Talk:California State Route 241/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about California State Route 241. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

NPOV

The part of this article discussing the extension of California State Route 241 is obviously an NPOV issue. The article conveys only the negative view point of this issue. The entire section is written in a very biased way, and the comment "For Southern Californias, it would be impossible to mitigate in any significant way the detremental effects of the toll road." is not true, as TCA has planned to build structures to mitigate the effects on wildlife and San Mateo Creek in particular. Theunknown42 21:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

"Yet the TCA routinely seeks congressional handouts of taxpayer funds for purposes such as environmental studies." This is definitely a NPOV issue. Dasubergeek 22:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Length reference

I don't see how the reference for the length has anything to do with the length. It is about bridges. —Kenyon (t·c) 09:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverts

Would somebody please explain why the detailed additions I made to the Foothill-South expansion were removed? There is no reason for doing so. If nobody can offer a valid explanation I will re-add them.

What did they say? --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Got no response, so I have re-added those portions to the Foothill-South section, as well as generally cleaned up the article and added a large number of links. --dthx1138 (T C) 15:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

NPOV Edits

This article keeps getting periodically edited to remove information which might reflect negatively on the Foothill-South expansion, and it needs to stop.

There is no reason to have removed information about the non-compete clause between TCA and CalTrans; the clause is not disputed by the TCA. Additionally, the last section will be reverted to the original title, "Expansion Controversy," and not simply "extension" as it is already in the "Foothill-South" section. Dthx1138 (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)Dthx138

- Just to follow up, I have significantly cleaned up the "Expansion Controversy" section and have added many references. I will be very disappointed if this text were to mysteriously disappear again. Dthx1138 (talk) 04:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Dthx1138

- one more thing, I realize that the references may seem biased so far as they are mainly from anti-toll road sites. I will attempt to add references to the TCA's positions soon. Dthx1138 (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)DTordini

I have noticed this too, I too have added important info that disappears. Like the fact that to So-Called State Park, is not really a State Park. This what happens when Liberals get to run everything in the state. They are all the same, Always trying to change the rules after the game has started.--Subman758 (talk) 18:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Not sure where I should be making this comment, but i think at least 1 exit is missing from the exit list. There is a toll booth on Irvine Blvd exit off the 133N. I don't see that exit in the list. Hope this helps. -rgs

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on California State Route 241. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 04:18, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on California State Route 241. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:07, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Los Patrones Parkway

For exits that are to/from the Los Patrones Parkway, could they be integrated into the SR 241 exit list or make a separate exit list for the parkway? -- FreewayDan (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Separate, like Interstate 10 in California#Spur to US 101 and California State Route 130#Mount Hamilton to Patterson. County officials currently intend to keep this separate and never turn the parkway over to the state. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)