User talk:NE2/Archive 11

Requests for arbitration/Highways 2
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Highways 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Highways 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, &mdash; Coren (talk) 22:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Just letting you know
JA10 and myself were heavily involved in the PA 39 article (I live less than a mile from the road, and I provided most of the local newspaper references and I'm currently researching when the road was established). Thanks to the fact that it's in Pennsylvania, it's a rather complicated history! :-) --Son (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK - added. --NE2 01:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration
Hello NE2. I was reading through some of your evidence, and was wondering if you'd be willing to explain the evidence entitled "Keilana distorts the issue" further please? I know I'm not very involved in the case and have not offered much, but I'd really appreciate further comments all the same. Thank you. Regards, Keilana talk(recall) 04:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You have a valid opinion, but I feel that the Mediation case was specifically narrow in order to achieve a compromise and to encourage you to follow consensus. Keilana talk(recall) 04:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Some Personal Thoughts
NE2 - I know that you and I have not seen eye to eye on some things in the past regarding USRD and such, but I'd just like to say that I DO feel strongly that you ARE a driving force for article improvement. For example; the work that you did on SR 99's history. Before you got a hold of it, there was little there. Now, there's a whole section, replete with stuff that I had NO inkling of!

NE2, you get involved in the articles, and your contributions are fantastic! Sometimes, I think you let pride and stubbornness get in the way though, and that's where the issues start happening. I know how that is, I tend to be somewhat stubborn about some things myself, at times to my own detriment. Luckily, I have a spouse to flick my ears when that happens!

Right now, during this whole RFAR especially, try this; instead of letting yourself fall into the pointless dreck of revert warring, fall back on Bold, Revert, Discuss. Not only will this work toward reaching an agreement on a change, but it will give you more credibility toward your arguments in RFAR. If the ArbCom sees that you've engaged in revert wars in the midst of an RFAR, your credibility is harmed. In contrast, if they see you actively engaging in BRD, it's a "good on ya".

I don't want to see you blocked or banned, NE2! I want to see what you can add to the history of SR 41! It's an interesting highway, the southern route into Yosemite. If anyone can mine the info and process it into the article, that would be you. Edit Centric (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

CR 83 maps revisited
Thanks to a recent family vacation up to New York City and Long Island, I finally found the source of the map used in the County Route 83 (Suffolk County, New York) article, that contained the Patchogue-Mt. Sinai Road extension, and the Cedar Beach Spur. It was published by Columbia Marketing Corporation, which was located at 242 West 30th Street in Manhattan. In 1980 these extensions were published in the 1980 Long Island Recreational Map. In 1979, it was in another CMC map, but I forget what the title of it was. I hope you don't mind if I send it back within the next few days. DanTD (talk) 19:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The Alleged I-605
Back in 2000, here's what was reported about the possibility of an I-605 being built: "Another WSDOT released study in 2000 suggested an I-605 beltway that stretched roughly from Tacoma through the Snoqualmie Valley and then to Everett would pull an estimated 29,000 cars off of Interstate 5. But the state never acted on the idea, instead focusing on other ways to relieve congestion on I-5. The idea drew such opposition that the King County Council eventually amended the county's comprehensive plan to specifically forbid such a roadway from cutting through the area." From: http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_071504WABi605JK.2ffde016b.html. In other words, the possibility of I-605 ever being planned, let alone built, died about 8 years ago. Is it, therefore, accurate to portray the road is going to be built when it is obvious that it isn't? Mh29255 (talk) 01:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You
I just wanted to thank you for understanding what I was trying to say regarding I-605. I have modified the article in such a way that I believe it now reflects far more accurately what I-605 really is: a series of proposals that have been rejected time & again for the past 40 years with no real consensus and no actual plan as a result. And, most importantly, no construction to begin any time soon. Again, thanks. Mh29255 (talk) 04:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

SR 41
S'okay, everyone has their own niche on the Wiki. You may find more later on... Edit Centric (talk) 01:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Greenville Connector
Now I'm confused by what you mean by govt speculation. Is I-169 a bill?, city speculation?, or just propose by news team? Isnt bill wrote in lawbook?-- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 20:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

NewspaperArchive
Did you actually subscribe to that service? I'm wary about quoting that particular snippet without knowing the story's title and a subscription is required to see the article. (in regards to the WIS 20 snippet you found) —  master son T - C 23:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're good. I think I need glasses 8)  Thanks.  —  master son T - C 23:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Confusions
I currently live in Southern California and regarding to the future highways I don't understand why will it go on the street code and not ever likely to be accepted? Did they even got approved by government? I habve questions on those.

SR 241 South extension to I-5 in San Clemente
Will it ever happen? Did government approve it? Because several people is having issues regarding to the natures. Because my school principal told me they might never extend the 241 South. Because the expand pollution might damage the beach as well. I hope they extend it.

