Talk:Highways in Croatia

Article Title

as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions which state:Convention: Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly recognized by readers than the English form. I think this is confusingly titled. As a Wikipedia reader I expect an article about the highways of Croatia to be similar to other articles called "Highways of ..." In other words: I don't expect the article to only refer to expressways and freewaylike roads to the exclusion of what most English speakers would Identify as a highway. Furthermore, 'Autocesta' strongly has the appearance of being a cognate to the terms 'autostrada', 'autobahn', 'autoroute' and so on. These articles, like this one, are about the freewaylike roads "unique" to certain countries. I would suggest following this emergent convention by calling the page: Autocesta, Autocestas in Croatia, Expressways in Croatia, Motorways in Croatia, Freeways & Expressways of Croatia, The Autoceste of Croatia etc; but not highways, unless the scope of this article is widened.Synchronism (talk) 01:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC) also from the WP:Naming conventions: "Do not use an article name that suggests a hierarchy of articles. Since Transport in Azerbaijan could just as well be considered a subdivision of Transport as of Azerbaijan ..." Synchronism (talk) 01:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Highway as a wide high-speed road is the meaning understood and prevalent in European English-language administration. I'm not talking only about England and Ireland here, but also about all countries whose governments use English language to some degree in international correspondence. When you say "highway" to someone who has learned English in Europe, he'll understand it as Autobahn. E.g. compare Highways in Finland, Highway system in Taiwan, National Trunk Highway System in China or Interstate highway system. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 14:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."

That is just one group of users, as a register of English it is far removed from any vernacular variety. And while this information would be notable in the article highway if it is verified, you've already expressed disdain that any one group's term might receive too much precedence.

I disagree about your assumptions as to what Europeans writ large would translate as autobahn. Highway is understood by many Europeans that I know to mean any public road. I'm very aware that some people, like you, have a different definitions (many different from yours) about roads. This is an encyclopedia written in English, articles need to be sensitive to vocabulary differences, not ruled by them. Look at the big picture. Highways in Finland is next. The other three mentionings make specific that they are talking about a specific system of highways and they do not declare that they are the exclusive highways to that country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Synchronism (talk • contribs) 21:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

And please look at these [1][2] and a pease explore this one even more [3].Synchronism (talk) 06:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

As an answer: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], etc. Also, highways prevail over motorways on Croatian sites by 97,800 to 7,020. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 19:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Although I agree that people who have learned English in Europe would readily recognize meaning of the word "highway" in the article title, that does not imply that they would not as readily recognize word "motorway" for this type of road. On the other hand, to native speakers of English, the word "highway" normally designates not only motorways, but also other types of road. The fact that wikipedia features articles such as Highways in Finland and the fact that Croatian government erroneously uses the word, does not make it properly used English word. Furthermore I agree that articles should be sensitive to language differences and not be ruled by them, but this is a case of an expression which is not normally used by Native speakers for the concept described. --83.131.226.138 (talk) 10:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

People living in Phoenix would readily recognize what "Broadway Curve" means, but that doesn't imply they wouldn't recognize the word if we wrote "Broadway Turn." However, there is an established use of the former term and not the latter one, so Wikipedia does not say "Broadway Turn," but "Broadway Curve." Same with Croatian "highways" vs. "motorways." Admiral Norton ^(talk) 17:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I for one might actually agree with your intent - the central operating company of first-class-highways-whatever-you-want-to-call-them, Hrvatske Autoceste (HAC), has its name officially translated as "Croatian Motorways Ltd" and uses the term motorway throughout its English web page, so there is certainly a case to be made for using that translation for autocesta.

Nevertheless, this article title should stay where it is, because it describes not only autocesta but also brza cesta and državna cesta, i.e. all common types of highways in the country. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I just noticed that all the companies related to autoceste seem to all use the term motorway (see external links section of this article), so we seem to have little reason to prefer the other, ambiguous term in our articles. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 00:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

As you write, it is better to keep the development the article has had lately, describing also ordinary roads, and keeping the name. We should avoid translating autocesta to highway. --BIL (talk) 11:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

