Talk:California State Route 241
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article, California State Route 241, may become the subject of controversies due to the ongoing Foothill Toll Road extension dispute. While suggestions to improve the content of this article are welcomed, please refrain from posting your personal opinions about the toll road extension. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Topics |  California State Highways |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add assessment comments) |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
The map in this article is maintained by the Maps task force. |
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Southern California, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage and content of articles relating to Southern California, its people, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. | ||
 |
This article is also supported by WikiProject California. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
 |
Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette. |
Contents |
[edit] NPOV
The part of this article discussing the extension of California State Route 241 is obviously an NPOV issue. The article conveys only the negative view point of this issue. The entire section is written in a very biased way, and the comment "For Southern Californias, it would be impossible to mitigate in any significant way the detremental effects of the toll road." is not true, as TCA has planned to build structures to mitigate the effects on wildlife and San Mateo Creek in particular. Theunknown42 21:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
"Yet the TCA routinely seeks congressional handouts of taxpayer funds for purposes such as environmental studies." This is definitely a NPOV issue. Dasubergeek 22:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Classification
Does this page still need to be a stub? --Rschen7754 03:22, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Length reference
I don't see how the reference for the length has anything to do with the length. It is about bridges. —Kenyon (t·c) 09:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reverts
Would somebody please explain why the detailed additions I made to the Foothill-South expansion were removed? There is no reason for doing so. If nobody can offer a valid explanation I will re-add them.
- What did they say? --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Got no response, so I have re-added those portions to the Foothill-South section, as well as generally cleaned up the article and added a large number of links. --dthx1138 (TC) 15:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV Edits
This article keeps getting periodically edited to remove information which might reflect negatively on the Foothill-South expansion, and it needs to stop.
There is no reason to have removed information about the non-compete clause between TCA and CalTrans; the clause is not disputed by the TCA. Additionally, the last section will be reverted to the original title, "Expansion Controversy," and not simply "extension" as it is already in the "Foothill-South" section. Dthx1138 (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)Dthx138
- Just to follow up, I have significantly cleaned up the "Expansion Controversy" section and have added many references. I will be very disappointed if this text were to mysteriously disappear again. Dthx1138 (talk) 04:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Dthx1138
- one more thing, I realize that the references may seem biased so far as they are mainly from anti-toll road sites. I will attempt to add references to the TCA's positions soon. Dthx1138 (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)DTordini
I have noticed this too, I too have added important info that disappears. Like the fact that to So-Called State Park, is not really a State Park. This what happens when Liberals get to run everything in the state. They are all the same, Always trying to change the rules after the game has started.--Subman758 (talk) 18:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Extension
I hear about the protest on 2/8/2008 vote against the 241 south extension. I don't know if project will ever be done. They wont bouther until next 3 or 4 years.--Freewayguy (Meet) 20:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