SR 57 South extension form Orange Crush Int to SR 1 or I-405 in Costa Mesa
Did the government approve it? Why they are signed on CSC code? If they were I thought means they are law and must be done, because I hear is much unlikely because lacking of space. When I came home from San Dimas at June 2006 on the 57 I hear no evidence of extending the 57. -- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 18:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

i-710 North extension to I-210
Isnt this project unlikely because those places like North Monterey Park places is too tight and not enough room plus too many housings. I told this is not likely to be built.

Do you have any answers?-- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 20:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Will the 241 south ever be built? I hear if 2020 if they dont built them the I-5 wll be 3 times worse. I-710 extension to I-210 is unlikely I went on the I-10 from Rosemead to Santa Barbara on August 2007. -- Freewayguy ( meet ) 20:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: ?
The page was showing up in CAT:CSD, but I couldn't see the category on the page, I was checking to see if a null edit (or as close to one as there is these days) would clear it. I should probably have tried action=purge first. —Random832 18:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

ok. —Random832 18:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Mark Bellinghaus/Mark Bellinghaus (collector)
This should not have been moved from the talk page into an article. It is a relevant record for the AfD discussion. You might have contacted me to ask about it. You should have at least notified me you were prod'ing it. Tyrenius (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Junction lists
Look at the bottom of ; I assume that's not what you meant. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry; it certainly wasn't. The regex has been fixed. --NE2 02:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

California State Route 275 GA Review: On Hold
Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

List of streetcar lines in Queens
On your page regarding the List of streetcar lines in Queens, you described the route of one Ocean Electric line as being "Beach, Far Rockaway, NY Long Island Rail Road original Far Rockaway Station at Mott Avenue,..." This "Far Rockaway Station" wouldn't happen to be the Far Rockaway–Mott Avenue (IND Rockaway Line), would it? DanTD (talk) 15:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

SR-174 DYK
I'm compiling a "trophy case" of DYKs at WP:USRD/DYK. Unfortunately, it appears they lost the DYK for California State Route 174. Do you happen to know what it was? --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Multiples of CA Routes
Can you tell me about your changes diminishing the major junctions so there is only one routes a city. Why you delete the 110, 57, and 55, and 241 from junctions of SR-91? and took the 405 and 210 of SR 39? I thought I-10 and SR 19 is at Rosemead not El Monte. Two years ago when I went to El Monte I took the I-5 to the I-605 and exit on Vallley Blvd. -- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 20:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * All routes are listed in the intersections table; only major intersections/cities belong in the infobox. El Monte and Rosemead are both technically correct, since the interchange is on the border. I got the former from the Caltrans traffic counts, but I'll use the latter since it's a lot closer to central Rosemead. --NE2 21:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, California State Route 47, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 06:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

FM 1905
Can you relook at your assessment? I've been told start-class has a complete route description & major intersections chat (sure i missed Spur 6), but its better than stub-criteria.Mitch32contribs 23:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

CA code
How do you cite stuff from WikiProject California State Highways/History/When each route was added to the state highway system? --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I tried downloading a few of the files but couldn't find the text... California State Route 16. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Go ahead... out of curiosity, do you just use Cite CAstat/title 1993 179‎ and then put in the year and the number in the parentheses with c. ? --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems to be good. Thanks. --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

B-class
Complete route description, history, and exit/junction list. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 03:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC) ~Feel free. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 03:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Historic Maps Link
That was pretty good. It doesn't give me anything I'm looking for right now, but it's still pretty good. DanTD (talk) 02:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

1967 Map
Good find on the scan of the 1967 map. Thanks, that significantly added to the article.Davemeistermoab (talk) 04:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Roads Newsletter, Issue 1

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —Mitch32contribs 20:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Q about CA 190
I've got an atlas myself, and I know I've seen others, that identify Horseshoe Meadows Rd. as CA 190. Heading west from 395 at Lone pine, California and dead ending at about 10,000 feet in the sierras.  I am not familiar with the history of this road, but I have driven it, have pictures of it too. It makes sense. The road is VERY well constructed for a local forest service road, but deteriorating due to lack of maintenance. It also has severely faded, unreadable signage, that looks an awful lot like Caltrans signage, not USFS signage.

But this does not match the research you've done for this article. As this road would lead up towards either Cottenwood pass or perhaps New Army Pass. Did your research uncover anything about this? Was this indeed at one time going to be the route of CA-190 over the sierras, that was dropped in favor of the route you've mentioned. Or was this only ever just a USFS road and several atlas makers did some incorrect guesswork.? Thanks in Advance.

Also, FWIW, this road is AMAZING. If you ever get to California, you have to drive it. From literally 3000 feet to 10000 feet in only about 2 linear miles (you can see the switchbacks from the map, but it doesn't do it justice, you have to drive it.) Davemeistermoab (talk) 02:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The signs are faded beyond recognition. Most looks like aluminum plates on posts. I tired and tried but couldn't make anything out of any of them. I say they look like caltrans signage as there are signs the right size shape and frequency to be the white county style mile markers that CA and NV use. Davemeistermoab (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your insight. I've long been curious. If you do want to make mention of it (that at least some atlases have this road marked CA-190) here's the citation text for the atlas I have:

Davemeistermoab (talk) 05:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Interstate 70 in Utah
Per your suggestion I have expanded the Route description section. This was kind of an oh duh moment, as I had said before, that is there to write about? ThanksDavemeistermoab (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Main page image
Regarding this edit, there are no images on DYK at all, and the FP is not a Google Maps screenshot, it is by the NOAA as explained on the image page. J Milburn (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, was apparently removed by another admin. I apologise. J Milburn (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I-405 (CA)
Did you post the purple tag merging the San Diego Freeway into this aritcle? Are there any valid reasons SD frwy should be combine together with I-405? because South portion south of El Toro Y is I-5. I live just 2 miles Southeast of El Toro Y. -- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 20:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree about that. Why do you call it for merging? For the record, I also live two miles, southwest of the El Toro Y... what a coincidence! ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 21:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Broadway Line (Lower Manhattan surface)
You created an article with this title. There is an assertion there that conflicts with information I found in the Encyclopedia of New York City. (See Talk:Broadway Line (Lower Manhattan surface)) Can you document your assertion, or can this discrepancy be somehow settled? -- BRG (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comment. I think I'm going to have to look into that book, as I'm trying to get the articles in MetroWiki to be as accurate as possible. -- BRG (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Eighth Street Crosstown Line
The same comment applies here as in the previous note. Your dates of incorporation obviously come from somewhere, but they differ from the ones I find. -- BRG (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverting edits to conform with the Highways 2 injunction
Hi. The above is limited to "uninvolved administrator who is neither a party to the case, nor a member of the WikiProject," so, in the future, please let myself or other uninvolved admins know rather than revert these yourself. Thanks in advance. El_C 02:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Categories
If you're going to remove categories, don't forget to CfD them. --Son (talk) 14:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, empty cats can be deleted after several days. However, here's a quote from Category deletion policy (emphasis added):


 * By emptying it, you're bypassing WP:CFD, and even if it turns out to be snow deleted or something along those lines, having a discussion about keeping/deleting the category is better than not. It would also get input from outsiders who crawl WP:CFD.  --Son (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how you are the one who wants it deleted - and I would move to keep it - it would be logical for you to nominate it for deletion. Because if it was I who were putting it up for CfD, I would vote keep and restore, which would kill the nom for deletion.  --Son (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You can restore it without going through any process, if you think there's a purpose to it. --NE2 16:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This site
Can you enlighten me base on all these routes if they made them up or they only went through bill? I don't know what the damn heck is the Interstate 730 doing there? I dont know if the wrtier made them up or they only wen through bill only?-- Freewayguy ( Meet ) 00:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Brush Creek, California
No problem to be deleted. I created the redirect since 3 articles link there. Check List of places in California (B), California State Route 162, Bear Magazine and tell me if it is safe to fix the redirect to Brush Creek (California). Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you have to replace the redirect with a stub with the place then? -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll go for a two-line stub in some minutes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Check Brush Creek, California now please and tell me your opinion. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 11:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Interstate 355 - FHWA approval date
I've looked. I've prodded. I've asked the FHWA and the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority. I've searched through most newspaper archives and looked at the AASHTO meeting notes (they only go back to 1989). I can't find an approval date anywhere, and most likely it's sitting in a file cabinet in Washington.

Without filing a freedom-of-information request (and that costs money), there's not much more that I can do... plus I think the date is in the "useful, but not critical" category. Otherwise I think I've addressed your concerns. If you have any more, leave them there or on my talk page - but I already know about the "passive verbs everywhere!" objection.

Thanks! &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 19:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's by far the best article of the bunch. Here's a couple more: . From August 12, 1988 and February 10, 1989. Since I'm not heading to Arlington Heights anytime soon, I might just bite the bullet and buy the article so I can dredge enough info from it to cite it. &mdash; Rob  (  talk  ) 20:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Makes sense to me. All that's left is the Great Active Verb Revolution, and whenever my grammar starts to kick in, I'll do that. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 22:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem - after a month I was figuring that "any day soon" would've been the promotion date. Thanks for your contributions! &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 13:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Highway categories
'Category:U.S. Highways in the District of Columbia to Category:U.S. Highways in Washington, D.C. may be consistent with other categories, but it's not consistent with the signs, which say DC-US (and Interstate shields spell out "District of Columbia", not "Washington, D.C.")' As you say it is consistent with the parent categories. This was nominated and open for discussion. There were no objections raised in that discussion.

