Talk:New York State Route 146B

wording question
The following sentence needs rewriting i think: "The entire lifetime of Route 146B was less than two decades, as it was decommissioned in 1964 after being commissioned at least seventeen years before." Being decommissioned in 1964, plus being at least 17 years old, does not necessarly imply that it was commissioned less than 20 years. Did you mean to say at most 17 years before? doncram (talk) 22:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The rewritten sentence now reads "Being assigned at least 17 years before, the entire lifetime of Route 146B was less than two decades, with the highway being decommissioned in 1964." However, that doesn't work either, logically.  Also I see in the infobox that it is noted the route was created by 1947 or before, and decommissioned in 1964.  By that, all you know is that it is at least 17 years old.  It could be 18, 19, 20, 21, 30, or 100 years old.  You could perhaps say, "Route 146B's entire lifetime might have been as short as two decades, as it is only known that it was built in 1947 or before, and it was decommissioned in 1964."  However, why not just say what you know:  "Route 146B, when it was decommissioned in 1964, had a lifetime of at least 17 years." doncram (talk) 06:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

USRD GA audit
This article has failed the USRD GA audit and will be sent to WP:GAR if the issues are not resolved within one week. Please see WT:USRD for more details, and please ask me if you have any questions as to why this article failed. --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)