User talk:MuzikMachine

Welcome!
Hello, MuzikMachine, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Alberta Highway 13 has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy Typically such edits are removed, but I have copyedited them and provided a source on your behalf. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Hwy43 (talk) 06:11, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced additions at List of Alberta provincial highways
Further the the above notice, are you able to swing back to List of Alberta provincial highways to add sources that support the Hwy 1A, 1B, 2A and 14 additions you contributed? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Alberta Highway 9
 * added a link pointing to Wheatland County


 * Crowchild Trail
 * added a link pointing to Memorial Drive

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Improper page move
I have reverted your WP:CUTPASTE of Yellowhead Trail (Edmonton) to Yellowhead Trail. This is not the appropriate way to move a page, because it does not preserve the editing history that is required by Wikipedia's license agreement. I have tagged the target page for deletion so that an admin can complete the move the right way. Thanks. — swpb T 15:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited British Columbia Highway 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glacier National Park. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

WP:RJL
I know it takes a lot of time adding junctions to the lists so I thought I'd try to save you some: WP:RJL is pretty clear in the matter - crossing that are just flyovers with no highway access should not be included in the lists. There's still some of them in various articles but as I come across them they will be removed. Thanks for updating the mileage on Deerfoot. -- Ace fitt 00:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I saw flyovers on some of the old railway-style schematic drawings so that's why I included them.  I deleted the flyovers on Whitemud Drive. Cheers! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 02:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Yellowhead Highway
There's no precedent for a Route list section at WikiProject Canada Roads/Structure, just an FYI. There's also nothing saying the infobox can't be done properly and include major junctions along the route as is done at WP:USRD, see Interstate 90. I'm not removing the Route list section though it's quite clearly intended for stuff like List of state routes in Tennessee, but we'll call it even and leave the junctions in the infobox. -- Acefitt 01:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Regarding the Infobox, I noticed that main interstate pages like Interstate 90 use the state instead of the city under the location tab, with cites (or counties) being used on the respective state pages like Interstate 90 in Washington.  I'm wondering if pages like the Yellowhead Highway and Trans-Canada Highway should list the provinces on the location, with provincial highway pages like Alberta Highway 16, etc listing the cities.  Thoughts? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 17:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd love to do it like that, but we can't cause the other guys won't budge on their ownership of that template. Some idiot decided that we should do cities instead of provinces, and include non-notable things like villages, and that's the way it has to stay. -- Acefitt 20:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I see you're running away with Routelist now, but here's what we have to do. We can do the table pretty much as is, but just use standard wikitable syntax and not Routelist for a couple of reasons: 1) you are using it to describe the components of a route and not different routes, therefore we need to eliminate the sortable columns. 2) The "formed" and "removed" columns are a not necessary and therefore a huge waste of space. 3) the table is not rendering correctly at certain resolutions. I'm switching over Yellowhead Highway and we'll go from there. -- Acefitt 00:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's fine. The wikitable syntax is better as it can be customized. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 03:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge submissions
The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada will soon be reaching its first-anniversary. Please consider submitting any Canada-related articles you have created or improved since November 2016. Please try to ensure that all entries are sourced with formatted citations and no unsourced claims.

