![]() | This page 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. |
I'm going to add a listas param which allows the setting of the DEFAULTSORT setting (similar to what all the other WikiProject banners have) and remove the sort param if no-one objects. -- WOSlinker ( talk) 23:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
|sort=100
, the item would be in the 1 section of the category list. The template code is currently littered with |{{#if:{{{sort|}}}|{{{sort}}}|{{PAGENAME}}}} after each cateogry to sort it. However, if sorting is set by using the keyword {{DEFAULTSORT:sortkey}} then there is no need for all that extra code. Actually, it doesn't appear as though the sort param is very well used. I only spotted 3 occurences, so I've removed them anyway from those banners as only sorting three items doesn't really help much as they are then out of place from all the other items in the categories. If I'm going to update the sort code, then I might as well change the param name to listas to match all the other banners though. --
WOSlinker (
talk)
23:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC)See [1], specifically [2] - apparently this new method leads to conflicts with the sorts used by other projects when they're not identical. – T M F 00:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Support, as suggester. -- Admrboltz ( talk) 01:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Is there a reason that our template does not include the U.S. Roads portal box like most other project banners do? -- Admrboltz ( talk) 16:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Meh... unless I'm missing something, this switch isn't as easy as it seems. Unlike the WPUS banner (which has a simple DC=yes for DC), NY and NY-CRTF could be in any one of 21 different parameters: {{{state}}}
and {{{state1}}}
through {{{state20}}}
. If a halfway decent way to detect when NY or NY-CRTF is one of the states is found, the rest of the code is simple. Adding the portal box to the template is as simple as adding {{
portal}} to the start of the table cell containing the "This article ... " text, and switching from one portal to two is as simple as adding a second parameter to {{
portal}}. –
T
M
F
07:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
As something of an off-shoot of the above thread, here's an idea that keeps reentering my mind every so often: implementing by-state importance ratings. The current importance system is fine on a national basis, but on a statewide level it doesn't really work. As it stands right now, each state only has one or two top-importance articles. In the case of NY, I can think of several articles that could/should be top-importance. I know that historically we've put a much greater emphasis on quality ratings than on importance ratings, but this might be something worth considering. – T M F 18:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Michigan has a portal now. Can someone duplicate the coding so that I can tag the articles and photos from the portal? Thanks. Imzadi 1979 → 07:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello, the format of file:Nuvola filesystems camera.png is PNG. The same image exists in SVG format. Please change Nuvola filesystems camera.png to Gnome-dev-camera.svg. Nodulation ( talk) 00:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
should be changed to:
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
This will convert USRD over to using the new HWY ACR forum. Imzadi 1979 → 19:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
For automating ACR
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
becomes
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">{{HWYACR}}</td></tr>|}}<!--
May need another in the future but this centralizes all the banners. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 23:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
As part of creating task forces for every state, we will need new links for the states that currently do not have task forces and will also need to change the links of the current subprojects and task forces, which still link to the name of the subproject. Dough 48 72 01:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Something that got missed... The CASH, NJSH and PASH SA wordings should probably be updated to reflect the change to task force status while making any other changes. I realize that we'd be retroactively changing things on articles that were SAs when the TFs were still projects, but that's not a big deal to me. Imzadi 1979 → 08:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Several years ago the Michigan Highways project (MISH) was made a subproject of the Michigan project (MICH) in addition to USRD. I'd like to propose that our banner, in addition to assessing Michigan's highway articles in Category:Michigan road transport articles by quality also asses them into Category:Michigan articles by quality. This would cement the relationship between the MISH task force and the MICH and USRD projects. Potentially, this relationship should be extended to all of the other states.
The only hitch would be importance ratings. Would it be possible for this template to take a mid-importance article for MISH and tag it as a low-importance article for MICH? Imzadi 1979 → 01:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
{{{typeX_importance}}}
and {{{stateX_importance}}}
(or we could begin deprecating both and call it {{{topicX_importance}}}
instead) and the state param could be something like {{{typeX_importance_parent}}}
, substituting "parent" for whatever descriptor works best for describing the state-level parent project.{{{state}}}
before it looks for {{{state1}}}
in cases where multiple states are listed. Those two params are not used at the same time in reality (or at least they shouldn't be), so this is mostly to make sure the template doesn't get confused. (It could also look for state1 before it looks for state; I have no preference as to what order they're searched for.) –
T
M
F
12:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)Bump since we didn't get anywhere with this before... I'm bumping the discussion back out of the archives. I believe that we already have state-specific importances in place to allow each USRD TF/project to have a separate importance, as NY does in many cases. So it looks like it's a matter of making a decision folks. Imzadi 1979 → 08:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can someone add a parameter to mark selected articles of P:MDRD? Dough 48 72 05:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Since we track maps, and we're starting to slowly deploy KML files to our articles, how about we add a parameter to track whether or not a KML file is needed in an article? Just like needs-map, it could be set to default to "yes" and place the article into a tracking category. Thoughts? Imzadi 1979 → 19:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please synchronize Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/sandbox and Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/subtopic/sandbox with the respective template. This will add the coding for both the needs-kml parameter and the MDRD-SA parameter needed for the section below. In addition, in Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/hookcounter, please change the contents to:
{{#expr:{{#ifeq:{{{hook1|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook2|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook3|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook4|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook5|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook6|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook7|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook8|¬}}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook9|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}}}
so that the main template will show the MDRD-SA output as needed. Imzadi 1979 → 18:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
{{ WikiProject India}} has an assess-date parameter that is used to track when the article was last assessed. Maybe this is something useful for tracking our assessment audits? Audit the article, change the date? Imzadi 1979 → 16:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
This article {{#ifeq:{{{MDRD-SA}}}|{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|is the current|was the}} '''[[Portal:Maryland/Selected article|selected article]]''' of the '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads|Maryland Roads portal]]''
to
This article {{#ifeq:{{{MDRD-SA}}}|{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|is the current|was the}} '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads/Selected article|selected article]]''' of the '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads|Maryland Roads portal]]''
Dough 48 72 02:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I am concerned that there may be a KML 'file' but that...
Admittedly in the latter case it is simply a matter of getting the page deleted. Nevertheless I think if the 'needs-kml
' parameter has not been set there should be a link to the KML page so it can be checked and instructions to confirm that the {{Attached KML}} template is used in the article before setting the parameter to 'yes
'. –
Allen4
names (
IPv6 contributions)
03:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
needs-kml
' is not set so that a bot can do some basic checks. –
Allen4
names (
IPv6 contributions)
17:11, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace Merge sign.svg
with MUTCD W4-1.svg
. The file was either renamed or the former was deleted in favor of the latter in the case of duplicates. Either way, our template no longer is showing a graphic as it should now.
Imzadi 1979
→
04:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
See
Template talk:New York State Route 17. The banner template is currently coded to look for Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}
, which returns Template:Attached KML/New York State Route 17
for that template's talk page. Since NY 17 has a KML file, the banner erroneously states that the template has a KML. Of course, the NY 17 template could be moved to some other name, but that's a lazy fix that IMO isn't acceptable. It's much a better idea to change the code in this template to only look for KMLs when the supplied class is one where KMLs are actually used, like articles and (maybe) lists. –
TMF (
talk)
00:43, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone else think it would be a good idea to move the photo requests into the issues section? I think it looks out of place where it is. – Fredddie ™ 16:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm in the early stages of developing a Lua-based replacement for {{ WPBannerMeta}}, and I would appreciate peoples ideas for features. If there is anything that you have wanted to do with your WikiProject template, but haven't been able to due to limitations in the meta-template, I would be very interested to hear it. The discussion is over at Template talk:WPBannerMeta. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I am proposing a new option for the |needs-jctint=
parameter, |needs-jctint=missing
. This option would be used for articles that should have a tabular junction list, but currently have none at all. Articles tagged with the new option would be placed in
Category:U.S. Roads project articles needing a junction list
Category:Road articles needing a junction list. I feel it would be best to separate these articles from those with hardcoded junction lists (|needs-jctint=yes
) and articles not requiring a tabular junction list (|needs-jctint=na
). I am requesting input from the community on this manner. Please state your opinion below. Thanks. -
happy
5214
09:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
Exit list}}
. I would be fine the banner replacing that template's function. –
Fredddie
™
22:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
{{ Requested move/dated}}
Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject → Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads – Every other WikiProject is named that way, plus that this templates categories are named that way. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 10:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Can someone please change the shield for the NJSCR-SA from New Jersey blank.svg to Ellipse sign blank.svg? Dough 48 72 19:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
This template has been mentioned here. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 14:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Why isn't this category there to see what articles don't have it? Thewombatguru ( talk) 10:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
|needs-kml=
defaults to "yes", it really isn't necessary. If it's not tagged, it will show up in a subcategory of
Category:U.S. road articles needing KML as if it were tagged with |needs-kml=yes
. -
happy
5214
12:10, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
@
Thewombatguru: because KMLs have to be named with Template:Attached KML/<article title>
in order to work with {{
Attached KML}}, the banner can automatically detect if the appropriate file has been created using an {{#ifexist}}
parser function. There is nothing that forces us to use a specific naming convention for maps, which could be uploaded in SVG or PNG format, even GIF or JPG. As for the {{
jctint}}-related tracking, a template on a talk page can't see if templates are used on the article page to automatically know.
Imzadi 1979
→
19:14, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/shield has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"|VI=Circle sign blank.svg" needs to be added to Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/shield, because "Virgin_Islands_blank.svg" does not exist, "Circle sign blank.svg" would be the same image as "Virgin_Islands_blank.svg" and it is used on Template:USVirginIslands-road-stub. Thanks, -- AmaryllisGardener talk 15:23, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could it be added so articles without KML-files will be added to e.g. Category:B-class articles without KML files ? TheWombatGuru ( talk) 07:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The live version incorrectly handles the photo parameter when it is the only issue. Photo request does not appear if no other issues are present. This is because the issue counter cannot take it into account as the counter can handle at most 8 issues. Since the photo parameter is listed as a main-section parameter in the documentation, the request should be displayed along with similar paramaters such as reassess and merge. The test cases illustrate this problem, and the sandbox contains proposed changes. Chinissai ( talk) 20:57, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
|photo=
to the list of issues that will trip it. @
Rschen7754: can you look at this? –
Fredddie
™
21:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
As expected, the more robust issue counter has uncovered more bugs with the template. When required issue parameters (such as needs-map) are left out, they are misinterpreted by the issue counter as not an issue. The default value of these parameters needs to be something other than ¬, e.g., "undefined", to increment the number of issues. Once again, the test cases illustrate this problem, and the sandbox has the corrections. Chinissai ( talk) 21:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Last discussed a little over two years ago, I think it's time to resurrect this proposal.
I've put the coding back into the template sandboxes, so if you look at Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/testcases, you'll see that the sandboxed banner is displaying a section with:
This article is also supported by the following projects:
followed by the appropriate state-level wikiprojects. The idea is that our banner would also pass the appropriate article assessments to a state-level project, and quite possibly WP:WikiProject United States.
All of the roads project banners have a similar behavior now, passing article assessments into Category:Road transport articles by quality to make Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/Live provide the overall assessment statistics for all of the projects combined together.
In a further refinement, or a phase 2, I would also suggest we come up with coding that allowed "( Detroit)" to appear after "WikiProject Michigan" in the list. We could then include the major metropolitan area task forces or projects grouped with their states.
If our banner were to pass its assessments to WPUSA, I would suggest we do so in the same silent manner as the "Road transport" tagging unless a parameter were invoked to specifically show it. Imzadi 1979 → 08:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
New York and Wikipedia:WikiProject New York have been renamed New York (state) and Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state) respectively with the categories updated appropriately. Please can someone who understands this template make the necessary adjustments. Timrollpickering 10:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
On
Talk:U.S. Route 63 in Missouri, I tried to correct the fact of the article having a KML (which it doesn't) on this template using the rater script, but now, for some strange reason, it displays two instances of the |needs-kml=
parameter. What might be the problem here?
ToThAc (
talk)
16:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
|needs-kml=
in less common situations, like articles on highway systems or interchanges, not on articles about specific highways. In those cases, this template automatically looks to see if a KML exists and internally fills in the yes/no. There was only one instance of the parameter once you removed the duplicate template. I just removed it completely to let the banner template do its automated function.
Imzadi 1979
→
16:37, 9 November 2017 (UTC)The result of the move request was: moved. While I sympathise with the opposers about the general pointlessness of moving templates, in this case there is a consensus that moving the templates will help with technical issues that apparently can't be solved by just using the redirect. Jenks24 ( talk) 13:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
– I request two moves to improve the consistency of the same type of templates as Template:WikiProject UK Roads, Template:WikiProject Australian Roads, Template:WikiProject Hong Kong Roads, Template:WikiProject Indian roads, Template:WikiProject U.S. Congress, Template:WikiProject U.S. Streets, Template:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, Template:WikiProject Canada, Template:WikiProject Canada Streets. Sawol ( talk) 08:40, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:U.S. Roads WikiProject
, but rather uses the convention of other projects Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads
). So, is there a rationale other than "the name of the project" for not moving the template to a standardized name? Perhaps if there is a documented rationale, it would help fend off the recurrent move proposals... --
LJ
↗
03:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)@ Magioladitis, MSGJ, WOSlinker, Ritchie333, Josve05a, and Rich Farmbrough: It's been over two and a half years since the template was moved, but it still does not show up in the various gadgets, like the AfC helper script, as an option. It believe that was one of the main reasons why the move was requested. Where's the follow through on this issue? Imzadi 1979 → 02:39, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
When I put "yes" for the "needs-kml" parameter of this template on a talk page, it does not update. For example, I changed the "needs-kml" parameter on Talk:U.S. Route 30 in Nebraska to "yes", since there is not a KML for US 30 in Nebraska, but it still shows up as "This article has a KML file..." Am I doing something wrong? Azmjc02 ( talk) 05:19, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to propose a few new parameters for this template (which could presumably be duplicated to the other road projects).
I feel these could help direct editors to articles that need attention in various ways in a more categorial fashion, especially in areas with lower wikiwork requirements. -- Floydian τ ¢ 03:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
{{
Maplink}}
or {{
Maplink-road}}
. I can work out a similar tracking cat that matches instances of P15 being used. It's not perfect, but it will take some guesswork out of which articles need interactive maps. –
Fredddie
™
03:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding #1, how would the needs-update work? Would it just be a flag that we turn on/off? Would it be automatic and require a 5-or-10-year timer? – Fredddie ™ 06:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
I had an idea probably 10 years ago that I never really went public with (or maybe I did and I forgot), but it was to remove the classes below GA from the class mask, meaning you would not be able to set an article as C-Class. In their place, there would be several checks in a similar vein as Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/bchecklist. If it met all of them, it would be B-Class otherwise it would score articles and give them a class accordingly. Basically it would ask if the big three sections were there and if they were any good; it would also flag the needs- categories if something was not good. I never progressed with this idea because it seemed really complex and hard to explain to others why it would be a good idea. – Fredddie ™ 06:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Here are some parameters that I'm thinking would be useful. The general answers would be yes, no, NA, and fix:
|has_RD=
|has_hist=
|has_RJL=
this would would also accept 'bulleted'|has_map=
I was going to add another one called |good_shape=
that would be used like the B-Class checklist, but then I thought we could just implement that instead. –
Fredddie
™
07:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Portal:New York roads has been deleted. Its former redirect Portal:New York Roads can be unlinked from this template. Certes ( talk) 14:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
|note 5={{#if:{{lc:{{{needs-kml|}}}}}||{{#ifeq:{{talkspace detect|main=yes|default=no}}|yes|{{#ifexist:Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}|no|yes|no}}|no}}}}
Should be:
|note 5={{#if:{{lc:{{{needs-kml|}}}}}||{{#ifeq:{{talkspace detect|main=yes|default=no}}|yes|{{#ifexist:Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}|no|yes}}|no}}|no}}
25or6to4 ( talk) 06:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Just something to fix: using photoreq=yes
for Washington adds a link to a disambiguation category (
Category:Wikipedians in Washington) and places talk pages in what is supposed to be an empty category (
Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Washington). In both cases, they just need to have "(state)" appended to them.
Sounder
Bruce
07:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
|photo=Washington (state)
, which can be handled by AWB. –
Fredddie
™
15:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove "-->" from "|auto={{{auto|}}} -->" Christian75 ( talk) 11:46, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
I propose to add support for the U.S. Route 66 task force so that Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66 task force can be merged into this template. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 20:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
|type=US66
.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Category:The United States articles needing KML and Category:U.S. road junction articles needing KML are being populated. Should these be created? — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 21:49, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
This template is using Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces which is no longer supported. I would like to update to use the native task force support in Module:WikiProject banner. Will do some work in the sandbox shortly. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 10:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:U.S. road junction articles needing KML, an unwanted yet non-empty redlinked category that was brought here a few weeks ago for cleanup, recurred again on the most recent run of Special:WantedCategories. I was able to resolve it again by checking what was done the last time it showed up and doing the same thing on the implicated page this time, but I had to spelunk through several levels of investigation (including diving down into Imzadi's contribution history to find the previously affected pages) just to find out what was done the last time it showed up, because I just raised the problem and wasn't the solver of it the first time. (And even if it is me again next time, I'm likely to forget what I did today due to the passage of time, and have to respelunk again to find it.)
(ETA January 2023: it recurred again today, and I did indeed have to respelunk.)
The point noted in the prior discussion was that road junctions or interchanges wouldn't have, or be expected to have, KML in the first place, meaning that this is a category that genuinely should never exist. However, if something else isn't done, it may recur again in the future, and since I with my prior knowledge of this situation won't necessarily always be the one dealing with redlinked categories it may get created by somebody else in error.
Accordingly, I wanted to ask if there's another way that this can be prevented in the future:
Thanks. Bearcat ( talk) 16:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
I'm going to add a listas param which allows the setting of the DEFAULTSORT setting (similar to what all the other WikiProject banners have) and remove the sort param if no-one objects. -- WOSlinker ( talk) 23:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
|sort=100
, the item would be in the 1 section of the category list. The template code is currently littered with |{{#if:{{{sort|}}}|{{{sort}}}|{{PAGENAME}}}} after each cateogry to sort it. However, if sorting is set by using the keyword {{DEFAULTSORT:sortkey}} then there is no need for all that extra code. Actually, it doesn't appear as though the sort param is very well used. I only spotted 3 occurences, so I've removed them anyway from those banners as only sorting three items doesn't really help much as they are then out of place from all the other items in the categories. If I'm going to update the sort code, then I might as well change the param name to listas to match all the other banners though. --
WOSlinker (
talk)
23:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC)See [1], specifically [2] - apparently this new method leads to conflicts with the sorts used by other projects when they're not identical. – T M F 00:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Support, as suggester. -- Admrboltz ( talk) 01:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Is there a reason that our template does not include the U.S. Roads portal box like most other project banners do? -- Admrboltz ( talk) 16:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Meh... unless I'm missing something, this switch isn't as easy as it seems. Unlike the WPUS banner (which has a simple DC=yes for DC), NY and NY-CRTF could be in any one of 21 different parameters: {{{state}}}
and {{{state1}}}
through {{{state20}}}
. If a halfway decent way to detect when NY or NY-CRTF is one of the states is found, the rest of the code is simple. Adding the portal box to the template is as simple as adding {{
portal}} to the start of the table cell containing the "This article ... " text, and switching from one portal to two is as simple as adding a second parameter to {{
portal}}. –
T
M
F
07:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
As something of an off-shoot of the above thread, here's an idea that keeps reentering my mind every so often: implementing by-state importance ratings. The current importance system is fine on a national basis, but on a statewide level it doesn't really work. As it stands right now, each state only has one or two top-importance articles. In the case of NY, I can think of several articles that could/should be top-importance. I know that historically we've put a much greater emphasis on quality ratings than on importance ratings, but this might be something worth considering. – T M F 18:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Michigan has a portal now. Can someone duplicate the coding so that I can tag the articles and photos from the portal? Thanks. Imzadi 1979 → 07:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello, the format of file:Nuvola filesystems camera.png is PNG. The same image exists in SVG format. Please change Nuvola filesystems camera.png to Gnome-dev-camera.svg. Nodulation ( talk) 00:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
should be changed to:
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
This will convert USRD over to using the new HWY ACR forum. Imzadi 1979 → 19:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
For automating ACR
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">A '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/{{PAGENAME}}|discussion]]''' on {{#switch:{{lc:{{{class}}}}}|a=reviewing this article's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review|A-Class]] assessment|promoting this article to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review|A-Class]]}} is underway. Please give your opinion.</td></tr>|}}<!--
becomes
-->{{#ifeq:{{{ACR|}}}|yes| <tr><td>[[File:MO-supp-A.svg|30px|center]]</td> <td class="mbox-text">{{HWYACR}}</td></tr>|}}<!--
May need another in the future but this centralizes all the banners. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 23:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
As part of creating task forces for every state, we will need new links for the states that currently do not have task forces and will also need to change the links of the current subprojects and task forces, which still link to the name of the subproject. Dough 48 72 01:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Something that got missed... The CASH, NJSH and PASH SA wordings should probably be updated to reflect the change to task force status while making any other changes. I realize that we'd be retroactively changing things on articles that were SAs when the TFs were still projects, but that's not a big deal to me. Imzadi 1979 → 08:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Several years ago the Michigan Highways project (MISH) was made a subproject of the Michigan project (MICH) in addition to USRD. I'd like to propose that our banner, in addition to assessing Michigan's highway articles in Category:Michigan road transport articles by quality also asses them into Category:Michigan articles by quality. This would cement the relationship between the MISH task force and the MICH and USRD projects. Potentially, this relationship should be extended to all of the other states.
The only hitch would be importance ratings. Would it be possible for this template to take a mid-importance article for MISH and tag it as a low-importance article for MICH? Imzadi 1979 → 01:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
{{{typeX_importance}}}
and {{{stateX_importance}}}
(or we could begin deprecating both and call it {{{topicX_importance}}}
instead) and the state param could be something like {{{typeX_importance_parent}}}
, substituting "parent" for whatever descriptor works best for describing the state-level parent project.{{{state}}}
before it looks for {{{state1}}}
in cases where multiple states are listed. Those two params are not used at the same time in reality (or at least they shouldn't be), so this is mostly to make sure the template doesn't get confused. (It could also look for state1 before it looks for state; I have no preference as to what order they're searched for.) –
T
M
F
12:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)Bump since we didn't get anywhere with this before... I'm bumping the discussion back out of the archives. I believe that we already have state-specific importances in place to allow each USRD TF/project to have a separate importance, as NY does in many cases. So it looks like it's a matter of making a decision folks. Imzadi 1979 → 08:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can someone add a parameter to mark selected articles of P:MDRD? Dough 48 72 05:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Since we track maps, and we're starting to slowly deploy KML files to our articles, how about we add a parameter to track whether or not a KML file is needed in an article? Just like needs-map, it could be set to default to "yes" and place the article into a tracking category. Thoughts? Imzadi 1979 → 19:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please synchronize Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/sandbox and Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/subtopic/sandbox with the respective template. This will add the coding for both the needs-kml parameter and the MDRD-SA parameter needed for the section below. In addition, in Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/hookcounter, please change the contents to:
{{#expr:{{#ifeq:{{{hook1|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook2|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook3|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook4|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook5|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook6|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook7|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook8|¬}}}+{{#ifeq:{{{hook9|¬}}}|¬|0|1}}}}
so that the main template will show the MDRD-SA output as needed. Imzadi 1979 → 18:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
{{ WikiProject India}} has an assess-date parameter that is used to track when the article was last assessed. Maybe this is something useful for tracking our assessment audits? Audit the article, change the date? Imzadi 1979 → 16:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
This article {{#ifeq:{{{MDRD-SA}}}|{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|is the current|was the}} '''[[Portal:Maryland/Selected article|selected article]]''' of the '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads|Maryland Roads portal]]''
to
This article {{#ifeq:{{{MDRD-SA}}}|{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|is the current|was the}} '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads/Selected article|selected article]]''' of the '''[[Portal:Maryland Roads|Maryland Roads portal]]''
Dough 48 72 02:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I am concerned that there may be a KML 'file' but that...
Admittedly in the latter case it is simply a matter of getting the page deleted. Nevertheless I think if the 'needs-kml
' parameter has not been set there should be a link to the KML page so it can be checked and instructions to confirm that the {{Attached KML}} template is used in the article before setting the parameter to 'yes
'. –
Allen4
names (
IPv6 contributions)
03:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
needs-kml
' is not set so that a bot can do some basic checks. –
Allen4
names (
IPv6 contributions)
17:11, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace Merge sign.svg
with MUTCD W4-1.svg
. The file was either renamed or the former was deleted in favor of the latter in the case of duplicates. Either way, our template no longer is showing a graphic as it should now.
Imzadi 1979
→
04:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
See
Template talk:New York State Route 17. The banner template is currently coded to look for Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}
, which returns Template:Attached KML/New York State Route 17
for that template's talk page. Since NY 17 has a KML file, the banner erroneously states that the template has a KML. Of course, the NY 17 template could be moved to some other name, but that's a lazy fix that IMO isn't acceptable. It's much a better idea to change the code in this template to only look for KMLs when the supplied class is one where KMLs are actually used, like articles and (maybe) lists. –
TMF (
talk)
00:43, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone else think it would be a good idea to move the photo requests into the issues section? I think it looks out of place where it is. – Fredddie ™ 16:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm in the early stages of developing a Lua-based replacement for {{ WPBannerMeta}}, and I would appreciate peoples ideas for features. If there is anything that you have wanted to do with your WikiProject template, but haven't been able to due to limitations in the meta-template, I would be very interested to hear it. The discussion is over at Template talk:WPBannerMeta. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I am proposing a new option for the |needs-jctint=
parameter, |needs-jctint=missing
. This option would be used for articles that should have a tabular junction list, but currently have none at all. Articles tagged with the new option would be placed in
Category:U.S. Roads project articles needing a junction list
Category:Road articles needing a junction list. I feel it would be best to separate these articles from those with hardcoded junction lists (|needs-jctint=yes
) and articles not requiring a tabular junction list (|needs-jctint=na
). I am requesting input from the community on this manner. Please state your opinion below. Thanks. -
happy
5214
09:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
Exit list}}
. I would be fine the banner replacing that template's function. –
Fredddie
™
22:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
{{ Requested move/dated}}
Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject → Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads – Every other WikiProject is named that way, plus that this templates categories are named that way. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 10:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Can someone please change the shield for the NJSCR-SA from New Jersey blank.svg to Ellipse sign blank.svg? Dough 48 72 19:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
This template has been mentioned here. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 14:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Why isn't this category there to see what articles don't have it? Thewombatguru ( talk) 10:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
|needs-kml=
defaults to "yes", it really isn't necessary. If it's not tagged, it will show up in a subcategory of
Category:U.S. road articles needing KML as if it were tagged with |needs-kml=yes
. -
happy
5214
12:10, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
@
Thewombatguru: because KMLs have to be named with Template:Attached KML/<article title>
in order to work with {{
Attached KML}}, the banner can automatically detect if the appropriate file has been created using an {{#ifexist}}
parser function. There is nothing that forces us to use a specific naming convention for maps, which could be uploaded in SVG or PNG format, even GIF or JPG. As for the {{
jctint}}-related tracking, a template on a talk page can't see if templates are used on the article page to automatically know.
Imzadi 1979
→
19:14, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/shield has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"|VI=Circle sign blank.svg" needs to be added to Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/shield, because "Virgin_Islands_blank.svg" does not exist, "Circle sign blank.svg" would be the same image as "Virgin_Islands_blank.svg" and it is used on Template:USVirginIslands-road-stub. Thanks, -- AmaryllisGardener talk 15:23, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could it be added so articles without KML-files will be added to e.g. Category:B-class articles without KML files ? TheWombatGuru ( talk) 07:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The live version incorrectly handles the photo parameter when it is the only issue. Photo request does not appear if no other issues are present. This is because the issue counter cannot take it into account as the counter can handle at most 8 issues. Since the photo parameter is listed as a main-section parameter in the documentation, the request should be displayed along with similar paramaters such as reassess and merge. The test cases illustrate this problem, and the sandbox contains proposed changes. Chinissai ( talk) 20:57, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
|photo=
to the list of issues that will trip it. @
Rschen7754: can you look at this? –
Fredddie
™
21:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
As expected, the more robust issue counter has uncovered more bugs with the template. When required issue parameters (such as needs-map) are left out, they are misinterpreted by the issue counter as not an issue. The default value of these parameters needs to be something other than ¬, e.g., "undefined", to increment the number of issues. Once again, the test cases illustrate this problem, and the sandbox has the corrections. Chinissai ( talk) 21:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Last discussed a little over two years ago, I think it's time to resurrect this proposal.
I've put the coding back into the template sandboxes, so if you look at Template:U.S. Roads WikiProject/testcases, you'll see that the sandboxed banner is displaying a section with:
This article is also supported by the following projects:
followed by the appropriate state-level wikiprojects. The idea is that our banner would also pass the appropriate article assessments to a state-level project, and quite possibly WP:WikiProject United States.
All of the roads project banners have a similar behavior now, passing article assessments into Category:Road transport articles by quality to make Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/Live provide the overall assessment statistics for all of the projects combined together.
In a further refinement, or a phase 2, I would also suggest we come up with coding that allowed "( Detroit)" to appear after "WikiProject Michigan" in the list. We could then include the major metropolitan area task forces or projects grouped with their states.
If our banner were to pass its assessments to WPUSA, I would suggest we do so in the same silent manner as the "Road transport" tagging unless a parameter were invoked to specifically show it. Imzadi 1979 → 08:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
New York and Wikipedia:WikiProject New York have been renamed New York (state) and Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state) respectively with the categories updated appropriately. Please can someone who understands this template make the necessary adjustments. Timrollpickering 10:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
On
Talk:U.S. Route 63 in Missouri, I tried to correct the fact of the article having a KML (which it doesn't) on this template using the rater script, but now, for some strange reason, it displays two instances of the |needs-kml=
parameter. What might be the problem here?
ToThAc (
talk)
16:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
|needs-kml=
in less common situations, like articles on highway systems or interchanges, not on articles about specific highways. In those cases, this template automatically looks to see if a KML exists and internally fills in the yes/no. There was only one instance of the parameter once you removed the duplicate template. I just removed it completely to let the banner template do its automated function.
Imzadi 1979
→
16:37, 9 November 2017 (UTC)The result of the move request was: moved. While I sympathise with the opposers about the general pointlessness of moving templates, in this case there is a consensus that moving the templates will help with technical issues that apparently can't be solved by just using the redirect. Jenks24 ( talk) 13:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
– I request two moves to improve the consistency of the same type of templates as Template:WikiProject UK Roads, Template:WikiProject Australian Roads, Template:WikiProject Hong Kong Roads, Template:WikiProject Indian roads, Template:WikiProject U.S. Congress, Template:WikiProject U.S. Streets, Template:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, Template:WikiProject Canada, Template:WikiProject Canada Streets. Sawol ( talk) 08:40, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:U.S. Roads WikiProject
, but rather uses the convention of other projects Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads
). So, is there a rationale other than "the name of the project" for not moving the template to a standardized name? Perhaps if there is a documented rationale, it would help fend off the recurrent move proposals... --
LJ
↗
03:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)@ Magioladitis, MSGJ, WOSlinker, Ritchie333, Josve05a, and Rich Farmbrough: It's been over two and a half years since the template was moved, but it still does not show up in the various gadgets, like the AfC helper script, as an option. It believe that was one of the main reasons why the move was requested. Where's the follow through on this issue? Imzadi 1979 → 02:39, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
When I put "yes" for the "needs-kml" parameter of this template on a talk page, it does not update. For example, I changed the "needs-kml" parameter on Talk:U.S. Route 30 in Nebraska to "yes", since there is not a KML for US 30 in Nebraska, but it still shows up as "This article has a KML file..." Am I doing something wrong? Azmjc02 ( talk) 05:19, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to propose a few new parameters for this template (which could presumably be duplicated to the other road projects).
I feel these could help direct editors to articles that need attention in various ways in a more categorial fashion, especially in areas with lower wikiwork requirements. -- Floydian τ ¢ 03:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
{{
Maplink}}
or {{
Maplink-road}}
. I can work out a similar tracking cat that matches instances of P15 being used. It's not perfect, but it will take some guesswork out of which articles need interactive maps. –
Fredddie
™
03:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding #1, how would the needs-update work? Would it just be a flag that we turn on/off? Would it be automatic and require a 5-or-10-year timer? – Fredddie ™ 06:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
I had an idea probably 10 years ago that I never really went public with (or maybe I did and I forgot), but it was to remove the classes below GA from the class mask, meaning you would not be able to set an article as C-Class. In their place, there would be several checks in a similar vein as Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/bchecklist. If it met all of them, it would be B-Class otherwise it would score articles and give them a class accordingly. Basically it would ask if the big three sections were there and if they were any good; it would also flag the needs- categories if something was not good. I never progressed with this idea because it seemed really complex and hard to explain to others why it would be a good idea. – Fredddie ™ 06:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Here are some parameters that I'm thinking would be useful. The general answers would be yes, no, NA, and fix:
|has_RD=
|has_hist=
|has_RJL=
this would would also accept 'bulleted'|has_map=
I was going to add another one called |good_shape=
that would be used like the B-Class checklist, but then I thought we could just implement that instead. –
Fredddie
™
07:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Portal:New York roads has been deleted. Its former redirect Portal:New York Roads can be unlinked from this template. Certes ( talk) 14:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
|note 5={{#if:{{lc:{{{needs-kml|}}}}}||{{#ifeq:{{talkspace detect|main=yes|default=no}}|yes|{{#ifexist:Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}|no|yes|no}}|no}}}}
Should be:
|note 5={{#if:{{lc:{{{needs-kml|}}}}}||{{#ifeq:{{talkspace detect|main=yes|default=no}}|yes|{{#ifexist:Template:Attached KML/{{PAGENAME}}|no|yes}}|no}}|no}}
25or6to4 ( talk) 06:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Just something to fix: using photoreq=yes
for Washington adds a link to a disambiguation category (
Category:Wikipedians in Washington) and places talk pages in what is supposed to be an empty category (
Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Washington). In both cases, they just need to have "(state)" appended to them.
Sounder
Bruce
07:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
|photo=Washington (state)
, which can be handled by AWB. –
Fredddie
™
15:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove "-->" from "|auto={{{auto|}}} -->" Christian75 ( talk) 11:46, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
I propose to add support for the U.S. Route 66 task force so that Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66 task force can be merged into this template. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 20:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
|type=US66
.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Category:The United States articles needing KML and Category:U.S. road junction articles needing KML are being populated. Should these be created? — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 21:49, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
This template is using Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces which is no longer supported. I would like to update to use the native task force support in Module:WikiProject banner. Will do some work in the sandbox shortly. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 10:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:U.S. road junction articles needing KML, an unwanted yet non-empty redlinked category that was brought here a few weeks ago for cleanup, recurred again on the most recent run of Special:WantedCategories. I was able to resolve it again by checking what was done the last time it showed up and doing the same thing on the implicated page this time, but I had to spelunk through several levels of investigation (including diving down into Imzadi's contribution history to find the previously affected pages) just to find out what was done the last time it showed up, because I just raised the problem and wasn't the solver of it the first time. (And even if it is me again next time, I'm likely to forget what I did today due to the passage of time, and have to respelunk again to find it.)
(ETA January 2023: it recurred again today, and I did indeed have to respelunk.)
The point noted in the prior discussion was that road junctions or interchanges wouldn't have, or be expected to have, KML in the first place, meaning that this is a category that genuinely should never exist. However, if something else isn't done, it may recur again in the future, and since I with my prior knowledge of this situation won't necessarily always be the one dealing with redlinked categories it may get created by somebody else in error.
Accordingly, I wanted to ask if there's another way that this can be prevented in the future:
Thanks. Bearcat ( talk) 16:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)