Talk:Roundabout

A formal request has been received to merge Traffic circle into Roundabout; dated: March 2018. Proposer's Rationale: A traffic circle and roundabout are the same thing. Discuss here. Richard3120 (talk) 01:30, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This topic was discussed before at Talk:Roundabout/Archive 2#On whether a traffic circle is different from a roundabout, above on this talk page. There didn't seem to be much agreement then, but there does seem to be a difference between the topics of the two articles. I think they could be merged, but more care will have to go into making sure the difference between a Roundabout and a traffic circle is properly highlighted. GamerMan7799 (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There also seems to be additional discussion already on this topic at the following places, some of which occurred with the discussion to merge Traffic Circle and Rotary: Talk:Traffic circle#Merge with roundabout, Talk:Roundabout/Archive 2#Rotary?, Talk:Traffic Circle#(Rotary intersection) Merge, and Talk:Roundabout/Archive 2#Lead. It seems this was a pretty controversial topic. GamerMan7799 (talk) 16:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support As I've pointed out above, this seems to be a pretty controversial topic, so I might as well throw my two cents into the ring. I think that the topics can be merged as long as there is great care taken to explain the difference between the two in their sections. GamerMan7799 (talk) 16:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support as they are synonyms of each other. Oxford dictionaries defines them as follows:
  • Roundabout: "NOUN / British / A road junction at which traffic moves in one direction round a central island to reach one of the roads converging on it. / North American term traffic circle or rotary"[1]
  • traffic circle "NOUN / A road junction at which traffic moves in one direction round a central island to reach one of the roads converging on it; a roundabout."[2] -- DeFacto (talk). 19:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Do I hear consensus (malformed signature by lomrjyo ) 00:23, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose There are two different things - if you haven't grasped that you haven't read the two articles, and the discussions above. Unfortunately the names for them seem to have been used in different and contradictory ways in different times and places. Merging the two is likely to just create a more confusing article. The OED is hardly a specialized source, and the definitions are vague and general. Johnbod (talk) 00:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"If you don't agree with me you haven't read the articles" is not an argument. If you described what you thought the difference was, that would be the start of an argument. As far as I can see, neither article succeeds in defining any kind of valid difference. The closest either comes is with U.S. Department of Transportation terminology, but the US DoT does not dictate common language usage, even in the U.S., and it certainly should not be the basis for how Wikipedia treats the subject.--Ericjs (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is described below (as well as in the articles). Johnbod (talk) 01:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is stated in the 'Traffic Circle' article. 'Traffic Circle' can refer to any rotary, while 'Roundabout' refers specifically to a rotary in which traffic merges directly with traffic within the circle. Whether this difference is significant or widely agreed upon is up for debate. For the time, being, I will Oppose the merge as there is a noticeable difference with how the terms are connotated. Flameoguy (talk) 01:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Roundabout and traffic circle are synonyms.Knobbly (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose Among other major differences, traffic circles have priority for cars entering, whereas roundabouts have priority for those on the roundabout. They are very different. Roundabouts have a different history and follow different rules and have wildly different shape and safety from traffic circles.GliderMaven (talk) 02:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Changed my vote to support. They're not different things, they're just variations on the same theme. And the traffic circle article is short enough that it can be merged, otherwise a sub-article could be used. Traffic circles work differently in different places, and a modern roundabout is basically just a subset of that. GliderMaven (talk) 02:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support They are fundamentally the same thing. Coverage in the two articles overlaps and IMO the encyclopedia would benefit from them being discussed in a single article, explaining the differences, use of terminology, and transition from one to the other in some places. It's not clear to me that "traffic circle" always means "give way to entering traffic" in contrast to the so-called modern roundabout's "give way to circling traffic", especially where the rules have changed. Hairy Dude (talk) 12:56, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  The angle the roads join in a traffic circle are still different though, they join tangentially to ensure you crash extra fast, whereas in a roundabout they join