This is an archive of past discussions with User:TwinsMetsFan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. No formal enforcement measures are being proposed at this time, in light of the hope that editors will act of their own volition and take with them a more in-depth understanding of the issues, principles, and the disputes themselves, for future benefit and to avoid the need for more formal responses; in particular, all members of WikiProject U.S. Roads are advised that when asserting the existence of a prior consensus, it is necessary to refer to prior discussions or debates on Wikipedia where that consensus has been established.
Thank you ever so much. Pomte did modify the Template:Text-superimpose in a few ways but somehow the alignment worked in mozilla firefox but not in IE, and very seldom within the infobox. So what you did is so cool that it works even in the infobox!! Having an easier Saskatchewan junction template is also going to be so nice to use... user Ultraflame started their stubs with an ordinary wikipedia table format, and then user Mitchazenia figured out a way to use the junction template so it said rural municipality instead of county, and km instead of mile, but it took so long to convert Transcanada SK HWY 1 wikitable to the junction template, but tis done now!!! If it is easier, then will work on the remaining articles as well. Thanks for helping out. Some coding I can do, and some templates but not too much and not the too too tricky ones. Mainly I learn by copy and modify or adapt so far and haven't got all the way to create from scratch. So I will say Thank you again!!!
The numbers for the RMs are included as the names of RMs duplicate the names of villages/towns many (most) times, but not always. The number also says where the RM is located as the RMs wiggle from the bottom SE corner of SK towards the SW till the Alberta border....and then go up and go from the west to the east till the Manitoba border...and then go up and then wiggle back from east to west till the Alberta border ... and keep go back and forth east and west from border to border until the numbers are done and you are at the Northern RM for all of North SK. But how you have SK 16 still makes sense as all the names are within the infobox clumped under the title RM, so even if the urban town of Colonsay is physically located in the rural muncipality of Colonsay folks will know, but in prose the number is still needed (me thinks) .. the SK 16 article looks neater in the infobox with no number...thank you. I think I also will do this in table format.SriMesh | talk04:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
NY 312
Hi, I'm working on NY 312, and I need some more history facts. Polaron gave me some of the major facts, but he told me that you would know the minor realignments and such. If you have time, could you give me a little information for it? Thanks in advance. JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone18:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much there is in terms of history for it. As far as I know, the only history relating to the route was that it was originally designated as part of NY 52 in 1930 and renumbered to NY 312 after NY 52 was truncated to Carmel between 1935 and 1938. I'm not aware of any history prior to 1930 or after 1938. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats19:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Ah, now I remember the NY 312 Polaron may have referred to. In 1935, NY 312 was the designation for modern NY 164. If modern 164 was designated as something else in 1938 (whether it be 216 or some other route), then the designation was likely shifted south at the same time as the truncation of NY 52. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats19:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
What is an IRC boot camp anyways? Beacuse orginally Rschen7754 prefer me to join the boot camp. Don't the boot camp help me to improve me on contributions, or they tell me which article needs strong help. Do you work in California highways, and have you ever been to California before?--Freewayguy (talk) 00:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be some disagreement over whether an article on an existing county road should be merged with one on the former State Route that used to run along part of it. From what I've read about both, the county route is longer, so perhaps they shouldn't be merged. I've said before in the past that I don't think that every County Road should be covered, but I wouldn't be ready to dismiss articles on County Roads so quickly. ----DanTD (talk) 14:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
The gist of it is that the diff above was spurred by the creation of an article for a county route that follows the former routing of a minor-at-best former state route that already has its own article. It is in many ways the culmination of a long period of frustration between myself and that editor. It won't happen again, as he made it clear my opinion means nothing to him, and I will do my best to be mutual about that position.
Now, as for the two articles... there isn't any reason they shouldn't be merged. The county route's lone claim to fame is that it was part of the aforementioned state route, and there was/is no routing differences between the two. The histories of both are also intertwined. – TMF17:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
What the heck do I care? I'm tired of you telling me what I should and shouldn't do for NYSR. Wikipedia is for free article writing. I wrote Tompkins 115 cause I felt like it. Also, you shouldn't tell me off for what I like to do on Wiki. Now, if you continue to whine, the less I am gonna listen. I don't care if you block me, but I'm free to write certain articles. If you don't want CRs in NYSR, support the freaking NYCR proposal. Heck, I've got certain freedoms on Wiki, so bug off my talk page. Merge, AfD, etc exist, and you're free to use them. If you continue to bug me, I will bring you to ANI. Mitch32contribs21:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, rest assured, if you make county route articles en masse, I will make full use of AFD. – TMF02:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I have a willing apology with a couple of suggestions. The following is a list that we can make a deal of:
Condition
Mitchazenia
TwinsMetsFan
1
Stop writing CRs unless notability is established
Merge NY 330 into Tompkins 115 (meaning 115 stays)
2
Stop writing on decommissioned routes
Help expand them wherever can
3
Start giving out an opinion on certain things
Be a little lighter on certain things done in NYSR
4
Continue disbanding NY minor list
Same. (Disband minor list)
5
Allow TMF to post on talk page again
Be a little less to complaining about what users do
6
Let TMF express his opinion and not complain to other USRD members
Trying not to be so hard on other users. NYSR is not a bureaucracy after all
If you're willing to agree to the conditions in the above chart, I'll give you my sincerest apologies to the above post. Also, I doubt all the conditions I listed will happen, but as you can tell, I'm willing to be friends again. After all, our arguing has caused a drastic halt in NYSR rather than helping it. Please reply.Mitch32contribs22:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: GA Reviews
Yeah, maintenance parameters and stuff can be something I can add to the list (gonna have to look back and see what exactly those are!). I think of GA as applying Wiki-wide standards, not necessarily project specific. In an ideal world, that's what an A-class review would cover, but not every wikiproject has an A class review process. GA reviewers, even for specific categories, shouldn't necessarily have to enforce specific project standards. —Rob(talk)15:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, I don't necessarily see those as project specific as much as I do see them as items that should be in an article that is deemed a GA (in short, I believe a reader would expect to find these items in a road GA). – TMF18:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I-15
Hey, Davemeistermoab informed me of the "back and forth" that's been going on between you and me on the Interstate 15 article. When I did my most recent edit to it I wasn't aware I made the same one before, so excuse me for that.
Anyway, I'm not getting your reasoning for including US-95. Yeah, Las Vegas is a major city, but so is L.A., and to a lesser extent Salt Lake. So are you saying we should include all the freeway interchanges that go on in those two cities (I-10, I-215, and UT-201 are just some I can name off the top of my head)? Thanks - CountyLemonade (talk) 23:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
No, and I don't follow how you arrived at that conclusion since there aren't any other junctions listed for the Las Vegas area. Generally, the infobox major junctions should have the "most major" junctions along the route that help to illustrate what areas the route passes through; however, there shouldn't be multiple junctions for one particular area. The current junction set on I-15 meets both of those theories. (FWIW, I didn't add the US 95 junction originally, but I do believe that it should remain nonetheless.) – TMF02:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to jump in... would I-515 be a better choice than US 95? 515 runs concurrently with the eastern half of US 95 in the LV area. I could see the argument that US 95 is a national road, however. --Rschen7754 (TC) 02:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Theoretically, I-515, US 93 and US 95 could all be listed; they meet I-15 at the same interchange in Vegas. – TMF02:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I am now understanding why you have US 95 in there. But a major junction is a major junction, and from what I've seen from other major interstate articles U.S. routes aren't in there, even to illustrate what major cities it passes through. If a person wanted that information, wouldn't they look at the major cities box in the route description? CountyLemonade (talk) 00:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
My viewpoint is that junctions in a major city (regardless of what the road intersected is) is a major junction. In any event, this discussion is really best suited for the I-15 talk page. – TMF18:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, TMF. If it's not too much trouble, could you add an option to {{jctint}} to allow independent cities (outside of counties) to be displayed? Something like this:
I would just do it manually, but oddly enough, MO-100's eastern terminus is at a noaccess junction, inside the independent City of St. Louis. (St. Louis isn't the only independent city out there; Baltimore and several major VA cities are as well.) Anyway, it's something that I think would be useful. Thanks in advance for attempting it. —Scott5114↗[EXACT CHANGE ONLY]03:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Done - by specifying "location=<city>" and "indep_city=yes", you'll now get a two-column cell that displays "City of <city>". – TMF07:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm trying to expand New England Route 17 and was wondering if your 1935 map shows what the route number is for the continuation of NY 23 across the state line in Massachusetts. It's still shown as Route 17 in 1931 and is already MA 23 in 1938. Also, another editor is insisting that the Hudson-MA portion of NY 23 was signed as part of New England Route 17 based on the 1923 ALA Green Book turn by turn guide. Additional info would be most welcome there. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk14:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The 1935 RMcN still shows NY 23's continuation into Massachusetts as Route 17. I'll also look into the NE 17 situation, but according to the 1920s info project page, it was signed as part of NY 23 from the outset in 1924. The 1926 RMcN (at the Broer Map Library) and the 1930 renumbering map are consistent with this. – TMF21:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 05:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter, Issue 4
Apologies for the late delivery; my internet connection went down halfway through the delivery process.
As discussed at WT:USRD, the participants list at WP:USRD is being split by state. Due to any of the following factors- your extended participation in WT:USRD discussions, your IRC participation, or your extended participation in Shields or Maps, I have guessed that you are a nationwide editor and have designated you as such in the USRD partiicpants table. This is part of the lengthy process. If this is in error, please let me know immediately. This is especially likely with this group as I have to guess whether you are a national or a state editor. Regards, Rschen7754 (TC) 21:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering
On a listing of a refernce route It doesn't show a image of Inner Loop for 940T. Can you help so it doesn't say Image... (when I didn't even write that in, etc)?
The 2008 Home Run Derby took place yesterday. Justin Morneau defeated Josh Hamilton in the final round, 5 home runs to 3, although Hamilton broke a record with 28 home runs hit in the first round.
From the Editors
Baseball has a history unlike any other sport. It has been played in countless countries throughout the decades, and it will undoubtedly continue play for many more. On this eve, some the finest players the sport has to offer will take the field at the Yankee Stadium. Four popes spoke there, Pelé scored goals there, "The Greatest [football] Game Ever Played" was battled out there, John Philip Sousa lead a band there, George Costanza worked there; but what do all these events have in common? They fail to reach the level of greatness that the baseball that was played there did.
In 1923, a man named Babe Ruth decided to build a new house, and over the years, that house was a home to some of the greatest baseball ever played. If I were to list out all of these great moments, it would be longer than the bill for the New Yankee Stadium. So I'll sum it up by saying that we can remember these great moments by adding them to this place we've gathered at for future generations to read about, to learn about, to dream about; but more importantly we can watch tonight and we can remember how baseball is unlike anything else that we will encounter in our lives. — Blackngold29
I knew you couldn't leave for good Twinkee. I missed you. Now that you're back in, its only a matter of time before you start editing like crazy again. It's an unhealthy addiction isn't it! How you liking Jerry Manual so far? --FancyMustard (talk) 05:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I doubt I'll ever return to the level I edited at before since I simply don't have as much time as I used to. As for Manuel, I enjoy his style of managing much more than Randolph's - and I think the players do as well, judging on their performance since that time (even in losses). – TMF23:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
You deleted this for "no assertion of notability", but this is not a speedy deletion criterion. Please undelete it; thank you. --NE218:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey there TwinsMets fan I asked User:RyRy to expand the article to try to get a DYK out of it, and I've gone back in behind his work to clean it up a bit. Would you mind taking another run through it as well if you have time? I want to be sure that the article is accurate and well worded, and not too fluffy. Your opinion would be most appreciated! Please reply here if you are interested in helping out, I'll watchlist your page. (as an aside in regards to your username, I'm not sure how that's possible to like anyone other than the Twins, but I suppose the Santana trade wasn't as painful for you as it was for me, heh :-). Cheers! Keeperǀ7617:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You still edit road articles or you stepped-down from it. Because lately, I don't see you editing any road articles. I wonder what you do now.--FreewayguyCall?Fish22:17, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
We apologize for not sending out our August newsletter, we have tried to cover some events of the month in this issue.
The playoffs have started! The Dodgers and Phillies have won their respective Division Series and will face off in the NL Championship Series. Both series in the American League have yet to be finished. Show your support for your favorite teams by keeping up with their season pages!
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Non-article Long Island pages, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 10:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
WHTK
When updating radio station logos, please move the old logo to the history section rather than just remove it.--Rtphokie (talk) 11:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
NY 35
Hey TMF, My map shows NY35 on the Mumford to Ontario routing. My map also shows a very small branch named 35B just north of that route in eastern Rochester from 35 north to US 104. For NY215, the map doesn't label anything as 215. Redman road is drawn on the map, but not identified. 25or6to4 (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Jctint/legend requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes ({{transclusionless}}).
I don't know about this. Is there a reasonable substitute available? BTW, sorry to bring this to your page, TMF. I can't find any discussion page on the template itself. ----DanTD (talk) 17:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
AFAIK, Michigan is the only state that still uses a legend box for their tables. I won't be heartbroken if this is deleted; two-fifths of the types shown there (no access and deleted) are no longer used per WP:USRD consensus, and the other three are usually combined with a one-liner in the notes column if they're used. – TMF23:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
US 62 in NY
I'll see what I can do. I see it's rather detailed, a bit too much so I think. I'm probably best at describing it from about Hamburg north to the end in NF, since I'm most familiar with that part. Daniel Case (talk) 00:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't recall there ever being consensus for changing {{Jctint}}, but I could be wrong. Could you provide a link to where it was decided? --Fredddie™20:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Admittedly, there is none at the moment for phasing out the "street" parameter, but as all it is is an extra parameter that's redundant to "road" and the functionality of {{jct}}, I figured its phase-out and eventual removal was non-controversial. Originally, what that parameter did was add the street name underneath the location of the junction - it used to be that the location cell did not span rows, thus in some cases there were many repeating locations and having the street name broke up the monotony. When we went to the "rowspanning" version of the junction list a couple years back, the street name was moved into the road's cell and it's been redundant to the "road" parameter ever since. So, basically, the "street" parameter just exists for legacy purposes.
As for the noaccess and deleted/decomd types, there is consensus for that. The discussion, admittedly old, is here. Although it's from late 2007, I doubt consensus on this subject has changed. At least, my opinion on the subject hasn't. ;)
I'm not against opening up a discussion on either topic. However, I don't see any reason why either of these items would be kept or wanted by the community at large. I've been wrong before, though. – TMF21:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I was looking through the Washington County quadrangles and off Route 22A there is an "Old State Road" that currently cul-de-sacs before the state line. This seems to match that old 286A I found on marked maps. The map is at this quadrangle.3 1/2 years of Mitch3211:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
My maps indicate that a 286A existed, but it was located somewhere around Hampton; certainly not that far north. – TMF18:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi TMF- You can take me off the list as well. I joined on when I first came to Wikipedia and soon found I did not have as much as I though to New York Highways as I only lived there for a year and anything I could contribute was already well developed. Good Luck Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you asses the article on John Lindsay back in march. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how to improve the article? I'd like to eventually get it to good article status. Thanks--Work permit (talk) 01:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not a big biography guy, but to me it looks pretty good. There appears to be a couple of paragraphs as well as some sentences at the end of paragraphs that don't have inline references; I'd get that resolved before making a GA run. That said, it otherwise looks like a solid article to me. – TMF21:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Commons uploading
When you uploaded the corrected NY shields, did you do them one-by-one or is there a faster way to upload? I'm doing the same thing with Iowa's shields, and since they go up to 999, I don't want to spend the next 3 weeks uploading shields. --Fredddie™20:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I did it one-by-one. There's a tool called "Commonist" that does batch uploading; however, I don't know if it can overwrite existing files. On the commonist page, there's a link to a Perl script that does batch uploads and overwrites files; however, to get it to work on Windows I have to go to a half-dozen different sites and download different things, so I passed on it. Commonist may be the best bet if it can overwrite files; if not, the Perl script will probably be the way to go. Hope that helps. – TMF20:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Of course, you're right. I didn't recognize it without the trees blocking the view of 590. It's obvious now that's the Seabreeze auxiliary parking lot. I've been wondering how the park feels about losing some of their parking to the new alignment. =) I'll add something to the image description and caption to make it clearer. PowersT14:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the spot. I didn't recognize the area either at first when I went down there last month because of all the trees that were there before. – TMF16:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The NY 50S issue
I was at a friend's house and ran across a 1973 map produced by Gousha/Exxon. I was looking at an inset, and well. The alignment that we have for NY 50S, was marked as NY 50 Spur, an auxiliary route, which makes more sense.Mitch/HC3217:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Here's what I have: The earliest map I have that shows a Schenectady inset is the 1938 Green Book. It marks only "mainline" NY 50, if you will, on Ballston Avenue in Scotia. The next inset is with the 1947 SNYDPW General Drafting, which marks 50 on both the mainline route and on Freemans Bridge/Maxon/Erie. The 1952 inset on the Sunoco RMcN shows the same thing - a split 50 on Ballston and Freemans Bridge/Maxon/Erie - as does all of General Drafting's insets throughout the 1950s.
By 1962, General Drafting ceased to mark the eastern leg of 50, showing only Ballston Avenue as 50. The eastern leg returned by GD's 1968 map, but as "ALT 50". (The 1962 and 1964 Rand McNally Capital District insets cut off east of Schenectady.) The 1973 Shell Gousha inset shows the east leg as "Spur 50" - matching your map to a "T" as it should given the year - and as you can see on yours it was routed on Seward Place instead of Erie Boulevard. The 1977 Exxon General Drafting still shows the east leg as "ALT 50" and still has it on Erie Boulevard. The east leg is devoid of any designations, "special route" or mainline, on the 1981 ILNY RMcN.
