Talk:Wilbur Cross Parkway

(Trees)

Many of the trees along the parkway were planted by its designer.

Do we have a name for that designer, or a source for this info? Rudimentary googling yields nothing.

Chick Bowen 00:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

   Well, "many" is sleasily vague, but i would speculate that the vast majority of the trees along it are wild trees in forests, like this panorama at the WCP's short encounter with the city of New Haven. (This is the northern edge of a busy suburban retail district, where the north edge of its Amity neighborhood squeezes up into a narrow valley about a block and a half wide, before Whalley Ave. and Amity Road merge.)
   This view is where it crosses Dixwell Ave., another busy suburban retail district, in Hamden, Connecticut. (The bridge that it shows was, i suppose, retrofitted to it well after the original construction.))
   In each case, you should pan 360° of "street" view, so you can --uhh -- check the ratio of tree-counts for the median (where there are no wild trees) and the shoulders (where wild ones abound), respectively.
--Jerzy•t 06:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

(Lighting)

Regarding the Sodium Vapor lamps comment, I don't believe they are actually that rare, so there should be a citation.
Jimmyboy2007 22:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Jimmy

W. Cross Pkwy

   The locals who bother not calling it "the Merritt" (which is what it is an extension of, just as the true Merritt is an extension of the Hutch) generally call it "the Wilbur Cross" (and the rest may not even notice that the two habits are different), so putting "W. Cross Pkwy" on exit signs from I-91 probably doesn't bother anyone from the SE quarter of the state. I imagine, tho, that Old-England folk (perhaps aware of West Cross in Wales or the West Cross Route in London) and even other non-New-Englanders -- especially New Yorkers, familiar with the Cross Bronx and Cross-Westchester [Expressways], and the Cross Island Parkway -- are likely to misconstrue (and misremember) what they saw. I'm creating some Rdrs and a Dab or two for the benefit of our diverse readership.
--Jerzy•t 06:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Merge with Connecticut Route 15?

I think that would make sense since 100% of the Wilbur Cross Parkway is part of route 15. There’s no article exclusively for the New England Thruway because 100% of that route is part of Interstate 95 in New York. There’s no article for the Maine Turnpike because 100% of that route is part of Interstate 95 in Maine. I feel the same logic should apply here. Anyone agree?

The Route 15 article is 21,300 bytes, Wilbur Cross is 9,700 bytes, the Merritt is 29,900 bytes, and the Milford Connector is 4,000 bytes. That's just shy of 65,000 bytes and would make for a LONG article: about twice as long as the Maine I-95 one. What benefit would you see in such a merge? Markvs88 (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

State statute is not a phone number

I removed the section of CT state law mentioned in intro paragraph because when you click on the link (on an iPhone) it assumes it is a phone number and asks you if you want to call it. Unless we can make it so there is no phone number link, we shouldn’t have the number in there. Needforspeed888 (talk) 03:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

That's entirely irrelevant. The long view of this is that numbers cannot be included Wikipedia articles because a particular manufacturer's phone handles them poorly. That's not Wikipedia's problem. Not only is it cited, but it's a state statute and to say we need to purge all state, local and government statues from all of Wiki's articles because someone might accidentally dial an (invalid!) number is absurd.Markvs88 (talk) 12:30, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I changed the dashes to dots, this seems to have solved the problem. Needforspeed888 (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

That's a much more sensible solution, well done. Markvs88 (talk) 17:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)