Talk:Newbury bypass

message: Work in progress. I was at the protest in March 1996 and have some photos that I took then to scan and post up. I was wondering if a new article should be created called 'The Third Battle of Newbury' and all the info about the protest separated from this article, with the article here being left specifically for information about the road itself. What do people think? Lizzyp
:I agree NickW 08:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgot to say - I've got lots of pics too! NickW 13:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Disagree. I think there should be one article about the road, as part of the wider series of transport articles on Wikipedia, and one article about the protest. As for the title, well the Third Battle moniker was widely used by the people involved and much of the media. It's more descriptive than emotive. NickW 22:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's nearly as descriptive as my suggestion, and I  don't think the article needs to be split up unless it becomes too big -- Joolz 13:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Swift reply :) The page is about the bypass and as such should carry information about the road being planned, built, and protested against, only if those sections become overwelmingly big do I think there would be a need for the page to be split up - perhaps we should settle this issue before discussing the appropriate name choices? -- Joolz 13:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

text: But there are many roads in the UK with their own page on Wikipedia - the M25, the M3 and the M6 are just some examples. Lizzyp 17:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe the way to progress here is to stick with this article and as has been suggested split it if space becomes an issue. I'm sure the best solution will appear in the long run... I do have one remaining concern - the protest against the bypass was about more than the bypass itself - I wouldn't want restictive limitations placed upon the article by a too suggestively narrow title  NickW 21:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

text: This rings a bell. I think Norris did likewise - but more recently. NickW 09:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree - without context it's misleading and inaccurate. NickW 21:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work in progress 

message: I've added a pic. of the Tot Hill eviction in progress. It's not particularly great but it's a start for the time being. I'll upload more in the near future.
I would also like to propose some guidelines for images of the protest - I think we should avoid including pics. where people are identifiable (unless permission has been given) - due to possible legal ramifications etc.. For this reason I've been struggling to find ones to upload! NickW 16:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers Lizzy - glad you agree on my image proposal. I'll ask around and see if anyone I know has some decent pics. too. NickW 09:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The security and policing costs quoted at the top of the article were way too low, so I've added the correct figure for the security. I don't have a final figure for the policing costs, but I've added the total to December 1996. The final figure would be a little higher, given the cost of the January 1997 "reunion rampage" and other later activities. I've also sorted out the references so they work with proper hyperlinks. I hope I've done this correctly. It seems to work anyway. This article gets better all the time. Thanks to everyone who's worked on it :) Chrisw404 14:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costs 

message: The result was Oppose the merger into A34 road. -- Seth Whales (talk) 09:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal  

message: Despite making it clear that a majority of local residents were in favour of this road's construction, the Conflict section is largely written from the perspective of the anti road campaigners and violates WP:NPOV. The road protests were a significant event and should certainly be documented, but they dominate the article. More balance is needed. --Ef80 (talk) 13:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Newbury bypass. 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/20060908154021/http://www.concrete.org.uk/downloads/awards_winners_historical.pdf to http://www.concrete.org.uk/downloads/awards_winners_historical.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) 15:47, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Newbury bypass. 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/20061111092301/http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/documents/Newbury_Bypass_Five_Years_After_1.pdf to http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/documents/Newbury_Bypass_Five_Years_After_1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927223213/http://www.highways.gov.uk/news/11555.aspx to http://www.highways.gov.uk/news/11555.aspx
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) 20:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)