Revision as of 16:52, 23 May 2018 editZH8000 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users22,121 edits →OR← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:10, 23 May 2018 edit undo86.153.135.111 (talk) →ORNext edit → | ||
Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
::I would urgently advice you to learn about how to make more serious (i.e. e.g. verifiable ]) statements before you try to write incomplete, incoherent, unclear, constructed (]) statements in a encyclopedia. -- ] (]) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC) | ::I would urgently advice you to learn about how to make more serious (i.e. e.g. verifiable ]) statements before you try to write incomplete, incoherent, unclear, constructed (]) statements in a encyclopedia. -- ] (]) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC) | ||
:::{{replyto|ZH8000}}Your English comprehension leaves much to be desired here as well. We are ''not'' discussing the relative costs of a year's travel, but the cost of transiting across the country in a day or so. As such, you are about as wrong as it possible to get with your examples. The cost of a Swiss vignette is €35.75 (there is no option to get a shorter validity than whatever is left out of the calendar year plus one month) . The cost for Austria is €9 (as a 10 day vignette is available). And for the Czech Republic the cost is €13 (again a 10 day vignette). Clue: €35.75 is larger than both €13 and €9. You have thus failed to demonstrate that the Swiss vignette is ''not the "most most expensive in Europe for transiting passenger car drivers"'', and the disputed sentence is entirely accurate as written. That you claim that that the point is incomplete and not understandable only underlines your inability to comprehend a sentence that is both complete and accurate. ] (]) 17:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:10, 23 May 2018
Taxation (inactive) | ||||
|
Disputed
Slovenia:
Due to exorbitant costs of vignettes aimed at people going to vacation to Croatia and Montenegro and others only passing through Slovenia, the highways are avoided by a large percentage of travellers.
Exorbitant? Large? Any source (beside forums and blogs)?--AndrejJ (talk) 05:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't think words such as 'exorbitant' should be used in Misplaced Pages except where exactly attributed to a specific OPINION.
As for the matter at hand, I just returned again from Slovenia and there is a case in the court now asking that Slovenia introduce a 10 day vignette which would be cheaper. As it is now - a visitor from the north driving thru Slovenia from Jesenice (Austrian border) to eg Koper in the south would have paid about 20 Euro return via old toll system and now pay 35 for a 6 month pass. They may save the 15 in gas and time - as the waits for tolls were often terrible at rush times :-). In any case 35 instead of 20 cannot really be called exorbitant - especially if you should use the pass for more than a one-time visit. Going on local roads is an alternative but not a sensible one if time is of any essence. They are more than pleasant if you do want to catch some flavor of Slovenia though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robfwoods (talk • contribs) 10:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It should be noted that the above has a reference reference to http://www.wieninternational.at/en/node/8938.
This URL has a statement that the 35€ 6 month pass is 23 times the previous toll of 1.50€ for 22 km. This is completely erroneous as the motorway in Slovenia runs for probably 200+ km from Austria to southern Slovenia (as well as east to Maribor) and the round trip toll would have been some 20€ on the old system for a one-time round trip.
- Most non-Slovenes using Slovenian highways (not counting trucks, the situation didn't change for them) drive during the summer to the Croatian and Montenegrin coast and back (passing through Slovenia 2 times). This is why Slovenian government is able to profit from the vignettes, while the regular Slovenian highway users pay several times less. The most impacted routes are Trieste-Istria, Trieste-Rijeka and Spielfeld-Macelj. When going north to e.g. Paris it is also better and way faster to use the old road to Dravograd than the Bregana-Ljubljana-Karawanken highway which is not only awful to drive and built in many unconnected stretches, but also takes a sharp curve through Ljubljana. The long parts of Slovenian highways are built for Slovenes only, because they are too impractical to be used by drivers in transit. Admiral Norton 17:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
- Bregana-Ljubljana-Karawanken highway which is not only awful to drive and built in many unconnected stretches.
- There are (July 2008) exactly two (2) unconnected pieces: Novo mesto-Trebnje (cca 15km) and part Vrba-Podtabor (cca 20km). Awful to drive??
- Paris through Dravograd? You must be joking?
- For example, take a common route Zagreb-Munich, ViaMichelin says:
- Quickest 104€ / 5h48m / 555km (500km motorways)
- Shortest 111€ / 7h34m / 549 km (312km motorways)
- Economical 100€ / 11h7m / 716 km (240km motorways)
- See also interesting voting: http://www.hak.hr/rezultati-ankete.aspx.
