Talk:Complete streets

message: I just wanted to comment by saying that this is a good summary of what a "Complete Streets Policy" is and how it can benefit a community. On a critical note, some sections are a bit short (ex. health & social benefits) and there are several areas where citations are needed - I added one. Overall I really enjoyed reading this article. Cheers 
JPurdyWNC (talk) 19:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice Article 

message: "Complete streets" is a commonly used expression, especially when talking about abstract policies, but the singular "complete street" is also used enough that I do not think having the article title be plural is justified. A single complete street can certainly be valuable even in an area where there are no others. Esetzer (talk) 04:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the plural article title? 

message: While the article provides clear and reputable information in an efficient presentation, informing visitors of the page about many important aspects of Complete Streets, I believe it could be more comprehensive to policy characteristics and the implementation process associated with Complete Streets. The addition of these topics could help to improve the article by introducing the connection between Complete Streets and the communities in which they exist. Core characteristics of this connection that are typically discussed within Complete Streets policy include the evaluation of context sensitivity and the best practice approach of establishing network connectivity. Smart Growth America in collaboration with The National Complete Streets Coalition have created neutral policy resources such as their Complete Streets Policy Workbook and a policy grading rubric included in their annual Complete Streets rating system of newly enacted Compete Streets policies of 2015. Furthermore, the addition of a Complete Streets policy discussion could provide a better scope of Complete Streets activity. For instance, we may note that, as of 2015, there are 899 enacted Complete Streets Policies within U.S. states and territories.
     In addition, the inclusion of Complete Streets policy exceptions is important; however, it currently appears to be presented as a tacked-on addition following design element examples. I propose a more established inclusion of typical policy exceptions and a discussion of the exception process either as a standalone element or incorporated into a new "Policy" Section of the article. Also, while The National Complete Streets Coalition is a reputable source, link [17] is broken and the link connection should be re-established to the "Policy Elements" section of the Complete Streets Policy Workbook or to the Guidebook in general. Kindly, --TannerWB (talk) 00:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:   Possible Improvements to Article Comprehensiveness 

message: Since Complete Streets has been introduced deaths involving motor vehicles has changed direction, the trend, which was going down, now has dramatically changed.  Having gone down nearly every year since 1982, 2015 saw a massive jump of 10.5% and 2016 of 5.6%.  It time to rethink Complete Streets.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nantucketnoon (talk • contribs) 02:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's no surprised you're blocked but even this comparison is absurd to compare to Complete Streets. The policy was adopted in 2015, the implementation is slowly happening through local DOTs. – The Grid (talk)  20:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:   Deaths Up 

message: − 		 
− 		 
− 	
*Passenger  vehicle  occupant  fatalities  in  urban  areas  
	 
− 	
increased   by   21   percent   since   2009;
	 
− 		 
− 	
*Pedestrian  fatalities  in  urban  areas  increased  by  
	 
− 	
69  percent  since  2009;
	 
− 		 
− 	
*Pedalcyclist  fatalities  in  urban  areas  increased  by  
	 
− 	
48  percent  since  2009;
	 
− 		 
− 	
*Motorcyclist  fatalities  in  urban  areas  increased  by  
	 
− 	
33  percent  since  2009;
	 
− 		 
− 	
https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812826
Nantucketnoon (talk) 23:03, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's no surprised you're blocked but even this comparison is absurd to compare to Complete Streets. The policy was adopted in 2015, the implementation is slowly happening through local DOTs. – The Grid (talk)  20:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistics Question Validity

message: Jujiberry (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I enjoyed reading the article as it addresses not only the benefits that complete streets can provide for communities but the significance of policies that address the economic and social factors. Also, it was not overwhelming to read because it didn't take a lot of space talking about the background history, but focused on explaining strategies in which cities provide safer sidewalks and streets. The resources provided help the reader learn how cities adopt policies and street designs to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. Thank you for providing images and links to examples of complete street projects. Jujiberry (talk) 22:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review  

message: The critique on Complete Streets is an attack on Vehicular Cycling.  The bias that exists in Wikipedia, as in a select group that portends to be a part of the bike community, is appalling.  This is not up to Wikipedia standards.  
Nantucketnoon (talk) 08:52, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfair 

message: Which capitalization is preferred? The article heavily uses both "Complete Streets" and "complete streets". We should either unify to one or make it more clear what the difference between capitalizations is. Googol30 (talk) 01:24, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: From personal experience, either one is used. The current page name  suffices Wikipedia's guideline for using sentence case for article titles. – The Grid (talk)  15:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization