Talk:M1 motorway (Republic of Ireland)

M1 motorway merged with this article

I suggest the M1 motorway (Republic of Ireland) page be merged with the N1 road. Legislatively, the route is defined as the N1. The M1 classification only applies "on the ground" as it were, on the motorway sections.

Considering that almost the entire N1 route is now the M1 motorway, there is no merit to having two seperate articles for the two designations (for the same route).

zoney ♣ talk 12:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Merging complete. The content copied (note, no history merging) originally came from M1 motorway in any case (edit history is in that article, from which this content was split). zoney ♣ talk 19:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Page move

This article is about the N1 national primary road. That includes the M1. It does not make sense to move the page to M1. Please read the article for more.

zoney ♣ talk 16:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Adding new Image

I've created a new image showing the primary destinations along the route of the M1 but don't know where to put it.

in the article Limbo-Messiah (talk) 17:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Not to be critical of your TSM-compliant designs (goodness knows the LAs could use someone who can!!) but I can't help but think that the flag and RCS signs are going a bit too far. (Especially the motorway ones as two plate signs pointing in different directions like that will never be seen on an actual motorway). Both the infoboxes and articles tell you the start and end points. --Rdd (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

My own view would be

• Flags - bin them - (but I don't see any!)
• The signs-in-two-directions are good, I don't think the fact they won't appear on any road is important; it is a great presentational image.
• The "Primary destinations" image is lovely but it does replicate the infobox without all the detail and may be overdoing the presentation a bit. We could end up with a photo of a destinations sign; an image and an infobox!

Sarah777 (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Renaming and reformatting this article to standardise Irish motorway wikis

I've renamed this article to bring it line with similar pages for the M8, M9, M7 and M6. The green N road signs will be removed and replaced with motorway blue signs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asteroid (talk • contribs) 20:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay. It's gonna take a while to sort this out and standardize it.

Also. I can't just drop the information about the N1, it needs to be there somewhere...

Trans5999 (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hm. A good way of incorporating that would be to make the M1 page the new standard, like we'll do with the M8. We could insert a "history" heading here, and incorporate the N1 information by saying how the M1 is the leader motorway in Ireland, in the sense that what has happened to it is now happening to the M7, M8 etc. I don't think the N1 deserves its own page anymore, just as the N8 won't deserve its own page when the entire motorway is finished. It might suffice to say the M8 transforms into the N8 at Cork city, and that this is all that remains of a once much longer route. Ditto for the N1. Basically, we only have to get this new format right once. The M1 page is the perfect place to fool around with it because it doesn't need to be updated every few months like the others do. Opinions? Seighean (talk) 16:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I would agree with Seighean above. In fact, I think that needs to happen to N7 soon. Currently, there are almost identical junction tables that need to maintained. But I agree with approach to do M1 first because of its state of development. Thanks Nelson50^T 17:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Well to start off you have the introduction. Then you have a detailed description of the route listing the major landmarks and towns along the route, and whether any tolls are to be paid (it should include of course that it leads into the N1/A1 at either end). Then we have the new History section which will deal with its construction. Then of course, you have 'Future' then 'Junctions' then 'References'. The latter three sections can follow the templates used in the M6-M9 pages. Don't forget that unlike the other M-ways, there have been concrete plans made for the M1 service areas. See: www.m1.ie and the NRA's website.

Perhaps a basic description of the service areas under 'Future' would be appropiate (which could be transferred to a seperate section called 'Service Areas' once they are complete). (BluntGuy) Trans5999 (talk) 21:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Names; M1 motorway (Rep. of Ireland)

This is a good move; just don't be tempted to standardise the article names! Eg. M8 Motorway (Ireland) remains; not M8 Motorway (Rep. of Ireland). RoI should only be used when there is another motorway with the same number on the island. Sarah777 (talk) 21:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually this one should really be moved to M1 Motorway (Republic of Ireland) , use the full word rather than "Rep." - that is the normal style. Sarah777 (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. I tried to rename it M1 motorway (Ireland) as per all the others, but the system wouldn't allow me. I'm not a very proficient wikipedian yet! Be sure to help us out if you get a chance, Sarah.(Furet) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.69.58 (talk) 23:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

There is a disambiguiation page called M1 motorway (Ireland). That's why it won't let you rename. You probably figured that out already anyway. (BluntGuy) Trans5999 (talk) 19:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep - I got stuck so I improvised...I doubt the current name is 'stable' 'cos there is a cheat in it! Can you spot it?? Sarah777 (talk) 22:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --John (talk) 05:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! The more I did the bigger the mess became....Sarah777 (talk) 20:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:DS M1 IE.png

I am not sure what this image currently adds to the article. We already know where the motorways travels between as it is in the article and in an infobox. If it is to illustrate what the signs on the road look like, a photo would be better. Failing that, it is decoration and I think we can do without it. Thoughts? --John (talk) 18:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. I removed a few similar images from related articles. I'd be happy to discuss restoring them if there was a consensus that they served an encyclopedic purpose. --John (talk) 02:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

They look very well but clinically I guess they don't add any information. Couldn't disagree with you here. Sarah777 (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I liked them, however.Limbo-Messiah (talk) 02:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Google Earth

I'm looking at Google Earth, specifically at East Wall Road, and it has an N1 tag on the road. Is this right??? --HighKing (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Structure of National Primary Route articles

In the context of the Irish road system the term N1 refers to two things:

1. the N1 National Primary Route connecting Dublin to the border with Northern Ireland north of Dundalk;

2. the non-motorway part of that route.

The term M1, meanwhile, refers (outside Northern Ireland) to the motorway part of the N1 National Primary Route.

I don't like the way that in merging the former "N1 road (Ireland)" and "M1 motorway (Republic of Ireland)" articles under the name of the latter these distinctions have become muddied. In particular, it's unfortunate that we have ended up with the principal discussion of the greater entirety (the N1 National Primary Route) being confined to an article manifestly about what is but a constituent part of it: the M1 motorway.

I can see that the probable reasoning behind merging the previous articles dealing with National Primary Route 1 in the way it has been done is that the length of that route now designated as the M1 motorway has become very much greater than that designated as the N1 national road -- but the fact remains that there is still only one national primary route from Bachelors Walk to the A1, and the M1 is but a part of it.

I feel that unless we can find a better way of sytematizing this three-way

• national route
  • national road
  • motorway

distinction then there will be a temptation to extend what is, to me at any rate, the present unsatisfactory M1/N1 structure to other National Primary Routes as greater and greater lengths of them are "motorwayized". -- Picapica (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I think the motorways do not merit having separate articles, as motorway in Ireland is merely a designation attached to sections of national routes. I recommend that rather the articles on the routes be named "N1", etc. and discuss the whole route, motorway or not. Best to break each route into logical sections - which I would suggest are not "non-motorway" and "motorway" but rather sections between towns/intermediate destinations (for older non-bypass routes) and by project for motorway or DC bypasses (e.g. for N7, "N7 Naas Road", "M7 Naas Bypass", "M7 Newbridge bypass", "M7 Kildare Bypass" etc. as section titles). zoney ♣ talk 22:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The motorways absolutely do need separate articles. The fact that they are part of national routes is clearly indicated in the first sentence of almost all motorway articles. To relabel all the articles "N7", "N6" etc would be confusing and unhelpful, because physically the majority of the routes are labeled M7, M6 etc. As for discussing individual bypass sections, that is what the "history" section proposed above (and realised in the M8 page) is for. To remake all those articles, some of which are of a very high quality because of what is essentially a mere factoid, makes no sense whatever.Seighean (talk) 01:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not at all against there being separate articles for motorways: on the contrary, since such separateness implies the separate existence of articles on the national routes! What I object to is the "merger-murder" by which the articles on the national routes risk being killed off, with the whole being replaced by a part (as has already happened with the N1/M1). It's as if we were to argue that there is no need for an article on (and entitled) "County Sligo" because a very large share of its population is in fact in Sligo Town, so we can happily merge all information about the county into the "Sligo" article (where the fact that it is but part of a greater whole "is clearly indicated in the first sentence").

Nor, for my part, do I wish to "remake all those articles". Happily, there are still separate articles on, for example, the M6 motorway and the N6. My recommendation, which I would be happy to hear others comment on, is that for now we simply alter the opening sentences to read (with changes italicized):
— The M6 motorway (Irish: Mótarbhealach M6) is a motorway in Ireland, forming part of the N6 Dublin to Galway national primary route
— The N6 road is a national primary road in Ireland, forming part of the N6 Dublin to Galway national primary route
with the words "national primary route" in each case linked to the existing "National primary road" article suitably amended to "National primary route". The structure would thus be (to return to the model I suggested earlier):

• national primary route (a single article for the whole country, explaining the concept and listing the routes)
  • national primary road # (one article for each number)
  • motorway # (one article for each number)
    

-- Picapica (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree totally with you Picapica - I was concerned at the "motorway takeover" but didn't have a solution worked out. Your suggestions are excellent. Sarah777 (talk) 00:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree at all! I think it's completely nonsensical to talk about e.g. the "N7" to mean parts of the N7 that are not motorway. The N7 is the whole route, not just the parts signed as N7. The existing situation, the suggested approaches and generally what's going on seems to betray a gross ignorance of the actual subject matter. I suppose par for the course for Wikipedia these days.

The N6 road is a national primary road in Ireland, forming part of the N6 Dublin to Galway national primary route

^^ This is completely meaningless nonsense. The distinction between "national primary road" and "national primary route" is a made-up Wikipedia distinction.

My compromise would be to allow separate articles for the motorways (i.e. those sections of national primary road that are motorway) if people really wish to make a distinction between them and the rest of the route, and then only summarise those articles as part of the content of the national route articles.

zoney ♣ talk 10:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Come on Zoney! "The N6 road is a national primary road in Ireland, forming part of the N6 Dublin to Galway national primary route" is obviously incorrect but the main thrust of the point that the M-ways should not gobble up the articles on the Primary Routes stands. "The N6 is a national primary route from Dublin to Galway, most of which consists of the M6 motorway (see separate article) etc" is what we should have. We should not have the N6 route with its history and route merged into the M6. Sarah777 (talk) 23:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Great to see you back btw Zoney - I thought we had lost you! Regards Sarah777 (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Scríobh Zoney: >> the suggested approaches [...] seem[s] to betray a gross ignorance of the actual subject matter. <<

Hmm, thank you for that opinion, Zoney! For all the little it probably signifies (the site does concentrate on British roads), I still feel I want to say that I have been a Sabrista and writing about Irish roads there for four years longer than you. Of course I admit ignorance (who knows everything there is to know about any subject you could care to name?), but I find the epithet "gross" a bit... well, gross.

