Talk:Public works

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government. Civil engineering This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering 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.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCE articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Urban studies and planning High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning 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.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Public Works → Public works

Pretty basic, there is no reason for the 'W' to be capitalized. -- Pharos 06:06, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Support. Jonathunder 06:09, 2005 Mar 1 (UTC)
• Oppose The unaesthetic side of naming conventions. —ExplorerCDT 07:01, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • This isn't the place to dispute established naming conventions. If you want to change the conventions so that all words in a Wikipedia article title are capitalized, the place to post that is Wikipedia:Village pump.--Pharos 07:38, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • blah blah blah. When I feel up to a fight, I'll take up your suggestion. In the meantime, I vote as I want.—ExplorerCDT 08:17, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • You may wish to consult proposed policy Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point which is what you are doing here. violet/riga (t) 17:46, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
        • Dissent is not vandalism. Thanks for the despotic attempt to strike my vote out as if it didn't count. —ExplorerCDT 17:53, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
          • It doesn't count, hence me moving the article in a few moments. violet/riga (t) 18:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
            • Sic semper tyrannis —ExplorerCDT 18:18, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Support, of course. Grue 17:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Support because it makes complete sense and is perfectly beautiful to my square eyes. Gareth Hughes 17:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This move request is now closed and further votes will not be counted. violet/riga (t) 18:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Advocates of American System Economics point out that such federal investments in infrastructure are counter-inflationary, because they increase the overall productive power of the economy, in contrast to federal investments that prop up speculative bubbles, as was the trend in the 1990s.

Who are these advocates? -Willmcw 10:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would someone who can decipher what is meant by "technically difficult projects did not ended up more exceedings of the budget than technically easy projects" please rewrite it in grammatical and comprehensible English. --Pfold (talk) 17:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC) I attempted to fix the text. You are welcome to improve on my modest efforts.AlexPlante (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Consequently, almost all significant infrastructure in the U.S., including the Transcontinental Railroad, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the Interstate Highway System, were created through federal investment (often employing private subcontractors)"

This is simply misleading. While the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 did establish a method of federally funding a majority of Interstate highways, most other roads and bridges are built by states. The infrastructure supporting running water is often supported by local government. Most other infrastructure, such as railroads, airports, and electricity, Internet, natural gas, oil, gasoline, food distribution, is created through private investments by individuals and corporations, not federal funding. Comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.133.27 (talk) 03:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the statement about corruption as there were no reference to any proof that a public works project is more or less prone to corruption than any other project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.68.122.140 (talk) 00:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Public works. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20100312224013/http://www.trustthevote.org:80/background to http://www.trustthevote.org/background
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100430171423/http://www.odi.org.uk:80/resources/details.asp?id=2608&title=typology-public-works-programming to http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=2608&title=typology-public-works-programming

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) 09:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the majority of the external links for the page because most of them were spam links to software. If someone disagrees with the removal please discuss here. LynxTufts (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]