Talk:Traffic circle

message: First traffic circle in the US: "Mass. drives to remove rotaries" and Columbus Circle - --Costoa 23:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: first in the US

message: you cant realy say that canberra has traffic circles per-say, because looking at vernon circle from above, you can see that is is closer to being connected chicanes. also, there is the fact that most of the roads in canberra are designed in a way that you can circle around. I also believe that there are probably much more well known traffic circles. --Alphamone 05:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Canberra

message: I'm not exactly sure the listing for oldest circle is entirely acurate. There are plenty of older traffic circles around. Among others,  Pierre L'Enfant's original street plan for Washington, D.C. has several circles designed and built in the 1800's  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.87.52 (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.  The circle in Tallmadge, Ohio was apparently built in 1807, "modeled after New England designs of the time period" according to this source found at the above-linked article: History of Tallmadge, Ohio  -- JeffBillman (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest Circle? 

message: Some people consider that all roundabouts are traffic circles, but not all traffic circles are roundabouts. Maybe some people do informally use the term "traffic circle" for modern roundabouts in the US, but the term isn't used like that in any official publication that I can find. I believe that the term "traffic circle" is not officially used for modern roundabouts because "traffic circles" have such a bad reputation. So... I've deleted this sentence from the intro: "In some traffic circles, entering roads are controlled by stop signs or traffic signals. In other cases, traffic enters the circulatory roadway by merging, sometimes at relatively high speeds." Anyway, the subsequent sentence covers the same territory better sice the term "traditionally" does not mean "always": "Traditionally, traffic entering a circle has the right-of-way, although some circles give right-of-way to the primary roads."--Farry 13:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sort-of reply here: Talk:Roundabout#Merge revisit. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 03:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restrict definition of "traffic circle"? 

message: Rotary is being merged here; for the time being I will drop some of that content here:
MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 04:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged back into the article. -- Beland (talk) 18:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge material 

message: Currently, there are two types of traffic circle included in this article, but the opening paragraph only defines one of them.  It mentions large diameters (over 100m) and small deflections, so that a high driving speed (over 50 kph) can be maintained.  But the first picture (Columbus Circle) and at least the first five examples given later on are of a very different type of circle, still with a large diameter, but within a dense urban setting and with 90 degree deflections, requiring entering traffic to come nearly to a stop before entering the circle.  For this reason, and also with traffic lights at many of these urban circles, it is too sweeping a statement to say that traffic in a circle usually has to yield to traffic entering.  I replaced that statement with a more nuanced one, but I realize that it is still lacking.  I think the opening paragraph needs to state more clearly the two types of circles counted in this article (neither of them being roundabouts) and then state in some manner that rules of right-of-way vary between and within the two types.  Any suggestions? --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban traffic circles versus highway traffic circles 

message: What is the point of separating them? I'd pick Roundabout as the article title. Lfstevens (talk) 02:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no clear difference between a roundabout and this term 'traffic circle' which I have never encountered in the UK --130.88.99.220 (talk) 16:45, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary there are clear differences between traffic circles, roundabouts and rotaries although the definitions of each do vary depending on jurisdiction. Check out the new references I added in my recent edit. 24.19.89.134 (talk) 23:32, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Merging is very controversial.  See Talk:Rotary (intersection). --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 01:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

text: However, I am in favor of the merge.  I think the only major difference between the word "roundabout" and "traffic circle" is preference.LakeKayak (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with roundabout 

message: Mention the worlds largest , preferably in its own section. If there is no undisputed one, mention that fact instead. Jidanni (talk) 12:45, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's Copeland Circle in Revere, Mass.  6/10 of a mile in circumference.  https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.430089,-71.017814&spn=0.003338,0.006968&sll=42.430695,-71.015625&sspn=0.006676,0.013937&oq=240+beach+st&t=h&mra=mr&z=18 Bellczar (talk) 05:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention the worlds largest {{lc:{{PAGENAME}}}} 

message: Given that there is no discussion of what it means for a rotary to be "unpopular," and given the NPOV policy, I will remove the discussion of the "unpopularity" of rotaries unless someone can produce some statistics from opinion research. (My own impression is that, like driving on the highway, people dislike rotaries when they first learn to drive and later adore them.) 134.174.140.216 (talk) 21:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what research can be found (and you are correct to be looking for it) but rotaries being converted to different styles of interchanges are certainly commonplace today, and I believe there is a PDF attached to this article from a state civil engineering board that bashes them.  It should probably say "unpopular with planners" either way.  Thanks, CSZero (talk) 21:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  CSZERO - the linked study is only an evaluation of the benefit of "modern roundabouts" (i.e., that angle traffic to slow it down). Little about rotaries, doesn't even include the word "unpopular". I take it you approve, although it may be that some professional association of engineers or urban planners has a stance, maybe we could put that instead. 134.174.140.216 (talk) 05:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: (Rotary intersection)"unpopular"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Traffic circle. 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/20140903014341/http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/presentations/safety_aspects/short.cfm to http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/presentations/safety_aspects/short.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100813235846/http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/manuals/chap_04_06.html to http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/manuals/chap_04_06.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070730130826/http://www.hamilton-baillie.co.uk/papers/ICE_paper_April05.pdf to http://www.hamilton-baillie.co.uk/papers/ICE_paper_April05.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified