Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Peer review/Illinois Route 22

Illinois Route 22
I did 90-95% of the editing on this for my first major article and it seems relatively complete without getting tedious or looking up some in depth history. I tried to do the best I could with the citations. Just looking for some specific overall feedback on how I can get it upgraded to a B or higher. RoadView (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Good article so far. I would add citations for the route description (and try to use non-map sources as well as map sources), as well as adding early history. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I added some citations to the route description and put in some more early history. I hope this can move up to a B class and wonder if its possible to even go higher than that - RoadView (talk) 14:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Moved it to B-class. For GA class, you need to go to WP:GAN and follow the directions there. (Unfortunately, above B-class it takes more work to move up in classes). --Rschen7754 (T C) 14:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I see several issues:
 * The junction list and infobox both have standards issues, specifically with this section.
 * Infobox: the "direction" row is unnecessary; just specify "west" and "east" for "direction_a" and "direction_b", respectively. The year in the formed row should not be linked per MOS:SYL.
 * Article proper: the photos should not have set sizes; see Picture tutorial and WP:MOSIMAGES.
 * Junction list: the USRD-standard header is "Major intersections".
 * The References section should come before the External links section; see WP:FOOTERS.
 * I believe I made at least most of the necessary corrections. - RoadView (talk) 06:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. –  T M F 18:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

In terms of the prose, I only looked at the lead. I noticed two things:
 * The lead has no real history of the route, just a couple of vague sentences. The lead should be a summary of the entire article and should be able to stand alone by itself as a sufficient entry on the route. See WP:LEAD for more guidance. Also, the last sentence has terms that should be avoided (such as "recently"; see WP:RECENT) and has a POV air to it ("ready to become much more modern").
 * Altered the lead to include some clearer history. - RoadView (talk) 06:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Overall, a good start, but there's room for improvement. Hope this helps. –  T M F 20:59, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Other things I've noticed: (od) I'll comment on a few points separately: Something I did not note in the GA review is that this article needs to comply with WP:ALT. Alt text is needed for all images as well as the map in the infobox. In addition, jct should be used for the intersections in both the infobox and the Major intersections table. ---Dough4872 04:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This really doesn't have anything to do with the article, but I thought the map looked a bit strange so I downloaded it and checked it out in Inkscape. The first thing I noticed was that the shields are embedded PNGs instead of imported SVGs, which results in the strange-looking scaling in thumbnails. Also, doesn't US 41 run alongside Lake Michigan through this portion of Illinois? A reader wouldn't know this by looking at the map. I'd also consider adding the MTF-standard background color.
 * The route length in the infobox is sourced to GIS data but the junction list mileposts are sourced to Google Earth. Is it possible to derive the junction list mileposts from the GIS data instead?
 * In terms of references, there are issues with either the cite template used or the parameters being used. Maps have their own template, see cite map. Additionally, Google Maps have their own template at google maps, which calls cite map and fills in a few parameters automatically. For the refs using cite news, the name of the newspaper should be in the "work=" parameter, not the "publisher=" parameter.
 * Ref 17 just says "Google Earth - 2002 historical imagery", which really doesn't suffice as a source. A link to Google Maps (which uses the same data as Earth) showing the imagery would fix this issue.
 * Row six of the junction list gives "Lincolnshire, Bannockburn" as the location. Is this junction located on a boundary between the two entities? If not, only one location should be given.
 * In the lead: "one that is ready to look to the future." - this is what would be considered unencyclopedic tone; see WP:TONE. I still haven't looked at the main article prose; I'll let the GA reviewer handle that. –  T M F 18:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I used the help page when I made the map, but I was having a hard time getting anything else to work other than what I did. Should I just type word "Lake Michigan" into the lake area?
 * The ideal change would be to download water polygon data for Illinois (through either the Illinois GIS source or this site) and physically add Lake Michigan to it. As for the not being able to get much to work, I've found that the most recent versions of QGIS - from 1.2.0 onward - aren't very good. Try using 1.0.2 or 1.1.0 (marked as unstable but I've found it to be very good) and see if that improves your results. If you're already using one of those versions, then we can try a few other things to see what's going wrong. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, first off I am using QGIS 1.0.2. Here are the steps I took to make the map I already made. First I originally downloaded the Lake county data from here. Then I realized that a small portion of the route was in McHenry county and that I would also need Cook county in order to show the general vicinity. At this point I was unsure how to combine the add additional counties to the overall map.(I have since figured out that you just add another layer.) So I then download the data from here  in hopes of getting the statewide data.  But then on closer inspection, there were parts of certain routes that were not there for some reason, it seemed like the data was not finished or something, so I decided it didn't look good enough to use. Then I downloaded the state data back from here . The file was huge and took a while to edit, but I deleted the all of the state except for the area I needed. Then, one by one, I colored in the routes. I had hopes of adding some city/urban areas that I have seen on other maps, but I could not figure out how to add this if it was even available. Finally I added the shields in inkscape and uploaded it.
 * I have since used your link to download the water boundaries and could not get them to appear with any of the data from here . I was able to get the water to appear with the road data from the same site as the water boundaries, but in I couldn't figure out if there was a way to only show state/US routes and interstates. There was no "SIGNT1" in the Classification Field and all of the other classifications were either nothing useful or a list of every street in the entire county.  So I hit 2 dead ends. 1 wouldn't let me use the water data with the ideal road data, and the other let me use the water data but would not let me easily work with the road data. I hope this makes sense and I really would like to make some better maps but I'm just not able to figure it out for some reason. - RoadView (talk) 13:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your point about the NHPN data is spot-on; the NHPN data for every state that I've seen except New York is missing routes. In the case of New York, it was missing some routes at first glance but the actual data for the routes was there, just unlabeled. But yeah, I'd say use the NHPN data only if you can't find a free (as in licensing) dataset from the state DOT or GIS service.
