Named junctions - inclusion criteria

[GC_A690]

Hi everyone. I've been wondering about this for a little while and couldn't find a clear answer on the wiki or on the forums so I thought I'd ask the question myself. Is there a formal set of inclusion criteria for named junctions on the wiki?

It seems clear enough that trunk road junctions are included where a verifiable name exists, however for non-trunk roads, whether primary or non-primary, I'm not quite so sure. I've taken it upon myself to create pages for a few junctions near me that are either a) obviously quite interesting (like Shiney Row Roundabout), b) locally important (like Salterfen Roundabout) or c) well-known and referred to by name locally (like the Board Inn Roundabout). These categories - as well as being invented by me - are clearly subjective; other people might have different views about what's eligible and what isn't. I certainly don't want to clutter up the wiki with junction pages that ought not to be there.

There are plenty of named junctions I could still add to the wiki, but I would like to get a bit more guidance before jumping in and adding a bunch of possibly unnecessary pages. Obviously I'd always make sure that a junction name is attested on at least one ADS or in some sort of official documentation before even thinking of creating a page for it.

What do people with more experience of the wiki think?

[wrinkly]

Basically, some people are keen on putting in named junctions so they create pages for them. Other people aren't so they don't. Result, the pages that exist are those that the first lot of people chose to create.

[rileyrob]

Yes, please carry on.

The inclusion Criteria I have used are as follows:
a) Junctions on Primary Routes - where there is no obvious name, one based on the location has been 'created'. Sometimes these are dubious, and there is a template (Template:Dubious_name) to identify these.
b) Junction on an A road where a name is mentioned on signage, is in common usage locally, or is clearly identifiable on mapping. Also junctions of interest as above.
c) Interesting junction on a B road - whether from an unusual layout, lots of history or on a local distributor / ring road, etc.

I have generally steered clear of Junctions on lesser (C / Unclassified) roads so far, although I know that there are some on the Wiki already for one reason or another.

At the end of the day, one of the golden rules of the Wiki is don't create a page unless you can write an interesting paragraph or more, or think that the subject is interesting enough that someone else will be able to.

[Truvelo]

This is one of the biggest problems I'm facing. For example in Manchester there are dozens of junctions for which no name exists. Many of these junctions are worthy of an article as they had some ambitious plans in the past. The 1960s Manchester Inner Ring Road has absolutely no names for any of its junctions and the A6010 has just one named junction.

[Johnathan404]

I think the rule is if it never had an official name you get to name it after yourself!

I don't see a problem with choosing a local landmark so we can identify it.

[c2R]

I've a problem with clearly made up names - but don't necessarily think that there should be a restriction on adding pages for junctions that aren't particularly notable, if they have an official or a name in common use or a signed name, and they are either on a main road or have other interesting features about them or have a planned or cancelled project about them. For example I added pages on all the Dorset junctions with named fingerpost finials that remain, as even though these are inconsequential roads, the signage is interesting.

[Steven]

I've a problem with clearly made up names - but don't necessarily think that there should be a restriction on adding pages for junctions that aren't particularly notable, if they have an official or a name in common use or a signed name, and they are either on a main road or have other interesting features about them or have a planned or cancelled project about them.

This matches my thoughts, with the critical thing being that you can write at least something about them.

I've certainly created pages for junctions that are a bit dull but have an official name on signage (such as New Cross Junction), and ones that have a common-use name that doesn't appear on signage (such as Scotlands Island), and even one where an "official" name appeared on temporary roadworks signage only (Bushbury Island).

Historically, we've had a lot of problems with junction pages where people just basically made up a name out of thin air; and couldn't say anything about them. The Roaders' Digest should fundamentally be a good source of facts and information rather than a "well, I kinda made it up". Once we start inventing names for things, then the trustworthyness of the Wiki drops through the floor.

I appreciate the issue where there's interesting things to say about a junction that doesn't exist, or doesn't have an official or common-use name. In this case I'd rather have a clunky obvious name such as "A12345 - B54321 junction" which doesn't claim to be called anything that it isn't.

[Bryn666]

I'd echo Steven's thoughts on this. Try and avoid blind invention, but remember some unsigned junction names are very well known - Roscoe's Roundabout, etc.

[GC_A690]

Helpful responses, thanks! Personally, my issue was not so much with the validity of the name but the noteworthiness of the junction. You've all answered that in a way that allows me to create plenty more junction pages, which is exactly what I was hoping for!

[Viator]

I tend to go with the flow of all of the above: any junction on any (already otherwise SABRE-mentioned) road merits an article if there are important and/or interesting road-related things to be said about it -- provided that the contributor is prepared to write at least two or three sentences setting out what those things are. In other words, I'm not at all keen on sub-stub articles which give the impression of having been created merely because they can be and because the junction is there. Beyond a simple map reference and a couple of road-number links, they do need to contain some worth-reading text.

As to junction names, all those included on signs must be included (and all junctions with signed names definitely deserve an article). Names in frequent road-traffic-related local use (e.g. in media traffic reports, planning notices and other regulations), even if not signed on the ground, should also be included where known -- and in such cases it is good if the article text can include an explanation of the derivation of the name where it's less than obvious to today's passer-through. What I am very much against is the pure one-off invention of names by contributors who appear to have done no more than look at a map and thought to themselves: "Mm, it's near Bluebell Wood, and Cowslip Farm is just down the road; shall I call it 'Bluebell Junction', or perhaps 'Cowslip Crossroads'?" This is particularly irksome to those who happen to live near enough to know that the junction has no such name for those who regularly use it!

[rileyrob]

This is particularly irksome to those who happen to live near enough to know that the junction has no such name for those who regularly use it!

This is the crux of the matter, and is a chicken & egg situation. If the article doesn't exist, chances are no one will write it any time soon, but if it exists with an incorrect name, and a disclaimer (eg the dubious name tag I mentioned above), then if someone identifies the error, hopefully it will be reported, and the page moved to the correct name. I have on occasion resorted to the OS Six inch map layer on Sabre Maps, where many old rural junctions are named. These names may be obsolete, but they were at least historical.

Of course, in much of rural Scotland, and perhaps elsewhere across the country, junctions don't have names per se, but instead people would say 'turn off at Invergarry' or 'right at Laxford Bridge', so the local village / landmark has become the de facto name of the junction through common usage.

[punyXpress]

Traffic Reports seem to be one of the most common sources of junction names, but I sometimes wonder who makes them up.
Many appear to take their names from long-defunct pubs.

[Bfivethousand]

I recall that when the Avon Ring Road was under construction, some pre-constructed junctions on each side of the missing link had already developed and taken names on direction signs (Wick Wick, Bromley Heath, Hicks Gate etc.). In continuing the theme with junctions yet to be constructed, some of the names (Dramway, Rosary etc.) often simply came from local geographical features as spotted on OS maps.