Talk:N3 road (Ireland)

Junctions

I have started a section on junctions in line with other topics. It's very patchy, hopefully somebody can improve on it. Etchy (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The name

M3? N3? Which is it? There's no explanation on the changing terminology in this article. --Jfruh 17:01, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

The N3 road is being extended to become the M3 motorway.

I think the article is reasonably clear, the first sentence refers to the N3 as being a national primary route. In the nomenclature of Irish roads, this gives it the N prefix. It then goes on to say that the route would become the "M3 motorway", the change from N to M reflects this change from "National Primary" to "Motorway".

It's worse than that. The overall route remains a National Primary Route, regardless of Motorway designations on parts or all of it. Even the M50 motorway around Dublin (which was only ever built as Motorway) was legislated for as the N50.

The Roads in Ireland article deals with the broader topic however. For this article it suffices to discuss the N3 road (as it is entirely designated as present) and refer to the upgrade/bypass of part of the route to become the M3 motorway (which will on road signage displace some existing N3 signage).

zoney ♣ talk 08:17, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Stub?

I'm taking out the stub marker. It's only a road, so how much more do we need before it becomes an article? If anybody disagrees, feel free to put it back in. jlang 12:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

I think this article needs some revision as it is biased against the routing of the M3 motorway and does not discuss the economic and social impact of not having proper motorway infrastructure through this part of Meath.

The article doesn't/didn't argue against the need to have a motorway, and I think it's unnecessary that it provides arguments in favour. This is specifically about the *route* chosen, i.e. through and not around the valley. zoney ♣ talk 22:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what point you're making. Should the pros and cons be deleted? Signor Eclectic 22:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Sources needed

Verifiable sources are needed if statements relating to route congestion are to be retained. Ferg2k 05:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps they'd be nice, but a trip to the N3 any weekday morning is enough to verify the statement. It is a fact that the route is narrow winding country road from Meath to the start of the Clonee bypass dual carriageway. Hence why the M3 is planned, and is going to be built in spite of objections, it being close to Hill of Tara, etc. In 2001 traffic regularly built up (i.e. actual jam, not just heavy traffic) from the Clonee bypass to the M50 junction; several kilometers of two lane dual carriageway. It would be worse now in 2006.

I'm removing the template but leaving the citation needed bits. The facts are not in question, though references for them would of course be good.

zoney ♣ talk 14:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Added the main pertinent reference for the sake of completeness. It's not exactly in question though; it's sucking life from several thousand people in Meath right now, and as I said, you can go take a gawk and laugh at the trapped cars if you really wish. The N3 from Clonee to Meath has not been the subject of any significant previous upgrades - it does not even have hard shoulders for most of the route. The EIS at least states this in the observation of the current situation. zoney ♣ talk 14:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The section relating to the election and how the people of meath " voted for the motorway" is argueable at best and in reality a complete lie, the people of meath voted on many issues, tara been just one of them. - ken —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.155.189.88 (talk) 01:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. If the vote had gone any other way the "ruin worshipers" would have been broadcasting the result to the World! Sarah777 (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Tarahill.jpg

The image Image:Tarahill.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Removing Time Line section

Now that the M3 upgrade has been completed, I wonder if we still need to Time Line part of the article. It is overly long and too detailed. None of other Motorway article have this. If there is no objection I will remove this Bigar (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was no consensus for move. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

---

N3 road (Ireland) → N3 road — This is a procedural notification of a move request, following a msg on my talk page from Sarah777 (talk · contribs) who wants to move the page. I have listed the move here so that the proposed move can be discussed and a consensus sought before any changes are made. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I notice you have also made the move more difficult by changing dozens of links from N3 road to N3 road (Ireland) - while this is clearly under discussion. Perhaps you'd like to share your reasoning on this? The existence of all those N3 links relates to the fact that this was the primary location for the article untill it was moved, without discussion, without consultation by someone. I am restoring the status quo at 21:00 and I assume you'll fix all the links you are now breaking? Sarah777 (talk) 09:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Can I strongly suggest you don't move things back as I'd and probably many others would consider this edit warring. As far as I can see the article was stable at N3 road (Ireland) for over a year from July 2008 to quite recently and so I'd consider this the stable position by length of time it'd been there. You then moved it back to N3 road, which you were quite entitled to do, but this move was then reverted. At this point is should have been obvious that the move was non-contreversial and you should not have moved the page again and started a requested move instead. I'll also note that this move was after I'd informed you that I consider all such moves contreversial so I find it even more amazing that you thought it OK to move it again. You did move the page and I'd consider that a minor case of edit warring. Therefore I have no problem with BrownHairedGirl reverting back to the stable position as in my opinion you shouldn't have made that move. I'd certainly consider another move inappropiate and ask you to refrain from such a move. No matter what your views is it the end of the world if the article is at this location for a week while it is discussed. Dpmuk (talk) 09:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Google, google books and google news (all done with US version to try to avoid regional bias) all suggest that the South African road is equally notable. Google hits aren't everything but there's also the fact that the South African road is about 600km long and connects the two largest cities in South Africa and taken together this convinces me that there is no primary topic. Dpmuk (talk) 09:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

