![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Rights of way in Scotland was copied or moved into Right of way on 17 October 2014. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Rights of way in Scotland was copied or moved into Right of way on 27 March 2018. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | On 14 May 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Right of way. The result of the discussion was moved to Right of way (public throughway). |
not done
I propose to merge Right-of-way (transportation) here and to make this topic the primary topic for the title, "Right of way", as these are closely related concepts falling under the general concept of there being a "right" for parties (ranging from individuals to transportation conglomerates) to access otherwise privately held land for purposes beneficial to the public. bd2412 T 13:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
The article Right-of-way (transportation) seems to have much in common with the article Easement, so, perhaps, it should be merged with that first of all. Then another merge might be considered later.
Rwood128 ( talk) 22:52, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus for a merge also. Jenks24 ( talk) 15:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
– I propose to merge the related concepts of Right of way (public throughway) and Right-of-way (transportation) (both stubby articles at the moment), and to move the resulting article to the primary topic title, Right of way, with variations like the existing Right-of-way redirecting to it. The distinction between the terms is semantic, one being the right itself and the other being a strip of land provided to facilitate the right (much like there is an abstract idea of "divorce" and a piece of paper that grants "a divorce"). With respect to primacy, the "right-of-way" while driving does not have its own article, the practice in fencing is obscure, and the various films by this name are virtual non-entities. --Relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC) bd2412 T 13:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Rights of way in England and Wales not merged; Rights of way in Scotland merged in 2014
I have proposed merges into this article on the Talk pages for Rights of way in Scotland and Rights of way in England and Wales. Rwood128 ( talk) 14:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Merged per discussion at talk:Rights of way in Scotland on 15 October 2014
Article merged: See old talk-page talk:Rights of way in Scotland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwood128 ( talk • contribs) 18:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
"In the 1979 Fifth Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, the definition of "right-of-way" had changed to accommodate the change of meaning over time. This is the 1979 definition:
"Right of Way. Term 'right of way' sometimes is used to describe a right belonging to a party to pass over land of another, but it is also used to describe that strip of land upon which railroad companies construct their road bed, and, when so used, the term refers to the land itself, not the right of passage over it. Bouche v. Wagner, 206 Or. 621, 293 P.2d 203, 209." http://www.trailofshame.com/I-Words-ROW.html Fxm12 ( talk) 20:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I’d like to request an edit to the “Crown land in Canada” section. I propose that, in the spirit of Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation commission report findings into the treatment of Indigenous people in Canada, the language in final paragraph be strengthened.
Currently, it reads that “The aboriginal peoples in Canada may have specific rights on Crown land and have claimed ownership of some Crown land.” If this sentence were to recognize the validity of Indigenous land treaties with the British head of state, it might read “the aboriginal peoples in Canada have specific rights on Crown land established under treaties signed with the British Empire, of which Canada is a self-governing entity within, and have claimed ownership of some Crown land.”
I suspect this kind of edit might be controversial. I’m not sure if clause “of which Canada is a self-governing entity within” is needed. The proposed edit is just a rough suggestion. I’m sure something better will come up from the group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.117.134 ( talk • contribs) 20:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
"In the United States, a right-of-way is normally created as a form of easement. The easement may be an easement appurtenant, that benefits a neighboring property, or an easement in gross, that benefits another individual or entity as opposed to another parcel of land."
In the United States, major highways are built on purchased land, including all of the
Interstate Highway System. For the Interstate Highways, that land was purchased with 90 percent Federal funds, and so it is 90% Federally owned, and 10% state owned.
24.121.195.165 (
talk)
14:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
This article is about rights of way that relate to footpaths, bridleways and trails generally–including waterways. I wonder to what extent that this is a British usage (see, for example Rights of way in England and Wales)? The article Right-of-way (transportation) is about commercial transportation routes. Oil and electricity are transported (carried) along such routes, along with more obvious forms of transportation. A merge was considered in the past, but it seems to me that the distinction is a useful one. Rwood128 ( talk) 18:34, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
It currently says: A footpath is a right of way that legally may only be used by pedestrians. A bridleway is a right of way that legally may be used only by pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians, but not by motorised vehicles. This not accurate; a footpath dsecribes the character of a path i.e. one used by pedestrians. It may or may not be a right of way, similarly with a bridleway, whereas 'public footpath' and public bridleway' do fit those definitions (in England and Wales at least; I can't speak for other legal settings). Geopersona ( talk) 20:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus to move, but no consensus on where to move to. Per WP:NOGOODOPTIONS, I am moving this to Right of way (public throughway), the pre-2014 title of this article.