That is completely correct. All four operators of motorways in Croatia (HAC, ARZ, AZM, BINA) use term motorway to refer to autocesta. Likewise, the latest government publications also use the term in that way. Furthermore, the article states that Croatians translate the term autocesta as highway which is entirely unsubstantiated claim, as this (mis)use of the term is virtually exclusive to Croatian speakers not proficient in English. Being a court certified translator of Croatian/English language pair I am confident that no speaker of Croatian, who is proficient in English would use any term other than motorway to refer to autocesta. Furthermore articles such as Highways in Finland do not really serve to demonstrate proper use of the term any more than this article on its own, therefore any such use of term highway in this article should be revised, since its use is entirely baseless in this instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.159.193 (talk) 12:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

In view of the highway/motorway discussion and conclusions - should Roads in Croatia and Highways in Croatia category pages be reorganized accordingly? - Currently Highways in Croatia category contains motorways only, even though term highways implies trunk roads which would probably entail motorways, expressways and state roads (at least major ones). Likewise if this category page were expanded to include all of those, it would hardly be any different from present Roads in Croatia category page.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

We need to rename Category:Highways in Croatia to Motorways in Croatia. You can put in a WP:CFD request if you like. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

On second thought, strike that. A policy-compliant rename satisfies speedy renaming criteria for categories so let's just go ahead and do it. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Category:State routes in Croatia or Category:State roads in Croatia? What would be the most proper translation of državna cesta? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Globally, both terms are nearly equally used. State roads seems to be a bit more correct translation of the term in this case since its use is more widespread locally (Hrvatske Ceste, HAK, radio traffic reports, government etc.) - and if I had to choose from two valid terms, I would definitely select that one which is used locally. --Tomobe03 (talk) 10:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Map

This could use a map, no? (LAz17 (talk) 05:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC))

Yes, the highways could, by all means. However, the expressways are mostly too short to be on a map of the whole Croatia and many are unmarked and thus not on the list. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 20:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

There's Image:Autobahn-Kro.png on commons nowadays, but it is a bit crude. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Solved! Image:Autocesta.svg exists and is used. Indeed, we actually have competition, because Image:Kroatien Autobahnen.svg also exists and is similarly well done. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

official list of all brza cesta

Where can one find such a list? Google can't find me anything of the sort... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

you can find the list here... http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/339381.html hope it helps... A1979 (talk) 13:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)a1979

Oh, I know about that one (linked from Hrvatske ceste), but that doesn't have "brze ceste". They should be a subset of "državne ceste", but I don't know if the markings match. It would be good to have an official reference that says it clearly, e.g. whenever a D<n> road is upgraded to a brza cesta, its marking changes to B<n> - that seems to be the pattern now. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The link above actually does not specify any brza cesta, rather state/county/local roads. Actually, Road Transportation Safety Act (in Croatian: http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/339713.html) defines brza cesta in Article 2 Section 4, and the term is not actually mentioned anywhere else in this Act. It would appear that brza cesta is applied to actual conditions of the road: grade separated intersections, two traffic lanes in each direction separated by a central reserve etc. Actually there are no B road designations used in Croatia, as suggested by the article, rather brza cesta sections are parts of state roads. For instance one part of D28 (linking Sv. Helena and Veliki Zdenci) is brza cesta (Vrbovec-Gradec) but it is not designated as B road - actually when the section of brza cesta was opened for traffic, it was prominently termed as brza cesta D28. (see http://www.vrbovec.hr/clanak.aspx?ID=393). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.159.193 (talk) 12:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

One further information to clarify road designation system used in Croatia: State/county/local road designation, unlike motorway (A) designation, does not say anything about actual conditions of the road - i.e. a state (D) road may be brza cesta (expressway), regular road with one traffic lane in each direction and level intersections or even a macadamized road (in case of parts of D34, D49, D32, D36 and D506) or any combination of those. The same applies for county and local roads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.159.193 (talk) 12:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. So it looks like the expressway naming scheme Bnumber on Wikipedia is a conjecture, against the Wikipedia:No original research policy. If there are no objections, I'll fix all references made to Bnumber to say Dnumber. Thankfully there aren't many. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Note - that classification is from April 2008. On the Croatian Wikipedia I found the link to the classification from October 2008 - http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2008_10_122_3506.html --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:56, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