N3 was the primary location until it was changed without consultation; I have suggested restoring primacy. You (UK editor?) might "regard this as edit warring" but you wouldn't think the mass move of N3 links to N3 (Ireland) after I made the proposed move was? No? Can I strongly suggest that YOU don't start edit warring on the series of Irish roads articles? Sarah777 (talk) 10:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Sarah, it was stable at N3 road (Ireland) for a year after a WP:BOLD move in July 2008 was uncontested. You want it changed, and this discussion is the place where you can make the case for that change. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

See my comments on your talk page about the links - that was done to make life as easy as possible for readers and I'm sure would be supported by the majority of wikipedia issues. As for where the article should I think my comments above explain my view adequately. I am trying very hard not to edit war but rather just to apply wikipedia policy, however if you feel sufficently concerned about my conduct feel free to ask for others to look at it. Dpmuk (talk) 10:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

That is complete nonsense Dpmuk. The links were dabbed minutes after I requested the move having remained undabbed for years. I suggest both you and BHG undo the links till the the naming issue is resolved or let's take this to Arbcom. I'll give you 10 minutes to decide. Sarah777 (talk) 10:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You'll find the links are now correct, so if you continue, you will be the one finding yourself in the shit. Jeni ^(talk) 10:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Jeni, comments like that really are not helpful here. While assuming good faith, such a comment can come across as "we made the change because we wanted to, but you can't undo it without getting in trouble and we know it." Probably not the intention, but that it what it sounded like. Canterbury Tail talk 12:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I cannot comment on the reason for the links being disambiguated at that time and I can see why you might consider it more than just normal disambiguating given the timing. That said the links being disambiguated to N3 road (Ireland) is (currently) clearly correct. How they got there then becomes irrelevant when it comes to what state the links should be in (although obviously not in the case of user conduct). I find your threat distirbing and quite uncivil especially given the ten minute deadline and my comment above about me being happy for you to get others to look at this. If you desire to take this to ArbCom I have no real objections beyond wondering whether it's appropiate to jump straight to arbcom (although I am aware there's previous history here which may well make this an appropiate move). Dpmuk (talk) 10:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

