Talk:Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals

Highways Mid‑importance

	Roads portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

International relations: United Nations / Law Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject International law.

Untitled[edit]

Which countries have signed the treaty? This is a suggestion for improvement. Mrs.EasterBunny 01:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated link[edit]

The link to "Detailed illustrations of signs and signals based on the convention" does indeed work; but most of the pages it links to, are outdated years back.130.226.45.152 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amber[edit]

The images seem to show yellow traffic lights instead of amber. In the UK we have amber, and the text of the article says it should be amber. 86.164.255.159 (talk)

Suggestion[edit]

A problem with this article is that it doesn't make any attempt to indicate how far the signage practices in non-signatory states follow, or are influenced by, the Convention. 86.164.255.159 (talk)

Contracting Parties[edit]

Claim is made, without link to evidence, that:

"The only countries in Europe that did not ratify this convention are Ireland, United Kingdom and Spain. This is one of the reasons why the road signage's quality and quantity in this countries is remarkably lower than in the rest of them."

I have deleted the claim about poor signage quality and quantity, which edit I suggest should not be reversed unless a link to confirmation can be provided.

- I write as a road user from one of the above countries, whose experience is that the quantity of road signs (if nothing else) is if anything excessive - indeed, in at least one of the listed countries (mine), courts will accept "forest of signs" (i.e., too many road signs to assimilate at normal travelling speed) as a valid defense when a motorist faces prosecution for disobeying sign posted instructions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.2.196 (talk) 01:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Circular yellow stop signs[edit]

This seems to be what the alternate rule will allow, but I have never seen a similar image. Hope I got the drawing right. knoodelhed (talk) 02:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, the sign looks like this:

. P M C 19:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Number of parties[edit]

I have reverted L.tak's change back to 74. If you count the list of countries on the same link, there are 74 countries which are signed to the Convention. Fry1989 ^eh? 23:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.. but generally to become a party to a convention, you have to be bound by it (which requires ratification, accession....). This treaty uses "contracting parties" which by definition are not signatories, as that would lie responsibilities to fully have implemented already during the signing (whereas they just have to "refrain from actions that defeit the purpose of the convention" according to the Vienna Convention)...L.tak (talk) 07:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy[edit]

The "additional" green light is not mentioned in the article (see CONVENTION ON ROAD SIGNS AND SIGNALS, article 23, paragraph 10).

In addition, the meaning of flashing amber light is not accurate - according to Convention "A single amber flashing light or two amber lights flashing alternately shall mean that drivers may proceed but shall do so with particular care." I.e., it has the same meaning as well as the green light. Ekruh (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does not have the same meaning. A green light implies right of way unless the driver is turning across traffic, and can imply that even then, if the main three lights have arrows in them. A yellow light implies a dangerous situation with a need to slow down and likely no right of way. Would you say that the priority diamond and the yield triangle have the same meaning, just because you're most likely not going to stop your vehicle for either of them? 93.136.47.163 (talk) 05:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pedestrian Walk/Don't Walk lights[edit]

What about Pedestrian light?

Red flashing lights may only be used at the locations specified above; any other use of the lights is in breach of the convention.

In many countries, Don't Walk lights flash red, meaning "Stop if possible". Tabletop (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/bkkriders/law/unc/sign1949.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Circular stop signs?...[edit]

Anybody know how many countries use circular stop signs, and why this was included in the standard? I've traveled in quite a few countries, but never seen any like that.

Just seems odd that a treaty to *standardize* signs would allow something so basic as a stop sign to be *anything other* than a red octagon with white letters... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CA:83C4:C000:A4:5DB7:EBDD:7227 (talk) 19:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The convention is quite old, and it had to make compromises to cover existing signage in some countries. I remember circular stop signs in Poland, but it was long ago. I would guess circular stop signs have been phased out everywhere already. Malgond (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UNited Kingdom?[edit]

The text of the article says that "The only countries in Europe that are not signatories to the Convention are [...] the United Kingdom". At the same time, the article map clearly show the UK as light green, meaning it is a signatory. So, which is it? 94.255.211.171 (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]