Talk:Plank road

On the "worldwide view" tag
I think the article could use additional information to create a better worldwide view. However, I think it primarily needs just one additional piece of information: some background on the development of plank roads in Russia, because Russia was a source for their design. If someone (and it might be me) submits a section on plank roads in Russia, I think the "worldwide view" tag can be removed. LaurentianShield (talk) 03:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Not really. The phenomenon is far more widely spread in space and time than that - they were big in prehistoric Europe for example. Johnbod (talk) 03:37, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Plank 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uctc.net/scripts/countdown.pl?267.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:21, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge the various plank road articles?
I suggest that the Old Plank Road and Plank Road Boom should be merged into this article. Any objections? Rwood128 (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Very strong oppose, and your out of procedure merge of Ancient trackway shoulsd be reverted. Johnbod (talk) 22:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Johnbod I won't comment on the "Plank road" for now.

Re the "Ancient trackway" article, I don't really understand where I went wrong. I was very cautious before doing this and there were no final objections. I gave Hedge89, who had earlier expressed doubts, ample time to respond. It seemed sensible to be bold in this case. I had thought a lot about these two articles (and have done much editing), and had very helpful feedback from Netherzone. All the same any guidance is welcomed. Rwood128 (talk) 12:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, Rwood128 I conceded because none of my arguments or rationale on the Ancient trackway article were getting through to you, and you were determined to do a merge to Historic roads. I gave up and stepped aside. I'm glad Johnbod commented. Netherzone (talk) 15:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Netherzone there appears to have been a serious misunderstanding here. I read your comments as a solid endorsement for the merge. But for this I would not have acted. I was not determined to do a merge at all, it just seemed to me that as the two articles overlapped this was a logical step. I am very sorry that this confusion occurred. When I was merging material from "Ancient Trackways" into "Historic roads and trails" no objections were raised. If you and Johnbod want to revert the merge I have no objections, though it upsets me that you both are commenting now, when I was trying doing my best. But maybe, Netherzone, I didn't read your comments carefully enough? Rwood128 (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I read this as the solid endorsement: "Hello Rwood128 - I don't object to the changes you propose. Your rationale is solid. Netherzone (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2018 (UTC)". You in fact moved this comment, from where you initially placed it, so that it came directly after my question to Hedge89, as to whether he could now support the merge. Initially (before the move) it seemed as if you might possibly be referring to the proposed name changes. I now realise that I might have doubled checked, but Netherzone you might have expressed your views a little more forcefully. Anyhow I've learnt from this. What I especially hate on Wikipedia is frequently editing without any kind of feed back. Rwood128 (talk) 16:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, my voice was soft, Rwood128. Here are extracts from my comments re: Ancient trackways that may be enlightening:


 * - there is a significant difference between an ancient trackway and historic road.
 * - a trackway is more aligned to traces and trails that are footpaths for undomesticated animals and humans - a way of getting from one place to another; whereas roads could also accommodate domesticated pack animals such as horses, mules, as well as vehicles such as carts, wagons, etc.
 * - the term ‘trackway’ refers to a linear route which has been marked on the ground surface over time by the passage of traffic. Trackways are usually relatively short routes for local use. A ‘road’, on the other hand, is a route which has been deliberately engineered. Roads tend to be major routes running for longer distances than trackways, often between towns." and "Roads were an innovation brought to Britain with the Roman invasion of AD 43. Their initial purpose was to speed the progress of the conquest by allowing messages, reinforcements and supplies to be transported quickly from established bases to the conflict zone.


 * (Note: in North & South America, we don’t analyze our trails, tracks and roads in relation to the Roman Empire, even if that is standard in the UK and Europe) I was referring to how historians use the term "ancient", as in Ancient history .
 * - definition for track: The mark or marks left by a person, animal or thing in passing; a trail, a wheel-rut, the wake of a ship, a series of footprints. That seems very accurate for this article. Trackway is not in my abridged version at all (not the most recent version), and trail has too many other definitions that it may be confusing. Road seems too utilitarian to use for an ancient path that might have begun as an animal migration trail that then developed into a hominid/human trail.
 * I then conceded to your arguments because I did not have a citation at immediate hand to back up my claim, which seemed was required. Perhaps you can now hear in my tone that I gave up.


