This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An anon has removed the following text with the edit summary "No evidence Marines offered to build motorway".
I am not opposed to the removal, but it did prompt me to look for a source, and I found End of road for 'urban myth' on Stuff, 10 August 2013, by John Bishop. This source could be used if the text is restored.- gadfium 19:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
New official name for the road (Maori: Te Ara Nui o Te Rangihaeata, English: The Great Path of Te Rangihaeata). May not warrant a change in the name of the page, but could be mentioned nonetheless. What do you guys think?
https://streetnames.nz/new-zealand/te-ara-nui-o-te-rangihaeata/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phenomenalcat5 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
This says it's Waka Kotahi the NZ Transport Agency but under the PPP I believe Veolia, a private company, is contracted to maintain it for a 25 year period. 210.246.44.125 ( talk) 10:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Per my previous note, sorry I meant Ventia, not Veolia. Dominion Post TG 20-page insert, 31.3.22, pg 4: "Ventia is the company that [WGP] has subcontracted to operate and maintain the motorway for the next 25 years." 210.246.44.125 ( talk) 10:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I've only ever heard it called "Transmission Gully". Articles like https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/ev-owners-warned-to-plan-charge-ahead-of-using-transmission-gully/VQXZ2KOTNXXK5TOOPMIT5O5EUM/ call it simply Transmission Gully, while on the Waka Kotahi website, https://www.nzta.govt.nz/projects/wellington-northern-corridor/transmission-gully-motorway/, the "motorway" is decapitalised. In short, its name is basically just 'Transmission Gully'. I think calling it Transmission Gully Motorway is a bit long and redundant with the latter part.-- Aubernas ( talk) 03:09, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
I think there's too much detail in the article about the hearings, delays, controversy and so on, that was current before it opened, but is now much less relevant, and could be summarised/culled. — Jon ( talk) 08:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An anon has removed the following text with the edit summary "No evidence Marines offered to build motorway".
I am not opposed to the removal, but it did prompt me to look for a source, and I found End of road for 'urban myth' on Stuff, 10 August 2013, by John Bishop. This source could be used if the text is restored.- gadfium 19:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
New official name for the road (Maori: Te Ara Nui o Te Rangihaeata, English: The Great Path of Te Rangihaeata). May not warrant a change in the name of the page, but could be mentioned nonetheless. What do you guys think?
https://streetnames.nz/new-zealand/te-ara-nui-o-te-rangihaeata/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phenomenalcat5 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
This says it's Waka Kotahi the NZ Transport Agency but under the PPP I believe Veolia, a private company, is contracted to maintain it for a 25 year period. 210.246.44.125 ( talk) 10:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Per my previous note, sorry I meant Ventia, not Veolia. Dominion Post TG 20-page insert, 31.3.22, pg 4: "Ventia is the company that [WGP] has subcontracted to operate and maintain the motorway for the next 25 years." 210.246.44.125 ( talk) 10:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I've only ever heard it called "Transmission Gully". Articles like https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/ev-owners-warned-to-plan-charge-ahead-of-using-transmission-gully/VQXZ2KOTNXXK5TOOPMIT5O5EUM/ call it simply Transmission Gully, while on the Waka Kotahi website, https://www.nzta.govt.nz/projects/wellington-northern-corridor/transmission-gully-motorway/, the "motorway" is decapitalised. In short, its name is basically just 'Transmission Gully'. I think calling it Transmission Gully Motorway is a bit long and redundant with the latter part.-- Aubernas ( talk) 03:09, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
I think there's too much detail in the article about the hearings, delays, controversy and so on, that was current before it opened, but is now much less relevant, and could be summarised/culled. — Jon ( talk) 08:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)