Talk:West Side Highway

Untitled
There seems to be some confusion about the collapse date. Online sources including nycroads.com say it was December 16, 1973, but the NY Times article from December 16 begins, "A section of the West Side Highway collapsed yesterday...". Also, the December 17 article says "the collapse of a portion of the northbound section near Little West 12th Street on Satruday." The 15th was a Saturday. --SPUI (talk) 22:56, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Go with the Times, thats more reliable than Mr. Anderson -JGCarter

the bridged section at Canal Street is worth mentioning as a way to cross the filled in outlet of former Lispenard Meadows, which could not support the highway's piers. --Wetman 07:24, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * You seem to know more about that than I do; if you don't mind, can you add that? --SPUI (talk) 08:35, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose merger

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was merged. –  T M F 05:03, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Westway (New York)‎ suggesting a merger with this article. I disagree. Westway was a discrete proposed project that was not built. The actual West Side Highway, by contrast, does exist. It will be clearer to keep the current format, with each article wikilinking to the other. JamesMLane t c 07:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The Westway project was a proposed modification of the West Side Highway. Because Westway was never built, and not being revived, it can be adequately covered in the history of the West Side Highway (since it is part of that highway's history). Considering it's only two paragraphs that are being merged, there's really no benefit to keeping it separate, especially since most of the Westway material we have is covered in this article anyway. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Westway was a huge, 13-year-long political battle. There would definitely be enough material about it for a much longer article, with more detail than would be appropriate for the West Side Highway article.  You're certainly right that we don't have that material at this time.  Keeping the separate article, however, will obviate spinning one off later.  The separate article will better serve the readers who want to know about Westway.


 * Other readers will want to know about the actual West Side Highway and won't care that much about something that never happened. They, too, will be better served if this article has only the bare-bones information about Westway. JamesMLane t c 15:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * But that 13 year long battle took place within the context of the West Side Highway. If Westway had happened, would we have a separate article on it? Probably not. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 02:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Westway was officially promoted as a highway project, but that wasn't its sole context. It would have involved extensive landfilling in the Hudson River to create opportunities for development other than the highway.  It was at least as much a real-estate deal as it was a highway project.


 * Anyway, that history is of limited importance now. Someone who wants to read about Westway today is most likely to be interested in the issue as an example of the clash between, on one side, government, big business, and big labor, and, on the other side, grassroots neighborhood opposition that was outgunned politically but was able to use environmental laws to achieve a (temporary) victory.  From that point of view, it could just as well have been a proposal to relocate the FDR Drive or to build a bridge to Governors Island.  The details of the debate don't have much to do with the contemporary West Side Highway.


 * So, you're probably right that, if Westway had happened, we wouldn't have a separate article about it. It makes sense to have the article because the fight was notable for its outcome. JamesMLane t c 23:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not arguing that Westway should necessarily forever stay merged with the West Side Highway article. You're right, there's a lot of interesting political intrigue and behind-the-scenes stuff here that could be used to write a decent article at some point (probably even an FA!). But, nobody's writing that article. As it stands now, the vast majority of the information is in the WSH article. What I am advocating is merging the two articles until such time that someone wants to cover Westway in detail. When the Westway section of this article gets too large, then we should spin it off into its own article, per WP:SUMMARY. The U.S. Roads articles in particular have a lot of premature spinoffs (i.e. someone making a split article before the appropriate section in the main article is actually too large) and I'd really like to rectify that. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support merge per Scott. I just compared the Westway article and the Westway subsection of WSH, and I'd say the latter actually does a better job of covering the project. Additionally, there's nothing wrong with merging a topic now and expanding it out later when the coverage of that topic becomes too long for the parent article. –  T M F 18:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually it may make more sense to merge the early history in this article with the West Side Elevated Highway article, and then combine the later information with the Westway article, i.e. to make the collapse of the elevated highway the end of one article and Westway the beginning of the modern history, including the reconstruction of the 1990's.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamela Miller (talk • contribs) 22:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support merger, per Scott and TMF.  Imzadi  1979   →  05:45, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on West Side Highway. 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/20150509061113/http://gothamist.com/2015/03/29/the_1920s_plan_to_run_a_highway_ove.php to http://gothamist.com/2015/03/29/the_1920s_plan_to_run_a_highway_ove.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Infobox maplink
The template Maplink-road in this article's infobox shows a map of the world. The "Route map" at the top of the page shows a proper map of Lower Manhattan, with the highway highlighted, so I assume the KML file is correct. What went wrong? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion
I propose merging this article with the one about the current boulevard. Part of the old structure was left up anyways, so its not like the viaduct is entirely gone. Xdwev vfre2wwd (talk) Xdwev vfre2wwd (talk) 04:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)