at right angles to slow the cars down. So unless they change the entire road layout, it's still a traffic circle, not a roundabout.GliderMaven (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Read the lead of the traffic circle article. It explains the differences. AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Right here in the 3rd paragraph: The U.S. Department of Transportation adopted the term modern roundabout to distinguish those that require entering drivers to give way to others. This article follows that convention and refers to other types as traffic circles or rotaries. The paragraph above that also explains the dictionary definition is the same but we are also conveying how the operation of the modern roundabout is different than the traffic circle. If the article can properly flow in a way such as traffic circle → roundabout → modern roundabout → note how the modern roundabout contrasts with the traffic circle then it would be a safe support. – TheGridExe (talk) 21:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Cautious Support I may be in position to merge the articles if another closes this dicussion as merge. --intelati/talk 00:16, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per AmericanAir88 Blogcoal (talk) 02:09, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Warning: User:Blogcoal has been banned by Checkuser.  I can't tell why — is the above a sock/meatpuppet post? — but perhaps someone with Checkuser privileges should read the log and inform us before it gets included in consensus. 128.135.98.225 (talk) 01:07, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support for three reasons. (1) There is one basic concept being explained by these two articles: an intersection in which all approaching traffic merges into a circular roadway. Such details as who gets right-of-way when, how many lanes are in the circle, the angle of the merge, etc., are subsidiary to this basic concept. One wouldn't argue for separate articles on T-intersections with 3-way stops, T-intersections where cross traffic doesn't stop, T-intersections with traffic lights, T-intersections where the through road has four rather than two lanes, T-intersections where speed-calming infrastructure is in place, etc. (2) In common usage (as distinct from traffic engineer jargon), the terms roundabout and traffic circle and rotary are synonyms. Which word you use depends not on the design of the intersection but on what regional dialect you speak. The article should definitely explain that there is this thing called a "modern roundabout" that differs from traditional rotaries/traffic circles/roundabouts in that it always (rather than sometimes) has a speed-reducing geometry and always (rather than sometimes) forces approaching traffic to yield to circulating traffic. (3) Even if we stipulate that UK roundabouts have always all been yield-on-entry, and all non-UK "roundabouts" are constructed to modern standards, the three terms "roundabout," "rotary" and "traffic circle" can still all refer to intersections on both sides of the "high speed vs. low speed" split, and on both sides of the "one lane vs. multi-lane" split; not all UK roundabouts are "modern roundabouts" by geometry. Thus the distinction that opponents of the merge are trying to make of roundabout vs. traffic circle/rotary is not absolute; the more accurate distinction is "modern roundabout" vs. some traffic circles/some rotaries/some traditional roundabouts. Perhaps a separate page at Modern roundabout is warranted, but the general term "roundabout," which predates the 1990s "modern" definition, is the same thing as -- or at least has too much overlap to be separated from -- "traffic circle" and "rotary." _``` t b w i l l i e _{`</sub> $1.25 <sub>`} 05:43, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  This already is the separate page for modern roundabout it even redirects here already. GliderMaven (talk) 10:20, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on the basis that a traffic circle is a type of roundabout with different rules to a standard one. There should be a "traffic circle" section. IWI (chat) 15:58, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• tentative Support as there is alot of overlap and might be best as a single inclusive article Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:36, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support because it seems that the terms are only distinguished in technical discourse.  Remember, Wikipedia article titles are not official names, but rather the term most likely to be searched for.  Just because roundabouts and traffic circles are distinct does not mean they merit separate articles.  We should have two articles iff the theoretical page Differences between roundabouts and traffic circles was so long that it violates Wikipedia's conventions on article length, and such is not the case. 128.135.98.225 (talk) 00:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support already has a section in the Roundabout article, no need to separate article. – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 00:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose they are synonyms only colloquially. There is a critical difference regarding right of way rules at the intersections. --В²C ☎ 22:11, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A copy of this template can be found here.