I'd hoped you might exhibit more of Sarah777's open attitude and – above all – the concern I share with her (which is what motivated me to raise this whole matter in the first place) about Irish motorway articles "gobbling up", as she rightly puts it, the national road/route [*] articles, as has already happened with the N1/M1. I was intentionally seeking only to propose an interim step (quote: My recommendation, which I would be happy to hear others comment on) which might at least serve to get us talking about the structure of Irish road articles. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear my use of any particular terms was quite open to comment and correction. The curse of Wikipedian "all-or-nothingism" sems to have struck again!

[*] "National road" / "national route": Zoney, I am – despite your conviction of my gross ignorance in these matters – fully aware of the issues of nomenclature here. "National road" is the only term used in legislation, but "national route" is frequently used not only by the National Roads Authority but also by the Department of Transport: "the N8 national primary route", "the M8/N8 national primary route", "the existing N9 route will be reclassified", "the M/N6 Dublin - Galway route", etc. etc. Sarah is quite right to point out that "The N6 road is a national primary road in Ireland, forming part of the N6 Dublin to Galway national primary route" is obviously incorrect – insomuch as there is, legally speaking, no "N6 road" which is less than the whole of the N6. Even you, Zoney, contrast "national road" to "motorway" in the account of speed limits you give on your own site, and people do observably contrast the N# "road" with the M# "motorway" as part of one "route", even if lawyers would object. Wikipedia, as I understand it, is supposed to reflect (or at least take account of) "real usage", so once again - while I am perfectly prepared to acknowledge that my proposed road/route distinction was shakey (though, please sir, I did invite improvements) - I think your "completely meaningless nonsense" is a bit over the top. (And are there such things, in any case, as "partially and/or meaningful nonsense"?)

C'mon, Zoney. Can't we work together? One of the main things I notice about this discussion so far is that those responsible for the "N1 merger murder" haven't yet replied. Mea culpa: I haven't contacted them directly to alert them of this discussion. Should I have done? -- Picapica (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. In case, by the way, I haven't made my position on this clear, Z., I fully supported your original merger of the N1 and M1 articles into a single N1 article. What I am presently objecting to, and shouldn't like to see replicated, is that later cart-before-horse renaming (move) of the N1 article to M1, which appears to be down, originally, to User:Seighean (as he is now). J'accuse!

I have, on the other hand, no problem with separate sub-articles on the M#, M##, M###, etc. if people wish to write them (I am an "inclusionist"). Just let's end the present farce (IMHO) where clicking on a link to the N1 takes readers to an article entitled "M1". -- Picapica (talk) 15:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Mea Culpa. No objections were made at the time though, if I remember correctly. Unlike your good self PicaPica, I have no interest in working with Zoney after his arrogant comments. Most of the important Irish national road articles were in a dire state of neglect before I and a few others started working on them. Seighean (talk) 17:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for that, Seighean -- and sorry if I came across as a bit abrupt myself. (I was clearly "off watch" myself at the time that the N1/M1 merger was made!) I have to dash just now -- but I do hope we can all look forward to working together constructively on this question. My basic aim is to achieve: "N#" as the "general coverage" article for each national road/route, with "M#" as the "particular" article dealing with the motorway stretch(es), where they apply, of each national road/route. It could well be that an M# article turns out to be longer in practice than the corresponding N# article -- I've no problem at all with with that -- just want to make sure that the N# articles themselves don't disappear! Will return to this discussion as soon as I can. -- Picapica (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

And thank you. All good points. Your suggestions seem positive and sensible to me. I will support such a move and assist when I can. Seighean (talk) 19:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Seighean. I'm working on it and I hope to be able, before too much longer, to present an illustration of what bringing the material here into line with that in the other Irish national road / motorway articles might look like -- but that does mean studying those articles carefully and just at present I'm finding myself a little short of the time needed for grands projets! -- Picapica (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Keeping the original "N" route/road articles allows for the excellent work on the history of these roads being done, mainly by Seighean. The M-ways all take a different route and have not developed as "organically" as the older routes. Sarah777 (talk) 12:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely, Sarah. In other words, what I'm aiming for is the "reconstitution" of an N1 article (even though most of the Dublin to Dundalk (for Belfast) route is, of course, now designated a motorway) to match those covering the other national roads. -- Picapica (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M1 motorway (Republic of Ireland). 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/20090604142819/http://www.arts-sport-tourism.gov.ie/pdfs/English-text5.htm to http://www.arts-sport-tourism.gov.ie/pdfs/English-text5.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 28 May 2017 (UTC)