Talk:Autopista
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Autopista is a Spanish language word designating a limited access highway." - This appears to be an article about a Spanish word, not a concept, and as such the history of the word can best be dealt with in that concept's article. WP:WINAD, particularly "Wikipedia is not a usage guide." Some description of usage is OK but I don't think a Spanish term for an international concept merits an article, particularly when other articles on that concept exist. - PhilipR 15:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Speak now or forever hold your peace. Like, in a week or two. I may not be able to fix the Freeway/Motorway mess singlehandedly but I'm going to take steps to make this class of articles more Wikipedic barring reasoned sentiment to the contrary. Regards, PhilipR 21:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Autopista describes limited access highways in certain Spanish speaking countries. Autobahn, Autoroute, Autostrada, and Motorway each have separate articles covering limited access highway in the countries where those names apply, so there's no precedent for merging this as you suggest. Unless you are going to propose a merge with all those articles as well, then there's no reason to suggest merging this one. Tubezone 21:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- They should all be merged together. There most assuredly is precedent (e.g. fixed-wing aircraft), since Wikipedia is not just a highway-related web site. There's absolutely no reason to have an article for each different language, any more than football (soccer) needs to be supplemented with separate articles for soccer, fútbol, futebol, Fußball, etc. Autobahn might be a separate case only because of its separate cultural significance, but even that's marginal.
-
-
-
- Unfortunately I don't have hundreds of hours a month to devote to this cause, which is the time allocation I've been warned is necessary to spearhead an effort to bring Wikipedia articles about limited-access highways into conformance with basic Wikipedia standards so I have to go for incrementalism. This was where I chose to start. In Wikipedia, persistent and wrong beats apathetic and right every time. - PhilipR 02:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Up for deletion
I am unsure as to the thruthfulness of this article as there are no sources/references, and so i have to put it up for deletion
[edit] Explanation for cleanup tag
The "see also" references that are all over the page need to be organised. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)