![]() | 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I'm a little confused by several changes:
1. The article name for New Mexico Scenic Byways. 1) It seems quite clear from the searching that I've done + the name as I found it on the Federal Highway Administration and NM DOT sites before I created the article that the current program name is New Mexico Scenic Byways.
2. Regarding use of WP:Plural, it seems to me that this is not a dog/dogs situation, but one where the name is actually the plural version. There is not one New Mexico Scenic Byway. So, using Byway is wrong - that's not it's name.
3. Scenic byways template. It's been confusing to me why the scenic byways template could not be on the individual scenic byway article pages -- but I tried to go with the flow to find a way that readers could get to the lists. It seems that creating the article made the most sense - and I'm confused why that has been removed from the See also list. Is it really going to hurt to have it in there? -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 05:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I added the former exits with a source. If you want to get more accurate mileage on them, please do. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 00:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I was just reading some changes made to the M-1 Rail page, and had some thoughts. Barring very major events like the scheduled completeion of a project, you rarely want to write too far into the future. For instance, the July 3 documentation of the bridge reconstructions over the freeways is something that you'll have to come back and correct, and it's really not that major of an event in the grand scheme of the project. We do not want the page to become a weekly or even monthly documentation of the progress of the project. Major events like ground-breaking major changes in the scope of the project, and things like securing major funding are fairly relevant on a case-by-case basis, but I'm not sure we need to be doing future tense about freeways bridge reconstructions. Just my two cents. You thoughts? -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 06:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
|class=future
and don't even begin to assess an article's content and organization as a project until the roadway is open to traffic.
Imzadi 1979
→
19:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)I am trying to make an article on U.S. Route 24 in Ohio since I feel it needs one. I've gotten a start on it at User:TenPoundHammer/US 24 Ohio and I would appreciate some help on the route's history, as well as the exact mileage of each junction. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 12:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Apologies. That was an inadvertent deletion, as I was trying to (too quickly before work) do an ⌥ Option+drag copy, which obviously didn’t work correctly. Useddenim ( talk) 21:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
When I open the .sid files, it tells me I need a plugin, then links me to a page that doesn't help at all. Any idea what plugin I'm missing to open them? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 04:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Imzadi1979 I am sorry for putting the r Shield request in the wrong place. ACase0000 ( talk) 02:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering if you were able to provide some feedback at the Sleeping Dogs FAC? It would be hugely appreciated. Thanks! URDNEXT ( talk) 19:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Why did you delete my message? URDNEXT ( talk) 19:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Why did you remove North Street/Larch Street? This is a grade separation/interchange, no less of one than US-24/Orchard Lake or M-25/JFK Drive, and according to MOS:RJL, all grade-separated exits should be included. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 13:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a ramp from EB 94 to WB 69 to me (ETA: This is the EB 94-WB 69 ramp]). How are you getting incomplete access out of this? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
So when do I include, and when do I omit, the street name? (E.g., US-23 being Lake Street at M-55's eastern terminus and US-31 being Parkdale Avenue at its western terminus, both of which were omitted.) Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
MOS:RJL says "If two interchanges with different roads have the same number with different lettered suffixes, they generally should not be combined." By that rule, shouldn't Rosa Parks and M-10 be listed as separate exits? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:41, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I was just wondering what the reasoning is behind the removal of the North-South Arterial Highway article. Given the fact that it is an expressway with junctions that would be repeated on multiple articles and is also undergoing a major reconstruction, shouldn't it warrant an article for itself? In addition, I was still actively editing the article so it was going to be improved rapidly. -- Dekema2 ( talk) 01:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
This is to inform you that Capitol Loop, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 13 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
"Links should not be placed in the boldface reiteration of the title in the opening sentence of a lead:
The Babe Ruth Award is given annually to the Major League Baseball (MLB) player with the best performance in the postseason. ( Babe Ruth Award)
Many, but not all, articles repeat the article title in bold face in the first line of the article. Linking the article to itself produces boldface text; this practice is discouraged as page moves will result in a useless circular link through a redirect. Linking part of the bolded text is also discouraged because it changes the visual effect of bolding; some readers will miss the visual cue which is the purpose of using bold face in the first place."
OK, fair enough.
But - without meaning to sound snotty here - there are definitely no rules that say that the descriptions of the plates in the tables should have the state/province/territory names, slogans and years in quotation marks; that the dates of issue should be in the format "(year X)–(year Y)" with no wrapping allowed; and that multiple notes should not be separated using ˂br˃ tags, bullet points or whatever.
That said, not everyone can or ever will entirely agree on how the things that go in these tables should be formatted. Bluebird207 ( talk) 23:51, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
OK, this will be the very last time I post on this talk page, and then I will leave you alone regardless of how you respond.
When you said, "You should be using this energy to improve the other mediocre examples to match, not tearing apart improvements and driving away interested editors; if that was your desire, to push people away and enforce mediocrity, you've achieved your goal", I honestly thought you were talking about Wikipedia in general - I did not think that you were only talking about the Vehicle registration plates of Michigan article (which I've chosen not to link to here).
So consider that a simple misunderstanding. I've already admitted that I can be a bit selfish and a bit misguided at times - and now I will admit that I'm capable of misunderstanding things now and again, too.
I have not, do not and never will have any intentions of driving fellow editors away from Wikipedia - and nor have I had, do I have and will I ever have any intentions of driving them away from individual articles, like the Vehicle registration plates of Michigan one.
You might find that I have not reverted your edits to this article. Well, all right, I partially reverted one - but that was merely because I didn't think the rules regarding the use of bold text in the lead section were that strict. (That was an example of me being a bit misguided, BTW.)
But I have not reverted any of the edits you made to the tables. I may not entirely agree with them, but I don't completely disagree with them either - and hence I've allowed them to stand. And I promise you, I will continue to allow them to stand.
And if you do edit the article again in the future, I promise you I'll let those edits stand too. Do not feel that you don't want to edit the article any more just because the two of us had a disagreement.
I myself will continue to edit the article - but only to update it (that is, when several new serials have been issued) and to put in additional information (like more detailed descriptions of some of the bases) as and when I see fit, and nothing else.
I will sign off by apologizing, one last time, for everything that has taken place over the last two days or so - for the disagreement, for the misunderstanding, for the report (which I'll admit now was an irrational decision - another example of me being a bit misguided), and above all for coming across as being a bit of an asshole. (Well, I do like to think that I am my harshest critic.) Bluebird207 ( talk) 08:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
This is in response to your query on IRC, which I was away from at the time. The reason for the lack of updates is not because I have forgotten or failed to keep up with them, but rather because the most recent QGIS contained several bugs that made generating the map impossible. Whereas on Windows it is trivial to "downgrade" by uninstalling and reinstalling an older version, this is more difficult on Linux because it uses a software-installation tool somewhat like the app store found on mobile devices. Downgrading is made even more difficult because applications depend on linked libraries which other programs also rely on, so incompatible versions of these libraries can become an issue. I will check next week to see if the bugs have been corrected in a newer update, but it is possible that I will still run into crashes while generating the map. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I saw you reverted my edits to the infobox because you thought the 10 junction limit included the termini. I always thought it was 10 major junctions plus the termini that are allowed in the infobox. The US Roads article standards do not mention this detail. Perhaps they should be updated? PointsofNoReturn ( talk) 20:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Imzadi1979, thank you for your thoughtful recommendations at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.
Per your helpful suggestion, I've gone ahead and modified the blurb text to only have one (1) instance of the word diff. Further, in subsequent days the link may simply be to the book's subtitle, Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties, as it has been referred to secondary sources, for example The Washington Post.
Hopefully this is now satisfactory for you to reevaluate your position at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.
— Cirt ( talk) 16:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Will you have another look at the TFAR discussion. I'm trying to compromise between multiple different editors's comments and suggestions here, please understand that. I've trimmed the amount of usage of that word in the blurb as much as possible.
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 18:04, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, if you think this is not a stub (via talk page assessment), please remove stub tag on talk page. Thanks! — revimsg 01:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I have cited it and given a link for more information-- ChristianOlson0214 ( talk) 16:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I guess I have a case of rude editing here. What is your opinion? Background: I got some behind editing on my contribs after posting some critisism of a oranisation based in Germany and Nevada. Groups of this oranisation supports this and that. As the only reason "UGH" of the removal of my contrib is strongly focussed on my name by IP users, makes it more suspect, even one of the IPs is form Vegas. -- Hans Haase ( talk) 10:21, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Please explain why the new article Multi State Route 92 was removed and replaced with the list of routes numbered 92. What could be done to improve that article to make it acceptable? I'm asking here, because after its removal, it does not have a talk page on which to discuss it. RogerD ( talk) 07:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Good late night early morning. I made some improvements to the
Transportation in South Florida article, including a thorough review of your written suggestions from the GAN, and have
submitted it at FAC. As a constructive critic, your comments on the matter are welcomed.
B137 (
talk)
07:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I would also invite you to leave a comment here: Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of tallest buildings in Miami/archive1 as this FLRC has stagnated, despite my several points about it being far from featured material standards. I know it may be out of your area of interest content-wise, but as a user with a long history of dealing with featured content, GANs, etc, I find this notification appropriate. B137 ( talk) 17:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I can't help feeling that this editor means well but for whatever reason can't figure out how to get to the article talk page. Thanks for your help, maybe we can still get him on board. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 22:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
This was regarding the freeways/expressways. When push comes to shove I would be hard pressed to tell you the difference between the two. What I am interested in is the "toll-free" part. Explained (with dedicated citation) further down in the lead is that Michigan actually has no tolls on any roadways. Given the reality of the toll situation (and the dedicated citation later on) would you mind if we just left any mention of tolls in that later sentence? Juno ( talk) 07:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I just put in a note on the Common's de-flag request requesting to keep the bot.
If you are having issues with the script I would be interested to know what they are.
There have been some enhancements that I wanted to do with the bot, so I am planning to do a test run this weekend. I sent a message to Freddie to see if his requests were still applicable, or if you have other suggestions I can try those too. After I finish the run, I will update the code on the bots page, as well as provide some example files. -- Svgalbertian ( talk) 23:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, someone is interested!
I have a question concerning presentation, now that I have worked out what is going on. It's to do with inclusion of |res=
or |HR=
. I assume they are mutually exclusive, but there is no documentation anywhere I can see. Any, if we take for example {{Cite California statute |1966|94|631|ex=1|res=true|section=4}} then that produces
California State Assembly.
"Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 17—Relative to delaying relinquishment of a portion of Interstate 80 leading to the State Capitol". 1966 Session of the Legislature, 1st extraordinary session. Statutes of California (Resolution). State of California. Ch. 94 § 4 p. 631.
or {{Cite California statute |year=1959|chapter=144|HR=true}} produces
California State Assembly.
"Relating to the Seaside Freeway". 1959 Session of the Legislature. Statutes of California (House Resolution). State of California. Ch. 144.
The thing is, the fact there was a resolution about this statute isn't actually shown in the citation. My feeling is that it could be shown as the leading part of the |volume=
in {{
cite encyclopedia}} – here something like "Resolution of the 1966 Session of the Legislature ..." or "House Resolution of the 1959 Session of the Legislature". Do you have any opinions?
BTW do you actually know what is the difference between a resolution and a House Resolution?
-- Unbuttered parsnip ( talk) mytime= Wed 10:01, wikitime= 02:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
|type=
parameter, which would then appear in parentheses, not the volume, which should be which book or subsection/department of the website contains the specific legislation.{{
cite web|author=California State Assembly|year= year|title=title of the legislation|type=statute or resolution, etc|department=the session, including extraordinary ones|work=Statutes of California|publisher=State of California|at=chapter and page location|accessdate=accessdate}}
.|format=
because it seemed to put it in a more logical place in the output.
Hello,
You reverted my edit to List of U.S. Highways in Michigan, I assume it contained one or multiple errors. But did you really have to delete everything, helping is a bit hard if an edit that contains errors is fully reverted. TheWombatGuru ( talk) 21:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of U.S. Route 45 in Michigan to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 10:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean by me oversimplifying here. It's just a half-Y interchange with Grand River. Or are you referring to the fact that it also incorporates an intersection with Freedom Drive and an at-grade turn into the Target plaza to the north? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 20:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Why do you re-add the scope="col"
and / or the scope="row"
to tables? - I have been editing wiki, primarily on
Wikia, for over 9 years and have never seen a case where you had to use those table parameters, if removed the table works and looks exactly as it did before they were removed. (
<span=help title="Morph">M o r p h |
<span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C |
<span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T)
19:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
! scope="row"
isn't in there, the plainrowheaders
class won't unbold and left-align the row headers. That class won't touch headers scoped as columns, so they still appear centered and bolded as normal. So, no, it didn't "look[] exactly as it did before they were removed"I know about "Transclusions" as well, but every time I have transcluded anything in the past,
Fram, who likes to delete pages and just say they are copyrighted and not give an editor a change to edit and remove such information while still leaving the rest of the page intact, or others would remove it so I quit doing that. As to the scope=
issue, those tags are still not needed unless you use the plainrowheaders
and I am sure there are some other classes that I do not know about. Otherwise, using the !
tells the screen readers and other software which cells labels are headers (column or row) and the or |
tells them that the data is a non-header cell.