Editors who disagree with this choice may open a new RM at any time, as well as opening a proposed move or merge for Right-of-way (property access), which some editors noted was insufficiently disambiguated from this article. ( closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal ( talk) 04:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
– Do not think this is the primary topic for this term. I expected to be taken to a page about the traffic term. The disambiguation page should be the PT, or maybe there needs to be a dab concept article, to clarify all these related but different terms. Natg 19 ( talk) 16:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 14:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment. Yes we need to begin by clearly distinguishing the different ways that the phrase "right of way is used". I wonder to what extent confusion may be created because of differences in how this term is used in different English-speaking countries? Rwood128 ( talk) 10:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The section of this article dealing with the US is inadequate. There are clearly public paths, trails, and waterways in North America, some hundreds of years old. I quote from the East Coast Trail article: "The Trail officially began in 1994 "when a group of hiking enthusiasts started the construction of a coastal trail" that would make use of existing traditional trails that linked local communities along the coast of the Avalon Peninsula" Newfoundland, Canada (my emphasis).There is also the National Trails System, that includes the famous Appalachian trail. There is some discussion of N. American urban footpaths here: Alley#North America. Rwood128 ( talk) 18:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Trails established by indigenous peoples that were used by Europeans settling N. America. Some became highways, while others have been incorporated into hiking trails more recently.
Rwood128 ( talk) 14:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Can someone add some information re the kind of legal framework under which American long distance trails have been established (other than historic use)? Likewise GRs in Europe? Rwood128 ( talk) 21:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Other countries, including Australia. Rwood128 ( talk) 19:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm not a grammarian, so I am having difficulty in understanding why on occasions the hyphenated "right-of-way" is used? Maybe the hyphenated version was originally used for the land over which a right of way travels, comparable to "footpath", "bridleway" or "highway"? This could have originate (a guess) by how the hyphenated version is used in connection with railways. User: 223.255.229.79, as you intervened on this topic, maybe you can help here? Rwood128 ( talk) 14:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
A discussion of the similarities and differences between the legal terms "right of way" and "easement" is clearly needed here. Is there anyone with a law degree who can assist? See [2], for example. Rwood128 ( talk) 10:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm confused. The name of the article Right of way has just been changed, by BilledMammal apparently, to Right of way (public throughway), without, as far as I can see, the discussion being finalised and an agreement reached. Also, shouldn't it be " thoroughfare" (throughway: American usage?). I have no problem with Right of way (public thoroughfare) though Public rights of way sounds better (more accurate) to my British/Canadian ear. Rwood128 ( talk) 14:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
A thoroughfare is a primary passage or way as a transit route through regularly trafficked areas, whether by road on dry land or, by extension, via watercraft or aircraft.[1] Originally, the word referred to a main road or open street which was frequented thoroughly.[2]. We are not discussing a "primary passage" open to all traffic. "Public right of way" has a clear meaning in the UK but I'm not convinced that it would disambiguate sufficiently in other jurisdictions. I'm stumped for the moment but meantime other suggestions may come forward? -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 19:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I realised that I've grown rusty (tired/old!). but it would have been simple to correct the error. My apologies, BD2412. Rwood128 ( talk) 20:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
The article begins: "In the context of thoroughfares, a right of way is a legal term". It is not about a highly regulated highway corridor, or motorway. No discussion is needed, surely. The word throughway was used once incorrectly in the article, until a moment ago. Rwood128 ( talk) 20:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Change to Right of way (public access). Change the associated article to Right of way (private access), or Right of way (property access). Rwood128 ( talk) 20:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
1. The act of passing over, across, or through something.. I'm warming to it, as it is suitably "mode neutral" and thus hits all our targets. A hat-note would still be needed to affirm that it doesn't cover expressways. Thoughts?-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 18:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
It is going to be difficult to come up with a succinct name that captures all the nuances without becoming an article in parentheses
. So it seems to me that it would be more productive to write a good {{
about}} hatnote. So how about this:
Would that work? Specifically, would it work with 'transit'? -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 13:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
There was an article, until a day or so ago, that surveyed all aspects of the term "right of way". The recent changes in effect deleted that article, called "Right of way" in favour of the disambiguation page. There was no consultation about this. Given the complexities of the subject, the deleted article served a valuable purpose, as well as expanding what the topic covered, to include closely related matters. It would have been better not to have deleted this material but rather to have changed the title, before creating this new article that is just on public thoroughfares. I have no problem with the new article but for the erroneous name. I believe I suggested such a "sub" right of way article previously. Rwood128 ( talk) 22:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
No one, no matter what, has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular article (or any part of it).Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | It has been proposed in this section that
Right of way (public throughway) be
renamed and moved to
Right of way (transit). A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{
subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{
requested move/dated}} directly. |
Right of way (public throughway) → Right of way (transit) – Per discussion at #New name above. The proposed name is succinct; the current name risks confusion with public highway. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 22:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Rights of way in Scotland was copied or moved into Right of way on 17 October 2014. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Rights of way in Scotland was copied or moved into Right of way on 27 March 2018. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | On 14 May 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Right of way. The result of the discussion was moved to Right of way (public throughway). |
not done
I propose to merge Right-of-way (transportation) here and to make this topic the primary topic for the title, "Right of way", as these are closely related concepts falling under the general concept of there being a "right" for parties (ranging from individuals to transportation conglomerates) to access otherwise privately held land for purposes beneficial to the public. bd2412 T 13:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
The article Right-of-way (transportation) seems to have much in common with the article Easement, so, perhaps, it should be merged with that first of all. Then another merge might be considered later.