- --AndrejJ (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, Slovenian highways are indeed awful to drive. You know, bumping into a big pothole at 160 km/h is no pleasant experience. The road through Dravograd has better pavement and you don't have to pay €35 for a trip you would usually pay €0.75 in each direction. Admiral Norton 09:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Had the dubious pleasure of encountering Slovenian bandits last Friday (04/09/08), checked by a posse of five "Scrambled Egg" uniforms, none of whom mentioned vignettes, didn't see a sign asking for one either. Stayed on the minor road to well past Maribor and took the 5km road to the Austrian frontier (no mention of vignettes), the only interest at the frontier was to shout "criminals", just like the old Commies did. Cost? 35€ for the vignette,150€ "fine" for breaking the law.
Nobody minds the EU helping your economy, just remember that when you help yourselves this way you remind us all about the other defects in the EU. When you do this to friendly innocents you lose friends just like they lose their innocence.
Bad luck to Slovenia and sour grapes in your harvest --Damorbel (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Deleted paragraph with rumors only. This is encyclopedia and must be given only validate information, not blogs... Be professional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.212.187.207 (talk) 14:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I updated the "Slovenia" section to reflect current facts.Somebody might check my grammar. I don't see anything disputable in it, so can the flag be removed ? --Xerces8 (talk) 09:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
merge into Toll roads in Europe?
Is there any real reason for this article not to be merged into Toll roads in Europe? Unless anyone's using the stickers outside of Europe, I see no point in having two different lists, we just get duplication or partial information in each article. --Joy (talk) 22:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Adding it to Toll roads in Europe would likely make that article too large. There is enough said about a vignette to warrant its own article, it seems. Guffydrawers (talk) 17:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Ton or tonne
It is self evident that the unit referred to in this article (vehicle mass) is the (metric) tonne rather than the imperial long or short ton. RashersTierney (talk) 09:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Long standing issue, but a new IP seems to be under the impression that ton and tonne are WP:ENGVAR variants of the same mass value. They are not. Rather than engage in edit warring I have asked for outside views. It should be noted that this article has been a target of determined sock puppets in the past. RashersTierney (talk) 23:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- I hate it too when everything isn't specified to the letter, so I have added the word "metric" to refer to the correct definition of metric ton (1000 kilograms). I hope this will put your struggle that has lasted over the past 3 years finally to rest. 190.213.15.141 (talk) 15:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hardly a three year struggle, but it does appear to address the issue per the usage outlined at the article Tonne. RashersTierney (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Removal of images
Why has this article been butchered with many images being removed without explanation? JG Murphy (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
vignettes / car tax
The vignettes described in the France section have nothing to do with toll stickers. It was just the way to prove that you paid your car tax. As a tourist you never had to pay a vignette. France always used toll booths on their motorways. I think the same is true for the vignettes in Montenegro. --93.130.151.77 (talk) 22:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, 93.130.151.77. I think you're absolutely right that in France many autoroutes have had a péage (toll) for some decades, and that a vignette to a French speaker is merely proof that the car owner has paid their road tax (see Vignette automobile in French WP). Guffydrawers (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vignette (road tax). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131001115038/http://portal.moldpres.md:80/default.asp?Lang=en to http://portal.moldpres.md/default.asp?Lang=en&ID=181315
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:52, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
OR
IP's added claim "Only offering a CHF 40 yearly option, Switzerland's vignette is the most expensive in Europe for transiting passenger car drivers" is WP:OR and not sourced by the given source (WP:VER failed). -- ZH8000 (talk) 02:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- First off, I would have appreciated if you added a link here on my talk page instead of giving me a whole three minutes to respond to your post before you linked me to an edit warring report.
- On to the dispute: Looking at the revision of content I added here, one can clearly see the quotation of the source:
- "It was introduced in 1985 at a cost of CHF30 and this was increased to CHF40 in 1995, a level where it has remained ever since. (...) Other countries which have a motorway tax sticker allow people to buy a cheaper, short-term vignette if they only use their motorways for a short time."
- The first bold part establishes the CHF 40 price of the vignette. The second part establishes that other countries have short-term vignettes and that those vignettes are cheaper. In the article, I wrote this:
- "Only offering a CHF 40 yearly option, Switzerland's vignette is the most expensive in Europe for transiting passenger car drivers."