'Category:U.S. Highways in Georgia (U.S. state) - isn't this redundant?' Probably. I don't know that I was behind that move which happened in 2006.

The best way to get these changed would be to nominate them at CfD. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't believe that I would oppose on the first. I think I would support the second.  Vegaswikian (talk) 08:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! You got more response in one day that my proposal did in 5 days.  Vegaswikian (talk) 23:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Image of US 50
Yes, I can confirm this is US 50 westbound just past the split with SR 89 at Meyers. IMO it would be better to get one near the top of echo summit rather than the base. I can check my photos if you'd like. But the description is accurate Davemeistermoab (talk) 15:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll check my photo library tonight. If nothing else, I drive US 50 between Carson and Sacramento fairly regularly. If you can wait, I can snap some pics on my next trip. The bridge over the American River does have some good views of downtown Sac. But I don't remember If I've taken pictures from the bridge or not.Davemeistermoab (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I couldn't find any pictures to add to the article. Davemeistermoab (talk) 03:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

US 50 Junctions
SR89 north in South Lake Tahoe (called the "Y") is "Tahoe City" (100% sure). 89 South at Meyers uses Jackson (100% sure) and either Markleville or Woodfords (It's definately one of those, I don't remember which). Junction 49 at placerville uses Gold Hill / Aubern (85% sure)North and Jackson (only about 50% sure) South. A lot of roads in that area of the foothills list Jackson as a city, even if its not technically correct. That is clouding my memory. Davemeistermoab (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Route 50 in California
Couldn't you AT LEAST look through the exit list first instead of clicking on "undo"? I'm a local to this area, dammit. You know, who died and made you the "king of roads"? PhATxPnOY916 (talk) 03:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * While I do agree with the point that NE2's manner does need to change, some editors (not you) are making a mess of the exit lists and keep repeating their mistakes (this does not refer to the county abbreviations). The easiest thing to do is click undo to fix it. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Postmiles
I understand the fact that you want to spiff up all of California's exit lists, but for the postmiles, why did you remove the statewide mileage, as you did to U.S. Route 50 in California? ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 05:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

US-101 CA
The jumping around with the exit lists is a bit confusing. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Explaining my revert
I see the point, but you're going about this the wrong way. The proper place to go is WT:CASH - not WT:USRD (besides maybe linking them to the discussion). Going to WT:USRD asks USRD to overrule CASH - we're trying to get away from that precedent as it has many editors up in arms.

The problem with tagging the templates is that currently we have not identified a replacement system - we don't want to trash the old system before we get a new system in place. --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Interstate 105 map
What's the problem with the cropped version? Those may be your maps, but from what I can see, nothing is wrong with it. So the segment of Interstate 105 is "too long" for the cropped version; however, I find the zoomed-out version with the LA freeways too small. ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 01:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * So what about the maps around the San Francisco Bay Area? Try Interstate 280, 380, or 780; your maps do not have the same frame. So why should this matter for the freeways in the LA vicinity? ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 02:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well so was Interstate 105; I think it was too short for the non-cropped version. I'm going to ask others to see which map is commonly preferred. ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 02:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

New frame

 * I'm removing my comment regarding to the new frame. Never mind...* ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 03:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevada State Route 88 is part of NHS?
This is a new one on me. I know that CA89 between Meyers and junction with CA 88 Then CA 88 over Carson Pass is signed with flip-over "US 50 Alt" signs for when the main route is closed. But to the best of my knowledge the Nevada portion is not included in that. Even then those signs are kept in a hidden state until needed. I don't think the alternate route was ever AASTHO blessed either. Davemeistermoab (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Woops, never mind. I see it on the NHS map. I'll crawl back into my cave now. =-) Davemeistermoab (talk) 18:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

CA 99
I saw this as a northbound exit. Not from the area, but thought it should have been added. And didn't see any Court Street. Is it the same as Court Ave? Bodo920 (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't the northbound exit be recognized then?Bodo920 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Strange. Thanks for clearing that up.  If only the sign was right...Bodo920 (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I checked maps on Mapquest and Yahoo, both showing N Park St. as the name of the street. This leads me to believe that the maps are right.  Perhaps the sign is accurate-I just don't know what it's referring to.Bodo920 (talk) 19:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Mapquest and Yahoo both say it is the Court St. exit. Probably because the sign says so, but I really don't know.  So it should probably stay as the Court Street exit because that's what the maps say and that's what the road signs say.Bodo920 (talk) 23:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Highway beautification
I have nominated Highway beautification, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Highway beautification. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Lea (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)