![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The last version by SPUI is a revert of the version by Doco that was explained by SPUI "holy god that uglified it".
IMHO the SPUI-version looks way uglier. Additionally, the format proposed by Doco follows the standard used for Autobahn articles in de.wikipedia which should make maintainance much easier. Bundesautobahns 2, 7, 8, 27, 40, 46, 52 and 555 use the same format, so some form of standardization may be in order.
I don't want to sart an edit-war, so I'm asking for opinions here.-- Qualle ( talk) 16:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Oh,a 2003 edition of the ADAC Maxi-Atlas that I own suggests that Gerolstein will be a folded diamond... Ranma9617 06:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the User:SPUI exit list (which is a horribly, horribly ugly mess in my opinion) to the autobahnbox template that I put up yesterday. Most Bundesautobahn articles (save one or two that didn't catch my attention yet) use that box by now. Yes, it -does- have some issues (namely the lack of images, but that's a Commons problem) but let's try for an uniform look here, unless someone's crazy enough to come up with a template that makes the people on en: happy AND rewrites all the exit lists we have on de. (Read: Not Gonna Happen.) -- Doco 22:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I saw your RfC and thought I'd respond, as a potential user of the article, not an expert. All I know about autobahns comes from driving across Germany and back again some years ago. If I was planning a journey using this road, I would probably use a journey planning site like Michelin or the AA (UK). I would not expect to see a map of all the interchanges in the wikipedia article. What I liked about this article was the extra information, for example about where you might find tailbacks. So my view is that yes, the infobox is too large and you should concentrate on including extra information. It is always useful to know about places to stop off and rest/eat/stay. Itsmejudith 11:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the above - try writing the more important (to readers) information in continuous prose, rather than using a table. This will obviously make the page a lot more easy on the eye and help the casual reader. Martinp23 17:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The infobox route map is totally broken and I have no idea how to fix it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
The section about the Eiffel Gap says this will take till 2018 before it is ready. It is now the second half of 2022, and this is still not ready. Does anyone have a current estimate when it will be ready? Else, it's better to remove this sentence as it is clearly false. Abigail-IV ( talk) 16:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The last version by SPUI is a revert of the version by Doco that was explained by SPUI "holy god that uglified it".
IMHO the SPUI-version looks way uglier. Additionally, the format proposed by Doco follows the standard used for Autobahn articles in de.wikipedia which should make maintainance much easier. Bundesautobahns 2, 7, 8, 27, 40, 46, 52 and 555 use the same format, so some form of standardization may be in order.
I don't want to sart an edit-war, so I'm asking for opinions here.-- Qualle ( talk) 16:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Oh,a 2003 edition of the ADAC Maxi-Atlas that I own suggests that Gerolstein will be a folded diamond... Ranma9617 06:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the User:SPUI exit list (which is a horribly, horribly ugly mess in my opinion) to the autobahnbox template that I put up yesterday. Most Bundesautobahn articles (save one or two that didn't catch my attention yet) use that box by now. Yes, it -does- have some issues (namely the lack of images, but that's a Commons problem) but let's try for an uniform look here, unless someone's crazy enough to come up with a template that makes the people on en: happy AND rewrites all the exit lists we have on de. (Read: Not Gonna Happen.) -- Doco 22:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I saw your RfC and thought I'd respond, as a potential user of the article, not an expert. All I know about autobahns comes from driving across Germany and back again some years ago. If I was planning a journey using this road, I would probably use a journey planning site like Michelin or the AA (UK). I would not expect to see a map of all the interchanges in the wikipedia article. What I liked about this article was the extra information, for example about where you might find tailbacks. So my view is that yes, the infobox is too large and you should concentrate on including extra information. It is always useful to know about places to stop off and rest/eat/stay. Itsmejudith 11:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the above - try writing the more important (to readers) information in continuous prose, rather than using a table. This will obviously make the page a lot more easy on the eye and help the casual reader. Martinp23 17:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The infobox route map is totally broken and I have no idea how to fix it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
The section about the Eiffel Gap says this will take till 2018 before it is ready. It is now the second half of 2022, and this is still not ready. Does anyone have a current estimate when it will be ready? Else, it's better to remove this sentence as it is clearly false. Abigail-IV ( talk) 16:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)