And it is still applicable, as indicated by the Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure website http://www.mmpi.hr/default.aspx?id=406. Interestingly enough, the same document specifies that public roads are divided into motorways, state, county and local roads - with no reference to brza cesta whatsoever. --78.3.189.195 (talk) 20:11, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep. But that's okay. This only affects the naming scheme, it doesn't affect the entire classification which is spelled out in the law. The naming scheme is important for article titles, which have to be unique and precise, but once we get past that, in the article content we can (and do) easily explain which parts of the roads are brza cesta, which parts are za promet motornih vozila, etc. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Apparently there is a piece of legislation clearly defining use of Bnumber designation, and apparently it is applied to motorways built in stages, and used as expressways instead of Anumber designation. - http://www.mmpi.hr/UserDocsImages/nn-73-03-Pravilnik-oznacav-ac.htm - and this would essentially mean that A and B numbering is identical (i.e. 1-13 at the moment) while letters A or B actually mark fully completed motorways and incomplete motorways used expressways (e.g. no hard shoulders, less than 4 traffic lanes etc.), while a state road built as an expressway would retain its original Dnumber designation. --Tomobe03 (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. So that basically means that it's legitimate to mention this in the descriptions of e.g. B8 and B9, and keep redirects. But for article titles I'd still stick with the most common name, A* or D*, per Wikipedia:Use common names. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Proper signage

All D*** state road signs that were found in wiki commons are now replaced with signs comprising modified sign background colour to match legislation regulating that issue. Furthermore, couple of those were missing, and now they have been added to complete the set. --Tomobe03 (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Dual carriageways for expressways

Expressways (brza cesta) are dual carriageways with limited access, but no emergency lanes, a lower speed limit, and no tolling.

Since the B8 is defined as an expressway, and it is a single carriageway road where toll is collected (even though only at one section), shouldn't the above definition be relaxed a bit? Perhaps to: Expressways (brza cesta) are roads defined as such by appropriate legislation [9], [10] or executed as a road comprising dual carriageway, limited access, grade separated intersections or any combination of those elements, with a lower speed limit relative to the motorways. Even though it is closer to reality, I admit it is somewhat cumbersome. Any suggestions?--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

For starters, we should just remove the dual carriageway requirement which doesn't exist in reality. The D533 is also a brza cesta, but is also just grade-separated and limited access. The speed limit is also questionable. I'm pretty sure I didn't see consistent 110kmh or even 100kmh on all of them. The external site motorways-exitlists page for Croatia also has that ambiguity. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

rethink and split time?

Now that we have the entirety of the state roads in the article, we've reached the point where the software shows us the "This article is 40K long." note, which usually means its time to reconsider that size :) Cf. WP:LENGTH. The readable prose is ~ 20 Kb now.

Since the term "highway" doesn't necessarily apply to all state roads, because many of them are really minor roads, one course of action would be to just move them out. That would leave the motorways and expressways in this article, but also some amount of references to major state roads. But then, that might also be somewhat arbitrary and cause a WP:UNDUE problem - the D1 is much more of a highway than e.g. D533. Anyone have any thoughts?

Note that I'm against any such major change without a couple of weeks/months of the current layout in practice, it could well be just fine as it is. Now that I've recalculated the size of the readable prose, while still including table content, it's well within the single-article parameters. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Indeed the prose isn't that long, and the tables themselves add to appearance of an excessively long articles - that might be addressed by collapsible tables for state road lists (all of them except perhaps the first one or two tables). If there is a consensus about that I could redo those to give the article a shorter appearance, yet retaining all the information contained now.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, D >= 100 is collapsible here because they're not necessarily important highways by definition. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of rethink and split: looking at the article it appears to me that it would be quite simple to split it into three list articles - motorways/expressways/state roads in Croatia. The new articles would require some additional editing of lead sections, but that would give us three reasonable units (something like this) and lend more meaning to Transport in Croatia article. Any thoughts?--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd give it some more time as it is. I tuned the incoming redirects and got the infoboxes to link to them, so it's even more accessible. The transport article remains meaningful either way, because it encompasses more than just road transport. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Recent title changes

A user decided to add the "road" suffix to the Croatian road articles. In the process, they apparently noticed that some of the roads are motorways. Gee. So they moved the moved pages to "autocesta" suffix. This created a nice little maze of twisty redirects. I've reverted many of these frivolous and pointless changes, but a lot remains. Here's one time when I wish we didn't have the Wikipedia:Be bold guideline. :( I'm going to have to file a bot request to undo the rest of the damage... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)