffic face-on.

I've heard that India has the opposite rule: Pedestrians should walk on the same side of the street as driving cars.

Is there any information about similar rules in other countries?Oz1cz (talk) 16:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The British highway code states: "If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic." Obviously, traffic drives on the left in the UK so in principle this is equivalent to to Danish rule. If somebody would like to do the research, this subject would be a welcome addition to the article. Tammbeck  talk  16:44, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hong Kong and Macau
Will Hong Kong and Macau switched to RHT like mainland China when the two are fully merged in China in 2047? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:842:C101:54E0:F034:DD47:7EEF:738 (talk) 05:10, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Why didn't Hong Kong and Macau switch to right-hand traffic already in the 1990s when being returned to China, which already had right-hand traffic?
 * Something notable is that China only has had right-hand traffic since 1946. In the 1930s some parts of China like the International Concession of Shanghai used left-hand traffic, and also the Japanese-occupied China during World War II. However, Chiang Kai-shek, who was allied with the USA, decided after the war to introduce right-hand traffic as national law, just as in the United States, perhaps in order to adopt the American traffic system in China but also remove the Japanese system with left-hand traffic.
 * But it would have been more convenient if whole East Asia had one joint traffic system, with left-hand traffic which seems to be dominating in Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand). 212.100.101.104 (talk) 00:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Modern decision of Japan and UK was done to favour local car makers?
I'm fairly certain that Rolls Royce and Honda etc simply put the steering wheel on the opposite side to Ford for technical reasons - and the govts of those 2 countries simply wanted to assist their local car manufacturers when later making the decision - which forced Ford of The US to change the steering wheel for imports simply because it was foreign. Yes of course Ford is foreign everywhere outside The US, but other countries either didn't have carmakers or their local makers put the steering wheels on the same side as Ford. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The German and French industries were well-established before Ford and I'm 100% certain that the UK had motor manufacturers – Daimler and Lanchester to name but two – not only before the Ford Motor Company was founded but also from roughly the same time as Henry built his first quadricycle. Ford's Trafford Park factory in Manchester Uk didn’t open until 1911. Mr Larrington (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have wondered why not left-hand traffic was introduced in the northern and central part of West Germany after World War II, although those parts of Germany became the British occupation zone. When the U.K. occupied Germany, it would have introduced left-hand traffic there, according to British model. Left-hand traffic in British-occupied Germany would most likely have stopped the Swedish plans to switch to right-hand traffic in Sweden, which then used LHT although most Swedish vehicles had the driver seat to the left rather than the right. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There were several UK manufacturers before 1900, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry_in_the_United_Kingdom#1896_to_1900. That web page describes much activity in 1895 and 1896 and refers to the "claim for the first all-British motor car" being contested.  Therefore the choice of the side of the steering wheel would not be due to a desire to be different from the USA.  Reasons for not changing to RHT in more recent times are discussed in the web page to which this is the Talk page. JRGp (talk) 18:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I wonder if Sweden would have planned a switch to RHT if the U.K. had introduced British left-hand traffic in the British occupation zone in the post-WW2 occupied Germany. Then Germany would most likely have had left-hand traffic, at least in the British occupation zone, and then most likely have contributed to an eventual switch to left-hand traffic in Denmark as well as to a stop to a switch to right-hand traffic in the then left-hand trafficked Sweden. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Most American cars seem to have been right-hand driven in the early 1900s. Perhaps at that time it was preferred to have the driver's seat on the curbside (which is the right-hand side in right-hand traffic) rather than on the side towards the oncoming traffic. But I wonder why the USA didn't switch to left-hand traffic when most cars were right-hand driven. If the USA is a former British colony, it should have left-hand traffic just as Britain - but it seems that the Americans tended (before they had cars) to drive wagons, drawn by more than two horses, from the left horse and therefore expected oncoming wagons to approach on the left, in order to be able to be attentive to oncoming traffic. But then why didn't the Americans start driving on the left when they produced cars with the driver's seat on the right-hand side of the vehicle? 212.100.101.104 (talk) 20:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Language
Most languages are written left to right. What about listing those languages which are written right to left such as Arabic? MountVic127 (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Map about vehicle regation
the map about vehicle regulation appears unreliable. Australia is said to approve registration of "wrong-hand-drive" vehicles, but actually doesn't! (excepting, maybe, diplomatic vehicles and some special categories). EU-countries, on the contrary, have to allow the registration of "wrong-hand-drive", but the map wrongly says the don't. 87.6.177.68 (talk) 17:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Traffic direction of railway and subway
It would be better to organize the 'traffic directions of railways and subways by country' in an easy-to-recognize table. 121.171.233.10 (talk) 01:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

