Wikipedia:Peer review/List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, Ontario/archive1

List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, Ontario
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to nominate it for featured list but need to work out the kinks first. Treat this review as if it were a featured list nomination.

Thanks,  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  15:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll treat this like an FLC, as you wished:


 * "…city provide year round connections…" I think "year round" should be hyphenated
 * "…to the deep rural areas…" I don't think "deep" is needed
 * "…from the south to the north." Take out both "the"s; their redundant
 * "It is closely rivaled…" I don't think "rivaled" is the right word
 * I'm going to stop the prose review, because I think it needs attention from a better copy-editor than I. Ask a good writer you know to do a thorough copy-edit before FLC.
 * The ALT text for the first image needs to be improved; try describing it to someone who's never seen it.
 * In the "Comments" column, some entries have periods while others don't. Be consistent.
 * All of the references need to have last access dates (add "Retrieved on 2009-08-29" to all of them, assuming they still all work). Mm40 (talk) 02:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Awesome stuff. I'll make the changes suggested. I do request leaving the whitespace between entries in the table. It helps me in finding individual entries to make changes (And I'm fairly certain that it doesn't effect the article itself outside of the edit tab). Thank you :)
 * -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * Per the rivaled comment, describing the 2nd longest road reads like padding
 * "roadways"?
 * "the ... roadways of the city provide year round connections to the deep rural areas of the region" ... an uncomfortable admixture of city, area & region; at best you must decide if this is a city or a region, at worst decide if the sentence is necessary at all.


 * King's Highways
 * "highways (7, 7A, 7B, and 35) and one freeway" What's the difference between a highway and a freeway? We need either links or definitions.
 * "Like the rest of the province" Per comment above, now its a province already?
 * "with the green maple leaf shield" surely "with a green maple leaf shield"
 * "Highways 7 and 35 occupy 83.8% of the highway kilometres with 140.0 km (87.0 mi) of road between them." -> "Highways 7 and 35 together measure 140.0 km and account for 83.8% of the length of numbered roads city/region/province [delete as applicable ;)]" (they do not occupy; some are freeways)
 * "The remaining 27.1 km (16.8 mi) consists of:" -> "The remaining 27.1 km (16.8 mi) comprises" - and lose the colon
 * "southern corner of the city" - are you sure you mean city - is its use consistent with other uses of the term? Should it be region / province?
 * "an alternate route of Highway 7" probably should be "an alternate route to Highway 7"; even then I don;t entirely like it but cannot right now think of better.
 * "the heart of Lindsay" probably "the centre of Lindsay" - heart is highly idiomatic
 * "Though generally one lane in either direction, several short sections with two lanes in one direction as a passing lane are scattered along the highways. The city's lone freeway, Highway 115, is two lanes in either direction for its entire length.". Consider adding links to Single carriageway, Passing lane, Dual carriageway
 * "downloading"? - you mean they've been recategorised as city roads? You need to define this term.
 * "6 were transferred to the responsibility of the county". Good grief. Now it's a county.
 * "renumbered mostly as their equivalent county road numbers." -> "renumbered, most being assigned their equivalent county road numbers."
 * "The removed highways consisted of" - you could probably lose this sentence altogether & move the colon back to "equivalent county road numbers:". If you want to keep it, we need to know why these were downloaded a sentence or two ago, and are now removed.
 * re: the list of roads. The article talks about them being renumbered "as their equivalent county road numbers", but only one of them appears to have been renumbered - the rest retain the same numbers. I'm confused. You must assume others will be too. And when you say "as their equivalent county road numbers" I presume you mean Kawartha Lakes and not Victoria, but because of the lack of number changes, I'm really not sure. Think of this as some sort of road accident along the numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, Ontario article ;)
 * "Victoria County contained 11" ... "6 were transferred ". What happened to the other 5? I ask this because later, in Secondary highways you say "Victoria County, which was renamed to Kawartha Lakes" and I'm thinking, well if they are one and the same geographic entity, what happened to the other five roads? Did they just get de-numbered, or what?


 * Secondary highways
 * "Victoria County, which was renamed to Kawartha Lakes" Why do we learn that only now. We've already dealt in King's Highways with the fact that we got a bunch of roads from VC. Lets say all was have to say about VC there.
 * "Secondary highways, but King's Highways. Why have the level 3 titles got different case for highway - capital and lower case.
 * "The city of Kawartha Lakes contains no secondary highways. Victoria County, which was renamed to Kawartha Lakes on January 1 2001,[6] contained 3 secondary highways". SO VC had three, and KL has none, but the roads still exist and have been given new KL numbers ... so in exactly what sense does KL have no secondary highways. Have the roads been given a lower designation than that of a secondary highway? If so I think you should make this clear.

There is more, but I've just mistakenly deleted my next five or so notes & so need a cup of tea. Remember this is pedantry of the highest order; don't be discouraged, it's really very good. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * City roads
 * "There are 44 numbered city roads in Kawartha Lakes, numbered mostly between 2 and 50, with the exceptions of Road 57" I think might be better as "There are 44 numbered city roads in Kawartha Lakes, 43 of which are designated in the range 2 to 57, and the remaining as road 121...
 * "There has never been a Road 1 or Road 13". There are some other numbers missing in the 2-50 range, if only 43 of the numbers are taken up. Care to explain them, or explain why you are only explaining one of them?
 * "Including overlaps". What's an overlap? I honestly don't think I know.
 * "the routes of the city roads cover 743.3 kilometres (461.9 mi) of roadway" Aaaargh. I think you mean "The total length of city roads LK is". It was just too flowery a way of putting that nugget of information across.

Okay, to continue:


 * King's Highways (table section)
 * "Route #" wraps even at the enormous resolution of my monitor
 * Column 1 sorts idiosyncratically. Once you hit the sort button, you get 35,115,7,7a,7b, and hit it again and you get 7b, 7a, 7, 35, 115. You cannot get back to 7, 7a, 7b, 35, 115. That's probably bad. Not sure what to do about that.
 * Don't like the Kawartha Lakes Highways title to the table. Why is it linked? From a format point of view, it looks poor (whether linked or not.) I don;t know what the MoS for this is, but comment that on my big monitor, the eye has to move a long way from the section title to the table title and the the cell 1a ... I'd kinda prefer things to be left justified & find the centre justification bogus. But you might check MoS tables for more, or find an FA with tables and see how it does it.
 * Centre justify the icons in column 1
 * Link 	Trans-Canada Highway
 * All of the sort icons in the table except the one at the top of column 1 cause the page to scroll up to the top. Not sure why that it. Definitely broken, though. (firefox 3.0.13 on XP)
 * "Note: All King's Highways, with the exception of 7B, pass through the region from one end to the other". I don;t like the word end, but have no suggestions. It jars because an east-west road passes through the region from side to side?
 * I'm having trouble integrating the end-to-end concept with the map. I'm expecting to see four highways (7, 7A, 7B, and 35) which go end to end = 8 points of intersection with the boundary ... I can count only 6 intersections (and even then I'm not sure what exactly the road going off bottom right is doing - what's that 90 degree bend all about? Whatever, the map and description do not seem to correlate. My bad. Except for 7b. (Highway 115 is the fourth)
 * "Formerly concurrent with Highway 35B". What does that comment mean?


 * City roads (table section)
 * "The following is a list of numbered city roads in Kawartha Lakes..." Why do we get a paragraph of explanation here when we did not for King's Highways, above?
 * "are signed with the standard flowerpot shield symbol as most regional and county roads in Ontario." -> "are signed with a standard flowerpot shield symbol as are most regional and county roads in Ontario."?
 * "Towns are ordered by where the route encounters them (either from the south to the north or from the west to the east)." You have gone in two sentences from describing an attribute of the roads (they have flowerpots shield symbols) to describing an attribute of the table, without pause. The solution is probably to move the flowerpot sentence up to the City roads description section ("There are 44 numbered city roads in ...")
 * You can then say "In the Communities column, towns are ordered by..."
 * You need to repeat this message, presumably, before the King's Highway table
 * "Route #" wraps
 * Icons do sort properly, though.
 * And all other sort buttons work
 * However, the icons are all but unreadable - I find it very hard to distinguish the very tiny gray on gray font.
 * Not happy that the icons are easter egg links to pages, some (most?) of which have not been written. New users will be quite surprised to find themselves bounced unexpectedly to an invitation to write an article
 * If there are penalties for irrelevant column sorts, that on Communities might win it. You are sorting on the first community in the list ... how useful is this?
 * Comments column: "where it is the boundary line between Durham Region..." -> "where it forms the boundary between Durham Region..."
 * Comments column: "Cofferdam". Check out Cofferdam. Is it one? Previously it was a Causeway
 * Comments column: "one of only two numbered roads to span the city from east to west". Again, city, region, province ... consistency please
 * Comments column: "Concurrent with Kawartha Lakes Road 17 for 1.1 km". Again, I'm uncertain what concurrent means ... presumably that one stretch of road has two road-number designations. Probably needs some more explanation somewhere
 * Comments column: That led me to think about concurrency and the maths in the article - how is it affected. Do we really have 910.4 k of numbered roads, or is there double counting in the 167.1 k of king's highway and 743.3 k of city roads?
 * Comments column: "(Including its terminus)" - lower-case the I
 * Comments column: "Follows the southern boundary of Victoria County". I thought VC had been abolished, and or that CoKL was the same shape / covered the same territory as VC. I sense dissonance again.
 * Comments column: "not referenced by city map". Which city map - ours, above, or someone else's.
 * Comments column: "but is signed as well as being marked on several maps". Clumsy sentence.

I think that's it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Pictures & captions
 * Can support wikilinks, e.g. to Mitchell lake
 * I have a problem with the legend on the File:KL Road Map.svg image ... difficult to read at 200px wide and expands only to 251px wide if clicked on ... still hard to read. Oh, maybe scratch that. Click it again and it's huge. Shame the image you see on the image page is not larger; I don;t know what control we have over the sizing of PNGs.
 * Why a lower case c in the city of... part of the map legend?
 * Image:Hartley Road causeway.jpg|thumb|200px ... I think the MoS advice is, do not set hard widths unless you have very good reasons for over-riding user's preferences. Preferred image width is user-settable in Preferences.


 * I just wanted to note that I am confused myself with the whole city/county/region/area thing. The land is an area or region, and the political municipality WAS a county before 2001, and is NOW a city. So, for example, the downloading of roads to the municipal governments in 1998 was to the county of Victoria, and not the City of Kawartha Lakes; For a short while, the roads were "county road x". Should I only use city, or should I use the correct term depending on the time frame? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  15:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It is a municipality which has the name city of KL ... so definitely not a region, area or province. I think I would try going with municipality for the CoKL days, and County for the VC days. I'd steer clear of city unless you can provide enough context, such as City of Kawartha Lakes. Hope that helps. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Haha, I know it's not a province... that was probably a mistake. So in the article I should refer to it as the municipality of City of Kawartha Lakes? I'm not sure if the name of it is "City of Kawartha Lakes", or if its the city of "Kawartha Lakes". City documents never make it expressly clear. The 'C' is generally capitalized and thus I'd assume it's the former. In some sentences, it reads strange when including the "City of" part, as opposed to just "Kawartha Lakes". Most of my mistakes are the effect of writing that whole article in one sitting. I'll respond here when I've gone through and fixed things up. Thanks again!  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  19:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)Okee dokee. I've now made it down to the Secondary highways part (Lots to go). I've clarified the city/county/area/region/province thing a bit I believe. There are two things, however, that I needed to discuss with you:
 * 1) "**re: the list of roads. The article talks about them being renumbered "as their equivalent county road numbers", but only one of them appears to have been renumbered - the rest retain the same numbers. I'm confused. You must assume others will be too. And when you say "as their equivalent county road numbers" I presume you mean Kawartha Lakes and not Victoria, but because of the lack of number changes, I'm really not sure. Think of this as some sort of road accident along the numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, Ontario article ;)"
 * 2) * I'm guessing removing "renumbered" makes that more clear... They were renumbered from, say, Highway 121, to Victoria County Road 121, and then Kawartha Lakes Road 121.
 * The sentence is Prior to 1998, the now dissolved Victoria County contained 11 King's Highways. As part of a province-wide "downloading" of highways to municipal governments, 6 were transferred to the responsibility of the county of Victoria and renumbered, most being assigned their equivalent county road numbers.
 * Q1. Is "Victoria County" something different than "the county of Victoria". (Sorry - this is a new question, based on rereading the sentence to arrive at an answer to your question.
 * Perhaps a solution is to say something like "given new Kawartha Lakes designations following the prior Victoria County numbering system, with the exception of XYZ which was renumbered PQR"
 * Hope that helps some. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Will do. They are the same, by the way. Both uses are very common and used interchangeably, but I will try and use only one term to keep it consistent and less confusing (Victoria County). -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  03:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay; but then in the sentence we're discussing, above, it should presumably read 6 were transferred to the responsibility of the county of Kawartha Lakes (my emphasis), rather than 6 were transferred to the responsibility of the county of Victoria --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a strange situation... If you skip out the middle-man, that works, but in all technicality they were transfered to the county of Victoria, then transfered to the city/municipality of Kawartha Lakes. I think when it really comes down to it, all that middle stuff is better saved for a Victoria County article, and this article would get along better just looking at what the municipality is called in current times. Is this ok or would it be skimping on necessary details? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  22:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I suggest: Prior to 1998, the now dissolved Victoria County contained 11 King's Highways. As part of a province-wide "downloading" of highways to municipal governments, 6 were given new County of Victoria designations following the prior Victoria County numbering system (with the exception of Highway 35A which was renumbered County of Victoria Road 8). Upon the renaming of County of Victoria as Kawartha Lakes, they received Kawartha Lakes designations with unchanged numbers. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) "Secondary highways, but King's Highways. Why have the level 3 titles got different case for highway - capital and lower case.
 * 2) * "King's Highway" is a legal term used in government documents. Secondary highway is not. Should I capitalize 'highway' regardless?
 * No. I've added the phrase "termed King's Highways" to denote that this is some sort of official term. It could be changed to "denoted by Act of Parliament 'King's Roads'" (if that is the case) but then that begs a citation for the legislation (or for some government document that makes the King's highway case. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I sourced there... There was definitely some act passed in 1930 to change them to that name, so I'll see if I can find it. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  03:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually... This is interesting... and confusing. From Provincial highways in Ontario

'' The term "the King's Highway", first adopted in place of "provincial highway" in 1930, has been deprecated since the 1990s, and the old signs were replaced circa 1993. Currently these highways are again designated "provincial highways" or "provincially maintained highways" by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. The Highway Traffic Act, amended as recently as 2006, still refers to them as "King's Highway". Both terms are sometimes used within the same regulation as the older term is phased out. ''

I'm going to add that directly in there. Since it mentions that the terms are used interchangeably in the HTA(2006), I shouldn't have to change everything to "provincially maintained highways", right? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  18:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think I'd be inclined to handle it with a link, such as this. And that's all the explanation of the term you need to supply. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Section break
Alright, so I'm pretty sure I've dealt with everything up to the end of the King's Highways section, so moving down the list now, I have so far done the edits up to the last section. As for some of the sorting links going to the top, that seems out of my control (It does it for me too on FF 3.5.3 on OSX), and would be a problem with sortable tables themselves. Th odd thing is that the latter table works fine. However, I have made it sort the highways in the correct order and centre justified them. I'll have a chance to get into the city roads table later on, but probably won't be done for another 24 hours. Let me know if I've missed anything above the city roads table (I'm pretty sure I've gotten it all or removed the info that was questionable). -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  <sup style="color:#3AAA3A;">τ <sub style="color:#3AAA3A;">¢  03:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, looks like I had the time tonight. I've gone through all the suggestions and made the changes. Three things that I have comments/questions for:


 * Image:Hartley Road causeway.jpg|thumb|200px ... I think the MoS advice is, do not set hard widths unless you have very good reasons for over-riding user's preferences. Preferred image width is user-settable in Preferences.
 * The main problem is that it becomes a blurb at a small size... I'm pretty sure the default size is under 200px.


 * Why a lower case c in the city of... part of the map legend?
 * Other changes in the article (I'm pretty sure completely) now refer to it as Kawartha Lakes. The 'city of' merely indicates it is a city, and is the same title used on MapArt titles (Which are essentially the unofficial roadmaps for at least southern Ontario). This is my alibi for not wanting to fix the image if possible


 * Comments column: That led me to think about concurrency and the maths in the article - how is it affected. Do we really have 910.4 k of numbered roads, or is there double counting in the 167.1 k of king's highway and 743.3 k of city roads?
 * This is one of the things I try to explain further up in the prose for city roads. Both the 910.4k and 743.3k are figures that are double counted through concurrency as I reached them by adding up the individual lengths which I aquired by measuring distances in google maps between points that I referenced to an official map. I'm not sure whether that is a huge or massive violation of WP:SYN. However, I see no harm in presenting the figure along with mention of how that figure was obtained. Thoughts? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  <sup style="color:#3AAA3A;">τ <sub style="color:#3AAA3A;">¢  07:41, 15 September 2009 (UTC)