I'm not sure what any of it means. It was clearly a state route of some kind; heck, a good chunk of the routing is a reference route today. The only way to present its history is probably how it's given above, but under what heading? That's the question. – TMF09:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Apology accepted. Editing with scripts and AWB is tricky at times; a lot of times, they try and change stuff that shouldn't be changed. I use AWB fairly regularly, so I'm somewhat used to having to undo some of AWB's general fixes. – TMF09:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
To elaborate further, this isn't something that needs to be done projectwide, just in that one article. Once it gets more text, particularly in the history section, we can probably go back to alternating. But with so many pictures illustrating a relatively short text, stacking looks better. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, we could just remove some of the pictures instead. Most are in the commons category anyway. – TMF20:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I do think it can lose one of them (Airtuna's picture of the east end ... I really don't consider photos of highway termini to be encyclopedic in and of themselves, and if I did I wouldn't be taking them in the dead of winter). But at the same time he made a lot of them, and I don't want to seem like I'm practicing a subtle form of article ownership by only using photos I took in the article. My thoughts are, we'll expand the text somewhat and see if we can find a place for it. Daniel Case (talk) 04:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
NY 363 / Brandywine Highway article merge
I believe you erred in merging these two articles. They're two different roads. I would be interested in verifying your (uncited) sources for these assertions.
dlainhart (talk) 08:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
The vast majority is 363 is part of the highway. Having separate articles for the two would be largely redundant and would result in a fairly crappy article for 363 (something like this). Unless there's something else that can be said about 363 by itself, it's best to leave it as-is. – TMF16:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you recently set criteria for the selected articles at Portal:U.S. Roads. I like most of the criteria, but I have one caveat with the quality requirement. I believe articles should be a minimum GA-class rather than B-class since GA's and better have to undergo thorough reviews to test their quality. Dough4872 (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, the reason I wrote what I did is that in the early days of the system that's what the criteria was. It was not at all uncommon for B-Class articles to be selected, and reaching GA status back then meant that your article would automatically be a portal selected article. I'm not totally against "upping" the criteria, but then the question becomes what to do with sub-par past selected articles? If this was FA, they'd be demoted. – TMF17:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Living in the present, it makes sense to raise the bar as we have plenty of articles GA and higher. In the past, we had few articles above B-class so the criteria was lower then for what needs to constitute a selected article. Dough4872 (talk) 23:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
NY and some of the national projects have actually had a high amount of B-Class articles for a long time, but I do get your point. As an aside, there are some B-Class articles that exist today that are better than many articles that have been deemed GAs (U.S. Route 62 in New York versus New York State Route 285 as a quick example); however, they probably wouldn't survive a PUSRD SA nom right now since the backlog of FA and A-Class content is huge - something like 20 or so articles as of earlier this month. (And of course, the remedy for the situation I pointed out is to GAN the former or GAR the latter, but that's not the point here. =) )
In any event, the "guidelines" I put down were intended to be informal and exist only to put the unwritten standards that I've (maybe others too) have referred to over the years in writing. The precedent set by the quality of past selected articles should really be the prevailing criteria and the only one that matters. The trick is to find some criteria that loosely matches precedent. I did some quick research, and the last B-Class article was selected in April 2008; however, it was listed as a GA 12 days later. The last "pure" B-Class - one that wasn't promoted after the fact - was in November 2007. Perhaps it is time to raise the bar based on precedent, where all of the SA-standard articles over the last year and a half have been GA or higher.
I guess on one end I'm torn about leaving good B-Class articles in the dust, but the counterpoint to that of course is to nominate them for GA. I guess another concern is that treating GA as the gold standard places a higher emphasis on items like NY 285 over a US 62 NY, but of course, the counterpoint to that was given above and the fact is that the "bad" GAs (typically ones that have no photographs or creative imagery at all) would be eliminated through the other standards anyway. So, I guess I'm not opposed at all to raising the standard - it's just that it's been at one level so long it feels weird to move it, I suppose. – TMF06:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I guess it really doesn't matter whether the minimum is B or GA since the other criteria calls for it to be well-referenced and well-illustrated. Dough4872 (talk) 17:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I been good and yeah I might come back on a part time basis. I'll start with your NY 273 article even though I'm a little rusty and that one is a bit tough for me to help.—JA10Talk • Contribs00:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, TMF. I noticed after you made this edit, that the way the table is formatted implies that the route leaves Wheatland and enters Scottsville at some point, but obviously the route is in Wheatland all the way to Chili (since Scottsville is within the town of Wheatland). Is this intended, or is it an unintended side-effect? PowersT12:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I suppose it's an unintended side effect. Current de facto practice at NYSR is to use only locations with defined boundaries in the junction list and the infobox, which is why Mumford was moved to the notes column. I personally wouldn't worry too much about it since the junction list is only intended to be a quick overview of the route. – TMF13:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
It just strikes me as odd, since it implies that Scottsville is at the same level of government hierarchy as Rochester, Chili, and Wheatland. PowersT13:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, from that standpoint, the junction table used to imply that Mumford was at the same level when it has no government at all. – TMF21:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, yes, I wasn't suggesting your edit was in any way inappropriate. It was just that showing up in my watchlist that brought the larger issue to my attention. Sorry for any confusion. PowersT22:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Old routings of NY 39 and NY 60
My apologies for not responding to the note you left for me about these routes sooner. I haven't been editing on Wikipedia too much in recent months. I would be happy to take some requested photos for the articles, though, when I get the opportunity. What are you looking for? Skudrafan1 (talk) 13:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Copyright v. Public Domain on NYS Created Docs
Hello, i'm writing because I saw you are the founder of the NYS wikiproject. I'm not very familiar with all image uploading rules yet as re copyrights. I wanted to upload a map excerpt from a school district map created by the NYSDOT and Suffolk County Planning department, assuming this would be in the public domain, and saw info to the effect that each state has different rules on such things, making it hard for me how to figure whether NY state government materials are public domain (as opposed to U.S. gov't materials, where it seems very streamlined to get those images online.) You can see the maps i'm referring to here. If there's a place on wikipedia to use to confirm NYS material are in public domain (or not), I'd appreciate any guidance you can offer! Thanks! --Neighborhoodpalmreader (talk) 17:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey. NY state documents typically are not in the public domain; the one exception that I know of is the NYSDOT MUTCD supplement, which is an extension of the FHWA MUTCD (a public domain document). I'm not an expert on licensing, though, so I'd check out Wikipedia:Copyright assistance and the pages that are linked from there. Hope that helps. – TMF17:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not ignoring you! I've put it on my list of pics to take. It's just not my usual area, but I'll get there sometime. Lvklock (talk) 04:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add DEFAULTSORT headers for categories if there are no categories and/or if the header is the same as the name as the article. The categories are sorted automatically by the name of the article which makes your adding redundant in that case. Besides, the United States Senate elections in NY are sorted by year, because the names of the articles have different beginnings (some special elections, later state elections), but the sorting should be in chronological order. Kraxler (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
AWB automatically added that when I was assessing articles; please bring this issue to their attention. Thanks. – TMF19:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the other editor provided references, which you did not do. If you had provided references with the claim and not tried to give it undue weight in the article (it definitely didn't need nor deserve its own section), I wouldn't have reverted your edits. – TMF04:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
All I see in the MOS section on images is a reference to "scaling down" upright images through "upright=x". I see nothing that refers to any fixed sizes whatsoever. Additionally, Wikipedia:Picture tutorial says "Typically if you specify a width in pixels, it should be at least 300px, so that it's no smaller than the user's preferred width." Indeed, my width is set at 250px, so while the images may look larger to you, they look smaller to me. – TMF06:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
There was a lengthy discussion on the Manual of Style talk page back in August about modifying the recommendation that images be left to display at the user's default size. The end result of that discussion is what you see on the page now. Specifically, the text "As a rule, images should not be set to another size (that is, one that overrides the default)" was removed. The intent, from reading the discussion, seemed to be to encourage the use of other image sizes when they are useful; if that encouragement is not clear in the new text, it may need revising. (That said, you are correct that Juliancolton's edit shrinks the images for many logged-in users, myself included, and that this is probably not desirable.) PowersT15:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I read through a few paragraphs of that discussion, and the impression I got is that size forcing is only recommended for things that have detail (like maps or diagrams) or need a large width to be useful (like a panorama) - which is what I thought was the status quo anyway. Is my interpretation correct? – TMF20:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
It appears the original impetus was to remove the implication that any size-forced images ought to be rare exceptions, and with it the natural inclination for users to go through and remove size forcing from articles (good-faith attempts to bring the articles in-line with what the MOS was perceived to say). Generally, consensus was that editorial judgment should be the arbiter of how big an image need be, rather than leaving it up to the user's preferences (which, for the vast majority of readers, are at the default of 180px). PowersT20:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with that for maps/diagrams/extremely wide photos and the like, but as for the pictures and changes that started this specific thread, I fail to see the advantage of adding set sizes to them. Like I said earlier, it goes against the picture tutorial and also has no to minimal effect on the reader's understanding of the pictures. – TMF23:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the only reason to change the size of the images in this case is to avoid the 180px default. There is a movement beginning to attempt to change that default to something more reasonable. PowersT16:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Rt 57 pic request
Yup, it's still on my list. I just relocated to my winter abode, which is much closer, so providing the weather cooperates, I should be able to do it on one of the next couple weekends. Lvklock (talk) 13:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
My stance in this is as neutral as an uninvolved third-party would be. The extent of Rschen's involvement in the matter is linking to the diff of your edit on IRC. I didn't agree with your change, thus I reverted it. Simple as that. – TMF04:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Ah, damn, I see why you brought it up now. The capital "T" came about through copy/pasting the name of the parent cat ("The Bronx") into AWB. I'll fix it ASAP. – TMF12:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Fixed. Thanks for bringing the issue up. When you add categories to routes in ~40 different counties, this kind of stuff falls through the cracks... – TMF13:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Your welcome. I was considering doing this myself, unless you were planning to rename the existing category or something. ----DanTD (talk) 13:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Roads and county cats
I'm not sure about this edit. The portion of US 6 that's in Rockland County is from about the toll booth to the middle of the Bear Mountain Bridge, maybe a tenth of a mile if you stretch it. It plays no role in the county's transportation network, really, and just incidentally located in part of it. (Perhaps we should have some NYSR or even USRD-wide policy that a certain minimum mileage or intersection is required to add a road to a county cat?) Cf. NY 246, which really shouldn't be in the Genesee County cat just because only the last 100 feet of the road is in Genesee County. Daniel Case (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
The line has always been considered to be black and white on this issue: if any part of the route enters a county, even just a few feet, that county's category is added and the county is mentioned in the infobox (for state routes). – TMF21:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
En dashes and hyphens
I didn't know that directions are supposed to be connected with en dashes, not hyphens. Thank you for correcting me. I will attempt to remember this in the future.
Hello TwinsMetsFan, WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I think this should be moved to {{Infobox road}}. I've had a new thought since we talked about it before. It should at IR so the size of the shields can be determined separately. IRS can call it to use 50x40px and RL could call it for smaller, probably 35x28 or similar. --Fredddie™04:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't feel that strongly about it either way, so if you want to move it to change things for the road list template, go ahead. As long as it doesn't affect how IRS is rendered, I don't think anyone would object to a move/fork. – TMF04:38, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
However, I don't see the point of moving it to Infobox road instead of IRS as the former generates banners where necessary through other subtemplates. – TMF04:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
NY 9R
I reverted back to my version. Instead of reverting perhaps you can help me make this article correct. I recommend if you believe my wording to be an issue that you concentrate on fixing my wording instead of whole-sale reverting. The previous edition is INCORRECT in many assertions of road names and does not mention that Baker Avenue is the border between the city of Cohoes and the town of Colonie. The route description section even claimed the entire length is in Colonie, not true as the north lane of said ave. is in Cohoes as is every building on the east side fronting on the road. Incorrect information is claiming the road starts as Columbia Ave Ext. it does not, it is Johnson Road (Columbia Ave Ext is a relatively new road from the 20th century, Johnson Road has existed since the 1800s and possibly even 100-200 years earlier than that as a Dutch or Native path to the Boght); the article also claimed that Columbia Ave Ext changes to Columbia Ave before the split with Johnson, incorrect, the name Columbia Ave is only used in Cohoes and not on 9R. These are facts and the current version is playing lose with facts and is outright incorrect. Possible mentions for the future to be added may be that sitting along the road is the headquarters of the Mr Subb chain, if there should ever be an article written on the local fast food chain.Camelbinky (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I wrote my post while you were writing the initial post on my talk page and could not have known your issues only your revert. Thanks for the dickish attitude and lack of good faith. I responded on my talk page here is my post plus more-
If you dont want to make it better, then just dont bother with working on it or reverting it then. You could have posted on the talk page or on my talk page here as you've done. The article was WRONG. If I took the attitude that cleaning up wrong information in articles shouldnt be my "responsibility" then that would be a shame.Camelbinky (talk) 17:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Including the two links you mention I added only three links all together, hardly overlinking. And as New York towns are unique it is standard practice to link them at their first mention so it cna be known that these are political entities and not "town" as in "settlement".Camelbinky (talk) 17:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Standard practice? They're not linked on any other road article in the state, nor are they linked on other articles about New York topics that use the words "town" or "city". – TMF17:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
They are linked in just about every village, town, and city article I know about. I know of several current and former editors (former editor User:JBC3 is where I picked up the habit as we discussed fixing up town, village and city articles especially geoboxes, and I believe that User:UpstateNYer does as well though not quite certain) who do link town, hamlet, city, etc to the Administrative divisions of New York article. IMO this is important as it keeps the distinction I mentioned between the generic town as a settlement and an actual political entity with a common council, town supervisor, and bureaucracy that provides services such as sewer, water, trash pickup, road maintenance etc. I see this discussion to be silly and ridiculous. What harm do you see over three links I added? Perhaps if you took a step back and realized I am trying to help and I fixed the inaccuracies in the article we could work together to make it better. I think you might want to take a short break on this as it seems you might be developing some ownership issues and I think you are a better editor than that. You may be an expert on working on road articles, but I am an expert on working on municipal articles.Camelbinky (talk) 17:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Artwork
Do you still have a copy of the white head on black background with a 411 inside the head?
I saw it on here and would like to use it as a logo on 411 NY.
If you no longer have it, could it be duplicated from Archive.org without infringement? Thanks. Sp07019 (talk) 18:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
That explains why I no longer saw it. An admin must have corrected it. At least I know it belongs to WSDOT. Thanks for taking the time to respond. Sp07019 (talk) 01:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
shield template
I added the states to the shield template and some of the state-name interstates. When I saved, part of the template was hanging out so it wasn't working right. I undid my change so it wouldn't break anything, but maybe you could see what was wrong because I sure can't find it. --Fredddie™12:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Do you think it's a good idea to include a parameter for when a section of highway first opens? This would be particularly useful for interstates that were built over a period of time. For instance, the first section of I-80 (IA) opened in 1958, but the road wasn't completed until 1972. --Fredddie™06:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
You have made comments on two current ACRs and the nominators have worked to address your concerns. Would you mind revisiting these? --Rschen775407:55, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
If the ACR was hanging on my comments I would, but since no one else has reviewed them, I see no reason to do it at this time. – TMF11:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
We're going to go ahead and try this again! The contest will begin April 1. It is a contest to encourage editors to improve teh quality of WP:USRD articles and participate in USRD. Precautions will be taken to make sure that people do not "game the system" and bring article quality down. Please sign up ASAP! Announcements regarding the contest will be made at WP:USRDCUP, Twitter, and/or IRC. --Rschen775406:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Not be an ass or anything but Fonda is 810 people in .6 sq miles, Fultonville is 710 in .5; this is hardly a big distinction (I wrote List of incorporated places in New York's Capital District so I know the numbers there are correct). Its been about a year since I last drove that section of the Thruway but I do believe Fultonville's name has the top listing on the exit sign as well. The other names listed in that section either have the exit within their corporate bounds (such as Amsterdam) or are the only placename close by to the exit. In this case perhaps listing both villages instead of just Fonda or Fultonville?Camelbinky (talk) 23:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't mind if both are listed. I tried to keep it at one location per exit, but I suppose that's not realistic for the NY 30A exit. – TMF00:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject U.S. Roads in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject U.S. Roads for a Signpost article to be published in early May. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. Before I think of adding the "busiest road in country" bit again, I found a link that should be more helpful than the one I had posted. I'd like to get your input. The link is: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-27-tolls_N.htm
Is this satisfactory?
Wrong key or not, the mileposts are unsourced. If no citation is added for them, they should be removed as there's nothing to verify them against as it stands now. – TMF06:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Fixed; the file name was changed in the time since the initial template was written. If you had looked closer, you would have noticed that Highway 41 was the only one of the extra sign routes that had a broken shield. As for the latter comment, the "infobox road/<area> <type> shield" et al templates will no longer exist when the conversion is fully completed. – TMF20:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I got a new one for you. Secondary highways have their own template which is not longer working. The template is Template:Infobox road/AB 2ndHwy shield. It could probably be merged if you use a switch for all numbers larger then 499. An example broken page is Dinosaur Trail.
I saw you talking in IRC about direction_a/b overriding direction_a#/b#. I put that in there intentionally as a shortcut for when all segments are the same direction. Rather than specifying the east and west ends four times, you can specify it once. I would like to see that shortcut remain, but maybe it can be coded another way. Perhaps...
{{#if:{{{direction_a#|}}}|{{{direction_a#|}}} end:|{{#if:{{{direction_a|}}}|{{{direction_a|}}} end:|From:}}}}
This way, the segment direction would override the general direction as long as both are specified. —Fredddie™09:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I assumed that's what you meant by the code. The way it was originally coded though, it wasn't possible to override the direction if needed (like if a three-segmented route has different directions for one of the three). The new code should, and has done so in sandbox tests. So, in short, the feature will most definitely remain - it's just improved now. =) – TMF21:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
No offense, but I think the previous code is a pretty poor way to code it when considering scenarios like the one I mentioned above. IMO, having "master" directions with the option to override them if needed makes more sense. – TMF03:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
