Talk:Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

message: It would be useful if whomever placed the 'Citations Needed' tag on this article stated where they think citations are missing!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triskele Jim (talk • contribs) 17:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to remove this tag if no in-text requests for citations can be produced.Synchronism (talk) 22:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed? 

message: I don't believe it's appropriate to throw a cite at Wikipedia:EL and start deleting external links in batches. Might be better to have some discussion first. Yes, weed out the irrelevant and spam, but don't just throw a bunch out based on your own personal opinions as to what's 'relevant'. I've reverted the deletions until some discussion can be had. RCMoeur (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Its the otherway around.  WP:EL states link essential to the topic only.  Most of those failed that without discussion. You can argue their inclusion, but I can't see how RoadGeek fonts or the history page on the Texas A&M site would qualify.  The latter could be used as reference, of course. -- KelleyCook (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a look at the removal of those links as well, and while I personally like those links, they were really only tangentially relevant to this topic, and so it was probably correct to remove them.  (Even still, I like those links well enough that I posted them on my user page.)  --DachannienTalkContrib 02:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: The 2009 MUTCD is now out, so the article graphics should be updated to those from the '09 edition. Mapsax (talk) 00:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2009 edition 

message: At the bottom of this page (which is listed in the External Links section of the article), there are links to old MUTCDs either on that site or elsewhere on the web. Those could be used to flesh out the History section. Mapsax (talk) 07:09, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old MUTCDs online 

message: Michigan has state supplement the map is wrong
 
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/natl_adopt_2000_2003.htm
St8fan (talk) 10:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michigan 

message: The virtual presentation The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) – General Overview of Proposed Changes 3-18-21_1 says that the named should be pronounced "M-U-T-C-D" and not as a combination of letters. I would cite it but it's tough to isolate the frame that says it (there's a PDF linked but that's tough to isolate, too), so it might not be worth it for something that's probably trivia, but it's there in case it becomes an issue. Mapsax (talk) 23:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: For people in the transportation and/or planning fields, MUTCD has always been pronounced by its initials or referenced by its full name. I don't know if it would be worthy to note as it seems common for federal programs except for cases like National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which is pronounced "NITZ-ah". – The Grid (talk)  03:58, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason why I brought this up is because the slide explicitly says not to pronounce it like your NHTSA example. If it's not an issue, though, I'm OK letting it be. Mapsax (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: The newsgroups reporting on this change seem to stem from The Guardian here. As much as it's a verifiable source, their news bait with the title is what isn't described in the article. They actually provide a better context about the MUTCD:
The MUTCD never states  and in Section 2L.02 (pages 510 and 511) mentions:
It could be something the feds might look into further but it never states "banning", it's about bringing into compliance. The 2026 date comes from the standard 2 years after publishing the newest edition of MUTCD (unless the compliance date is specifically mentioned in Table 1B-1).
tldr; much ado about nothing – The Grid (talk)  14:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said that the feds "banned" funny VMS messages (other than headlines of reliable sources that I handpicked). I said that they "strongly discouraged" such messages. AlphaBeta135talk 01:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the removal of "funny messages"