Talk:U.S. Route 285 in Texas

Duplication?
Hi there Is this article essentially a duplicate of U.S. Route 285? Or at least could the Texas section in the main article be expanded with the new content you have provided? Is there significant precedent elsewhere for reading an article such as this? Jamesbushell.au (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * yes, there is significant precedent already. We have a rough "three-state rule" in place to decide when an Interstate or U.S. Highway gets state-level sub articles. U.S. Route 141 exists in only two states, so it doesn't have separate articles, but because US 41 runs through eight states, U.S. Route 41 in Michigan exists. Yes, there are a few cases where we've opted not to create the separate articles, like U.S. Route 8, but based on the overall length of US 285 and how the individual states' lengths compare, there would appear to be ample expected detail that would warrant separate articles on each state. Even if this shouldn't have a separate article, the article title at least needs to exist as a redirect so that jct doesn't produce a redlink when   is used in articles.
 * I would suggest that you start adding the missing History section and work on expanding this. The cited source in the article would give you the basic content of that missing section in a single writing session. At 170 miles, I would expect a bit more content here in the RD as well. The gut reaction that this article is too short to stand alone is very understandable, and your current practice at splitting articles out without thoughts of expansion doesn't disabuse others of the notion that this may need to be merged.  Imzadi 1979   →   23:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * reping.  Imzadi 1979  →   23:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)