"I cannot comment on the reason for the links being disambiguated at that time and I can see why you might consider it more than just normal disambiguating given the timing.". Very droll indeed. That links which (1) have stood unaltered for up to seven years (2) I notify BHG of an intention to restore the article to match the links (3) within seconds she changes the links to the veriosn that I want to change. So "I can see why you might consider it more than just normal disambiguating"; well spotted! Sarah777 (talk) 11:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I must admit it'd be amusing to see it go to arbcom, I'd have to get my stopwatch out and time how long it is before they say "go away". Jeni ^(talk) 10:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought you had retired? Sarah777 (talk) 11:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Per Dpmuk, on first glance I was prepared to say that this probably was the primary topic, but there are a significant number of results for the South African N3 that imply this isn't actually the primary topic. Jeni ^(talk) 10:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per dmuk. The South African M3 road is arguably more significant than the Irish N3, because it is much longer than the Irish road, and unlike the Irish road the S. African one connects two major cities. The massive controversy over the construction of the M3 motorway (Ireland) arguably tilts the balance towards the significance of the Irish N3, but in either cases the relative importance depends very much on the reader's perspective (if you're a transport buff, the S. African road probably rooms larger, but from an environmental or archaeological perspective the Irish one is more important). Disambiguating the two roads, as at present, is the best way to facilitate readers with varying interests, and as with other road articles it also assists both readers and editors by allowing these of navigation popups to ensure that all links point to the correct article. Given the usefulness to both readers and editors of such easy disambiguation, we should set a high threshold for selecting a "primary topic" in this sort of article, and treat full disambiguation as the normal procedure unless there is one road is an order of magnitude more significant than all the other similarly named roads. (I believe that this accords with the spirit of the very clumsily-worded guidance at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC).
  The dab page also includes a redlink to the N3 road (Belgium). So far as I can see, this is not a particularly important road in Belgium, because it has been superseded by the A2/E314 and A3/E40 roads (see this map of a return trip from Brussels to Aachen: the direct route chosen by google maps goes along the A2, and only by adding several waypoints does the return journey stick to the N3 rather than using the A2 or A3). Its significance seems to me to somewhat less than that of the English A40 road, a former major route which has been partly replaced by the M40 motorway. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Based on looking at Google Australia's results for N3 road -wikipedia -London (the latter an only partially successful attempt to eliminate results for the N3 postcode in North London) there appears to be an almost even split between hits for the Irish and South African roads suggesting there is no clear primary topic here. My subjective feeling is that this is even more worthy of the primary title being a disambiguation page than is the case with the M2. Thryduulf (talk) 11:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
• Comment Currently "N3 road" Directs one to the DAB page. Why not simply #REDIRECT it to this page? It seems that would solve the dispute. If not, why not? --Ludvikus (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • More exactly, why not do this?: N3 road → N3 road (Ireland) --Ludvikus (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Because then we impede disambiguation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Beacause as discussed above the South African road looks, at least to many editors, to be at least as notable and so there's no clear primary topic, and hence disambiguation is appropiate. If this move doesn't take place then N3 road should probably becomes a disambiguation page listing roads with that name (effectively a copy of the first four items of the roads section of N3). Dpmuk (talk) 22:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
      • I understand now. So we need a uniform WP policy. Here two editors are in conflict over two different countries - Ireland vs. South Africa. But WP does not say what we ought to do. I understand that the I. road is a major thoroughfare. I haven't checked, but may I assume that the Road in SA isn't trivial. If so, then we should keep the DAB #Redirect - otherwise South Africans (who I understand also have English speakers because the Brits were there when the Sun never set on their Empire). I haven't checked, but I assume our English encyclopedia must have a large following in South Africa because of their English speakers. So I think we have possible WP rules which should diminish the possibility of edit wars. Hope these observations are helpful! --Ludvikus (talk) 23:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
      • And now I checked: N3 road (South Africa). I can only imagine now that an South Africans, and the Irish, speaking to each other (in English) of their N3 road would mean, confusingly perhaps (if rarely) of two different ways (pun intended). Much ado over highways, ha? --Ludvikus (talk) 23:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
      • But then, why do you, User:Dpmuk, "oppose" the proposed move? You want South Africans to reach their destiny, no? --Ludvikus (talk) 00:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
        • Ooops. I see your point User:Dpmuk (I got you on the wrong side of the road, so to speak). --Ludvikus (talk) 00:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
      • I have absolutely no idea what User:Sarah777's argument is regarding the proposed move. I see clearly that she's opposed to the position of BHG. But why? I don't think the "stability" of an article is sufficient. I've made a direct query at Sarah's Talk page, but received no reply yet. The question now appears to be why should WP be prejudiced against South Africa, and in favor of Ireland. Is that not so?
      • Not a single vote is for "Rename/Move". There's so far a 100% vote "Opposed" (only 4 though). I remain neutral, because I'm primarily interested in preventing this apparent edit war from continuing. --Ludvikus (talk) 00:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
      • And this, by BHG, is extremely useful here: [1]. --Ludvikus (talk) 01:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - there are several roads by this name, and I'm not convinced that there's a primary topic here. N3 road should remain a disambiguation page. Robofish (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

• Strong oppose - No clear primary use, disambiguation is correct method here. Mjroots (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Well it's time I took a stand on this issue. We do have that "road" in South Africa were the British once ruled (when the Sun never set on it) - so there's presence of English speakers there, on its "motorways." But I sure would like to see better uniform WP policy set up - so it would be easier to demonstrate that there's no "cultural imperialism" when issues of nationalism arise. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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 (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on N3 road (Ireland). 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/20150402104826/http://www.northernsound.ie/news/part-of-n3-belturbet-bypass-opens/ to http://www.northernsound.ie/news/part-of-n3-belturbet-bypass-opens/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615094938/http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/10978-SI_255_OF_2009-0.pdf to http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/10978-SI_255_OF_2009-0.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090412142441/http://www.m3motorway.ie/ to http://www.m3motorway.ie/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)