User talk:Regan123/Archives/2008/January

Highways Agency
Hello,

I really like your additions to the Highways Agency page.

However, is it possible to perhaps reinsert the Outstation list, but in a more suitable method?

Sam

--Samiddon (talk) 23:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Samiddon (talk • contribs) 23:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for the comments. I took it out because I don't think it is encyclopaedic. Perhaps you could open the discussion on the article talk page? Regan123 (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Car accident
Hi, I've just done a major rework of Car accident & wondered if you'd like to give it a proofing one day when you've got some time. It was a rambling mess, hopefully I've been able to pull some structure over it. Though I still wonder about the appropriateness of the 'collision prevention' subsection in this article. Best regards, Ephebi (talk) 13:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi mate, will go through it in detail later, but after a quick read it looks like it could do with some references however the article does a lot more organised. Regan123 (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Congestion charges generally
It seems that congestion charge schemes are to be implemented across the whole of the UK, according to the BBC. Maybe do you think a general article on congestion charge schemes in the UK should be created. Cities identified so far (implemented or not) include: London, Durham, Derby, Edinburgh, Manchester, Belfast and probably many others. See here Simply south (talk) 22:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi. We already have Motoring taxation in the United Kingdom which we could redirect Congestion charging in the United Kingdom to. That article has a few too many stub sections at the moment, but work is keeping me away from WP, annoyingly.  I will look at the Belfast and Derby schemes soon and see if we can create other articles. There is also an overview at Road pricing as well. Regan123 (talk) 22:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It doesn't seem like all things mentioned are to do with congestion charging. Motoring taxation seems to be about the many different types of schemes, of which congestion charging is just one, others including road tax and tolls. I do not think motoring taxation should redirect. Simply south (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No. I was talking about the other way round - congestion charging redirects to Motoring Taxation.  At the moment I'm not sure we have enough for a separate cohesive article just on congestion charging.  However I was also planning on doing an article on road pricing proposals from the government.  Maybe the two could be combined into one article with a summary in Motoring Taxation. Regan123 (talk) 23:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've had a further search on google and just simply congestion charging is being talked about being introduced into most major cities by the various authorities, so not just the cities i've mentioned. Examples of other cities where it is, or most likely, to be implemented are Liverpool and Newcastle although others seem to be backing down e.g. Bradford. Simply south (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * OK. I'll try and pull something together but it won't be for a few weeks yet.  Alongside work i've got the FAC to work on! Regan123 (talk) 23:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * And make that it seems many cities generally and some towns. I think most are still proposals only. And i won't hurry you either. I've got a huge assignment to do myself. Btw, do you think we should move this discussion to one of the many projects and then some? Simply south (talk) 23:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * WP:UKROADS seems the most appropriate, but it can be very quiet over there. Regan123 (talk) 23:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Possibly also WP:UKGEO. Simply south (talk) 23:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll copy it to one and redirect from the other. Simply south (talk) 23:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * OK. Do UKRoads as the primary location... Regan123 (talk) 23:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * (I probably shouldn't have included the end part.) Simply south (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

TFA
If passes FAC, do you think it should be on the main page on Feb 17? Will (talk) 16:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. It was one of the reasons for nominating now to have it in place for a nomination.  Keeping my fingers crossed now! Regan123 (talk) 16:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

 * Thanks for your kind words. Kbthompson (talk) 16:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - January 12, 2008
Hi! There's going to be a London Wikipedia Meetup coming Saturday January 12, 2008. If you are interested in coming along take part in the discussion over at Meetup/London7. The discussion is going on until tomorrow evening and the official location and time will be published at the same page late Thursday or early Friday. Hope to see you Saturday, Poeloq (talk) 03:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Elizabeth II in Scotland
Queen Elizabeth is NOT referred to as Queen Elizabeth II in Scotland. On ALL official documentation she is simply 'Queen Elizabeth'. On post boxes, she is Queen Elizabeth, on the royal crest and at the royal palaces, she is Queen Elizabeth...in the Scottish Parliament, she is referred to as Queen Elizabeth...hence why, on the Scotland page, I changed the text to Queen Elizabeth...you seem to wish to perpetuat the myth than Queen Elizabeth is 'Queen Elizabeth II' in Scotland, which is facutally and legally incorrect...call yourself a moderator...rubbish! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.240.226 (talk) 14:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not a moderator, but anyway I raised the topic on the Scotland page. The response seems to contradict you.  See Talk:Scotland Regan123 (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're wrong, anon.  WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN  play it cool.  20:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Roads for Prosperity
Not sure why you redirected Roads for Prosperity (the name of a white paper from the UK government) to the Roads article (and linked to it from Twyford Down)? It seems to be a very different thing.PeterIto (talk) 19:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Roads for Prosperity is currently a redirect to the Roads article. When I can get a copy of the White Paper I intend to expand it to a full article, but at the moment, a wikilink exists to take it to an article which explains a bit about it with a little bit of context and I don't see it doing any harm.  There was no information on this until I created the Roads article and the redirect link has been around for a little while now. Roads for Prosperity is perhaps one of the most important phases in the history of roads in the UK since the Preston Bypass.    I don't see why there isn't a connection.  It shouldn't be a redirect forever, but it needs to go somewhere at the moment. Regan123 (talk) 19:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Makes sense. How about making a comment on talk page to say what you are doing. The other big policy document that is really important that is Traffic in Towns that you should link to. I have a copy if you need any more details PeterIto (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep. My "to do" list grows by the hour.  User:Ephebi has done fantastic work and I agree a summary is needed in the Roads Article.  If someone has a copy of the Roads for Prosperity White Paper I would be delighted to see a copy! Regan123 (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I will ask around, I have contacts at the DfT who might be able to help PeterIto (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for that. It seems to be a most elusive piece of work. Regan123 (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Road Schemes Category?
Not sure where to ask this question, so I will ask you here. As you may have noticed I have been systematically adding information about current and proposed road schemes to UK road articles. I would like to use an info-box to contain the main information (name, estimated cost, start date, finish date, contractor etc) and also to have a category to gather them all together. Has this already been defined? If not do you support the idea. Please reply on my talk pages. Thanks PeterIto (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the work on this. It is an area that is sadly lacking, yet it is darned easy to reference with the modern information we have on the web.  I wouldn't have a problem with major schemes (eg. new bypasses that are particularly controversial) having one, but for a small section of an article it might be overkill.  We do have UK road routebox as well, which might be modifiable to include this info. Regan123 (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me. I agree one needs some guidelines on 'notability' of improvements (although what is notable to one person won't be for another). The thing to bear in mind is that more than one road scheme can apply to a single road and will have different time-lines, so I think they do need independent 'lives' from the road. The M1 has a number if distinct widening schemes at different stages. My interest is on strategically useful schemes mentioned in HA plans, Regional plans, and 'major schemes' in Local Transport Plans all of which I would argue are notable PeterIto (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Where an improvement scheme is about one road I don't see any need for a separate article, except for things like Newbury bypass and the A12 in London. For the M1 these widening schemes can be included in the articles.  Maybe it would be good to look at them individually and consider how to proceed. Regan123 (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)