 * My last gasp was a question:
 * - Is there a reason why these roads/trails/paths/tracks are defined in terms of the Roman Empire? That seems to apply to Europe, parts of Eurasia and north Africa. Would pre-industrial age or some other more global way of determining "ancient" or "historical" be more encompassing?


 * I gave up the ghost because it did not seem that my efforts to save the article would succeed. I did not want to argue, and it seemed that merging was important to you, and yes, through my lens you were insisting that a merge proceed. You also had the support of another editor, so I moved on to other things. It seems obvious that both of us were trying to do our best. Netherzone (talk) 16:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Netherzone I suspect that differences between British and American English may be part of the problem. My education was in England, though I've lived very many years in Canada, Trackways are often described as roads, including the Sweet Track "the world's oldest road", and The Ridgeway–both CNN and English Heritage call The Ridgeway Britain's oldest road. English Heritage differentiate between "proper roads" and earlier unmade roads. The Sweet Track" might well also be described as a "plank road" or "corduroy road". Again I will refer to the Encyclopaedia Britannica online article on roads:


 * ANCIENT ROADS OF THE MEDITERRANEAN AND MIDDLE EAST


 * The first roads were paths made by animals and later adapted by humans. The earliest records of such paths have been found around some springs near Jericho and date from about 6000 bc. The first indications of constructed roads date from about 4000 bc and consist of stone-paved streets at Ur in modern-day Iraq and timber roads preserved in a swamp in Glastonbury, England.

This is cited in the lede to Historic roads and trails. Rwood128 (talk) 18:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Rwood128, Next time I shall do things correctly and apply force. That's a joke ;-) Yes, it can be frustrating when one is seeking feedback and finds silence, especially after devoting time to something.


 * Onward to the lede: The opening sentence is confusing. It sounds like the article is only about pathways in the USA and Canada. If we are going to stay with the current article name, how about this:
 * Historic roads or Ancient trackways are a path leading from one place to another that "have great historical importance or fame".[1] Examples exist from prehistoric times until the early twentieth century. This includes trackways, tracks, or roads that existed in "the period of history before the fall of the Western Roman Empire" in 476 A.D.[2] "The first roads were paths made by animals and later adapted by humans."[3] In North America they are often called trails. Netherzone (talk) 19:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I have tried to fix the lede to Historic roads and trails. But I'm still uncertain what your views, Netherzone, are on my recent comments on roads, and possible difference in how words like road and trackway are used–and whether you still want the merge reverted? I don't like feeling that I have ridden roughshod over others' ideas. Rwood128 (talk) 20:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Really this discussion (or most of it) needs to be moved to the talk page of the article we are mostly discussing, and continued there! I'll do t5his if no one objects. We also need to consider how to integrate with History of road transport - this covers much of the same ground, often much better, but completely omitting many things covered here. Johnbod (talk) 21:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Btw, I have set up Category:Prehistoric wooden trackways in Europe as a sub-cat of the Plank road cat. Please add any other articles we have. I think there is enough in common for a general article on them. Johnbod (talk) 22:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * (1) But, Johnbod, why create a new article? Wouldn't it be better just to expand the Plank road article? Yes, I realise that "Plank road" is a modern term, but it is the same technology as that which existed in prehistory.


 * (2) Also, isn't a plank road just a sophisticated version of a corduroy road? Perhaps these various articles might be gathered together, and the title "Plank road" changed to Wooden roads?


 * (3) And another query. Can you explain why Plank Road Boom shouldn't be merged into "Plank road"? Currently it is an undeveloped aspect of the "Plank road" article. Rwood128 (talk) 19:57, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * (1) No it wouldn't. The technology is similar, the functions not always so. I think there has been too much undigested bundling of related but different subjects together already. (2) might be a good idea, with brief sections on all the various types, probably as a new article. (3) is a bad idea - it is an admirably long and detailed article on a very specific time and place, and would swamp all the others, as they are now. There should be a short section on it here, with a "main" tag. Johnbod (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks, Johnbod, for these helpful comments. Rwood128 (talk) 22:48, 6 December 2018 (UTC)