Talk:Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals

message: Which countries have signed the treaty?  This is a suggestion for improvement. Mrs.EasterBunny 01:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The link to "Detailed illustrations of signs and signals based on the convention" does indeed work; but most of the pages it links to, are outdated years back.130.226.45.152 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Outdated link

message: Claim is made, without link to evidence, that:
"The only countries in Europe that did not ratify this convention are Ireland, United Kingdom and Spain. This is one of the reasons why the road signage's quality and quantity in this countries is remarkably lower than in the rest of them."
I have deleted the claim about poor signage quality and quantity, which edit I suggest should not be reversed unless a link to confirmation can be provided.
- I write as a road user from one of the above countries, whose experience is that the quantity of road signs (if nothing else) is if anything excessive - indeed, in at least one of the listed countries (mine), courts will accept "forest of signs" (i.e., too many road signs to assimilate at normal travelling speed) as a valid defense when a motorist faces prosecution for disobeying sign posted instructions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.2.196 (talk) 01:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contracting Parties 

message: This seems to be what the alternate rule will allow, but I have never seen a similar image. Hope I got the drawing right. knoodelhed (talk) 02:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the sign looks like this: . P M C 19:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular yellow stop signs 

message: I have reverted L.tak's change back to 74. If you count the list of countries on the same link, there are 74 countries which are signed to the Convention. Fry1989 eh?  23:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.. but generally to become a party to a convention, you have to be bound by it (which requires ratification, accession....). This treaty uses "contracting parties" which by definition are not signatories, as that would lie responsibilities to fully have implemented already during the signing (whereas they just have to "refrain from actions that defeit the purpose of the convention" according to the Vienna Convention)...L.tak (talk) 07:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of parties 

message: The "additional" green light is not mentioned in the article (see CONVENTION ON ROAD SIGNS AND SIGNALS, article 23, paragraph 10). 
In addition, the meaning of flashing amber light is not accurate - according to Convention 
"A single amber flashing light or two amber lights flashing
alternately shall mean that drivers may proceed but shall do
so with particular care." 
I.e., it has the same meaning as well as the green light.
Ekruh (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not have the same meaning. A green light implies right of way unless the driver is turning across traffic, and can imply that even then, if the main three lights have arrows in them. A yellow light implies a dangerous situation with a need to slow down and likely no right of way. Would you say that the priority diamond and the yield triangle have the same meaning, just because you're most likely not going to stop your vehicle for either of them? 93.136.47.163 (talk) 05:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracy 

message: What about Pedestrian light?
Red flashing lights may only be used at the locations specified above; any other use of the lights is in breach of the convention.
In many countries, Don't Walk lights flash red, meaning "Stop if possible".     Tabletop (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pedestrian Walk/Don't Walk lights 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/bkkriders/law/unc/sign1949.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Anybody know how many countries use circular stop signs, and why this was included in the standard?  I've traveled in quite a few countries, but never seen any like that.
Just seems odd that a treaty to *standardize* signs would allow something so basic as a stop sign to be *anything other* than a red octagon with white letters...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CA:83C4:C000:A4:5DB7:EBDD:7227 (talk) 19:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The convention is quite old, and it had to make compromises to cover existing signage in some countries. I remember circular stop signs in Poland, but it was long ago. I would guess circular stop signs have been phased out everywhere already. Malgond (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular stop signs?... 

message: The text of the article says that "The only countries in Europe that are not signatories to the Convention are [...] the United Kingdom". At the same time, the article map clearly show the UK as light green, meaning it is a signatory. So, which is it? 94.255.211.171 (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  UNited Kingdom?