Talk:Walton Summit motorway


 * Was added for completeness. NickF 21:29, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It was added because you are using that "pathetic motorways" web site as your primary source, rather than (say) a list from the Department of Transport, and haven't yet realised that the web site is wrong and that there is no such thing as "Walton Summit motorway".
 * There are plenty of motorway-class stretches of road linked to the main carriageways of motorways in the U.K., some quite long, where the motorway restrictions apply, simply because no non-motorway traffic could ever reach the road (or should ever reach it because the only way off is a motorway at the far end).
 * It's a common cartographers' trick to insert deliberate errors into things, just to see who is copying the information. It's also a common Wacky Website trick to choose humour over accuracy.  And it's certainly going to be a trick of a "pathetic motorways" web site to build up the importance of a road as a "motorway" simply so that it can have one more target to knock down as "pathetic".
 * Take a long hard look at the photograph of the signs in the "Walton Summit motorway" entry in your primary source. Now recall what those shapes of sign mean in the U.K. Highway Code.
 * Uncle G 02:55, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
 * Fair comments - the road was already referenced from the List of motorways in the United Kingdom page, but had no page itself, and as I had read about it, I added it. On closer inspection of other photos, it looks like it claims to be the M65, leading directly to the M61, and then the M6 and M65 (again). Go figure... Maybe this should be part of the M65 page. NickF 00:15, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I resent the implication, being the webmaster of the aforementioned site. The site is not a "Wacky Website", but a factually accurate record, with comments tossed in. You are allowed to educate without boring people, you know! (If you still think it's just a "Wacky Website", check out the M64 or M67 pages...)

UncleG is proceeding from a false assumption: that the classification of all motorways is listed on signposts. There are many other examples of "unsigned" motorways where official DfT documentation exists, such as the tiny A635(M) in Manchester or the A14(M) in Cambridgeshire.

The Walton Summit Motorway is an extremely unusual case. Whilst it is quite true that there are many short motorway spurs that are simply a part of the "parent" motorway, such as the M1 spur at Luton, the Walton Summit Motorway does not fall into this category.

As is clearly pointed out, the Walton Summit Motorway is neither part of the M61, nor part of the M65, but does have motorway classification because it inescapably leads to the roundabout that links the two. There is no other stretch of motorway in the UK where a short "spur" motorway actually links two different motorways.

If it is part of the M65, as the "start of restrictions" sign at the bottom of the hill implies, then why does the directional flag sign state "M61 (M65)", meaning a part of the M61? This is a common form of signage throughout the UK system, but is unusual to be found upon a motorway.

A similar item can be seen with reference to the example of the A635(M) above, the "start of restrictions" sign when heading westbound on the A635(M) clearly states "A57(M)", but the DfT documentation states otherwise. (it's the "Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 3266 The City of Manchester (Mancunian Way A635(M) and A57(M) Mancunian Way Slip Roads) Special Road Scheme 1992 Confirmation Instrument 1995" that you're looking for if you're really concerned about its accuracy. A PDF copy is available on Pathetic Motorways, but a simple Google search will turn up the relevant central government pages if you doubt the source material).

The Walton Summit Motorway is a motorway without a number, hardly an unusual concept in road terms, where most roads either do not possess a classification number, or is of a "C", "D" or "U" classification, which do not appear on road signs. It is, bowever, an unusual concept in motorway terms.

Does it deserve to be in Wikipedia? Perhaps, perhaps not - it's hardly the most well-used or important stretch of motorway in the UK!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.152.10 (talk • contribs) 26 February 2005


 * It would be a shame to lose the article because then we'd lose the discussion! Thincat 14:42, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

VFD debate link
I have merged this article with M65 motorway after this VFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)