You may submit articles using this link for convenience. Thank-you, and please spread the word to those you know who might be interested in joining this effort to improve the quality of Canada-related articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Module changes
We're not even having a discussion about this before you made the executive decision to revert the WP:UCRN changes in the infoboxes? -- Acefitt 21:10, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you have a link to the discussion when it was originally changed? Outside of links to Queen Elizabeth Way (unsigned ON 451), most infoxboxes use route numbers as opposed to abbreviated names. - MuzikMachine (talk) 19:38, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, there was a discussion... specifically related to SPF which we agreed that 99% of the population does not know is named Highway 100, is not signed anywhere as Highway 100, and is a road which AT in documents lists as "SPF" in place of 100. This is obviously an anomaly and other infoboxes therefore do not set precedent. -- Acefitt 22:54, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough re: SPF, that's one reason why I blanked out the route shield. What about Stoney Trail and Anthony Henday Drive? Standard practice would have Hwy 201 & Hwy 216 respectively in the infoxbox links, not shortened names. I feel those should be reverted. MuzikMachine (talk) 04:41, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I will restore those and leave SPF. -- Acefitt 20:39, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Edmonton neighbourhoods
I see that you recently edited Template:Edmonton neighbourhoods. Would you care to weigh in at Template talk:Edmonton neighbourhoods? 117Avenue (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:British Columbia Yellowhead Highway.png
Thanks for uploading File:British Columbia Yellowhead Highway.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Southern Yellowhead highway
Hello, Thanks for your help with the formatting on List of British Columbia provincial highways page. I just wanted to point out that on BC-5, the Yellowhead shield is only used SOUTH of Kamloops. The standard BC shield is used NORTH of there, on the Coquihalla Highway. I do mean this with all due respect, and I only do this to alleviate the misconception. Fhsig13 (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, it was like that when the Coquihalla opened but changed a number of years ago (2000s?) and the Yellowhead shield is currently used on the entire route; see Google Streetview at Hope, Merritt, and Kamloops. I've driven the Coquihalla a number of times and haven't seen a standard BC-5 shield for a very long time, with the possible exception of the odd remnant. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 05:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Be that as it may, since the signage is still present, plus the article for BC Highway 5 describes it as such, as well as the BC Government website, I suggest we leave both signs on the page(s). Let me know what you think. Fhsig13 (talk) 07:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Has BC changed its signage convention for the Coquihalla Highway? It was BC-5 from 1986 - c. 2000, then the signage was changed to YH-5. IMO, it's no different than the Crowsnest Highway where it's all signed with the Crowsnest marker. I'll concede that the "Southern Yellowhead Highway" name applies to Kamloops-TCH 16. If non-free copyright issues weren't an issue, personally I would apply the Yellowhead shield to road junctions and retire the BC-5 shield, but that's a different story. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I think they may have changed the signage convention, yes, given that the signs can be found on the highway, however, those could also be leftovers from 1986-c. 2000, so we'll have to check more into that. Also, it looks like the no-free copyright matter has taken a backseat for now, as Marchjuly has stopped pushing the matter since I added the free-use rationales to the image descriptions, so I don't think it's anything of major concern from here on out. Fhsig13 (talk) 20:26, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I'm trying to figure out a way to get the YH-5 shield for Template:Jct which is used any various lists. At this point, I think my options are obtaining permission from the BCMoT or creating a vector of some sort (maybe using PD clip art?); it would only need to be acceptable for approx 20px, though I don't know what copyright ramifications exists. Any thoughts? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 21:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The version that exists should work alright, so long as you add corresponding free-use rationales on it's description page. Fhsig13 (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I’d be cautious about just assuming that added a rationale to a file’s page is in and of itself a specific justification for non-free use as explained per WP:JUSTONE. As for the files being discussed at FFD, you’ve provided no clarification as to why the use of those file is “enormously significantly” to that list article and the rationale you added were basically copied-and-pasted ones that also do not address the particular ways the files are being used. As I explained, this type of usage is almost never allowed, so the burden is upon you per WP:NFCCE to provide not only a separate, specific rationale, but a valid rationale. There’s been no need for a further comment at FFD about that because you haven’t really addressed the relevant NFLISTS issues.


 * You also haven’t addressed how using a copyrighted image and adding the number 16 to it suddenly makes the copyright status of original imagery void. If your new version is a derivative work of a copyrighted image, then permission is needed from both copyright holders for it to be accepted by Commons. If you did create a freely equivalent for one Yellowhead sign, then someone else can do the same for the other in the same manner and a non-free is not needed for any Yellowroad sign. — Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Redcoat sign
Hi MuzikMachine. Not sure if you were aware of File:RedCoatTrail.png when you upload a non-free version of essentially the same logo as File:Red Coat Trail highway shield.png. Their are some minor color difference between the Commons version and the non-free, but the only copyrightable element is the Redcoat imagery and that appears identical or at least close enough to make WP:NFCC a concern. At the same time, it might mean that your version might also be covered under the same OTRS permission email; however, that's somehting I'm totally sure about so I will ask a Commons admin/OTRS volunteer about it. — Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Marchjuly, I think File:RedCoatTrail.png photograph of a highway shield along the route that was touched up. I attempted to upload it for the Red Coat Trail article but it was removed as it was considered a lower quality image. The used to be a higher quality, non-free version, but I think it was deleted. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 17:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand that there are slight differences bewtween the two, but the Commons file might be deemed sufficient enough for primary identification purposes to preclude any uploading of any non-free files of the sign. WP:NFCC#1 require that when a free equivalent image can be used for the same encyclopedic purpose, then it should be used. It doesn't have to be exactly the same image or exactly same quality; it just has to be good enough to provide the same encyclopedic information.
 * It's also possible that the OTRS permission of the photo can be extended to also apply to other versions of the sign since the only copyrightable element in both the photo and your version is the Redcoat imagery. The shield outline and text are typically things considered utilitarian or otherwise not eligible for copyright protection, which means they can easily be recreated with a free version of the Redcoat added to them. When I say "easily", I mean by someone with experience in image creation like you typically find at WP:GL or c:COM:GL. It might also even be possible for someone to clean up the Commons' file to make look better, or find a higher resolution version of the photo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MOMs Way hwy.png
Thanks for uploading File:MOMs Way hwy.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Re:Alberta shields
I use Inkscape for my SVG needs. I wrote up a tutorial on how to make shields a few years ago located at WikiProject U.S. Roads/Shields task force/Tutorial. Additionally, you're more than welcome to use WikiProject U.S. Roads/Shields task force/Requests if you're not comfortable doing it yourself. As far as the copyright status goes, personally, I think we're OK since the designs are too simple for U.S. copyright laws, but I believe the Alberta wordmark is trademarked. It might behoove us to email someone at the Queen's Printer (and equivalent office in each province) for clarification and then forward that on to OTRS. If worse comes to worst, we move the files off of Commons and go from there. I found some guide-sign designs which could be used for that don't include the Alberta wordmark and are way too simple for copyright protection. ( and ) –Fredddie™ 01:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * PS: let's keep the conversation here. –Fredddie™

