Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/Standards/Structure

This is a draft of the project's standard for article structure – ie standard sections, and standards for the content that goes into those sections.

Text
The use of lists is discouraged; prose or tables should be used when more appropriate.

Infobox
The standard infoboxes applicable to Australian road articles are:
 *  - For roadways, streets, and junctions (Style guidelines here)
 *  - All bridge structures
 *  - All tunnel structures
 *  with small - Where a full infobox would be excessive - eg. former highways

If any cases appear where multiple infoboxes may be required, this should be discussed first.

Route description
Each article should have a prose description of the route.

Preferred direction choices in order of precedence should be based upto similar criteria to the RJL

If the route crosses multiple states, then use the majority direction (by distance).

If not already checked, please try to ensure road direction is correct before nominating for GA level or above.

History / Future
Where applicable, each article should have a history section and / or a future section, describing past and present affairs of this road.

Details in the future section must be verifiable and not speculation, per WP:CRYSTAL.

Extra sections/subsections
Extra sections and subsections are not discouraged as long as their inclusion into the article makes some sense.

Junction list / Exit list
Each article should have a list of junctions. Junction lists need to follow MOS:RJL, the international road junction list section of the Manual of Style, as well. Any AU specific quirks will be listed here. This section should generally be the last section of the article.

Bridge Articles
See: BRIDGE

Any further guidelines created for Australian Bridges should remain compliant with WP:BRIDGE standards.

Tunnel Articles
No standards as yet. As a basic start they should at least have a description, history, and a junction list (if they are a complex tunnel with exits other than the two portals). Whether this needs to be MOS:RJL compliant would need to be discussed.