Talk:Texting while driving

Texting while driving was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 13, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed

Template:WAP assignment

Automobiles Unassessed

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles 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.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law C‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discussion

I am anonymously disputing the NPV (Neutral Point of View) of this article. Specifically, making a wiki about TEXT messaging specifically of all the possible distracting activities begs the question and reflects the mainstream media's bias against new technology. Are cell phones any MORE or LESS distracting than say, eating, yelling at a child, or adjusting the radio? Until such research is cited, factoring ALL typical distracting behaviors while driving, the NPV status of this article is in dispute.

An analogy: Having an article for "Texting while driving" makes as much logical sense as having an article specially for "Sex while driving."

A possible cause is the wiki itself was created by: User:Sebwite. A look at his personal site shows he may have created this site as a way to advertise his web design services to businesses who would profit from paying someone to make such a wiki.

Feedback appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.27.236.117 (talk) 21:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear anon. Unfortunately, it's a rather poor anaology. People learn to drive. People learn to have sex. It's pretty obvious that (for most people) these two activities are best enjoyed in separate situations. They are not really compatable behaviours. People have been driving for generations, and have been having sex for perhaps a little longer. But mobile phones are new, and are designed to be mobile. They offer novel opportunities for mixing communication with moving around. And moving around involves driving. But the danger of mixing the two is not obvious. Especialy for new drivers. Texting, because it involves reading and writing, is just much more distracting than simply conversing. In any case there are plenty of comparative distractor studies if you care to look. Althuogh, admittedly, none that I know of that have used having sex as a comparison. But the field is still wide open, buddy ... Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are few suggesstions in this particular section of this article that I would like to propose. The author states, "Technology definetly contributes to safe, undistracted driving." The author uses several software programs that are available that control the ability to text and drive, but there is no supporting evidence or research that these programs make operating phones while driving safe, and the author is stating that you can use a cell phone safely. This is technically a criticism of "texting and driving bans", but the information is not presented in a clear, organized way. The next question is, "what defines a safe or good reason for texting while driving?". The reasons and justifications are based on the perspective of those who feel the need to the text. There is no supporting evidence or definitions of "safe texting". Furthermore, the author briefly mentions the topic of receiving messages, but I would add that another criticism of the bans against texting and driving would be the fact that one can receive a text message without their permission- does the act of reading the text message, or the fact that the notification sound of a text message can also be a distraction, make the driver at fault or one who has broken the law?Trovb5 (talk) 02:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have some good points, Trovb5. But drivers who wish to have as few distractions as possible will learn to prevent the possibility of such, e.g. by locking phones away or at least turning them off. But you are right, there is currently a gray area about receiving text messages as opposed to sending them. Certainly in the legal sense. I think it has been assumed for this article that "texting" means "reading and sending texts in a text conversation"? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden

This is the news today from Sweden - 22nd December 2012 - http://www.svt.se/nyheter/sverige/inget-forbud-mot-sms-under-bilkorning - Here they have decided that everyone in the world is wrong and its okay to text and drive. You will have to use Google Translate to understand it if you do not understand Swedish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.217.252.132 (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review

The article briefly discusses remedies, i.e. bluetooths, to address the problem of texting and driving but what programs are out there to educate the public, in particular teens about the safety of texting and driving. Was there any research done, in particular areas where the "notible crashes" were to see if the city/town/county implemented any education programs? The article does not mention that police officers have computers in their vehicle. Are they exculed from the law. Hope these suggestions help. Suzanne10 (talk) 19:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

North Dakota law went in effect today.

http://www.valleynewslive.com/story/15183750/nd-ban-on-texting-while-driving-takes-effect — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.73 (talk) 14:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy paste

The thing that made me say that is the [#] w/o links throughout the article:Jay8g ^{Hi!- I am... -What I do...} _{WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC- WPIM} 04:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio bans texting

In the state of Ohio, a new law came into effect on August 31, 2012 which bans texting while driving. While the main article does mention this, it only refers to a news article as the citation when the Ohio BMV website seems to be a better sitation. The map in the main Wikipedia article indicates that Ohio has no texting laws at all (the state has no coloration). http://bmv.ohio.gov/texting_ban.stm -- 64.18.43.44 (talk) 18:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to opening paragraph

Removed citation to Allstar study involving 10 participants, because it lacked statistical significance. Also removed reference to increasing risk of accident by 23x, since that is a misrepresentation of the findings of the remaining citation. I don't know if my wording of the sentence sounds quite right, and could be done better by someone else, however making a mountain out of a mole hill is not keeping with a neutral pov. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonivy (talk • contribs) 19:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

POV Dispute

I've added a tag because of the non-neutral point of view of the article. It seems to need some heavy editing, verification of sources, and rewriting. Is there such a thing as an expert in "texting while driving" that could edit this page? If not, it may be appropriate, given the very specific nature of the topic, to mark the article for deletion. Jon Ivy (talk) 19:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Color-coded Map of United States contradicts information in the 'Existing Laws' section below it

The map appears to be out of date--or at least it contradicts information in the 'Existing Laws' section below it. A specific example is the state of Alabama. The 'Existing Laws' section states that texting is banned for all drivers, but the state is colored yellow on the map, indicating that only novice drivers are banned from texting. Image should probably be updated or removed.