I also have goal of trying to get the BC 5 Yellowhead shield to go on the template; however, there are copyright issues. I'm guessing the best course of action would be e-mailing the BC Queen's Printer? Cheers! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 19:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply and the links. I was referring to the old Secondary route without the workmark, but as you noted it is a pretty simple design. If I wanted a template created, I just submit a request on WikiProject U.S. Roads/Shields task force/Requests?
 * If you can make sure they're free, we can make the shields. –Fredddie™ 00:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I made a blank for the pre-2000 Secondary shield, AB-secondary highway (1970s).svg (based on & ). If it looks good, I can start adding numbers on applicable routes.

Orphaned non-free image File:British Columbia Highway 16.svg
Thanks for uploading File:British Columbia Highway 16.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Highways in Quebec
I saw your comment on the articles needing translation into English about using Google Translate. If you need someone to check the accuracy of the translation, I could probably help. I'm not a native French speaker, but I was a French Immersion student for several years. Clovermoss (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for offering! MuzikMachine (talk) 17:34, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'll try to take a look at it. I'm a relatively new editor, but I've gotten links at the Teahouse before about translation and whatnot that I can reference if I have any difficulties. I'll leave a note on the discussion page too about my edits. Clovermoss (talk) 20:06, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I've taken a look at the French Wikipedia article and have double and triple referenced some things in my dictionary for some words that could have different meanings based on context. I'm not completely finished with the translation, but there has been some significant changes from Google Translate, although a good portion of the translated text is quite accurate overall. I have tried to explain the thought process behind my edits on the talk page for the article as I've been going through it. Clovermoss (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

expert
Do you know how to improve on Boundary Road (Vancouver), especially when one editor is hellbent on deletion and removes big chunks of it then nominates it for AFD? Aerostar3 (talk) 05:45, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you have any insights into the history of Boundary Road? Specifically, any cancelled expansion plans or possible bridge connections into Richmond and beyond? Another idea would be to expand the description and talk about neighbourhoods and notable landmarks. A couple ones I expanded were 97/98/101 Avenue, Edmonton, John Laurie/McKnight Boulevard, and 36 Street E/Métis Trail. Any way to have the article meet WP:NOTE or WP:STREETS? If I get a chance I could do up a Major intersections list.-- MuzikMachine (talk) 17:20, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Just a heads up, Aerostar3 was banned for hounding and harassment. Boundary is definitely not worth trying to save, as it really isn't a major arterial or even notable beyond being on the edge of Vancouver and Burnaby.  Sounder Bruce  02:07, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I would ask that maybe deleting Boundary Road be reconsidered, it is a major arterial as identified by Translink, though building a case for it being notable might be tricky. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 02:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC) (Edit: Nevermind, I read the deletion talk page and the article/subject really doesn't have anything of note.)
 * I don't think that arterial designations would fly under WP:GNG and can be fairly arbitrary on the part of various government entities. When I stumbled across the (somewhat recent) Vancouver articles, I was pretty shocked to see how poor they were and couldn't see much chance of them developing into anything worthwhile, especially given the lack of enthusiasm there is for local streets at AfD.  Sounder Bruce  02:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Vancouver has an overall lack of enthusiasm for most things streets or cars...but that's another topic for another day. :) -- MuzikMachine (talk) 03:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Mount Edward Road
Hi there! Thanks for your edits on PEI highway articles. I think I noticed a few times now that you've referred to a "Mount Edwards Road" in Charlottetown, but the road is "Mount Edward Road" (no S in Edward). If I'm mistaken and that wasn't you then I apologize, I just thought I'd mention it since I fixed it a couple times. Cheers! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC) Whoops, my bad. I must have done a quick glance at the map and then used copy/paste. Thanks for letting me know. Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge third anniversary
The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada is approaching its third-anniversary. Please consider submitting any Canada-related articles you have created or improved since November 2016. Please try to ensure that all entries are sourced with formatted citations and have no unsourced claims.

