Talk:State Route 343 (New York−Connecticut)

Corrected route description (bold intro). Had 304.
This article was changed to bring its intersection template to the NYint format. No other changes were made. It is important to verify, update and/or correct as necessary. Fwgoebel 21:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments
Just a few comments on the lead as you work on this (more later):
 * "The route used the Dutchess Turnpike for its entire length, along with the nearby U.S. Route 44." This has a double meaning and I can't determine which it is.  You could mean that US 44 also uses Dutchess Turnpike, or that NY 343 also uses US 44.
 * "It was a major transportation route at the time ..." At what time?
 * "Several landmark locations ..." Why not just "Several landmarks ...?" -- Laser brain  (talk)  03:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've tried to address the issues above. --Polaron | Talk 04:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

More: Great start. I think it's definitely a solid GA as it stands but needs a good copy-edit before the prose will be up to FA standard. A lot of what I pointed out are little fixes that I could have easily made myself, but I wanted to give you examples of what to look for. Look forward to seeing it at FAC in the future. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "Along with the nearby U.S. Route 44, Route 343 used the 19th-century Dutchess Turnpike for its entire length." Still doesn't make sense to me.  Double meaning.
 * What's the status the images in the intersections table issue? I keep seeing pieces of discussion but I haven't really followed it.  If the trend is to remove them, I would recommend doing so before you list it at FAC.
 * I would de-link "1947" in the lead.. serves no purpose.
 * "Route 343 begins at an intersection with NY 82 (formerly also U.S. Route 44)" Unclear.. could mean that NY 82 was formerly also called US 44, or that the intersection used to also be with US 44.
 * "The road heads eastward, intersecting with an old routing of Route 82 ..." The "with" is unneeded.
 * "Route 343 continues through fields, residential homes and farms ..." It goes through homes?  Recommend "past" instead of "through".
 * "Soon afterward, at the intersection with County Route 99, it then turns to the southeast for a distance." The "then" is unneeded.
 * "As it enters Dover Plains, it makes rapid turns in direction." I think either "rapid turns" or "rapid changes in direction".
 * "Routes 343 and 22 head to the north out of Dover Plains through..." "Head north" will suffice. We also have the "through homes" problem again.
 * "Route 81 merges in as the main roads ..." Just "merges", not "merges in".
 * I realize you might have been trying to maximize the prose since it's short, but some of the detail like going past a "small stream" or "pond" seems excessive.
 * "44 and 22 continue to the north, with Route 343 heading eastward towards the state line." The "with -ing" construction is ungrammatical.
 * "The road, known as Amenia Road, heads northeast towards the town center ..." What road?
 * "Stone statues that marked the way to different places including New York City, Fishkill and Boston were put up along the road during the Revolution, helping with suppliers of salt from Boston." This is actually a really interesting fact.. any more info available?  Photos?

database
7 landmarks are located along this route. This database places Rte 343 in Region 8, County 2, Dutchess County, County segment or county order control 011. All are REC 3 They are located at mileposts:

So in the other database table... SriMesh | talk  04:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC) Now to explain the coding in english and decipher coding, and add bibliography to use (used web citation for these files not really a good citation template in this case) ...
 * GISRTE 343 8201 refers to the first are the route number then the region then county then county order control segment.
 * RTE Route number
 * LTR letter if necessary
 * REG region 8
 * CO Dutchess County
 * COC begins at 1 for the county in which the route begins.
 * BMP beginning mile post
 * EMP end mile post
 * LEN length of segment
 * STAHIG State highway number the contract number under which the section was built or original highway number.
 * RESIDE 824 may or may not correspond to county - responsible for maintenance.
 * RD: 1 would be undivided.
 * NUMOFL Number of lanes going in both directions are 2
 * PAVWID Pavement width in feet in both directions.
 * SHOWID Shoulder width on right side in direction of travel 0 means no shoulder only curb
 * SHOTYP Shoulder type
 * 4 stabilized reinforced with asphalt, gravel, sand needing mowing
 * 6 unstablized looose nature needing mowing
 * 5 stabilized reinforced with asphalt, gravel, sand  not needing mowing nothing growing
 * 1 curbed no mowing nothing growing.


 * SURSCO Surface score condition current year (2006) 1 poor; K or 10 excellent
 * MEDWID NA
 * MEDTYP na
 * SURTYP surface type
 * 4 ashpalt concrete / plant mix over 8 inches thickness
 * 2 Bituminous macadem


 * BASTYP base
 * 7 portland concrete cement more than 8 inches thickness
 * 6 portland concrete cement less than 8 inches thickness


 * SUBBAS sub base
 * 2 natural soil graded and drained
 * 5 less than 12" of gravel/stone


 * TERTYP terrain type
 * 1 flat
 * 2 rolling


 * ARETYP area type
 * 1 rural
 * 2 unincorporated community


 * CULTUR culture type
 * 6 agriculture open land
 * 2 residential


 * PERPAR % parking
 * 0 No parking
 * K


 * PASSIG passing sight distance in feet recorded
 * TRK % truck
 * TRAFYR traffic count year


 * DHV design hour volume or vehicle traffic volume
 * AADT Average annual daily traffic volume 2 way
 * FUNCLA functional classes
 * 07 Major collector
 * 02 other principal arterial
 * 06 minor arterial
 * 08 minor collector
 * 16 minor arterial


