User talk:C16sh/Archive 3

Junction lists

Hello. Your recent junction list edits have several issues, including but not limited to:

• Please stop adding destinations and cities to at-grade intersections; these are only added to interchanges per WP:NYSR/STDS.
• Do not place route markers (shields) in the middle of a sentence (which violates MOS:ICON), and do not replace links to articles with shields (which violates MOS:ACCESS and severs the link to the article in question).
• Do not add non-notable junctions to lists, such the county roads you added to NY 27's junction lists. Although some routes list county routes, this is typically because the number of junctions the route has with Interstate, U.S., and state highways is low. In the case of NY 27, however, it already has many junctions with highways in those three classes, and adding in county route junctions does nothing but lengthen an already long list.
• Do not remove non-breaking spaces from articles ( ), as these are required to format the article correctly.
• Do not list unsigned routes as if they are signed; this violates MOS:RJL.
• Finally, regarding [1]:
  • There is absolutely no need to make a junction list for CR 94A, which does nothing but repeat everything that's already been mentioned in the section above and adds nothing to the article.
  • There is no need to add NY 24 to every row of the junction list as CR 94 does not intersect NY 24 at every junction.

I suggest that you read and become familiar with MOS:RJL, WP:NYSR/STDS, and WP:USRD/STDS, as well as the Wikipedia-wide Manual of Style. Thanks. – TMF 03:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, do not add road names to interchanges when the road name is not posted on guide signs for the interchange. – TMF 20:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

And on a similar note, entries for interchanges should only contain items that are present on the guide signs for that exit per MOS:RJL. That means any road names that are not posted on signage are omitted, any locations not listed on the signs are omitted, and any routes that are not posted on the sign are only put in parentheses (or in the {{{name#}}} parameter of {{jct}}) and their route marker is not shown. Again, I strongly suggest that you read MOS:RJL before you make any more edits.

Finally, keep in mind that the junction list is the least important part of any road article. There have been editors in the past who only edited junction lists, and they eventually drew the ire of the Wikipedia roads community for that reason. Please consider contributing to more important parts of articles, such as adding a route description to an article that does not have one. – TMF 00:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Again, please edit something other than junction lists. Junction lists are the least important part of an article, and edits that do nothing but tinker with the list are generally useless. – TMF (talk) 23:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

AN notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. – TMF (talk) 23:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

TwinsMetsFan, I honestly have no idea who User:Jonathan Yip is, nor have I tried to copy his edits. I did not know what I am just trying to do my part by contributing to Wikipedia in order to make it the preferable encyclopedia for everyone. Also, on another note, I see that you have reverted the edit that I made to the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. I am okay with other users reverting my edits if my change was incorrect, but could you please explain why it is not preferable to use in the infobox? Many thanks. C16sh (talk) 00:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Infoboxes for NYC streets

Can you point me to the consensus discussion which decided that road infoboxes are appropropriate for NYC streets? I do not believe thet add anything to those articles, so I'll be reverting your bold additions until I see that consensus discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: NY 114

Well, I've read your response and looked back at my revert. I admit I was jumpy on the revert, seeing you added the CR 113 junction, which is why I reverted. The reason I did, is that unless the county route or local road is an interchange with a freeway, or a former alignment of a state touring route, CRs are non notable junctions. That's why I reverted the addition. Looking at the article, the junctions there also need to be axed. I appreciate the talk page message, considering the situation. Ultimately, that's why it was reverted. I understand the good faith effort to add them, but that's my justification. Thanks for the note on the CR 38 status, considering that was overlooked. Mitch32^{(There is a destiny that makes us... family.)} 23:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response--I understand your reasoning for the revert. I guess it's time to get to work! :) C16sh (talk) 00:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I won't revert again, but you've misinterpreted what I said. I said no CRs are allowed in junction lists unless they meet those criteria. None of the junctions in NY 114 meet that criteria, which is why I reverted you last time. They all need to be removed not re-added. Mitch32^{(There is a destiny that makes us... family.)} 13:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Even if they aren't allowed, I think an exception should be made here. NY 114 meets only county roads between NY 27 and NY 25. If anything had to go, it should be the two county roads on Shelter Island. They are county roads, but not major roads in general. Stephen Hands Path IS a major road in the Town of East Hampton. C16sh (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, all of the signed county roads have clearly posted signs. Thanks again. C16sh (talk) 19:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

They still need to be removed. Lots of routes do this in NY, and they don't get junctions for CRs. Its not a criteria.T hey should be either a) ex-touring route, b) freeway interchange, c) termini of a state route. There isn't another reason. I'm not going to break precedent because you want them. Mitch32^{(There is a destiny that makes us... family.)} 22:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

CR 79 was originally a pre-automotive toll road, and CR 38 which is multiplexed with CR 79 in Sag Harbor was formerly proposed as a limited-access highway, as was CR 60. That's enough of a reason to keep them. I can't see that much of a reason to keep Stephen Hands Path, though. As far as the Shelter Island intersections go, CR 69 leads to Ram Island, and I still rememember maps claiming it was NY 114A(I wish I could find the ones that have them). CR 115 is the closest thing to a major intersection in Shelter Island Heights and leads to the western part of the Island. There are other county roads that are less important, but I'm willing to compromise and let thema all go. ----DanTD (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Parks Highway RJL

I started a sandbox to complete the RJLs for Alaska routes. I set the one for the Parks Highway aside as I was having two major hangups. First was in verifying locations for junctions, mainly on account of how slow and cumbersome the Census Bureau FactFinder site tends to be. Second was in figuring how to accommodate both mileposts and physical mileages, which are different as the former is based upon mileage from Anchorage. Your doing this and adding it to the article saves me a little bit of time, so thanks.

Just a few issues, which you or I or anyone else can take care of: 1) The redlink to New Wasilla Airport, which is actually the same place as Wasilla Airport. The old Wasilla airport was vacated over 20 years ago and is now a city park, which was named after Tommy Moe following his Olympic victory. 2) The Mitchell Expressway is the name given to the portion of the Parks between the Airport Way and Richardson Highway intersections. 3) The Richardson becomes the Steese at Airport Way, not at the Mitchell interchange. Different sources offer conflicting information on the last two points, so I'm stating this based upon the signage present on the ground.RadioKAOS (talk) 00:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I created a temporary replacement for the mileage issue––just using the "mile=" and "mile2=" for now makes sense. I also created a redirect from New Wasilla Airport to Wasilla Airport. I just recently changed the wording in the Mitchell Expressway line so that is fixed as well. But as far as Steese vs. Richardson, I used Google Street View which indicates Steese being north of the Mitchell Expressway and Richardson south/east, as I live nowhere near Fairbanks. But considering that the street view of the area could be up to five years old, if you have another source that disagrees with this please let me know and/or fix it. C16sh (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

This document is probably the most reliable source. See pp. II-37 and II-42, which lists Airport Way as the endpoints of both highways. To try to correct this misconception, I took photos of the Airport Way intersection back in June, which shows the signage in each direction referring to both the Richardson and the Steese, rather than just the Steese. My older laptop isn't handling processing 16 MP photos very well, so my photo upload backlog continues to grow while I continue to take more photos. I think most folks who depend upon Google Street View tend to take the signage depicted here perhaps too literally. It doesn't make it clear that the exit is to get to the Steese, not the exit to the Steese itself. I believe the signage on South Cushman is similar.RadioKAOS (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:USRD would like your help

Just so you're aware, there are 48 other states that have roads articles that need attention. Michigan's average article is a Good Article, so that state doesn't need much help. I can't vouch for the behavior of some New York roads editors, but it's clear they don't want you around. We do. USRD has over 2400 stubs. Most of these just need a little TLC. You can always ask us questions as WT:USRD. I hope you join us! –Fredddie™ 15:07, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

To add to that, we have an IRC channel at WP:HWY/IRC that you're welcome to stop by! --Rschen7754 21:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

AK-3 terminus

When the Parks Highway was first opened, the AK-3 alignment at its northern end followed the old Fairbanks-Nenana Highway alignment, through UAF and along College Road to the Steese Highway (current Old Steese Highway). A slew of road projects occurred in the Fairbanks area between 1975 and 1977. Amongst those were the construction of the final portion of the Parks Highway, or its current alignment between Sheep Creek Road and Airport Way. As that was the end of the highway at the time, AK-3 did follow Airport Way to the Steese (the Steese Expressway was constructed at around the same time; prior to that, AK-2 went directly through downtown Fairbanks). The alignment changed yet again when the Mitchell Expressway was built during the early and mid 1990s. Hope this helps. I've gone through ADOT&PF's website somewhat, but not extensively. I don't know what historical materials they may have put up there. Since I live here, whenever I'm looking for such information, I usually pay a visit to their offices, or the Rasmuson Library at UAF, to search for it.RadioKAOS (talk) 22:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

That is perfect. Thanks again. C16sh (talk) 22:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Went through a number of old editions of The Milepost. Wish I had time to go through all of them in detail, because it would set straight a lot of issues that Alaska road articles have been facing in general (namely with the histories). Prior to the completion of the Parks, the southern end of AK-3 followed Trunk Road and the Palmer-Wasilla Highway between the Glenn Highway and Wasilla. Matanuska Road had already long existed, but it was mostly a narrow, winding country road which paralleled the railroad tracks, and it may not have been practical to upgrade it to highway standards. I also found indications that the portion running through the Nenana River canyon, just north of the Denali Park entrance, was difficult enough to construct that it was arguably the one factor holding up completion of the highway. Ironically, due to the "Glitter Gulch" buildup of park-related tourism facilities, it's currently one of the major points along the highway.RadioKAOS (talk) 02:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Assessment system

Now that you've been able to make some good improvements to U.S. road articles, you might want to take a look at WP:USRD/A (specifically, the Stub/Start/C/B/GA/A/FA part). It's basically an inventory system so that we know the quality of an article without having to open it up; a bot then generates some tables for us. Let me know if you have any questions! --Rschen7754 07:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Locations

Just so you know, in the locations column, we don't put relative directions; we only list something if the junction is actually in that city or town. --Rschen7754 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll go back and fix some of those changes. For future corrections, is it okay to say "near XX," or does the location column only apply if the intersection is in the city/town boundary? Thanks. C16sh (talk) 03:10, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

It's only if it is in the city/town boundary. In the infobox, it is okay to say near though. --Rschen7754 03:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Editing Maryland road articles

I appreciate your effort in being bold and working on Maryland road articles. However, in looking at the articles you edited, I have a number of concerns:

1. You have added colors to the junction lists of those articles. You claim that you added these colors per MOS:RJL, but I just want to make sure you know that per those guidelines, colors are optional; they are not required. Generally, Maryland road articles do not have colors, but there are a number of exceptions. You were not wrong to add the colors, but I want to make sure you know you do not need to go through every article and add colors. There are times colors will look strange, as is the case with I-395 where three out of four rows of the junction list are colored red.
2. You added a hospital icon to the junction list in Baltimore–Washington Parkway. We do not use the hospital icon in junction lists for U.S. road articles.
3. You used MOS:RJL to justify removing cities from the Destinations column in the junction list in a few articles, most prominently in MD 410, claiming the only thing to display should be things on street signs. While you are technically correct that MOS:RJL says this, there are also customs at work that vary state to state. In some states, destination cities are not provided for non-freeway routes and route termini are explicitly mentioned in the Notes column. In other states, such as Maryland, destination cities for most or all routes are included and route termini are implied. Sometimes the destinations reflect what is mentioned on signs—both the big green signs and little blade signs at intersections—but sometimes they do not. Rather than rely solely on MOS:RJL, you should look around at a sample of articles and figure out what the local custom is. When in doubt, leave the information alone.
4. You removed a bunch of junctions from the infobox of MD 410. Again, which junctions are included is a custom that varies from state to state. In Maryland, the custom is to include junctions with state routes as well as U.S. routes and Interstates, up to a maximum of ten. Which routes are included is a subjective matter. Again, if there is nothing inherently wrong with the routes included, there is no need to remove them.
5. Finally, I noticed you have added incorrent information to articles. I first noticed this in independent city (United States) where you added Anchorage. In the I-395 article, you changed the notes for the Conway Street junction to indicate an interchange. This junction is an at-grade intersection, not an interchange. You also added a Bridge row, which was not necessary. While the highway is on a bridge, adding that row may imply the highway is not on a bridge at its terminus. These are details that are not best suited for tables, but should be explained in the Route description.

I do not want to be all bad news, so I want to point out some good things you did. You changed some of the templates from jctint to MDint. There are hundreds of Maryland articles that either have jctint that should be changed to MDint, or where the junction lists are still hard-coded, and should be converted to MDint. We would greatly appreciate it if you would help convert those junction lists. There are also many articles, mostly on roads in central Maryland, that need history to be added. If you have any questions about what should or should not go in a Junction list or any part of a roads article, feel free to contact me.  VC  16:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, I will keep this in mind and fix the issues (such as the airport and the intersection on I-395). I will also start weeding through some articles as you suggested. -- c16sh (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I am glad you are adding templates to the Junction lists in Maryland articles, but I see you are continuing to remove cities from the Destinations column. The custom in Maryland is to include cities. Can you explain why you removing this information?  VC  00:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry...I am used to removing this kind of information. When I focused my editing in NY the editors in charge there sticked to ONLY what was on the signs and none of the extra stuff (which I believe is quite necessary). I will try in the future to stick to the MD customs. -- c16sh (talk to me) 21:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Florida SLDs

I noticed you have some Florida sandboxes, but I'm not sure if you're still interested in them, but I found and have been using straight-line diagrams from FDOT. (http://www2.dot.state.fl.us/straight-linesonline/Home.aspx) They go by county and segment, but they go out to three decimal places. Enjoy! –Fredddie™ 04:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I will definitely be using this. -- c16sh (talk to me) 13:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but what would you recommend considering that the mileage done by FDOT is on a county-by-county basis, therefore the mileage resets at the county line? Is it sufficient to just add the previous county's mileage to the number of a county in the middle of a route? Thanks in advance. -- c16sh (talk to me) 21:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)