- You'll see that the bold part here shows that the comparison is done in the context of a tourist or transiting visitor, hence the findings of the above quotation apply. Now where is the OR here?
- Or maybe you want to point out a country using vignettes whose shortest term vignette for passenger cars (the tourists' motor vehicle of choice) is more expensive than Switzerland's? 93.142.87.187 (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- At the present time anyone using the Swiss motorways is obliged to pay for an annual vignette. This is what the article states and is correct. ZH8000 is trying to claim that there is a cheaper CHF40 for a yearly vignette for short term visitors and gave a cite. Unfortunately he has either misunderstood the cite or deliberately misstated it. The cite says that it is part of a proposal to increase the annual cost of a vignette to offer a lower cost vignette valid for two months (not the year as claimed). In any event (per WP:CRYSTAL we do not document the changes until such time as they actually happen. 86.153.135.111 (talk) 10:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- 86.153.135.111 (talk · contribs): Please, learn how to use talk pages WP:TALK. And please, please, learn to read, this (your text) is just simply awful! -- ZH8000 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- @ZH8000: I know how to use talk pages. If You regard my post as awful, then maybe you ought to learn English. If you cannot understand English then you should not be editing the English Misplaced Pages. You have also made four reverts to this article and are therefore Edit Warring. That they have not been made in 24 hours makes no difference. It counts as a slow motion edit war. 86.153.135.111 (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- If that would be the case, and if you would re-read your own statements, you would learn how odd your statements are, since I did not say the slightest comparable of that what you claim. You are simply very unattentive and therefore thoroughly inconsistent (I don't need to be a native English speaker to easily percieve this, well, it's actually very obvious). -- ZH8000 (talk) 16:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- @ZH8000: I know how to use talk pages. If You regard my post as awful, then maybe you ought to learn English. If you cannot understand English then you should not be editing the English Misplaced Pages. You have also made four reverts to this article and are therefore Edit Warring. That they have not been made in 24 hours makes no difference. It counts as a slow motion edit war. 86.153.135.111 (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- 93.142.87.187 (talk · contribs): I would thoroughly advice that you check your own statement more seriously.
- Despite the facts that there is a Swiss vignette for fourty francs and that it is indeed also valid for 14 months, these facts do not make your statement more true - it still stays wrong. Full stop. Besides that the sentence is logically incomplete (it is not quite clear what your message is, but probably because you don't even understand what the main message of your own statement ought to be).
- The incomplete main message, "is the most expensive in Europe", does not say of what. The reader must assume what the author possibly meant.
- But facts are:
- 1. The Swiss vignette is by far not the most expensive yearly toll road in Europe. Very easy examples are the Austrian one, it is more than double as expensive, or even the Czech one is more expensive! There are probably more examples, but it simply needs just one example to falsify your statement.
- 2. The Swiss vignette is by far not the most expensive toll road in Europe for traversing a country; easily verifiable.
- 3. And, and this will propably surprise you, since you never did check it by yourself, the Swiss vignette is not the most expensive toll road in Europe even according a price-per-km rate, even for traversing the most direct, north-south axis through Switzerland (Chiasso-Basel, 300km), namely 13.3 Rappen. – For notabene traversing the Alps in totally seemless two and a half hours on 94% motorways with a hundred of bridges and more than 40 km of tunnels!!! Even this would justify a much more expensive price.
- I would urgently advice you to learn about how to make more serious (i.e. e.g. verifiable WP:VER) statements before you try to write incomplete, incoherent, unclear, constructed (WP:OR) statements in a encyclopedia. -- ZH8000 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- @ZH8000:Your English comprehension leaves much to be desired here as well. We are not discussing the relative costs of a year's travel, but the cost of transiting across the country in a day or so. As such, you are about as wrong as it possible to get with your examples. The cost of a Swiss vignette is €35.75 (there is no option to get a shorter validity than whatever is left out of the calendar year plus one month) . The cost for Austria is €9 (as a 10 day vignette is available). And for the Czech Republic the cost is €13 (again a 10 day vignette). Clue: €35.75 is larger than both €13 and €9. You have thus failed to demonstrate that the Swiss vignette is not the "most most expensive in Europe for transiting passenger car drivers", and the disputed sentence is entirely accurate as written. That you claim that that the point is incomplete and not understandable only underlines your inability to comprehend a sentence that is both complete and accurate. 86.153.135.111 (talk) 17:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)