 * The best way to deal with the statewide data from a state GIS is to split the data into subsets, like one for Interstate Highways, one for U.S. Highways, etc. This is easiest to do using v1.1.0. In that version, it's as simple as selecting all Interstate Highways, going to (I believe; my current comp can't run QGIS due to being a 64-bit system so I can't check to verify) the Layer menu and clicking "Export selection to shapefile" or similar, saving, then repeating for the U.S. Highways and state highways. This breaks the data up so that it'll be quicker to find and select a particular route; it also allows you to control the color and width of the lines in the different highway groups with a couple of clicks.
 * Try using the Political Boundaries set from here. It's not the exact equivalent for the TIGER data's urban areas, but it's probably close enough for our purposes.
 * I assume you followed the tutorial where it said to embed the images, which resulted in the PNGs. I have no idea why that was written into the tutorial, since I've never seen anyone use that (and now I see why since the resulting PNGs don't scale well at all). I've since removed that line from the tutorial. Instead, simply import the shields into Inkscape. If you're using the ones on Commons, no further action is necessary - just import, size, and place.
 * The scenario with the water is probably a conflict between the datums that the Illinois GIS data and the TIGER data use. The easiest way to go would be to obtain water data from the Illinois GIS source since extracting routes from the TIGER road data is very tedious and time consuming. Try using the Streams and Shorelines data from here. As an aside, county boundaries (which help provide context to readers) are also available here. Let me know if these tips help. –  T M F 17:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well the good news is I got v1.1.0 and was able to quickly remake the version of the map I already made, minus the shields, using the data from here . The bad news is at that point I got the data from your links and tried to add them as a vector layer to my map for some finishing touches. But, like before, when I did nothing showed up. I know the data is good because when I start a new project and only add the water or boundary data it works. So is there an easy fix to this, or did I mess something up along the way? - RoadView (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see where the embedded image stuff came from. I'll revise that part of the tutorial, since I've never seen anyone outside of the tutorial use that method. –  T M F 18:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The infobox source was done by someone else and I was unable to figure out how it was done or how to do anything besides make the map
 * Well, based on the map source code you have QGIS, which can be used to read the GIS data. Simply open the data in QGIS and click the attribute table button (the one that looks like a table). USRD/L has some instructions on what to do. There will likely be at least three relevant columns - one for a route number, one for a beginning milepost for a segment, and one for an ending milepost for each segment. Sort the table by route number (by clicking its table header) then use the ending milepost column to get the mileposts. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I was able to open the attribute table, however there were over 20 columns. I looked through them to locate route 22, but it there were so many mileposts that was hard to figure out what all the data meant. I couldn't tell exactly what the mileposts corresponded to. I guess I'm saying that it would be nice for there to be a column that stated the road that is at the listed milepost. Maybe I'm making this more difficult than it is, but it wasn't simple enough to get the data from. Also, for route 22, I couldn't find any mileposts higher than 19.19, when I have double checked the distance myself in google maps to be approx. 19.6. I'm wondering if this is totally accurate or if I'm again oblivious to something obvious. - RoadView (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I may look this over the reference issues eventually, but it sounds like a long process of going through most of the references and adjusting the templates
 * Not really, it'll probably take five minutes at the most. I may have made it sound more complicated than it is. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I changed the cite news references to include "work" instead of "publisher". I also used the google maps template where needed. For the links to the village boundaries I just left them as cite web templates. I assume I made some improvements; not sure if all work is done. - RoadView (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I changed the google historical imagery reference to another website because I didn't know if there was a way to link the historical imagery instead of the general google map imagery
 * Well, gmaps uses the same data (aerials, road lines, etc.) as Google Earth, so if the aerials were from 2002 in Earth, they'll be from 2002 in gmaps. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm still not sure how to directly link to any historical imagery in earth or gmaps. I open earth and adjust the historical imagery slider back to 2002. Then I click view in google maps, but the map that comes up shows the current imagery and not the historical. Is there something obvious I am missing? - RoadView (talk) 14:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hm, I wasn't aware of the historical aerial imagery feature of Earth until you mentioned it here. Now that I know of it, I have a better understanding of the situation. I don't know of any way to link to any aerials that aren't available online (though you did find a site with it, so this point is essentially moot). –  T M F 17:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I changed the row six info box note
 * OK, now that I know what the situation is, I altered the table to display it in a more standard form. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This actually looks much better - RoadView (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I will look into an alternative way to make the statement in the lead - RoadView (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know if there is a way to do it while complying with wiki policies. The point is a POV take by its essence. –  T M F 18:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Took care of the jct templates. - RoadView (talk) 19:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The pictures and map still need alt text. See New Jersey Route 50 for an example of how alt text is used in road articles. ---Dough4872 21:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe I took care of it. But I wonder how a FA like Interstate 355 gets away without any alt text. - RoadView (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It was promoted before alt text came around, it should have it as well. ---Dough4872 22:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, the alt text in the first image of the route description as well as the one in the Current construction need some work, it should describe what physically appears in the image and not simply repeat the caption. ---Dough4872 22:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. - RoadView (talk) 12:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks better. ---Dough4872 16:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)