You may use the above button to submit entries, or bookmark this link for convenience. For more information, please see WP:CAN10K. Thank-you, and please spread the word to those you know who might be interested in joining this effort to improve the quality of Canada-related articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 22:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New Brunswick Route 17, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint John River ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/New_Brunswick_Route_17 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/New_Brunswick_Route_17?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:33, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

General Service Area
Hi, I'm  Aloha27  talk  21:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC). I noticed you added the category | General Service Areas to the article Brule, Nova Scotia. We no longer use the category in favour of community. Thank you.  Aloha27  talk  21:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King George Boulevard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SkyTrain.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:58, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British Columbia Highway 99A, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SkyTrain.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

US 191 MT
I had a junction list for US 191 in my sandbox forever, I was just wondering if you used it at all. I'm not looking for credit or anything, but now that there's an article I can get rid of it.

Anyway, there's a 2019 Montana Road Log! https://www.mdt.mt.gov/publications/docs/brochures/roadlog.pdf –Fredddie™ 18:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the 2019 Road Log! I tried a quick search and could only find their Arc Webmap, but no .pdf. I had no idea you already had the Junction list that in your Sandbox, I definitely constructed it from scratch. I noticed there's nothing for US Highways in Wyoming, do you know if there's any reason or is it just low on most ppl's priority list? Happy Holidays! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 19:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's a low priority and it's not like there isn't a route log either. Wyoming is pretty, but it's also pretty boring.  There's only so much you can say about mountains, grassland, and oil derricks. –Fredddie™ 20:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Red Coat Trail highway shield.png
Thanks for uploading File:Red Coat Trail highway shield.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Old Strathcona into 2005–06 Edmonton Oilers season. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 20:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, this was a follow-up on a Split/Move suggestion that I put on the Old Strathcona article quite a while ago, where the Blue Mile was better served being referenced in the 2005–06 Edmonton Oilers season as a one-time historical event verses something still relevant to the neighborhood. It took a while to get support (or to be followed up) but I wanted to close the loop on that. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 04:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ontario Highway 7B, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madoc, Ontario.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Adding various colours to Ontario road junction lists
Have you sought out any consensus before implementing a wide-spread change like this? I'm not a big fan of the route transition (better served by a row that covers the destination and notes column) or the incomplete access (doesn't even link to anything anymore) shading, which doesn't really add anything for the average reader/driver that aren't better covered by the notes.

Also, small aside, but please do not use thekingshighway.ca as a source; it is a self-published source. Use it to figure out what dates or terms to search for to get newspapers or reports, and feel free to add it as an external link, but it is no good for citations (See my failed attempt to make a case for it). -  Floydian  τ ¢ 02:56, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I was trying the Route Transition as an experiment to see what the response would be as MOS:RJL is ambiguous on its use (the other colours are fairly self-explanatory). The definition is "Indicates a transition from one route number to either another route number, or a section without a route number, along a named road" so I thought there could be a case for its application for 17 <--> 417, as the road continues but the number changes. Most other lists use at provincial/state boundaries as opposed to , with the exception of when it crosses a waterway. Incomplete (movement/access) interchanges are marked red as per MOS:RJL so that should be included. I'll keep that in mind with thekingshighway.ca. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Quebec Route 335, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Laval.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2023
  Volume 10, Issue 1 • Fall 2023 • About the Newsletter • A New Future for Road Articles Online  Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
 * Features
 * —delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of  Imzadi 1979  →  on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ontario Highway 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marysville, Ontario.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Saskatchewan Highway 16
Saskatchewan Highway 16 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:09, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Ontario highway transfer lists - 1997 and 1998
Hey, was curious if you'd like me to email you the highway transfer lists (aka the downloads) for 1997/98? I noticed you made Ontario Highway 87 and figured it may be of service. Reply on my talk page please, I don't check my watchlist. - Floydian τ ¢ 16:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)