Talk:Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | On 10 March 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 to Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The result of the discussion was moved. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
History section is, uh, weak.
editAccording to the DOT, the FAHA had a much different history than what we give. See http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/interstate/interstatemyths.htm#question1, where Ike's role is not disputed but not given as the source of the bill either. See also Lee Mertz's article: "Origins of the Interstate" (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/origin.htm). Kdammers (talk) 02:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
National Interstate and Defense Highways Act
editI'm in the process of organizing the navigation box for federal transportation acts here. If this act is popularly known as "National Interstate and Defense Highways Act" wouldn't WP:COMMONNAME apply here? – The Grid (talk) 13:21, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
What about public transit?
editI've come to understand that this legislation marked a turning point for the nation's transportation priorities with roads and highways replacing public transit as the chief recipient of public monies. Comparing the evolution of transit and roadways between Europe, Japan, and the United States in this era and beyond reveals a philosophical distinction between public works projects that exists still today. We got lots of cars on roads and highways, they have lots of subways, trains, and buses, and far less personal vehicles. The political, economic, social, and environmental implications are far reaching from pollution and climate change to traffic to decentralized and disconnected cities ad more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.1.137.41 (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Requested move 10 March 2022
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 04:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 → Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 – The official statute, FHWA, and National Archives all use the hyphenated version. This would also be consistent with the 1944–1974 acts that have articles. Some modern media sources, such as the Washington Post, LA Times, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune also use the hyphenated version consistently, while others like the NY Times seem to flip flop between the two options. SounderBruce 23:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 02:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Law has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 02:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject United States has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 02:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject National Archives has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 02:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject United States History has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 03:05, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support I was questioning this in the past when editing the transportation-related legislation. – The Grid (talk) 03:47, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Nom: Being consistant with other articles is a good thing. One wuld think this not controversial. -- Otr500 (talk) 16:11, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Time to change
edit“Eisenhower role has been exaggerated” POV. Ike was the reason this went into effect. The braincild wasn’t some guy named Fallon. It was Ike’s plan. Remove this assertion 2601:58B:900:72D0:849F:4A7A:EFFB:5A7D (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- The statement is sourced....so... – The Grid (talk) 20:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- What do you mean so? Statement is “sourced” incorrectly. Either put accurate information in there or none at all. It’s POV. Sooooo 2601:58B:900:72D0:E045:2B38:BE1B:D8E0 (talk) 20:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)