 * HCC HIghway control code now called jurisdiction HCC no longer used
 * 0 State Highway
 * 9 All duplicate mileage


 * YS year scored
 * YLW year las work
 * ACCON access control NA
 * ARC Adjusted rating capacity
 * VC volume capacity ratio
 * NATHIG National Highway System NHS principal arterial
 * 9 NYS parks, recreation, preserve
 * 0 general NHS


 * S81...S96 and S97....S05 yearly surface rating conditions 1 poor 10 or K is excellent
 * REFMAR Reference Marker
 * TANTRU Tandem truck designation NA
 * BLK1
 * TRKYR
 * WORKTYP Work type maintenance
 * 1 1-1/2 inches of hot ashpalt overlay
 * 7 cold in place recycling with 2 or more coarse overlay


 * OLAP route overlaps
 * + where in fact the route overlaps


 * BLK2
 * 3


 * PAVTYP pavement type
 * A flexible asphalt
 * O overlay is ashphalt put on a highway once concrete

Thank you very much for this. Some of this information should definitely be added to the article. At a minimum, this database would be a good reference for some of the information already in the article. The most useful ones, I think, are the "terrain type", "area type", and "culture type" information. Some of the pavement and shoulder information is probably too esoteric for a general purpose encyclopedia since, in this particular case, there is nothing to make it stand out from other similar surface roads. For other routes with unusual pavement or shoulder characteristics, such information should be included. Other useful stuff for general inclusiion is functional classification, volume to capacity ratio, truck %, number of lanes, and highway control code (jurisdiction). The database would definitely be useful to the New York State Routes project as a whole. Is there a way we can get a copy of this from you? --Polaron | Talk 14:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, can send it via a number of ways, will try to add content to other articles as well. The above explanation of the codes is a very short explanation, as there are two books to explain the database and how roads there are engineered, one is 84 pages long.SriMesh |  talk  03:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New York State Route 343. 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/20121003024523/https://www.dot.ny.gov/news/traveler-advisories/2006/2008-04-071 to https://www.dot.ny.gov/news/traveler-advisories/2006/2008-04-071
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6aJzyxuKC?url=http://www.ct.gov/dot/LIB/dot/Documents/dpolicy/hwylog/hwylog.pdf to http://www.ct.gov/dot/LIB/dot/Documents/dpolicy/hwylog/hwylog.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 4 May 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move to State Route 343 (New York−Connecticut). Consensus seems to be clear that this compromise solution is preferable. Cúchullain t/ c 19:17, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

New York State Route 343 → New York State Route 343 and Connecticut Route 343 – Neither route is more notable than the other. This should have been fixed a long time ago.  Cards84664  (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

This is a case of Interstate 110 and State Route 110 (California). Both are equally notable.  Cards84664  (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Another option for naming in this sort of case can be seen at Route 10A (Vermont–New Hampshire). Dekimasu よ! 19:07, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose—since the New York highway is an order of magnitude longer, they don't need to be given equal billing in the title. Additionally,, you could have waited until the article was no longer the TFA to propose the move; there's nothing that waiting a few more hours would have lost this discussion, but now we have a big warning message on an article prominently linked from the Main Page.  Imzadi 1979  →   19:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * What's the cutoff length for notability? If there isn't a specified mileage, dosen't that mean SR 110 should be removed from the I-110 infobox header?  Cards84664  (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * the California situation is a sui generis situation; legally all of I-110 in California is SR 110 because California law classifies all highways as a state route of that number. This isn't a notability situation; if it were, we'd be talking about whether or not CT Route 343 would even have an article/redirect. CT Route 343 is notable, so it has an article. In this case, it's been merged into this article. Since the NY highway is an order of magnitude longer, 18.45 mi vs. 1.5 mi, then I don't think we need to consider equal billing in the page title. If we did, the proposed title is the wrong way to do it according our standard practices, and has the "correct" suggestion instead.  Imzadi 1979   →   15:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per User:Imzadi1979 (and little WP:UGH). If there is really a problem, User:Dekimasu's suggestion looks nicer.  (I don't like the I-110 title either BTW.)  —  AjaxSmack  00:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Imzadi. The New York section is much longer than Connecticut's, therefore more notable. A redirect from Connecticut Route 343 is good enough. Nova Crystallis  (Talk)  00:04, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * OpposeNon would propose such a naming if both routes had different numbers. These are different objects which should be descript in different articles. (I also consider Interstate 110 and State Route 110 (California) as nonsense.) --Matthiasb (talk) 17:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Opposed as currently proposed. The proposed title for NY/CT 343 is unwieldy. It is different from the I-110 title (which by the way is not the subject of this RM, so all these "I Don't Like It" arguments above aren't relevant to the final outcome). I-110 is in one state, and in that case, the state route and interstate are equally notable. Not so with NY/CT 343. Right now the current proposed title gives the CT side equal emphasis with the much longer, and more notable, NY side. I think Dekimasu's option is better and this article should be called State Route 343 (New York−Connecticut). epicgenius (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a great way of putting it, so I'll go with this one.  Cards84664  (talk) 16:17, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose; CT 343 is really just a side route, basically, that gets you to New York from Sharon. It really plays no real role in Connecticut's state highway network other than that. Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Support State Route 343 (New York−Connecticut) instead per CONSISTENCY and per Epicgenius. ToThAc (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Support State Route 343 (New York−Connecticut) per my comments above. Dekimasu よ! 02:41, 11 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.