User talk:TwinsMetsFan/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Aww...

[1] :( —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 06:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Proposed change to NYSR

Sure, I'll take a look. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways 2

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.

— Coren ^(talk) for the Arbitration Committee, 03:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Shield and templates

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!!!

Thank you for the shield and infobox help!!

SriMesh | talk 03:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

RM

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 | talk 04:04, 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. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:00, 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. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 19:17, 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. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 19:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I expanded the article to B. I don't think it's good enough for GAN, but I'd like to see what you think. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 20:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It definitely isn't ready for GA. Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject New York State routes/Pre-Good Article checklist, a page that I put together the other night that has a list of "dos" and "don'ts" for GANs. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 21:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think so, but I just wanted to check. I'm still kinda new to the USRD and the NYSR. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I-587

Why you forward the i-587 to NY 23? The I-587 is sign and is an existing route, I thought that page is long enough.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 19:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

1) It's NY 28, not 23. 2) There's no need to have two articles on the same stretch of roadway. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 19:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

What about i-124 then I thought i-124 shares the same route as US 27;plus the signmature is delete.--Freewayguy (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Then merge that into US 27 if you want. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 20:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Or merge them with U.S. Route 27 in Tennessee?US 27 is for at least 5 states and putting I-124 stuff in would just make article too tight.--Freewayguy (talk) 00:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

That state-detail article doesn't exist. In any event, I don't do work in Tennessee, so you may want to bring this up at WT:TNSR. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 00:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

IRC boot camp

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)

No clue. I've never been to California, and I don't work on their highways. – T M F 02:40, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Quick Question

What's the story behind this diff - on the face of it, it's quite concerning. Nick (talk) 12:09, 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. – T M F 17:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

WV 273 Shield

Can you make a shield for WV 273, the under-construction downtown connector for Fairmont, West Virginia? Thanks! Brian Powell (talk) 17:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

You got it:

– T M F 18:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Umm...

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. ^Mitch32^contribs 21:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Whatever. --– T M F 02:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, rest assured, if you make county route articles en masse, I will make full use of AFD. – T M F 02:48, 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.^Mitch32^contribs 22:32, 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). – T M F 18:54, 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.) – T M F 02:45, 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 (T C) 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. – T M F 02:54, 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. – T M F 18:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll continue the discussion there - CountyLemonade (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: NY 93

Sorry about that; didn't see the 'citation needed' tags at first glance. Thanks for catching it. :) --Dbm11085 (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. – T M F 22:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Feature request for {{jctint}}

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:

County	Location	Mile	Roads intersected	Notes
St. Louis	Richmond Heights	37,676.5	Fat Cat Place	Toll of $76,000,000 for exiting here
City of St. Louis		37,677.3	Burton Richardson Plaza	A new car!

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)

Hm... it should be feasible. I'll look into it over the next couple of days. – T M F 06:01, 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>". – T M F 07:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. (BTW, I figured you'd find this revision of my test sandbox slightly humorous. :P ) – T M F 00:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

New England Route 17

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 | Talk 14:59, 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. – T M F 21:15, 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.


The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 4 • 30 April 2008 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors	Features Arbitration case closes USRD gets a couplet of Featured Articles The Road to Chicago	State and national updates Leaderboard Arizona Michigan Nevada New York Texas Utah
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot (talk) 22:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

US 29 (DC)

I got the infobox set up. Would it be okay if you can create a map for U.S. Route 29 in the District of Columbia? Dabbydabby (talk) 04:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

USRD participants list

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 (T C) 21:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Categories: User talk archives