Talk:M1 motorway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.
B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This page has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
M1 motorway is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

Contents

[edit] List of sights from the motorway

I have started a list of important and/or interesting landmarks that can be seen from the motorway, or that the motorway passes by. Please add any that are appropriate.

[edit] Split and disambig

Was just thinking, might be a good idea to split and disambig this page, any thoughts? --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 17:01, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done. The Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland sections were obviously too long to just have on the same page. I was simply postponing the inevitable work. I've fixed all the links to point to the individual pages. zoney ♣ talk 11:12, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
WHOA! WAY too short a time for discussion (imho) and NOT a good idea. yes, it made sense to put the NI and ROI versions on separate pages, but M1 will, in common usage, refer to the London-Leeds motorway and WP practice is to put the main usage on the direct page whenever possible. This will need to be reverted I believe. --Vamp:Willow 13:41, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Rather than revert this now, I've temporarily made M1 motorway a redirect to the england page, and added links to the other two (which should be on that page anyway and not just lost to the world because of a disambig being created. Now then ... I see no justification for making M1 motorway solely a disambig page; it is illogical and wasteful. Can anyone put up an argument? --Vamp:Willow 13:48, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Your solution seems quite reasonable. I don't think the English M1 motorway should be at [[M1 motorway]] even if that redirects to the English motorway page. It's important that people don't get the routes confused, as they are all designated EXACTLY the same, and there's even two of them in the United Kingdom. It's better that people link unambiguously to [[M1 motorway (England)]] where possible (and yes, I guess it makes sense to redirect M1 motorway there for those who blindly assume there is only one).
Apologies for acting before discussion, but I didn't see the need for protracted discussion on what I considered a long-overdue page split.
zoney ♣ talk 14:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for that, but I'll point you at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, specifically Types of disambiguation #3 and the first para of The disambiguation page. The (English) M1 is clearly the primary topic, both historically and by size / number of connections geographically and on WP so should be at the main entry - and where until yesterday it was located! It is wrong in WP terms to have a redirect as a main target so it should move back to the direct name, but rather than jump into this at speed again we should hold off for a few days first to get further comments / observations. One thing we should always aim for on WP is consensus! --Vamp:Willow 15:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm, I disagree with this. The English M1 might well have the most traffic, but this isn't like city articles - these are simple numerical designations that clash when multiple countries are taken into account. Can't we make it equal topic and have M1 motorway as a disambig? — Trilobite (Talk) 6 July 2005 17:10 (UTC)

[edit] Route of M1 on opening, and sections opened

According to the Motorway Archivehttp://www.iht.org/motorway/m1m10m45.htm, the M1 went from Berrygrove (J5) to Crick (J18), and the M10 and M45 spurs were in place. This is confirmed by maps dating from the late 1950s Surely documentary evidence overrules personal recollections? from IP-only editor

Indeed, but as it happens I have discussed this very point with the operator of that site and he acknolwedged that - in fact - the Watford side of things was actually a spur from the main route (both were two-lane only at the time) as the main route was intended to be across to the A1 entry to London. You can also refer to the London Transport plans for the Northern Line extension to Bushey Heath as their route - eventually - was dropped after the planning and construction of the M1 as the location of the planned terminus station (and cinema / shopping complex) was later covered over by the M1 extension embankment (leading to Edgware and the new Fiveways terminus). He also agreed with me that the M10 commenced life as M1 but changed to the M10 fairly quickly once it was clear that the A41 link (ie Berrylands) was getting more traffic than the A6 - A1 link. ps. I have maps too ;-P --Vamp:Willow 14:29, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is no doubt that the M1-bound carriageway of the M10 was signed as "Birmingham M1", and the M1-bound carriageway of M45 was signed as "London M1", but as a driver was inescapabably heading for the M1 in either case, that seems fair enough. It's also true that until further M1 extension, the M10 and M45 were certainly busier than the sections south of J7 and north of J17. That doesn't necessarily mean that the route carried the main number though.
However, I've been back and checked my 1959-60 Road Atlas (which the main section of was printed to late for the M1 to appear in!) has a "Motorway Supplement" in the front, that contains a map of the M1, with M10 and M45 clearly labelled as such. I've also re-checked my contemporary OS one-inch sheets and M10 and M45 are clearly marked there too. However, I'd love to see a map from a decent source showing M10 and M45 as M1...

[edit] First UK Motorway?

Again, according to both the Motorway Archive and contemporary mapping evidence, the M6 Preston Bypass opened in December 1958, with the M1, M10 and M45 opening in November 1959.

Totally agree even the M6 motorway article afirms such Dainamo 21:14, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Indeed. iirc from the media reporting, the M1 was the first-planned but because of length (the M6 bit being far shorter) wasn't built / open first! --Vamp:Willow 23:12, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Actually, the M6 was planned first - it was to be a "guinea pig" road, which spawned the M1 later. The M6 at Preston originally opened as dual 2 lane, with soft shoulders, which, apart from an extra lane each way, was exactly how the M1 was constructed. The media aren't a reliable source with roads history. Archive material from planning offices, however, is. For what it's worth - construction of the M62 began first, with the embankments for the Barton Bridge being placed in anticipation for the eventual Stratford-Eccles Bypass.

