Talk:U.S. Route 80 in Arizona

Updating Sources
I am currently in the middle of replacing self published or unreliable source material with more reliable sourcing to improve the quality of this article. As of this post, at least half of the inferior sources have been replaced with better ones. -MatthewAnderson707 (talk) 00:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Reassessment
There was a request to reassess this article for WP:USRD. After looking through the article, the B-Class assessment is accurate. If anything, the article should be reassessed higher, but that can't be done through the standard assessment/reassessment processes. To promote it to the next class would require a Good Article Nomination and evaluation through that process.  Imzadi 1979  →   15:53, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Avenues of improvement
I went through last night to clean up redundancy in the citations.
 * Newspapers are normally indexed in libraries by date. Volume and issue numbers aren't typically given for a newspaper citation. Editions aren't given unless there are multiple editions for the same date. The day of the week for publication is irrelevant in most cases.
 * State names in locations aren't needed if they're already a part of publisher's name, or if the city is well known.
 * City locations are only needed for newspaper citations if they're not a part of the paper's name.
 * Newspaper articles contain a dateline at the top that indicates the location from which a story is filed. This location is not used as a part of the citation.

Going forward, the RD looks pretty good. The History section feels a bit unwieldy though. Some of the subsections there are a bit long from an organizational standpoint. It might help to make the content more digestible just to break the text into more subsections.

One thing to note: typically we use the last alignment of a highway before decommissioning as the basis for the RD and the junction lists.  Imzadi 1979  →   16:33, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the tips and suggestions on better sourcing. I Will most certainly work to improve this in the future. And I agree. The history section could be better organized and improved in areas. My hope is to eventually eliminate the Mule Pass section by making it its own article where such heavy details would make more sense. I also plan to simplify other overly complex or wordy areas. In the case of other routes, I can perfectly understand the reasoning behind last designated routes. US 80 in California and Arizona however seems to pose a unique situation similar to Route 66. Since former US 80 is well signed and designated historic routes, using a routing from when the highway's popularity was it at its peak I feel better supplements the Historic Route sections. In the case of Arizona, the early 1950's appears to be the general time frame Arizona is aiming for preserving with the highway. The State Transportation Board has even gone on record to state the time frame the designation is aiming to focus on is 1926 to 1955. The 1951 route displays the intended and designated historic route, helpung to give those wondering why US 80 has such a designation a good answer. If US 80 was still commissioned in both states, you could count on me putting the active route above all else. That said, I'm willing to update New Mexico's section of the route to when the state last recognized it as an active highway in 1988, if I can ever find the resources. I know that after the 1988 renumbering, NMDOT no longer considered US 80 active, similar to the situation with US 85, despite it being recognized within New Mexico by AASHTO until 1989 to 1991. Only question is where can I find reputable sources to back that up? Either way, I plan on continuing tk improve the quality of this article once I'm done overhauling the history section of US 70 in Arizona. Cheers! -MatthewAnderson707 (talk|sandbox) 19:52, 27 July 2019 (UTC)