Rwood128 ( talk) 22:52, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus for a merge also. Jenks24 ( talk) 15:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
– I propose to merge the related concepts of Right of way (public throughway) and Right-of-way (transportation) (both stubby articles at the moment), and to move the resulting article to the primary topic title, Right of way, with variations like the existing Right-of-way redirecting to it. The distinction between the terms is semantic, one being the right itself and the other being a strip of land provided to facilitate the right (much like there is an abstract idea of "divorce" and a piece of paper that grants "a divorce"). With respect to primacy, the "right-of-way" while driving does not have its own article, the practice in fencing is obscure, and the various films by this name are virtual non-entities. --Relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC) bd2412 T 13:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Rights of way in England and Wales not merged; Rights of way in Scotland merged in 2014
I have proposed merges into this article on the Talk pages for Rights of way in Scotland and Rights of way in England and Wales. Rwood128 ( talk) 14:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Merged per discussion at talk:Rights of way in Scotland on 15 October 2014
Article merged: See old talk-page talk:Rights of way in Scotland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwood128 ( talk • contribs) 18:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
"In the 1979 Fifth Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, the definition of "right-of-way" had changed to accommodate the change of meaning over time. This is the 1979 definition:
"Right of Way. Term 'right of way' sometimes is used to describe a right belonging to a party to pass over land of another, but it is also used to describe that strip of land upon which railroad companies construct their road bed, and, when so used, the term refers to the land itself, not the right of passage over it. Bouche v. Wagner, 206 Or. 621, 293 P.2d 203, 209." http://www.trailofshame.com/I-Words-ROW.html Fxm12 ( talk) 20:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I’d like to request an edit to the “Crown land in Canada” section. I propose that, in the spirit of Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation commission report findings into the treatment of Indigenous people in Canada, the language in final paragraph be strengthened.
Currently, it reads that “The aboriginal peoples in Canada may have specific rights on Crown land and have claimed ownership of some Crown land.” If this sentence were to recognize the validity of Indigenous land treaties with the British head of state, it might read “the aboriginal peoples in Canada have specific rights on Crown land established under treaties signed with the British Empire, of which Canada is a self-governing entity within, and have claimed ownership of some Crown land.”
I suspect this kind of edit might be controversial. I’m not sure if clause “of which Canada is a self-governing entity within” is needed. The proposed edit is just a rough suggestion. I’m sure something better will come up from the group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.117.134 ( talk • contribs) 20:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
"In the United States, a right-of-way is normally created as a form of easement. The easement may be an easement appurtenant, that benefits a neighboring property, or an easement in gross, that benefits another individual or entity as opposed to another parcel of land."
In the United States, major highways are built on purchased land, including all of the
Interstate Highway System. For the Interstate Highways, that land was purchased with 90 percent Federal funds, and so it is 90% Federally owned, and 10% state owned.
24.121.195.165 (
talk)
14:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
This article is about rights of way that relate to footpaths, bridleways and trails generally–including waterways. I wonder to what extent that this is a British usage (see, for example Rights of way in England and Wales)? The article Right-of-way (transportation) is about commercial transportation routes. Oil and electricity are transported (carried) along such routes, along with more obvious forms of transportation. A merge was considered in the past, but it seems to me that the distinction is a useful one. Rwood128 ( talk) 18:34, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
It currently says: A footpath is a right of way that legally may only be used by pedestrians. A bridleway is a right of way that legally may be used only by pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians, but not by motorised vehicles. This not accurate; a footpath dsecribes the character of a path i.e. one used by pedestrians. It may or may not be a right of way, similarly with a bridleway, whereas 'public footpath' and public bridleway' do fit those definitions (in England and Wales at least; I can't speak for other legal settings). Geopersona ( talk) 20:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus to move, but no consensus on where to move to. Per WP:NOGOODOPTIONS, I am moving this to Right of way (public throughway), the pre-2014 title of this article.
Editors who disagree with this choice may open a new RM at any time, as well as opening a proposed move or merge for Right-of-way (property access), which some editors noted was insufficiently disambiguated from this article. ( closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal ( talk) 04:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
– Do not think this is the primary topic for this term. I expected to be taken to a page about the traffic term. The disambiguation page should be the PT, or maybe there needs to be a dab concept article, to clarify all these related but different terms. Natg 19 ( talk) 16:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 14:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment. Yes we need to begin by clearly distinguishing the different ways that the phrase "right of way is used". I wonder to what extent confusion may be created because of differences in how this term is used in different English-speaking countries? Rwood128 ( talk) 10:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The section of this article dealing with the US is inadequate. There are clearly public paths, trails, and waterways in North America, some hundreds of years old. I quote from the East Coast Trail article: "The Trail officially began in 1994 "when a group of hiking enthusiasts started the construction of a coastal trail" that would make use of existing traditional trails that linked local communities along the coast of the Avalon Peninsula" Newfoundland, Canada (my emphasis).There is also the National Trails System, that includes the famous Appalachian trail. There is some discussion of N. American urban footpaths here: Alley#North America. Rwood128 ( talk) 18:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Trails established by indigenous peoples that were used by Europeans settling N. America. Some became highways, while others have been incorporated into hiking trails more recently.
Rwood128 ( talk) 14:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Can someone add some information re the kind of legal framework under which American long distance trails have been established (other than historic use)? Likewise GRs in Europe? Rwood128 ( talk) 21:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Other countries, including Australia. Rwood128 ( talk) 19:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm not a grammarian, so I am having difficulty in understanding why on occasions the hyphenated "right-of-way" is used? Maybe the hyphenated version was originally used for the land over which a right of way travels, comparable to "footpath", "bridleway" or "highway"? This could have originate (a guess) by how the hyphenated version is used in connection with railways. User: 223.255.229.79, as you intervened on this topic, maybe you can help here? Rwood128 ( talk) 14:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
A discussion of the similarities and differences between the legal terms "right of way" and "easement" is clearly needed here. Is there anyone with a law degree who can assist? See [2], for example. Rwood128 ( talk) 10:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm confused. The name of the article Right of way has just been changed, by BilledMammal apparently, to Right of way (public throughway), without, as far as I can see, the discussion being finalised and an agreement reached. Also, shouldn't it be " thoroughfare" (throughway: American usage?). I have no problem with Right of way (public thoroughfare) though Public rights of way sounds better (more accurate) to my British/Canadian ear. Rwood128 ( talk) 14:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
A thoroughfare is a primary passage or way as a transit route through regularly trafficked areas, whether by road on dry land or, by extension, via watercraft or aircraft.[1] Originally, the word referred to a main road or open street which was frequented thoroughly.[2]. We are not discussing a "primary passage" open to all traffic. "Public right of way" has a clear meaning in the UK but I'm not convinced that it would disambiguate sufficiently in other jurisdictions. I'm stumped for the moment but meantime other suggestions may come forward? -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 19:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I realised that I've grown rusty (tired/old!). but it would have been simple to correct the error. My apologies, BD2412. Rwood128 ( talk) 20:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
The article begins: "In the context of thoroughfares, a right of way is a legal term". It is not about a highly regulated highway corridor, or motorway. No discussion is needed, surely. The word throughway was used once incorrectly in the article, until a moment ago. Rwood128 ( talk) 20:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Change to Right of way (public access). Change the associated article to Right of way (private access), or Right of way (property access). Rwood128 ( talk) 20:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
1. The act of passing over, across, or through something.. I'm warming to it, as it is suitably "mode neutral" and thus hits all our targets. A hat-note would still be needed to affirm that it doesn't cover expressways. Thoughts?-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 18:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
It is going to be difficult to come up with a succinct name that captures all the nuances without becoming an article in parentheses
. So it seems to me that it would be more productive to write a good {{
about}} hatnote. So how about this:
Would that work? Specifically, would it work with 'transit'? -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 13:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
There was an article, until a day or so ago, that surveyed all aspects of the term "right of way". The recent changes in effect deleted that article, called "Right of way" in favour of the disambiguation page. There was no consultation about this. Given the complexities of the subject, the deleted article served a valuable purpose, as well as expanding what the topic covered, to include closely related matters. It would have been better not to have deleted this material but rather to have changed the title, before creating this new article that is just on public thoroughfares. I have no problem with the new article but for the erroneous name. I believe I suggested such a "sub" right of way article previously. Rwood128 ( talk) 22:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
No one, no matter what, has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular article (or any part of it).Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | It has been proposed in this section that
Right of way (public throughway) be
renamed and moved to
Right of way (transit). A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{
subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{
requested move/dated}} directly. |
Right of way (public throughway) → Right of way (transit) – Per discussion at #New name above. The proposed name is succinct; the current name risks confusion with public highway. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 22:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)