Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:02, 10 September 2008

	A4232 road has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 9, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Wales Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geographical coordinates

A4232 road is of interest to WikiProject Geographical coordinates, which encourages the use of geographical coordinates in Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Geographical coordinatesWikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinatesTemplate:WikiProject Geographical coordinatesGeographical coordinates

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Wales may be able to help!

This page needs a lot more work, some of the information is not 100% correct. Seth Whales 20:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Page now completely updated. Seth Whales 06:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Junction names

I have not been able to find the official names of the St Fagans Slip Road or the Techniquest Slip Roads, so I have used the "common" names used Seth Whales 23:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I telephoned Cardiff Council and spoke to a Senior Technician (Transport) who confirmed that the junctions do not have "official" names. Seth Whales 16:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Southern Way

Southern Way is all A4232, not A4161, as on Google Maps and others. Having travelled along it and took note of the signs. Seth Whales (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Refs (re GA)

Hi folks. One basic thing that the reviewer is likely to comment on: fill out all the details for the references. Some of them are complete (or reasonably complete), but much of the lats two-thirds need completing. Just a heads up. The JPS 14:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Next job...more details of references...noted. Thanks, Seth Whales (talk) 22:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Job done (I think??). Seth Whales (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; that'll be one less thing for you to worry about later. I'd consider merging the short Doctor Who and Torchwood paragraphs. The JPS 17:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Job done. Seth Whales (talk) 10:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "which basically involves digging a trench" -- basically is extraneous. Dates could use non-breaking spaces.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I noticed most of the references don't have an author specified. Is this because no specific author can be attributed to every reference? "It has always been intended that the short stretch from the Llanedeyrn Interchange to the Pontprennau Interchange on the A48 (Eastern Avenue) dual carriageway, be used to link the last two link roads of the PDR together." probably needs to be referenced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   "It passes a sewerage treatment plant, a scrap metal business and the city's landfill site, which do nothing to impress any visitor to the city." Self-deprecating, possibly, but also NPOV.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Lots of high-quality images. Very nice. A map would be tremendously helpful.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

As best as I can tell, this article is close to being a Good Article. —Rob (talk) 01:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Review response

Thanks Rob,

Hopefully I have addressed the problems;

1. It is reasonably well written.

   Removed "basically" and entered non-breaking spaces for dates.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   All the references regarding the South Wales Echo do not have the author specified as they were all supplements in a series called "Cardiff Moving" and so did not list any authors/editors.

   The section "It has always been intended that the short stretch from the Llanedeyrn Interchange to the Pontprennau Interchange on the A48 (Eastern Avenue) dual carriageway, be used to link the last two link roads of the PDR together." I cannot find any reference to it, therefore I have reworded the sentence to "The road between the Llanedeyrn Interchange to the Pontprennau Interchange on the A48 (Eastern Avenue) is also dual carriageway and there are no plans to renumber this section of the A48."...which hopefully is okay without a reference.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   I have removed "which do nothing to impress any visitor to the city."

Please let me know if I have not addressed your points correctly. I have requested a map (above), and I have also looked at other articles for someone who can create one, but Stratosphere is on an "indefinite wikibreak and has no estimated time of return". A map really would be great though. Seth Whales (talk) 09:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be hard without GIS data for England. Which may or may not exist. Looks good now, though. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Junction names etc.

I have already established that no "official" names of junctions exist. I have however referenced the names of junctions which are commonly used...Please do not keep reverting the edits without consensus on this talkpage...thank-you. Seth Whales (talk) 19:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you provide evidence that the terms you have provided are used as actual names rather than as points of reference? 217.36.107.9 (talk) 09:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I reiterate, I have already established that no "official" names of junctions exist from Cardiff Council. I have however referenced the names of junctions which are the names commonly used. More information is better than less information, therefore please do not keep reverting the edits. Like most junctions / roundabouts, they are purely descriptive, therefore roundabouts are generally named after a public house for example, which is on the roundabout itself. This is an established norm. Seth Whales (talk) 19:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You haven't answered the question. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 14:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

For clarification, the name "Techniquest Sliproad" would refer to a sliproad called "Techniquest Sliproad", and not "the sliproad signposted for Techniquest" - that's a point of reference. Sometimes, less is more. Take a look at the arguments put forward at WP:USEFUL and WP:NOHARM for more (or less, as the case may be) on this. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Lastly, I have already added references to the junctions, Here I have cut and pasted the paragraph from the reference regarding the Techniquest Sliproad "Come off at Techniquest slip road, turn immediately left into Adelaide Street, at the junction go straight across James Street and into Mount Stuart Sq, (our offices are opposite the now closed Barclays Bank or at the rear of The Coal Exchange)". I reiterate, there are no "official" names of junctions, only names that are commonly used, this applies to the Culverhouse Cross Interchange as much as the Techniquest Slip Road. I am therefore not proposing to delete every junction name in the article. The only "official" names of junctions refer to the junctions on the M4 motorway, i.e. junction 30 and junction 33. Seth Whales (talk) 20:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

"Come off at Techniquest slip road" evidently means "the slip road that is signposted for Techniquest". "Culverhouse Cross" appears at the top of the road signs, in the part which identifies a junction, and therefore is the name of that junction. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

"Come off at Techniquest slip road" obviously means "Come off at Techniquest slip road"...the common name for the junction. Culverhouse Cross is also the "common name" for the junction...the road has no "Official names" for its junctions. if you wish to check with Cardiff Council, please be my guest. Seth Whales (talk) 15:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Check page 110 of the current Highway Code. It gives examples of signs for junctions called "Park Street Roundabout" and "Turpin's Crossroads". At Culverhouse Cross, the name "Culverhouse Cross" appears in that position on the signs. Therefore it is the name of the junction. Now can you please stop adding redundant, duplicate information to the article. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I reiterate for the umptenth time, there are no "official" names of junctions, only names that are commonly used, this applies to the Culverhouse Cross Interchange as much as the Techniquest slip road. The only "official" names of junctions in the entire article relates to the junctions on the M4 motorway, i.e. junction 30 and junction 33. I have taken time to telephone to check with Cardiff Council, if there are any problems with this information, I suggest any editor please do likewise. This is now the end of this futile discussion and I now consider any edits to alter the junction names to be vandalism as the junction names have very good sources including the National Assembly for Wales. Seth Whales (talk) 10:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I spoke to Cardiff Council on this very matter between 15 August 2007 and 3 October 2007. It took me many occasions to contact the person responible for name streets/roads in Cardiff. He gave me his name, but I have not recorded it on this page because a. I wouldn't want to put any persons name onto Misplaced Pages, b. He asked me not to anyway and c. If anyone could be bothered to check with the Senior Technician (Transport) at Cardiff Council, they would discover that it was the same information that was given to me, i.e. no "official" names exist for the A4232 road only "unofficial" names which the Council use to describe the junction, i.e. if the junction is in Culverhouse Cross, they would call it the Culverhouse Cross interchange for reference or ease of use. As I said earlier if the edit is reverted again I only consider it vandalism and will be reverted accordingly. I did not spend all that time trying to contact the correct person for anyone to feel that they know best and to vandalise this article. Seth Whales (talk) 08:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Compromise

See User talk:Ian13#Compromise. Seth Whales (talk) 10:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Editing

• For information CIA (disambiguation) refers to Cardiff International Airport and Cardiff International Arena...see also the reference in the article ( http://new.wales.gov.uk/916148/916555/1482420/Airport_access_report_2003.pdf?lang=en ), which is a Welsh Assembly Government, this gives the abreviation as CIA in the document, therefore as CIA is explained in the article it is acceptable to use the abreviation.
• To delete "until the an unclassified length of Port Road to CIA" is important and should not be deleted at the whim of any edit who feels that it is good to disrupt the work of editors at Misplaced Pages.
• Overall, as neither point is worth losing sleep over I am not going to revert these unhelpful edits, even though the editor who deleted this information is 100% wrong to do so. These edits are not helpful, they add nothing to the article and only take information away from the article. Seth Whales (talk) 14:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Engineering and technology good articles
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class Wales articles
• Low-importance Wales articles
• WikiProject Wales articles
• WikiProject Geographical coordinates pages
• Misplaced Pages articles that use British English
• Misplaced Pages requested maps in Wales