Talk:Roadgeek

message: Oh man... I don't think there has ever been a more accurate word for me than Roadgeek.  I never knew it existed.  Probably much like the native americans not realizing they were called Indians by the white men and also very similar to the molecules within dog feces not realizing that they are called by many foul names. --Wraybm1 03:47, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedian roadgeeks

message: "A roadgeek (sometimes roadfan) is a person that is interested in roads as a hobby. Typical roadgeek behaviors include:
Taking road trips for the roads rather than the destination (sometimes called roadgeeking)"
Isn't that sort of redundant a roadgeek doing roadgeeking?  Personally, I prefer "road scholar" ;) US 71 20:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think roadfan has a less demeaning connotation. --Triadian 00:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roadgeek/Roadgeeking 

message: I think maybe something ought to be mentioned about those of us who are immensely interested in roads, but don't take road trips just for the roads, and don't have extensive road picture galleries and such. I remember being on a roadtrip with my father and crossing the Louisiana border from Mississippi. I just about freaked the first time I saw one of their four-digit state highway markers. Since then, I've enjoyed AA Roads and their network of roadgeek pages immensely. I have learned lots about signage. Anyhow, maybe I'm a certain type of road geek, too. Just a passive one. I think that deserves to be alluded to in this article, but I don't want to unilaterally rip up someone's hard work. --Coryma 17:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  passive roadgeeking 

message: AFAIK, I created the term "roadfan", at least in this context (see Category talk:Wikipedians interested in roads) - I explain the origin in this December 21, 1999 Usenet post: 83p0qt$ggi$1@nnrp1.deja.com.  IME it's not really as prominent as "roadgeek", even after seven years.  Mapsax 23:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer roadfan because I don't like the term geek attached to what I do. I don't go geeking. I'm just a freakin' fan. Roadgeek is derogatory. I think it is fairly common if you check Google. --Triadian (talk) 22:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Roadgeek" vs. "roadfan" 

message: I have checked the links and references and there is enough links and information available to verify the authenticity of this article. I have improved the reference section. However the article could have some cleaning up by more subject knowledgable editors, there still seems to be question marks about originality and POV. Even though I do not have an overwhelming interest in the subject I think there is a lot of room for expansion and it would be nice to see some non North American input as I think it probably is a global hobby.--Matt 02:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: For whomever took/put up the Zzyzx Rd pic, I just wanted to say thank you... Driving from LA to Vegas, how can you NOT notice the biggest landmark before the "Big Thermometer" in Baker? Way cool! Jeff
:LOL I know, one day on my third trip to vegas I took a picture of that sign for myself and my gf said what a geek I was, taking photos of roadsigns :) --Cubbi 13:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ZZYZX!!! 

message: It would be interesting, not to mention more informative, to actually explain the notablility of each of the features listed in this section.  Otherwise it is a meaningless list which does not assert any reason why these are included over any other feature one might consider for inclusion.  — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 22:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
:I agree.  However, all of the locations in the list have their own articles and at least some of those offer notability claims with sufficient sourcing.  I am reverting the deletion of the list, which should be looked at item by item.  There is no doubt that The Ridge Route provides a good example of a Roadgeek destination and ample evidence is offered in its article.--Hjal 16:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the problem is that the article was listing these locations as sites of interest for roadgeeks, which a source is needed for that.  See WP:SYN.  There should be sources for some of the things on the list.  Route 66 for example, there are lots of information out there on driving the road.  --Holderca1 talk 14:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another reference for a road of interest to roadgeeks has been added.--Hjal (talk) 22:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

text: For the record, a similar list used to exist on the railfan article but was eliminated, see discussion here The problem is this list will be subject to POV, as "favorite roadgeek locations" is a personal issue. Some roadgeeks are interested in historical places, others engineering marvels, others sign goofs, etc... Dave (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This list is important both to further document the existance and notability of roadgeeks and to demonstrate their behavior.  I think that the solution to the potential POV problem is to list only those roads or road-related sites that can be demonstrated to be of interest to an identified roadgeek (with a reference to a reliable source) or to a significant number of people (whether identified as roadgeeks in the referenced source or not), with a reference to a news article or to an organization's website.  Some of the WP articles linked to for indivual roads on the list provide such sources already, but some editors seem unwilling to accept the existance of a WP article as sufficient in this article.--Hjal (talk) 02:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sites of interest 

message: Needs more info about other countries, imo. Btw I would describe myself as a moderate Roadgeek, even though I can't drive yet! tractakid (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't really say it's "biased" towards USA, but yes, more information on other countries is needed. Can someone add the necessary template, or else the relevant information of other countries? Thanks. NoNews! 09:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased towards USA

message: SABRE has recently had unsolicited requests to appear on BBC Local Radio (see this thread). We've already got one reference in this article to satisfy "one of the larger and most prominent communities of road enthusiasts online", but could this be another one to back up the notability claims? --Ritchie333 (talk) 12:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SABRE On The Radio 

message: Someone has tagged this section as original research with the rationale "It should have added it to the "Sites of interest to roadgeeks" section. There is nothing to mention, the whole section is original research and it will be removed in 3 weeks if it remains that way". Does anyone else have any opinions on this? --Ritchie333 (talk) 16:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll add in that I'm that someone. I feel this is pretty self explanatory. We are deciding, based on no criteria, "sites that are interesting to roadgeeks". Unless a reliable source can be found for these, the section should be removed as original research (in all honesty I should delete it now and it can be readded when and if someone can justify and source its inclusion; however, given the ongoing GAR I think its best to allow some discussion in this case). - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 16:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sites of interest to Roadgeeks section 

message: It seems to lack any coherent focus. I think railfanning and planespotting are written better, with much less external links and dubious lists. I'm not really in a position to rewite this article, but an editor with extensive knowledge on the subject ie NE2 could impart wisdom upon it. Buffaboy talk 23:52, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is, well, a mess. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Roadgeek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060905172529/http://www.houstonfreeways.com:80/statesman_2004-12-12.htm to http://www.houstonfreeways.com/statesman_2004-12-12.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Roadgeek. 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/20110619010858/http://www.totalvauxhall.co.uk/2008/09/10/society_for_all_british_road_enthusiasts to http://www.totalvauxhall.co.uk/2008/09/10/society_for_all_british_road_enthusiasts/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904021116/http://road.club.pixnet.net/forum to http://road.club.pixnet.net/forum
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://roads.tulok.net/u-a43.html
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) 19:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified