User talk:Morriswa/Archives/2012/December

Category:Interstate 676
Category:Interstate 676, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 678
Category:Interstate 678, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 11
Category:Interstate 11, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 12
Category:Interstate 12, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 16
Category:Interstate 16, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:18, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 17
Category:Interstate 17, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:18, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 82
Category:Interstate 82, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Interstate 89
Category:Interstate 89, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Dough 48  72  00:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 20:19, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Categorization
Regarding —I believe (not 100% certain) that this is out of the scope of the category—Cat:US 62 should only contain the US 62 article, and directly related articles, i.e., the state detail articles. You might want to get comments at WT:USRD on this issue. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 12:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Categories
Please do not add categories that are tangentially related to a route, such as Category:U.S. Route 9 to Pennsylvania Route 145, Pennsylvania Route 248, and Pennsylvania Route 873 and Category:U.S. Route 22 to Pennsylvania Route 248. The category for a U.S. highway should only be used for subjects related to the main article (not its spurs) along with the main articles of its spurs. For instance, the US 9 category can include U.S. Route 209 and Pennsylvania Route 309 along with roads or subjects related to US 9, but not roads or subjects related to the spurs such as US 209 and the former US 309.  Dough 48  72  22:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you explain exactly what you mean by your "warning"? Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 23:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The categories you added to those articles are not relevant and therefore should not be included. For instance, while PA 873 may have been a former alignment of US 309, it is not related to US 9 itself and therefore should not be included in the US 9 category.  Dough 48  72  02:14, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. I understood that. However there isn't a Category:U.S. Route 209 or Category:U.S. Route 309, yet, so I just went up to the parent. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Be BOLD and create the categories! –Fredddie™ 16:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright, Flaming Gorge-Uintas Scenic Byway, though it has everything to do with U.S. Route 191, does not belong in Category:U.S. Route 91 because US 91 and US 191 aren't the same highway. US 91 isn't even mentioned in the article at all. – TC N7  JM  02:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Morriswa, be advised that this edit appears to be an inappropriate use of the rollback function. Edit warring, even tepid ones like that, could cause you to lose the function. –Fredddie™ 16:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see Rollback for the proper uses of rollback; in short, vandalism only. --Rschen7754 17:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you're seeing something I'm not...what does Maryland Route 179 have to do with Category: U.S. Route 50 and Category: U.S. Route 301? All I'm seeing is that they intersect each other and that there's something in the history about MD 179 not originally intersecting US 50. – TC N7  JM  20:56, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If I read the page correctly, I saw that US 50/301 use a roadway that used to be part of Maryland 179. Also, shouldn't roads that use former alignments of another road be added to the category for that road? Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Still not seeing it. Could you point it out? Sorry if this is obvious or something, I'm just not seeing it. – TC N7  JM  01:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Part of MD 179 followed a similar path to a portion of modern US 50 and US 301. We do not know for sure whether they used the same exact road or a new roadway was built. Even if the same roadway was used, does that mean the US 50 and US 301 categories should be added to MD 179? I think not. The US 50, US 301, and similar categories are great for articles that are clearly connected, like state-detail articles and tributaries. They are inappropriate for articles only tangentially related. I wish you would stop adding these categories to tangentially related articles and, even worse, revert/rollback edits that remove the categories.  V C  02:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Final warning regarding rollback
is not an appropriate use of the rollback tool. Seeing as you've done it immediately after you've been warned about it, this is your final warning. The next time I see this, your rollback privileges will be removed. --Rschen7754 00:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoa! Hold up, dude. I didn't even see your warning before this post. So, just to be sure I understand, the rollback tool/function is only supposed to be used for reverting vandalism? Sometimes, on my watchlist, I don't see the "undo" function link. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 00:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Rollback is not a substitute for undo. Please read Rollback, which you were supposed to have read when you requested rollback in January 2012. --Rschen7754 00:20, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I quickly perused that page. However, I would like to be clear: Don't both rollback and undo perform the same function? I know that rollback is only to be used in certain instances, but I was just wondering if they perform the same task. I also want to let everyone know that I am not trying to cause any problems. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 00:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Rollback does not leave an edit summary that you can customize. It's thus only used for reverting vandalism, and very limited exceptions. Using it to edit war is grounds for removal of the right. --Rschen7754 00:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

You may also want to consult with WT:USRD on your use of categories, as I recommended above. I believe you are interpreting the categories to be much broader than most people would prefer, thus why you're getting reverted. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 02:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

What the heck?
is completely off base. --Rschen7754 05:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The article said that CA 78 ran along the future alignment of US 95, or something like that. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 05:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't. That's a FA and I wrote the article myself. --Rschen7754 05:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)