Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/New York/Archive 2

Subst: the IN template shortcut
While making a table for NY 5 tonight, I did as suggested and labeled every template with subst: as I went. When I did a "checkpoint" save, I noticed that the US and NY templates substituted correctly but the Interstate one did not (as it resulted in a poorly coded if: command being inserted; however, the link still worked, amazingly). Hopefully someone with better knowledge of coding can develop a workaround on that template (located at Template:NYSRInt/IN). -- T M F T - C 06:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Now irrelevant. -- T M F T - C 16:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Request help with Susquehanna crossings
I'm burned out adding all of the PA entries in List of crossings of the Susquehanna River. The remaining sections that need additions, verification (scan for missing crossings) and table formatting are all in NY. Stictly speaking we're looking for more than just NY state route bridges, but I figured this would be a likely place to appeal for help. I've been using the USGS aerial photos at terraserver-usa to scan for crossing, google maps and mapquest to ID the crossing, and topozone for the coor dms. Click on the coordinates on one of the already listed crossings to access. aTdHvAaNnKcSe.--J Clear 00:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Route Browse
All Interstate and U.S. routes, past and present, now have the NY browse box. Because of this, US and Interstate routes in the Infobox road browse have now been enabled for New York. -- T M F T - C 12:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

County routes, part 2
TwinsMetsFan, are you making Suffolk County Road shields now? Because I might be able to use them for my proposed NY 25A intersection box. DanTD 14:06, 29 July 2006 (EST)


 * Yep, I'm making not only Suffolk County Road shields, but also CR shields for any county in New York state that needs them. Let me know which roads you need and I'll whip 'em up. -- T M F T - C 18:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I appreciate that, but you may have to hold off on it, because I can't seem to get it right. All I keep getting is this:



Among my problems, I can't get the Queens County bar up, and the NY 25 intersection won't stop shifting to the right side.

DanTD 09:00, 30 July 2006 (EST)


 * The type= line seems to be having trouble if the entry is capitalized. Also, the NY 25 row shifted because of a missing "}}". You can also use "town_special=" instead of "town=" if the linked article is not of the form "Town-name, New York". --Polaron | Talk 13:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Polaron is correct. The "type=" entry, as of the overhauling of the code a few days ago, must be in lowercase, especially in the case of "type=county". Other than that, the county shields are in the form "(County) County Route (number) NY.svg" and I'll see if I can get an SVG of the Caumsett shield uploaded tonight.


 * BTW, I'm on a self-imposed wikibreak, so I'm limiting myself to a half-hour of "wikitime" each night until Thursday, so my response times will be a bit delayed. -- T M F T - C 06:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The NY 25A Intersection Box was just added. Whoever can make the new routebox can do it now.

DanTD 13:44, 10 August 2006 (EST)

Route 130 in Erie County
I have been creating route maps for WNY counties at work over the past few weeks. There seems to be difference of opinion on where Route 130 in Erie County has its western terminus. The Wiki entry states that it is Route 5 in Buffalo, and both Google Maps and Yahoo Maps agrees with this. The NYS Route page at Gribblenation states that the end is US 62. This is seemingly in agreement with the NYSDOT Traffic Counts document which only goes as far west as US 62 (Bailey Avenue) in conducting traffic counts.

Since I am new to using Wikipedia and there are seemingly different opinions on the matter, I wanted to put this to discussion. I feel that US 62 is most probably the correct western terminus. I have enjoyed using this project as a reference so I don't want to change a route page without first discussing it. --Nate b 15:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You are correct. Current NY 130 officially ends at US 62 in Buffalo which state GIS maps confirm. The extension towards NY 5 is Reference Route 954L. --Polaron | Talk 16:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * More food for thought: According to, Broadway between Elm/Oak Streets (one block east of NY 5) and Fillmore Avenue only is Reference Route 954L. So from the way it appears, Broadway is not state-maintained between NY 5 and Elm Street as well as between Fillmore Avenue and Bailey Avenue (US 62).


 * Regardless of that, the western terminus of NY 130 is indeed US 62. -- T M F T - C 18:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, if you do update the NY 130 page, please update the page to the new routebox and project standards as well. -- T M F T - C 21:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Counties in Infobox
I added counties the the NY 30 infobox today, but thinking the entire time "How much is too much?" Should we limit the number of counties that are listed, and if we do, should we only list cities for routes that exceed this number (i.e. NY 5)? -- T M F T - C 21:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Routebox/Infobox discussion, part 4(or is it part 5?)
I see that there are some pages that are currently tagged for having obsloete infoboxes like New York State Route 107, as well as some others I didn't create. Is anybody working on new routeboxes and intersection boxes for these roads right now? --DanTD 14:35, 4 August 2006 (EST)
 * Not sure. Maybe they're on break due to the ... madness happening at highways now. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  19:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Eventually, I'll get to them if no one takes care of them. I have more time now than I did the previous few days, but the mess going on at Highways is leaving me a bit uneasy. -- T M F T - C 21:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

County routes
Smartyshoe has begun some articles on county routes in Dutchess County, where he lives, with the idea of starting a statewide project. I found out about this when he added one Dutchess 77, to the junction list in the infobox for NY 9D

Is anybody else as skeptical about this as I am? There are some people out there who felt that articles on every state highway in the U.S. was a bit much already, and this has the potential to add tens of thousands of road articles to Wikipedia, quite a few of which don't, IMO, rise to notability anwyhere beyond the counties in question. I can see some ugly deletion votes coming, and I'm not really sure I'd keep.

In any event I really don't think county routes belong in our infoboxes. Daniel Case 01:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Just noting that there are similar county route articles for California and New Jersey, and, to a lesser extent, for Florida, Texas, and Michigan. But, I agree that county routes should not be in state highway junction lists. Polaron 03:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Point taken. Still, note the differences in New Jersey's county routes, which use a statewide numbering system and are sometimes even used on street signs. I can't remember the last time I heard anyone in New York use county route numbers in giving directions (I live on one, and I know the route number and it's well signed, but I'm probably the only person on the block who knows. Mainly because it complicates maintaining the street).


 * Quite a few of our county routes are relatively minor back roads that I would otherwise be hard-pressed to justify articles on. Daniel Case 02:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree wholeheartedly with the exemption of county routes from the route boxes. --TwinsMetsFan 14:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I apologize for posting COunty Routes in the boxes, but I feel they are notable topics. Smartyshoe 13:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * After thinking about it, I suppose County Routes could be listed, but only if the route in question is a notable route. No one wants to see a 0.5 mile county route listed that's in the middle of nowhere, if you know what I mean. :) --TwinsMetsFan 19:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, but county routes are notable (by this I mean they deserve articles, not they belong in routeboxes), right? Smartyshoe 13:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. If a county route is notable enough that it warrants a full-fledged article, then it should go in routeboxes IMO. --TwinsMetsFan 14:38, 14 May 2006(UTC)


 * Infoboxes, you mean. And I think those are crowded enough already (scroll up and you'll see some of a discussion related to an edit war over what SPUI feels were overly long infoboxes on the California highways project, which didn't even include county roads). Since this issue does not appear to have been resolved and we have some infoboxes for really long routes like 5, 12, 13, 28, 30 and 31 yet to create pending what I feel should be a resolution of whether we follow the example of Route 17 and leave a full junction list to a section within the article itself, let's not add in yet another complicating factor. Daniel Case 15:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we have two arguments going on here: 1. Are county routes deservent of articles. 2. Are they deservent of routeboxes. I say yes to #1 and no to #2 unless they are highly notable, not the case here

The naming is bad - which Orange County does Orange County Route 15 mean? County Route 15 (Orange County) is a simple name that resolves the ambiguity. --SPUI (T - C) 02:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I assume you mean County Route 15 (Orange County, New York). -- T M F T - C 18:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

A lot of County Roads in Nassau & Suffolk are actually major highways, so there are certainly those that do deserve articles. In the case of Suffolk CR 67, I propose that any red link to that road be redirected to the Long Island Motor Parkway. DanTD 09:42, 3 July 2006 (EST)


 * Maybe one article could be dedicated to CRs of "lesser importance". IE: One page covers CR 1-20, if one of the routes is signifigant enough, just link it to the original page.

CR 1: from route X to X. CR 2: Main article: CR 2 (whatever county) CR 3: from route X to X Crispy1995 02:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is a statewide county route WP, but if there isn't, perhaps we here at New York State routes could take the county routes under our wing. Of course, I know that there's a lot on our table right now (switching routeboxes, making junction lists, the whole state road naming convention thing, etc.), but it's time to set a standard for the county red links, among other items.

My proposal:
 * 1) All NYS county route articles should be titled "County Route X (Y County, New York)", where X is the route number and Y is the name of the county. The only exception should be for Dutchess County, which has its own WikiProject. In this case, the name should remain "Dutchess County Route X".
 * 2) Shields will be in SVG format and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons in the form "Y County Route X NY.svg", where Y is the county name and X is the route number. This naming convention is the nationally used convention for county route shields.
 * 3) Structure for county routes should be the same as for state routes. The infobox will be determined at a later date.-- T M F T - C 00:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) County routes, by nature, are not major junctions and should not be listed in any infoboxes. They can, however, be listed in the Major intersections junction table and their inclusion, if the county route is visibly signed and the junction table is not a "two-page pullout" (like NY 5), is welcomed.

Thoughts and comments are welcomed and encouraged. -- T M F T - C 00:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC) See below. -- T M F T - C 21:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Not being from a county that signs county routes, I've not much experience with their relative importance. I'm not sure it's a project I'd want to get into. Powers 00:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a WikiProject page that User:Smartyshoe created a few months ago. Also of relevance is Category:County routes in New York. --Polaron | Talk 00:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, now that I know that there is a WP for NY county routes, we won't need to worry about the articles themselves, just the naming convention for them presented in point 1. Also, points 2 and 4 of the proposal are merely placing what's already practiced in writing.


 * I'm also trying to compile a list of counties that actually make reference to county routes here. The Greater Rochester area is interesting. Monroe County makes no reference to county routes whatsoever other than markers at county-maintained bridges. In Ontario County, if the road is a county road, then that is the road's name. Wayne County: the CR number is located on the upper right-hand corner of street signs. Orleans County: I admittedly have no idea. And finally, Livingston County, which does sign all CR (and very prominently as well). -- T M F T - C 01:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've never seen any reference to county routes in Orleans. Obviously there are county-maintained roads but if they're identified by number, they're not signed (nor used by the public).  Then again, I never noticed the numbers on Wayne's street signs, either, so Orleans might have something equally sneaky.  Powers 12:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

For the interested parties, arguments for points 1 and 2 of the proposal should now be voiced here. Point 3, as stated before, is moot and point 4 has already been put in practice long before this, so I am withdrawing the proposal. If you have information more counties that could be listed on this county route status page, please leave me a message on my talk page. -- T M F T - C 21:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Problem with non-numbered routes
I tried to add the new routebox to Lake Ontario State Parkway but I can't get the "New York State Routes" link to show up without also picking a next and previous route for browsing. As there's no obvious next/previous sequence here, what should we do? Powers 19:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * For the time being, I've added blanks for the image and the links that were made as a result for a quick fix. I'll see if I can get a browse function working for parkways without messing up the routebox in the process. =) -- T M F T - C 19:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, the browse function for Infobox road was pretty much set in stone, so I created a new infobox for the parkways.


 * Example:


 * All of the flags are pretty much the same as they are on the normal routebox, except that the image displayed can be specified, as can the images and routes in the browse function. Note that you can also abbreviate the routes in the browse if you so desire.


 * Now, returning to the question of what the sequence should be, I think we should either go (a) by reference route number or (b) alphabetically. -- T M F T - C 20:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Is there going to be problem with keeping this template up to date if the other one changes? As for sequences, I'm not sure any sequence is logical, but alphabetical is the closest to the numerical browse we have on numbered routes.  Powers 00:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll monitor Infobox road and if any changes are made to it, I'll make the necessary changes on Infobox parkway. So, there shouldn't be any problems keeping it up to date. I also agree that an alphabetical sequence would be the best option. -- T M F T - C 05:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


 * After a bit of thinking, it occurred to me that making any kind of sequence for the parkway infobox would be tedious and, in some cases, difficult (as it would require a complete indexing of every highway and parkway in NYS). So, to make this a bit easier, I removed the browse section from Infobox parkway. -- T M F T - C 06:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Revisiting this issue, another template has been created for the reference routes (not just parkways). Unlike "Template:Infobox parkway" above, this infobox (Template:Infobox NY Reference Route) is derived directly from Template:Infobox road, so updating it every time that Infobox road is updated will not be an issue. See Inner Loop (Rochester) for the template (and coding) in action. Now that the reference routes have an infobox, I think that we should bring them under the scope of WP:NYSR. Comments are welcome. -- T M F T - C 20:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

A Heads-Up...
Another "poll" has been launched regarding national state highway naming conventions. This could severely impact the NY WikiProject, especially if the final decision is anything missing the word route (as there is NO ONE in New York State that calls a state route a "highway"). -- T M F T - C 16:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Where? Powers 20:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * State route naming conventions poll. There's nothing there now, but if it gets off the ground, it bears watching with a careful eye. -- T M F T - C 21:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I already added a duplicate article of New York State Highway 101 just so I could redirect it to New York State Route 101. Ultimatley, though, when I think of "highway" I tend to think of either the divided and/or limited-access type. "Parkways" I tend to think of as limited-access roads with park-like settings and stone-covered arch bridges that lead to parks, although that's not the case in all municipalities(Florida, Georgia, William Floyd, etc.). I'm going to stick with New York State Route X for New York and State Road X (Florida) for Florida. If you haven't seen my user page, I tend to add info for Florida roads too. --DanTD 11:45, 7 August 2006 (EST)


 * As a notice to anyone who hasn't been watching the aforementioned poll, voting is now open. -- T M F T - C 21:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Auto-archiving
A proposal came up on WT:USRD recently about using Werdnabot to automatically archive the talk pages of state road WikiProjects. Would anyone have any objections to using Werdnabot for this project (as I personally think it's a good idea)? -- T M F T - C 21:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not a big fan of Werdnabot. It clutters up my watchlist.  Powers T 20:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * With all due apologies, I don't see that being a reason for not using the auto-archive bot. The cons (having this page appear every time an archival is made) are outweighed by the advantages (hassle-free archiving and trimming down the length of this page, as well as removing obsolete discussions). -- T M F T - C 02:37, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd agree with you if manual archiving was difficult. For pages like User talk:Jimbo Wales, sure; the activity level is high enough that werdnabot is useful.  But for a page like this, manually archiving every month or two seems sufficient to me.  Powers T 13:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I had 60 days in mind as the time limit for the bot, so it wouldn't clutter up the watchlists of users that much. I dunno, I'm personally in favor of the bot (as it's one less task that needs to be performed) and I'd like to hear the opinions of others on this issue as well. -- T M F T - C 01:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It appears User:Rschen7754 didn't notice this discussion, or didn't care, and set up auto-archiving anyway. I'm still against it; the time limit has no bearing on how often Werdnabot archives, only on how long a section stays before being archived.  It's the former to which I object.  Powers T 14:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * All valid points. I've taken down the auto-archive (if we elect to restore it later, it'll still be in the edit history). It already did one archive, but no harm came to be as most of those sections would've been moved in the next manual archive. Again, I'd really like to hear the opinion of the other members of the project as well so we can come to a group consensus. -- T M F T - C 04:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Ack my bad. Sorry about that, I forgot about this discussion. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  16:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion on the automatic archiving. I don't think it will do any harm to do so. Although it appears that there are still some bugs in the Werdnabot program. Might be best to wait a bit before implementing it here. --Polaron | Talk 04:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Location list header
The current standard for the project uses the heading "Towns along the route" for the listing of all towns, villages and cities along the route. Stepp-Wulf made a change to New York State Route 350 today, changing "towns" to "communities". Instead of reverting the change, it made me think for a bit and, I've come to the conclusion that "Communities" makes the most sense between the two. I would not use "Locations" because this would over-broaden the section and would allow users to list everything from towns to parks to tourist attractions, which is not the purpose of the section.

What does everyone think? Should we keep it at "Towns along the route" or should we change it to "Communities along the route" or some equivalent? -- T M F T - C 01:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess residents of the state don't really refer to the town but rather the hamlet (if the don't live in a city or village). "Communities" is probably ok and putting hamlets is probably more useful to the reader. However, hamlets don't have well-defined boundaries and makes deciding exactly where a junction is more difficult for some cases. --Polaron | Talk 01:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * In most cases, the hamlet is defined by the junction, so I don't think there's an unacceptable level of confusion there. =)  "Communities" seems the best catchall term for town(ship)s, villages, cities, and hamlets.  Powers T 14:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Since it's been 10 days and the general consensus is to use "Communities", I'll change the project standard to reflect the change. -- T M F T - C 05:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Renaming of NYSR userbox
Today I renamed the title of the NYSR Userbox as per the German userbox solution. The new template code is:

User:JB82/Userboxes/User NYSR WikiProject

Typing the above will give you the same template as the old code:



Please make a note of it.

Typing out the old code name ( User NYSR WikiProject ) will still give you



but I have yet to make the proposal to have it deleted. JB82 19:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That's fine. But why did you remove the optional parameter for changing the shield number from not only this userbox, but also from the PA and VT userboxes? -- T M F T - C 21:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I thought project membership userboxes were to go in as a subpage of the project. Powers T 22:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that was a suggested idea, but it was never implemented as a required part of WP:GUS. At least, that's the impression I got after reading this message on the WP:UB talk page. Also, here's the text on WP:GUS itself regarding this:
 * All controversial userboxes, including those currently in Wikipedia:Userboxes will be migrated out of template space into userspace or an appropriate subpage, such as a corresponding WikiProject. So my interpretation is that it doesn't matter where it is, as long as it's out of template space. I agree with you though, Powers, it makes more sense to place it as a subpage, but I don't think it matters in the long run. I'd really like to know why the shield-changing capability was removed, though... -- T M F T - C 04:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, except this isn't a controversial or divisive userbox. =)  As far as I know, the only reason to move WikiProject memberboxes out of template space is specifically to put them into the WikiProject space.  Powers T 13:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * After thinking about it, your point makes perfect sense. That way, the userbox has a greater connection to the project and is not just a random box sitting in someone's userspace. Another point: by placing them as WP sub-pages, users who create the userbox can't take ownership via the link to the userbox. So, yes, I would support the move of the userbox to a WP:NYSR subpage. Of course, that means I need to move three of them out of my userbox space (NYCR, VR, USH)... =) -- T M F T - C 18:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Fortunately, moving is easy; the problem is changing everyone's user pages to point to the new location and then deleting the redirect. =)  Powers T 13:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

For those who haven't noticed, the userbox has been moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject New York State routes/Userbox. -- T M F T - C 16:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

State route naming conventions poll/Part2
Your state is invited to participate in discussions for its highway naming convention. Please feel free to participate in this discussion. If you already have a convention that follows the State Name Type xx designation, it is possible to request an exemption as well. Thanks! --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  00:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The junction table
Lately, I've been making junction tables for numerous WikiProjects that have a significantly different look than the one used here at WP:NYSR. Examples of these tables can be found at Pennsylvania Route 18 and State Route 14 (Ohio), as well as a modified intra-county table at County Route 380 (Chautauqua County, New York). See WP:PASH, WP:OHSH, and WP:NYCR for the coding behind these tables.

With that said, I actually prefer this design over the one currently used here at WP:NYSR and WP:VR. Should we adopt the new design used at PASH and OHSH or should we stay with the current junction table? -- T M F T - C 17:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it looks more professional. I worry that the county/location columns take up too much space, but I think it's useful to have them in-line with the junctions.  I'd also rather have the mile markers in the first column, but that wouldn't look good with the multi-row county and town columns in between the mile markers and the route column.  Powers T 15:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I've redone the junction table for New York State Route 153 using Template:NYint. If no one objects in the next few days, I'll begin using NYint instead of NYSRInt as I convert articles to the current standard. -- T M F T - C 21:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * There's something weird going on. The table doesn't look right in Firefox.  Powers T 14:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That's likely the Gecko renderer acting up. I use Firefox myself and sometimes the row/column/both borders don't show up, especially when Wikipedia is busy. Other times, it appears fine. It's an odd but well-documented (on numerous other talk pages) glitch in Firefox. -- T M F T - C 21:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Since no one's objected, I'll make the change on the project page to use Template:NYint. Comments are still welcome, though. -- T M F T - C 12:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I hate the new Junction tables. They don't work. I've been trying to fix the one for New York State Route 231 and it keeps screwing up on me. I can't add any county roads, which I need to do, partially because NY 231 ends at two county roads. Even the wikified exit list for the Long Island Expressway forced me to screw up unbuilt Exit 47. DanTD 13:24, 12 October 2006 (EST)

Reordering of bottom sections of standard
After reading the peer review of New York State Route 104 and using it to improve the article, I noticed that our standard here at WP:NYSR is in slight violation of WP:GTL. I think that we should reorder the sections as shown there and rename our "Miscellanea" section to "Notes". Comments? -- T M F T - C 05:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. Seems an obvious change.  Powers T 01:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Another suggestion: make the "Major intersections" section title vary by route; that is, "Major intersections" for a typical route and "Exit list" for an expressway. -- T M F T - C 20:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with the option to have major intersections title vary. Seems like common sense to me.
 * But I fail to see the problem with the bottom sections. It appears to me that the sections already are in the correct order ("See also", "References", "External links" -- #2, 4, and 6 on WP:GTL), and the "Miscellanea" section at this project isn't parallel to the "Notes" section mentioned on the GTL, which is meant to be for footnotes from the article text. -- NORTH talk 04:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point. After re-reading WP:GTL, I now see that the Notes section is explicity for footnotes, so we'll keep the lower project sections ("Miscellanea" and lower) at status quo. -- T M F T - C 06:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * What about for routes that are part expressway and part not, of which there are many (104, 590, Lake Ontario State Parkway, etc.)? Powers T 14:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say that any article that has only an exit list (and not the junction table) should have the header "Exit list", while articles with the junction table as well as an exit list should be kept at "Major intersections". -- T M F T - C 19:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you give examples? I'm not clear on the distinction. Powers T 23:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * NY 104: Only a junction table present → Major intersections.
 * NY 49: Both present → Major intersections. Note that NY 49 needs to be cleaned up so that the junction table and the exit list are in the same section.
 * NY 440: Only an exit list present → Exit list. -- T M F T - C 00:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm. NY 49 looks really bad to me; the two tables are completely different formats and color schemes.  Is there anything we can do to bring them in line with each other?  Powers T 14:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * See the section titled "The junction table" above. -- T M F T - C 14:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh! Missed that.  Powers T 15:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * So, an expressway that has at-grade intersections would still use an exit list? Are those intersections still considered exits?  Powers T 15:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The best example to explain this would be the format used on New York State Route 590, which has an exit list composed of both exits and intersections. To answer the questions: yes and yes for this purpose. -- T M F T - C 03:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough, that's the exact article that prompted this question. Calling them all exits, though, seems strange.  Note, for example, this text from Ridge Road (Western New York): "The divided highway, as well as County Route 241, comes to an end at an interchange with New York State Route 590 at exit 11, the northernmost exit on the expressway."  As of right now, 590 is still considered "expressway" north of the Ridge, so presumably the at-grade intersections are not "exits".  They're also not numbered as exits.  It just seems weird.  Powers T 15:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

(back left) Here's an idea: an exit list as per the Interstate exit list guide for the separated-grade intersections and a junction table per the Major intersections specifications for the at-grade intersections. Of course, that means that, in the case of 590, only Culver Road would be listed due to those specifications. -- T M F T - C 23:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah except I like the way the Route 590 article looks now. =)  Maybe what I'm agitating for is a generic heading rather than having to try to decide whether a given route has intersections or exits.  "Junction list", perhaps?  Powers T 19:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's just me, but "Junction list" sounds a bit too generic. Plus, that header could potentially open the floodgates for the inclusion of non-notable roads (in other words, your ordinary back road going from Somewhere to Nowhere). I'll put a notice on the news template regarding this issue and, hopefully, the other members of the project can provide some insight on this as well.
 * To the last part of your comment, I don't think it'd be that difficult to determine the correct header. I've created a table on the project page that clearly explains when to use each header. -- T M F T - C 21:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well it was just a thought. I know the table specifies "exit list" for a highway that is entirely grade-separated and "major intersections" for everything else, but I'm just not convinced that's the best way to determine whether something is an "exit" or not.  Is there an exit for NY Route 15 off of NY Route 252?  For NY 154 from NY 441?  And are the at-grade intersections on the Lake Ontario State Parkway exits or intersections?  Powers T 15:00, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Common sense is encouraged when determining the header. If in doubt, I'd say use "Major intersections". We have until now and it's worked with no problems. Side note: every case mentioned above would use "Major intersections" as all but one of NY 15/153/252/441's intersections are at-grade and the Parkway is split roughly 60/40 IIRC (60 being grade separated).
 * For determining what an exit is, I'd say it's an exit only if the grade-separated interchange in question is part of a string of consecutive grade-separated interchanges. That would make the 15/252 and 153/441 interchanges just grade-separated interchanges (as they are nothing more than such in my personal view), and the Parkway exits "exits". -- T M F T - C 19:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I think I've gotten a bit off track. Let me try to re-state the issue.  =)  To my mind, there are three basic types of intersections:
 * Normal at-grade intersections
 * Separated-grade expressway interchanges
 * At-grade "expressway" intersections
 * NY 252 at NY 15 is a special case, I think, since 252 cannot really be said to be an expressway at that point (since the on-ramps from 15 are gated with traffic lights). Anyway, I guess the problem is that I can't decide if category 3 should be considered exits or not.  If one is giving someone directions north along NY 590, would one say "Take the Titus Avenue exit"?  Or would one say "Turn left at Titus Avenue"?  I think I would say the latter -- but yet I prefer the Exit List format over the Major Intersections format for that portion of NY 590.  (This particular example may be moot in a couple of years when they put the roundabouts in and reduce it to two lanes, but I think the LOSP is comparable.)  So perhaps the problem is when to use an exit list table and when to use a major intersections table.  =)  Per the project page as it stands now (WikiProject New York State routes), NY 590 ought to use a split format, switching to a Junction Table north of Ridge Rd.  I would disagree with this and would suggest that NY 590 ought to be as it is now, with just the exit list.  Same for the Lake Ontario State Parkway.
 * Is this clear or am I just rambling? Powers T 14:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Crystal clear. =) I'd say that category 3 wouldn't be exits, personally. In any case, after thinking a bit, I'm changing my stance regarding roads like 590 and the LOSP. We could use a "combo" exit list (like the one present on 590 right now) as I personally consider those roads expressways. That's no problem. Now for determining what roads should be an expressway...this should probably be determined on a case-by-case basis. Take NY 49 for example. It features both at-grade exits and grade-separated interchanges, but I wouldn't consider it an expressway. Is this idea of mine a bit vague? Yes, but it may be the best way to approach this. -- T M F T - C 18:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there's so much variety in road types, even along a single touring route, that it may be impossible to set up a hard-and-fast rule. In most cases, it's obvious which is the best, and in cases where it isn't obvious, maybe it just doesn't matter.  =)  Powers T 13:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * We can set up guidelines, of course. Obviously all limited-access divided highways without at-grade intersections should use an exit list, and all normal surface roads should use a junction table for major intersections.  =)  For the ones with mixtures of both types of road, or divided highways with at-grade intersections, a case-by-case determination is necessary.  Powers T 13:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan to me. I'll make the change on the project page. -- T M F T - C 19:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Other Palisades Parkway Shields
I just found a link with other Parkways that have similar shields to the Palisades Interstate Parkway:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeracer/6740229/

Maybe they should be added, and maybe they shouldn't. But I could swear that the Long Mountain Parkway has a totally different shield altogether. DanTD 16:39, 13 September 2006 (EST)

Take over my New York State Route 23B Article
I just started a crappy article on New York State Route 23B. Who wants to take it over, and add more detail?

DanTD 14:20, 20 September 2006 (EST)

SVGs are coming...
For those who haven't noticed, I've been working on some SVG shields for NY routes over on the Commons. The numbering sizes used for these shields are not based off of a specific measurement; however, they are based on dozens of pictures of NY shields found via Google searches. Hopefully, these will be completed before the end of October. -- T M F T - C 03:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * What, specifically, are you doing? I thought we had all the shields we needed.  Powers T 15:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's similar to what I did over at WP:NCSH, where, after receiving permission from the project, I made SVGs for every NC highway to replace all of the PNG shields. I got the idea to do the same thing here after noticing all of the NY SVGs available over at the commons. By combining these SVGs with my PA ones (for shield size and corner radii, etc), I was able to produce the SVGs there now.
 * Short-term, this will have no effect as not all of the SVGs have been done yet. Eventually though, I want to switch from PNGs to SVGs, as many road WPs have (this should be painless as the naming convention for the SVGs is the same as the PNGs - all that will need changing is the extension). -- T M F T - C 18:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * All of the SVGs are now done. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 03:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * To those still using the PNGs: please start using the SVGs instead. NE2 has run AWB on most (if not all) of the NYS route articles and has updated all of the PNGs with the SVGs, so please, use the SVGs instead. This will save everyone a great deal of hassle in the long run. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Reorganizing the List of State Routes in New York
See Talk:List of State Routes in New York. -- T M F T - C 19:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Browsing for reference routes
Just wanted to let you guys know that while I was tweaking the browsing for New Jersey, I set up browsing for New York Reference Routes for infoboxes and browseboxes at the bottom of articles. For example, see the bottom of Palisades Interstate Parkway. That's the only one I've put it on so far, and the only one I plan to at the moment. -- NORTH talk 22:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if making a browse for reference routes is a good thing. See "Problem with non-numbered routes" above for a previous discussion on this issue, which led to the creation of an infobox for reference routes without a browse. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 01:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I created it solely because on the PIP article, there was already a browsebox for reference routes, and I wanted to merge the two browseboxes together.
 * I don't see the issue in the above section, as these aren't actually unnumbered routes, and they do have an obvious browsing order. However, if you don't have any desire to use them on other articles, that's totally fine with me.  I only created them in order to replace the browsing that was already in place on the PIP article. -- NORTH talk 02:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not saying the browse is bad - I'm just saying that until articles (or at least redirects) and reference markers are made for every reference route, the browse will have some kinks in it. The issue that I was referring to was not explicitly mentioned in that section, but the basis of my argument was present there (regarding indexing, in this case the reference routes). That said, the essence of my stance is that until every reference route is added to the List of New York State Reference Routes, we should probably hold off on a browse - that way, we won't have to change the browse on every route every time a new reference route is added to the list or to Wikipedia. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 03:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Totally understand now. I had glossed over the fact that the list was incomplete.
 * Nevertheless, it's been created now for the "enjoyment" of all. Feel free to use it sparingly, perhaps much less sparingly once the list is completed. -- NORTH talk 16:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Seaway Trail
I noticed that Wikipedia doesn't have an article on the Seaway Trail. Would such an article fall under the jursidiction of this WikiProject? Here's a web site for those who may not be familiar with it:. Powers T 13:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see a reason why it wouldn't, since the Seaway Trail is composed of state routes, county routes, and local routes, so, by default, the article would fall under both WP:NYSR and WP:NYCR (in the same way that Ridge Road does), IMO. On a personal note, I'd enjoy seeing an article created for it. Also, is the Seaway Trail shield on Wikipedia/Commons yet? If not, I'll create it. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 19:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * A question though: would the Seaway Trail shield be a logo or just another shield? If it's a logo, then I'd have to upload the shield as a small PNG; otherwise, I'd upload it as an SVG I created this morning. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 14:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I would guess that it is owned by the non-profit Seaway Trail, Inc., and thus not in the public domain, if that affects your decision. Powers T 03:01, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * In that case, it'd have to be a low-res PNG then... -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 07:01, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Shield uploaded as Image:Seaway Trail.png. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 15:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Here it is in context.  =)  Powers T 18:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Lake Ontario State Parkway in junction lists
In most junction/exit lists, the Lake Ontario State Parkway is listed as just "Lake Ontario" with the shield and a link to the correct article. Despite the presence of the shield, I think this is too confusing for the reader. While it follows the convention for other state parkways, the major difference is that residents rarely say "Take the Lake Ontario to..." whereas they might say that for other state parkways. Might we come up with an alternative wording? Powers T 13:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Even though I'm the one that started using "Lake Ontario", I completely agree. Perhaps "Lake Ontario Pkwy" would be better? That way, it's clear that we're referring to the parkway, not the lake it parallels. -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 19:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Lake Ontario Pkwy" would be fine, I think, though I wouldn't want to go through and change all of them. =)  Powers T 19:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks to AWB, I was able to quickly change the links to read "Lake Ontario Pkwy". In the process, I was also able to carry out a ton of fixes on virtually every NYS route article (including infobox coding fixes, shield fixes, etc.). I apologize if I clogged up anyone's watchlist. =) -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 01:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

New York State Route 27 Exit list
Isn't it time the exit list for New York State Route 27 is moved to the front of the page, instead of lingering on the talk page?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_York_State_Route_27

DanTD 20:11, 26 October 2006 (EST)
 * It needs a bit of work to conform to the recently-created exit list guide, but in defense of the NY 27 list, it was created prior to the adoption of the guide. In any case, I'll stop rambling and agree that it should be moved to a sub-section of "Major intersections". -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 01:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * To whoever fixed it, I have to let them know that the intersection with the western terminus of New York State Route 27A in Massapequa Park, and the interchange with Merrick Road in Rockville Center, are not the same. DanTD 16:00, 6 November 2006 (EST)