Talk:CanAm Highway

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on CanAm Highway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070919001049/http://www.grouptravelplanner.net:80/WesternCanada/GettingHere/ to http://www.grouptravelplanner.net/WesternCanada/GettingHere/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080215212302/http://saskhighways.homestead.com/provincial.html to http://saskhighways.homestead.com/provincial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Total length and length in Canada
The total length and length in Canada should be in metric because the CanAm is also in Canada hence the Can in its name. The length in the United States can remain in miles but for total length and length in Canada it has to be in km. MetricSupporter89 (talk) 20:55, 4 January 2019 (UTC)


 * @MetricSupporter89: Please provide support from the MOS for changing unit styles mid-article. The primary units should remain consistent throughout. —C.Fred (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:METRIC It says on articles that are not just about America should use si and non si approved for si use. MetricSupporter89 (talk) 04:12, 8 January 2019 (UTC) I checked the history and Imzadi1979 had just reverted to his version 11 hours ago. MetricSupporter89 (talk) 14:01, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The vast majority of the highway is in the US. That counts as strong national ties.  Calidum   04:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed, given the relative lengths involved, this article has stronger ties to the US than to Canada on this issue. Good writing involves consistency, and we should not be flipping primacy of measurement systems back and forth in the same text. On a side note, please don't edit the article to implement your proposed changes until this discussion ends.  Imzadi 1979   →   06:58, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:METRIC also states the sources should be given preference. In this case the gives units in metric. Zaurus (talk) 17:34, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * that is a self-published source, and as such, it's not supposed to be used in the article as a source. So we can't give that source any preference. That brings us back to the fact that approximately $3/4$ of the length of the highway is in the United States.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:45, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Your argument feels like a red herring to me. If you have a problem with the source, that is a separate issue. As of today it is the source of the contested information. --Zaurus (talk) 08:59, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:METRIC does not give preference for units based on the sources (see this discussion). In fact, it states "where the article's primary units differ from the units given in the source, the undefined undefined template's |order=flip flag can be used". As per strong national ties, considering the vast majority of the road is in the US, and MOS:RETAIN I believe it should stay unchanged. -- Voello  talk  09:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Can't remember where I saw sources units get preference, but I'll concede on that point. I think MOS:RETAIN is more related to English spelling than units. This discussion addresses it more appropriately. It would be nice if In non-scientific articles relating to the United States, the primary units are US customary could be updated to In non-scientific articles only relating to the United States, the primary units are US customary, but for now we are left with a little bit of ambiguity. Two of the three countries listed here use metric only road signs. The third, with albeit the vast majority of the road, uses a mix of the two. I really cannot understand the objections to placing metric first here.  --Zaurus (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't you mean one of the two countries? The highway doesn't exist in Mexico.  Imzadi 1979  →   01:26, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I mean one of the two countries. Thanks. However I still think your argument about "vast majority of the road is in the US" it not good enough. Not sure how to reach consensus on this.  I don't think this is drama as  calls it. I think we need an answer. CC: --Zaurus (talk) 20:17, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your selective application of facts. Several days ago, the article was changed prematurely before the discussion had reached any sort of consensus. Now it's back to the status quo ante, which is how it should be until there's a consensus to change it. Following WP:BRD, the original change to metric first was bold, but it was reverted, and we're discussing. Until that discussion concludes, the article should be left alone. Once it concludes, then we change it based on the results of the discussion.  Imzadi 1979  →   19:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

CanAm Highway article incorrect road.
The major US portion is I25, not I85. 2600:1700:97B2:8EB0:50A5:D97C:EDE8:3198 (talk) 15:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)