User talk:O/Archive 01

Interstate Template
Greetings, in order to fend off any controversy that might arise, it's been discussed, here, that Interstates ending in 0/5 are major per AASHTO and that's why 85 and 30 are highlighted. Cheers!  S tratosphere (U T) 02:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The Pennsylvania State Highway WikiProject
Welcome to WP:PASH, the Pennsylvania State Highway WikiProject. On behalf of all the members, I'd like to thank you for joining up. If you are interested in creating SVGs, please talk to User talk:TwinsMetsFan as he has made all of the SVGs currently in existence for PA shields. Also, there is WP:HbgAR, the Harrisburg Area Roads WikiProject. It is a subproject of WP:PASH, and only has 2 members at this point.

The naming convention for all Pennsylvania roads are Pennsylvania Route x, x being the route number. All articles follow the same format; you can check out more details at WP:PASH. An good example to look at is Pennsylvania Route 39. It includes a good write up about the road, as well as a table of major intersections.

For further details about PA routes, you can check out User:Myselfalso/PA Routes and User:TwinsMetsFan/PA Routes. Again, thanks for joining the Pennsylvania State Highways WikiProject and I hope you do an excellent job contributing to the project. --myselfalso 05:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Like myselfalso above, I also welcome you to WP:PASH. I noticed that you created SVGs for PA 299 and PA 955 and that you used Series D for the font on the shields. According to, , and , though, PennDOT uses Series C, not Series D, for these shields (see here for a previous discussion regarding what font should be used for what shields). A template is also available for creating PA shields on the commons at Image:PA-3di.svg. If you could correct these shields, that would be great. Thanks. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 21:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

PA Turnpike
That works out a little better.

I had cleaned up how I know what direct junctions there was on the Turnpike, but putting the TO for the two routes, and the future on 95 works better IMO

Thanks :) PYLrulz 22:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 195 (New Jersey)
If you put the state-name shield back, I will be happy to revert it off again. The image doesn't render properly. When you go to the image page (Image:Interstate 195 (New Jersey).svg), the numbers appear to be in Series E font, and the state name is not in Roadgeek font. When you applied it to the article, the numbers render in Series C with extra space between the numerals, and I can't tell what font the state name is in. (This is in Firefox.)

Even if you fix the image, it's not appropriate for use on the article because the image in the infobox should reflect how the road is actually signed -- New Jersey rarely uses state-name interstate signage anymore -- not a pretty little image based on vintage signage. -- NORTH talk 23:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I see, I don't know why it's messing up on the image page. Regardless, no, that's not the sign that goes in the infobox. -- NORTH talk 23:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Infobox_road can be used since it's an intrastate route. Using the interstate infobox takes the State highways in New Jersey link out. -- NORTH talk 00:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * For intrastate routes, browsing is allowed to go in the infobox. -- NORTH talk 00:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * That's a valid point, on top of which WP:NJSCR (which I wrote myself) still says that infobox_road does not go on Interstate routes, although I meant to change that. However, there are a lot of other articles on intrastate Interstate and U.S. highways that use alternate routeboxes, and I'll start a discussion on WT:USRD to see if we can change the project policy. -- NORTH talk 01:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

One thing to keep in mind is that, despite what some people tend to think, WikiProjects can never set policy that must be followed 100% of the time. At best, anything you read on WP:IH and similar pages are guidelines, which can be broken for reasonable exceptions. -- NORTH talk 19:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Missouri Route 364
Please read Reliable sources; AARoads is not one. The source also does not say anything that you included; it says:
 * Interstate 364 currently does not exist in Missouri. Due to the numbering of Missouri 364, it is possible that once the road is completed, it might become part of the Interstate Highway System. However, no official plans for that are currently in place.

--NE2 22:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Please see my comment at WT:USRD. Thanks. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 22:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please read my comments at WT:USRD. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur. Please use the state parameter. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Have you listened to what anyone has been saying? The template you made at Infobox Interstate/Business is more easily handled by using Infobox road directly and using "type=Interstate Business" (although, admittedly, most states do not have this set up yet). Also, "changing the infobox to the one specified here"? Consensus has indicated that infoboxes for Interstates do not have to be Infobox Interstate, yet you insist on the opposite. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 21:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)