Talk:U.S. Route 41 in Florida

Needed formatting fixes
I assessed the article at Start-Class even though it does have all of the Big Three sections because the history is lacking, and there are missing junctions. Please add all of the junctions from the southern terminus in Miami north to Tampa to the article. As for the history, there is obviously a lot more than can be written about this highway. As for the RD, it's pushing being too long. I'd summarize it just to cut some extraneous details out, and break up some of the really long paragraphs into more manageable chunks.

One last thing, but there are errors with hyphens, dashes and slashes in the article. "US 41-SR 40" should have a slash (US 41/SR 40) if the two highways are concurrent, and a dash if they're intersecting (as in the US 41–SR 40 interchange). There are also several places where links to other highways should be piped to shorten the name to just the abbreviation.  Imzadi 1979  →   19:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * And I thought I was missing something. Oh, well. It still had to be writen. In the meantime, I've got an idea of my own for this article. DanTD (talk) 21:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Regarding the junctions between Miami and Tampa, I thought the Tamiami Trail article and a possible extra hatnote to that would've sufficed. I take it you won't mind if I swipe it from there and add it to this. DanTD (talk) 22:28, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Precision in junction list
I'm confused as to why there are three different levels of precision. I'm wondering if whoever added them dropped trailing zeroes that should be present. For example, if the FDOT source says that the first junction is at "0.620" miles, the editor used "0.62" instead. Another thought is that FDOT may be dropping zeroes, which is something that MDOT does, even though they are measuring to three decimal places of precision. In any case, an effort should be made to use a consistent level of precision, even if that means padding with trailing zeros.  Imzadi 1979  →   00:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Because an interchange or bridge is bigger than a point. --NE2 02:49, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I understand that, and where necessary, we use mile and mile2 so that a range can be displayed, à la "0.609–0.624" etc. based on what the source gives for the boundaries of that range. We should use a consistent level of precision based on the source information though.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That to me is overprecision. It may be useful on a long bridge, but it really doesn't matter at exactly what mileage an interchange begins or ends. (Personally I'd go for two decimal points on everything (5 feet is too precise for me), but with the source to 3, it's a lot easier to correct errors/adjust for realignments when you don't have to recalculate from the source.) --NE2 03:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * PS: how would you get the mileage to 3 decimal places for this interchange with Main and First? The SLD has the following locations (measured from the county line):
 * 23.421 northbound offramp
 * 23.492 south end of northbound bridge
 * 23.539 southbound intersection with MLK/Main/McGregor
 * 23.582 southbound intersection with Carson; north end of northbound bridge
 * 23.620 southbound offramp to First
 * 23.643 northbound onramp
 * 23.647 south end of Caloosahatchee bridge
 * 24.586 north end of Caloosahatchee bridge
 * The interchange clearly includes the First Street crossing, which is north of 23.647. But it just as clearly does not stretch north to 24.586. --NE2 03:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Expanding the history
For quite a while I've been hiding a sentence in the history section regarding an old roadside attraction along US 41 near Brooksville, that I found out about in more recent times;

During the 1950s a pre-Disney tourist trap was established south of Brooksville called "Negroland," which claimed to show life in African-American rural communities, but in reality contained black residents dressing and acting in grotesque stereotypes as a means of entertaining white tourists.

I know it's not that much of an expansion, and it might stir up some controversy, but at least it's something. -User:DanTD (talk) 12:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * UPDATE I just found out what it was. It was the "Lewis Plantation & Turpentine Still," and it was just south of Hernando CR 570. I don't know if it belongs in the article, but it was an attraction along US 41 in Brooksville. -User:DanTD (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Tamiami Trail
This is the same road, and merging the two together would beef up the History section of US 41 and eliminate the redundancy between articles.  Imzadi 1979  →   07:21, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. There's no redundancy unless you choose to make one. The Tamiami Trail was a major undertaking with a lot of history. --NE2 08:22, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Aside from the reason mentioned by NE2, The Tamiami Trial also includes two bannered routes of US 41. -User:DanTD (talk) 11:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. If the Tamiami Trail article were merged in, the history section would have to be pared back per WP:UNDUE. Tamiami Trail was only 265 miles versus the 479 miles of US 41 now.  A good summary of the Tamiami Trail article should be sufficient on the US 41 article. –Fredddie™ 21:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Let me state for the record I understand User:Imzadi1979's desire to beef up the history section, but I believe there are other segments we can focus on besides the Tamiami Trail. A quick search through the commons gallery can reveal an old bridge over the Alapaha River along US 41. We can add some material based partially on that. I'm not entirely certain of where else we can look, but there's always got to be something we can dig up. -User:DanTD (talk) 04:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC)