Talk:Washington State Route 20

Newspaper clipping
I have a newspaper clipping from the day the North Cascade Highway was completed. I plan on adding to the history section, along with former routing of 20, and the former names of the different sections. I will take a while, but be well worth it. TEG 08:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


 * That sounds great - as long as you have the day, date, newspaper name, article author - the clipping should be a valid reference. I look forward to seeing what you can do here. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 03:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion - WA 20 Spur

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was Merge. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Washington State Route 20 Spur is a three paragraph article about a 7.78 mile spur of this road. --Rschen7754 (T C) 09:32, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree - should be merged. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - This is a short bannered route that would fit better with the article on its parent route. ---Dough4872 16:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge discussion - WA 213

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was no consensus. There's no clear consensus here, and the last comment was made nine months ago. Closing as a stale merge. –  T M F 18:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Washington State Route 213 is a 0.35 mile route. This was formerly a spur of SR 20, and still is numerically related, making this an ideal target. --Rschen7754 (T C) 09:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Ibid. I totally agree it should be merged. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral - While the history of being a spur of SR 20 makes it a good candidate to be merged, it has its own individual number which could keep it independent. ---Dough4872 16:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Although once SR 20 Spur, SR 213 is now an independent route that is slated to continue (as defined by the RCW) to continue and extend towards Okanogan, making it soon longer than SR 41 in Newport and other routes with legible articles. – ĈĠ, Super Sounders Fan  (help line|§|sign here) 22:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The route definitions don't necessarily mean the road will be built. Look at California... --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Content removed from Washington State Route 113
Possible merge material – Kacie Jane (talk) 23:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Route description
The original route of SR 113, used between 1964 and 1973, extended 16.29 mi from US 101 in Discovery Bay to what was SR 525 (now SR 20) south of Coupeville. The highway became SR 20 in 1973, during the western extension from Fredonia to Discovery Bay. The roadway began at US 101 in Discovery Bay, located southwest of Port Townsend in Jefferson County. From US 101, the road followed the shoreline of Discovery Bay past the Jefferson County International Airport and Airport Cutoff Road (now SR 19) into Port Townsend. Within the city, SR 113 became Sims Way and Water Street before using the Port Townsend–Keystone Ferry operated by Washington State Ferries into Island County. After leaving the ferry, the highway entered Fort Casey State Park and Ebey's Landing National Historical Reserve before turning north and east to end at SR 525 south of Coupeville. In 1970, the roadway had an estimated daily average of 3,150 motorists at Old Fort Townsend Road near Port Townsend, making it the busiest segment of SR 113's former route; the busiest segment moved south to the Airport Cutoff Road (SR 19) intersection, with an estimated daily average of 18,000 motorists in 2007.

History


From 1964 until 1973, SR 113 used a Discovery Bay–Coupeville route that originated as the Port Townsend branch of Primary State Highway 9 (PSH 9 PT) and a branch of Secondary State Highway 1D (SSH 1D) in 1937, during the creation of the Primary and secondary highways. In 1964, these two highways became SR 113, as part of a new numbering system created by the Washington State Legislature and the Washington State Department of Transportation. When SR 20 was extended west from Fredonia in 1973, SR 113 was decommissioned. The Port Townsend–Keystone ferry wasn't technically part of SR 20 until 1994, when all of the Washington State Ferries routes were added to the state highway system.

Recent Revert
I have reverted this edit, which was from a IP sock puppet of who was banned by the community for one year, to be followed by an indefinite block. The original insertion is here. As the edit is referenced and not vandalism, users should discuss whether it be re-inserted by an editor that is not a sock. Banned editors are not allowed to edit, even if the edits are good: but others can restore good edits that were made by an editor before their ban. Thank you. Doc  talk  00:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Unincorperated territory
can you cite the specific passage in Manual of Style/Road junction lists that prohibits Kettle Falls, an incorporated city in Stevens county, or Pine Grove, a Census designated community in Ferry county from being in the table. As I read it its ONLY excluding places that are out in the middle of unincorporated county/state land outside of any linkable place, that is not the case with either Kettle Falls or Pine Grove.-- Kev min  § 14:52, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * "If the location is indeterminable, or if the junction lies in unincorporated territory, this should be left blank." A CDP is, by definition, unincorporated and its boundaries and name can change every 10 years. According to WSDOT's city limits map, the first US 395 junction is way outside of Kettle Falls' city limit, so it should be left blank; SR 25's is fine, but a borderline case because it is not fully within city limits.  Sounder Bruce  16:05, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Again though, that is not how I read the instructions at RJL, which I read as don't try to add a place that does not exist at all, eg the junction of SR20 and Old Kettle Falls Road, which is outside of any place. Pine Grove is an established community and the cited place for the junction of 20 and 21 north, and has an article already that it linkable in the table.-- Kev  min  § 16:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So does Monroe North, a made-up name for a place that doesn't consider itself to be a contiguous community. Pine Grove lacks any WSDOT signage on the highway (either a welcome sign or a mention as a control destination), and is not mentioned at all in the State Highway Log, which is the primary reference for the table. Since it cannot be verified as a community on the highway, it should not be included.  Sounder Bruce  16:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Recent revert 2
, you made a revert with the edit summary "5 is a small number" which suggests you wanted to revert "SR 20 is one of five State Routes" to "SR 20 is one of only five State Routes" but: a) your revert actually undid two edits, one of which is unexplainedb) your edit summary is too terse to provide any context. We don't call every instance of the number 5 small. I made the edit because the article provides no justification for deviating for our usual practice of neutral language. Is the number of closed roads unusually small and/or smaller than for other states? If so, provide this context in the article to justify the characterization of the number as "only" 5.{{pb}{{pb}Thx CapnZapp (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The use of "only" is a neutral observation given that there are only 5 of 175 state routes (or 5 of 196 state-maintained highways) that have this qualifier. That's 3% when rounded up. An obviously small figure that does not require outside explanation. The "unexplained" revert is simply to keep the article from running afoul of verifiability guidelines, as the length is not specified in the source and frankly isn't important to note.  Sounder Bruce  22:32, 31 August 2023 (UTC)