--Bryn666 23:50, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • Can someone please provide verification for the statement, "It was the first full-length motorway to be built in the United Kingdom"? The Preston Bypass was the first motorway to be built in the country, which is not even mentioned in the article to clarify the statement. Also, I am confused by the phrase "full-length motorway". Given that the M1 has seen a "series of extensions", at what point in time was it considered "full-length" and why wasn't the Preston Bypass "full-length"? As the statement was added by an anonymous editor, I suspect there won't be any verification. However, I thought I would be polite and ask for some anyway before I rephrase the sentence. Thanks. Road Wizard 18:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Well it's probably something to do with the length of the scheme; the Preston bypass is about 8 and a bit miles long, the M1 scheme 67 miles. The Preston bypass was just a bypass of a (then) town, whereas the M1 was an inter-urban scheme. Richard B 20:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
That may well be what the editor was trying to indicate with their statement. Unfortunately though, neither length nor purpose of a motorway has much bearing on whether it can be described as "full-length". For example, the M57 motorway is about 10 miles long and only serves the purpose of a bypass around Liverpool but it is the "full-length" it is ever likely to be in the foreseeable future. On the other hand the M6 motorway is the longest motorway in the UK yet it won't be considered "full-length" until it reaches either the Scottish border or all the way up to Glasgow. Other than as a fanciful description, I am not sure what value the phrase "full-length" adds to the article. Even if a verified source can be found for the statement, I think it will have to be qualified in the article by phrasing it as something like "Many people often consider the M1 motorway to be the first full-length motorway in the UK, yet the first motorway was in fact the Preston Bypass, which now forms part of the M6". Road Wizard 22:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
A quick search on google for "first full length motorway" reveals several quite reasonable looking sources for this claim, but I can't find one that states what is meant by "full length". Perhaps "first inter-urban motorway" would be more useful - the description in the Motorway Archive Richard B 23:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
"First inter-urban motorway" does seem to be a more accurate phrase. Does anyone see anything wrong with the statement "Whilst the M1 is considered to be the first inter-urban motorway to be completed in the United Kingdom, [1] the very first motorway to be built in the country was the Preston Bypass, which later became part of the M6. [2]" before I include it in the article? Road Wizard 12:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
"very first" is an over-emphasis, but maybe your suggested mid-section could read "the first road to be identified as a 'motorway' in the UK was the Preston Bypass ..."? --Vamp:Willow 12:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I finally got around to adding the statement today. I took your advice and removed "very". Thanks. Road Wizard 12:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] J25 Info wrong

You can get on and off at J25 in both directions. Will look what the signage is next time I'm passing. --Dunstan 15:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Building of New Lanes

Anyone got further details on the plan to build lanes between J5 and 10 for cars with at least one passenger?. --User:Oliver.Shepherd 18:41, 23 March 2006

Another 4 sources for you. Official press-notices about the scheme. 10th December 04, 7th March 05, 7th March 06, 13th March 06. Road Wizard 23:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I thought the new run to Luton, 4 lanes plus H/S plus MIDAS = 5 lanes but that the outside lane, lane 5, was to be HOV. The article prob shouldnt speculate what legal form the final road takes. --81.105.243.17 (talk) 18:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Underpass between J14 and 15

Should we add an entry for the private turnings on each carriageway between J14 and 15? Looking on Google Earth, it would appear that they are connected by a tunnel under the motorway, presumably for coppers to turn round at the border between Northants and Bucks. --Dunstan talk 10:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Fascinating. Do you have a ref for that? --Guinnog 11:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=hanslope&ie=UTF8&t=k&om=1&ll=52.145801,-0.83921&spn=0.004306,0.014827 --Dunstan talk 21:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
That does look like a service road for either the police or maintenance vehicles, but I am unsure as to the relevance in including it in this article. I would classify it along the same lines as saying "there is a broom closet on the second floor of the shopping complex". I suppose you could include it if you want to, but it certainly shouldn't be listed in the "List of junctions" section as it isn't really an exit or junction. It is one of many unmarked service roads along the motorway network which are off-limits to any unauthorised vehicles. If we did mention it in the article, would we also have to mention that unauthorised use is illegal and those caught using it by the police will likely be prosecuted? Road Wizard 21:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, no change to the article. I'd just wondered for a long time what it was before Google Earth came along to solve the mystery. --Dunstan talk 09:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
There are lots of these along all British motorways; it is a "change-direction" access for emergency vehicles only and it is a moving traffic offence for unauthorised drivers to use them, although some foolhardy types can be seen doing so. Not sure if it would be breaking UK law to add them to junction lists here, but perhaps - "knowingly inciting another to commit an offence". MarkThomas 21:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] J10A

In the motorway junction list, should it not have Junction 10A, also? It goes from Luton South (Airport) to Junction 10...

Cheesypot 15:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Length

The body of the article says the M1 is 193 miles long, as per the Motorway Archive [3], the infobox says 190.8, which seems closer to the 191 miles I've just got for a Google Maps route [4]. Which is correct? Dupont Circle (talk) 22:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] End Leeds or Yorkshire?

The consensus for the past two and half years has been Yorkshire[5], baring in mind that the M1 does a hard right and goes round Leeds never entering the city proper I feel saying it joins Leeds and London is misleading. --Nate1481( t/c) 13:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably West Yorkshire would be more appropriate to narrow it down a bit. Keith D (talk) 14:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
West Yorkshire makes sense to me, not knowing exact geography, I'm not sure how close it does get to being in 'Leeds proper', eg Does the M3 actually end in Southampton? Bevo74 (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
West Yorkshire works for me, I'd say that the M3 goes to Southampton as it ends on waht is effectively the ring road, the M1 is going away from Leeds at the end. P.S. My initial revert was based on the fact the editor who changed it first had made several 'Leeds centric' edits including calling West Yorkshire 'Greater Leeds' (a term I've never heard after been here for 7 years). --Nate1481( t/c) 15:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)