Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Peer review/New York State Route 21


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New York State Route 21
Although I havn't done much work to this article yet, I would like to know what it needs then start working, and hopefully aim for FA eventually. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated. Thanks. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  20:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * 1) The infobox needs a map. I know, you can only do so much on that, but make sure one is requested through the MTF before you take this article to the upper levels of assessments.
 * 2) The length should have the units linked. use the lk=on parameter in the convert template for this.
 * 3) Maybe more of a stylistic preference, but the counties aren't needed in the place names for the termini, IMHO. The counties aren't used in the other locations in the lead.
 * 4) You should include NY 21 as an abbreviation in parentheses in the lead before abbreviating the other route names.
 * 5) 1930 shouldn't be wikilinked in the lead, there is an article on the 1930 renumbering that should be wikilinked instead.
 * 6) Some things are wikilinked a second time in the beginning of the route description, but others aren't.
 * 7) I-390 is a redlink. Shouldn't it link to Interstate 390 (New York) instead?
 * 8) What's along the roadway? The route description on first read, to me anyway, sounds like a rote description of the turns and concurrencies along the route that I could get from any map. Are there any landmarks of any kind? There are some mentions, like  Canandaigua Lake, but they seem like the exception, not the rule.
 * 9) You abbreviate state routes to NY ##, but spell out US Route 20. I'd abbreviate both.
 * 10) 1930 renumbering is wikilinked in the History. I'd leave that there, even with it linked in the lead. (I tend to prefer some redundancy in wikilinks between the lead and the body.
 * 11) Does NY 72 redirect here? I'm lost why it's bolded (and spelled out) otherwise.
 * 12) Why is County Route 120 in bold? CR 101 isn't. Also, CR 101 is spelled out as County Road, and CR 120 is a route. I'd fix this.
 * 13) Does the history need a recitation of NY 17F at all? At first reading to me, it doesn't seem relevant.
 * 14) The jct list looks good, but someone else more familiar with NYSR standards might want to comment.
 * 15) I'd only comment that where multiple shields are used in a junction listing that if they're on the same line only if they're duplexed, separate lines if multiple routes meet in common. I'm not familiar enough to know if that's the case here. Also. there's only one listing I can find on there for NY 63, even though it overlaps with NY 21 according to how I read the table.

Imzadi1979 (talk) 03:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I requested a map a while ago, so that should be coming in soon. The other things I can do, though. Thanks for the suggestions. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  13:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Re 8, this is one of my earliest route descriptions; therefore it isn't that good.
 * Re 9, I disagree. Abbreviating US and Interstate Highways can cause a non-roadgeek reader to be confused (what's "US 20"?). The possibility of said reader being confused about "NY x" is slim since the article is on a New York route. Putting "NY 21" at the outset eliminates any potential confusion.
 * Well, maybe a New Yorker would be confused, but not a Michiganian. We refer to highways all the time by I-##, US ## and M-## without confusion. All that would be necessary would be a "U.S. Route 20 (US 20)" on first reference to clear up that issue though, I think. It just feels inconsistent to abbreviate one various (state routes) and not another (US Highways). Plus, US 20 is abbreviated in the junction list.
 * Would a non-roadgeek not be confused? Also, links in the junction list/infobox ≠ links in prose per INNA and USSH
 * Well, to my mom, US 20 would be perfectly understandable, and she's definitely NOT a roadgeek at all. Setting aside quoting INNA and USSH, my background before I was a roadgeek is as a copy editor among other things. It's perfectly acceptable, and in fact probably preferable, from a copy editing standard to spell it out on first mention [New York State Route 21 (NY 21) or U.S. Route 20 (US 20)] and then use the abbreviation through the rest of the article. Also, on many maps or atlases, US Highways are abbreviated to US ## in the legends. The usage is hardly restricted only to the roadgeek community, so to bypass it completely is kinda silly to me.
 * Re 11, yes it does.
 * Re 12, CR 120 redirects there; CR 101 doesn't. I don't get the route/road thing; in New York, the terminology varies by county and AFAIK the proper term in Wayne County is "County Road".
 * Didn't know that. Here in Michigan, they're consistently all county roads unless someone is using a name (Hobbs Highway, Midway Drive, etc)
 * Re 13, I don't see where the recitation is.
 * It is as follows:
 * The segment of pre-1930 NY 17 between Andover and Hornell, bypassed in the renumbering, was redesignated in 1930 as part of NY 17F,[2] an alternate route of NY 17 between Andover and Addison via Canisteo.[7] In the 1940s, NY 17F was removed from the state highway system and replaced with an extended NY 36 from Andover to Hornell.[8][9] The alignments of NY 36 and NY 21 south of Hornell were flipped in the 1950s, placing both routes on their current alignments south of the city.[10][11]
 * I re-read the whole history. I see now that part of NY 17 is now NY 21, but it was confusing to me on the first reading. I'd clean the history up somehow to combine all the NY 17 references together if possible.
 * If that reference wasn't there, an editor could correctly deem that statement to be unreferenced. I attempted to write the history in a way that made the most sense - cover NY 21 as it originally existed, then cover what later became NY 21 afterward. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 22:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Re 14, the junction list meets all current NYSR standards and practices.
 * Re 15, your first sentence is correct. However, there is no overlap between NY 21 and NY 63. If there was an overlap between the two, it would be noted in the notes column. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 22:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I must have misread that then.
 * Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.