China
Macau is listed as British colony and that's incorrect, Macau was under Portuguese power, not British 2001:8A0:BA8C:7E00:ECC3:5524:1412:8042 (talk) 21:26, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I cannot see where Macau is described as a British colony. Can you be more specific please? HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I wonder: Exactly which areas in China used left-hand traffic, before 1946? It seems that at least the International Concession of Shanghai and Japanese-occupied northeast China (eventually including the current capital Beijing) used left-hand traffic in the 1930s. Some sources say that even Kunming (or whole of the Yunnan province) and Guangzhou (a.k.a. "Kanton") used left-hand traffic - before the year after the World War II end, when Jiang Jieshi (internationally known as Chiang Kai-shek) ruled that the whole China, including Taiwan (which used left-hand traffic during Japanese colonization 1895–1945), shall use right-hand traffic, just as in America. However, Hong Kong and Macau have so far never switched to right-hand traffic, despite being returned to China from the U.K./Portugal. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 22:58, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Left-hand traffic in the British occupation zone in Allied-occupied Germany?

 * Topic moved to here from Talk:Allied-occupied Germany

I wonder why left-hand traffic wasn't introduced in northern and central West-Germany, despite the British occupation of those parts (and the fact that Britain uses left-hand traffic). If British-occupied Germany had introduced left-hand traffic, just like present-day Tanzania/Kenya after WW1, it would most likely not have been any plans for Sweden (then with left-hand traffic) to switch to right-hand traffic (which Sweden now did in early September 1967).

If British-occupied Germany would have left-hand traffic, just as Britain, it might have been connected to the U.K. (without any switch between the right- and left-hand side) via a left-hand traffic motorway through Belgium (and on a bridge across the English Channel). 212.100.101.104 (talk) 20:36, 9 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the British occupation was only temporary and not any annexation, and despite occupation by a country with left-hand traffic, West Germany maybe preferred to keep right-hand traffic as all the rest of Mainland Europe (except Sweden before 3 September 1967) used right-hand traffic (as well as mostly cars with the driver's seat on the left side), and the other occupation power(s), mainly the U.S., preferred to drive on the right, and the British occupation zone then drove on the right as well, in order to allow traffic across the occupation zone border without switch between the right- and left-hand side.
 * However, Austria, or perhaps half of the country, used left-hand traffic before the Nazi German annexation, and did not switch back to left-hand traffic after its independence from Germany in the end of WW2. I guess the reason was that the occupation powers, mostly France and the U.S., preferred to drive on the right, and that all the rest of Mainland Europe drove on the right; this was the reason that Hungary switched to right-hand traffic in 1941. 90.231.234.93 (talk) 20:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Brazil and right-hand vehicles
Brazil, as a right-hand traffic country, does not allow registration of RHD vehicles as a rule. But it has one exception: if a RHD vehicle over 30 years is imported, its registration will be allowed under the collection category, as it will happen if the vehicle is LHD, as Brazil allows registration of imported cars only if new or over 30 years.

Resolution Contran (National Traffic Council) number, 528/2015, in Portuguese: https://www.gov.br/transportes/pt-br/assuntos/transito/conteudo-contran/resolucoes/resolucao5282015.pdf

Fasouzafreitas (talk) 18:22, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Ban on Right Hand Drive vehicles in Turkey
https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=8182&MevzuatTur=7&MevzuatTertip=5

Traffic Regulations, Main section 4, Subsection 1, Article 30, Paragaraph "J" states that; Vehicles with RHD may not be registered for traffic. Except vehicles that are "temporarily imported" (eg. diplomatic), or special use vehicles.

"... geçici ithal ... iş amacına göre ... hariç ..., direksiyonu sağda olan araçların tescili yapılmaz."

Please someone update the list. 92.192.190.201 (talk) 12:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Switch to right-hand traffic in Pakistan
It has been some proposal that Pakistan, formerly part of British India, should end British-style left-hand traffic and switch to right-hand traffic. Is it really possible for a populous country like Pakistan to switch from left-hand to right-hand traffic?

The reasons for the proposal to switch to right-hand traffic in Pakistan are that cars built for left-hand traffic, with the driver's seat to the right, which are imported to Pakistan mainly from Japan, have become more expensive to import, in comparison to much cheaper China-made cars, which mainly have the driver's seat to the left, and thus are built for right-hand traffic. To allow import of cheaper China-made cars (which mainly have the driver's seat to the left), rather than expensive cars from Japan (with the driver's seat to the right), it is necessary for Pakistan to end driving on the left and switch to right-hand traffic. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Prince Edward-Island and the British colony of Newfoundland
«Prince Edward-Island and the British colony of Newfoundland (part of Canada since 1949)[18] in 1947, in order to allow traffic (without side switch) to or from the United States.[19]»

This make no sense these two provinces (colony) share no border with the US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.210.7 (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)