BTW - it is no wonder no one can follow the Manual of Styles! The MOS rules to it, new editors or those that do not edit frequently can not find anything there -- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 20:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
!
will only tell the screen reader that the cell is a header, but the software won't know it is specifically a row header or a column header, just a generic header. It is my understanding that such specific attributes are recommended by the W3C, and it does not hurt to add them and leave them in place. As for the MOS, an editor can write and create content and learn the more specific rules as he or she goes. If editors stick to sentence case and emulate other articles, they'll be fine until they want to polish an article for GA or FA.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)Do you know if there was ever an exit from northbound I-75 to John R. Street in downtown Detroit? I ask this because I can't figure out why the I-375/M-3 exit is 51B and 51C if there's no 51A. I thought I could make out a ramp to John R. on an old aerial, and the 2003 Michigan map shows a ramp there, but do you know of anything more concrete? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
(
edit conflict)Can you stop half-assing edits to Featured Articles? A "?" is not a milepost. If you do not know the milepost to use, leave it blank. Additionally, former exits really require the year(s) when the interchange or ramps were removed. I cannot just comment it out because of the |cspan=
and |lspan =
elements further up. Also, please stop editing before I can reply. Go fix yourself a beverage and stop editing. I'm on my third edit conflict of the night, and your crappy editing technique is about to drive me into an early retirement, leaving you to finish improving the last of Michigan's highway articles.
Imzadi 1979
→
04:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Just to let you know
-- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 13:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea as to what to directly ask for but I sent the following email to the FBCTRA, HCTRA and the NTTA:
My name is James E. Rooks, Jr. and I am a editor on Wikipedia and was working on their page that lists all of the Tollways in the state of Texas. I noticed that they did not have the shields for the < name of toll road authority > toll roads. When I asked why, I was informed that they are not in the M.U.T.C.D. nor are they in the Public Domain, so we can not use them without permission to use them.
I am inquiring to see what needs to be done to gain permission or what license is required to be able to use the proper shield markers on Wikipedia
Yours truly,
so we will see what they reply back ( if they do ) -- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 00:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
This version I contributed a typical circuit diagram to give a practical information. The digrams are based on GM vehicles, but show typical variations of VW also. An IP 24.n came along, removed my edits 3 times, began an never ending discussion, but had no real alternative to give this information. Interpreting is would be rated as theory finding. The only argument was WP:UGH. What do you think? --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 23:27, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed you nominated Yount Road (Fairview Alpha, Louisiana) for a speedy delete. I occasionally edit articles about Louisiana, and have encountered the creator of this article before. I suspect there is an issue of competence, but am not sure how to address it. I offered help when the user went by User talk:Dragonrap2. Every time I encounter this editor I need to do cleanup. Not sure how to help. Cheers. Magnolia677 ( talk) 12:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
You reverted the contrib of the citation note of the inverted SPUI. A citation is not neccessary it map material already shows it. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 16:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
See my previous edit in interchange (road). I fixed samples from unexperienced users. This is what I was talking about the article SPUI. Result: We are experienced, already. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 12:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
was already references, by google earths historical images. I did not revert that. Thanks. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 16:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I withdrew from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Savile Row/archive1 when Savile Row became unstable. The article has now been stable since August so I am considering nominating it again. You made some pertinent comments in the FAC; do you feel your concerns have been addressed, or should I be paying more attention to formatting before re-nominating? Regards SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
So noting a left exit is fine? And "Xbound exit and Ybound entrance" should have an "only" after it? Just wanting to make sure. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 02:04, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
I made a page for U.S. Route 35 in Ohio without realizing that the main page at U.S. Route 35 had a junction list already. However, the junction list on the main US-35 page is incomplete, and goes against the conventional west-to-east due to the configuration of the route. Is there a precedent for highways that change directions in a way that counters the traditional west-to-east, south-to-north format for junction lists? Or would I be better off getting rid of the junction list on U.S. Route 35 and splitting off the Indiana portion into its own article too? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edits on List_of_auxiliary_Interstate_Highways regarding interstate highways in Florida? All information I changed or added was verifiably correct. I removed the part about the I-295 beltway around Jacksonville that said, "Since this isn't a full circle, proper termini should be listed." It is a full circle beltway as of 2011. This can be verified on its page: Interstate 295 (Florida). The termini I listed for I-795 in Jacksonville are also correct. The ones currently listed are both incorrect. And it is in fact under construction, not only proposed. Both the proper termini and construction status can be verified on the page Interstate 795 (Florida). I have added my changes again. There is no reason to go back and forth over this; the information that you reverted it to was incorrect and not verifiable. 24.127.240.127 ( talk) 06:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
So you're okay with me using the old Sunoco map for the Greenlawn exit but not the former John R exit in downtown Detroit off I-75? Is this because I-75 is a featured article? What would be your suggestion for citing the John R exit, since the MDOT maps didn't usually show it? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 20:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
the captions overlap, making them unreadable. Frietjes ( talk) 15:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Might I suggest that this sentence shouldn't use "many"? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't agree that South Pole Traverse should use British style dates. It is funded and built by U.S. government entities from one American base to another American base. U.S. is a signatory of the Antarctic Treaty, but I don't think that makes the project any less American from start to finish, your comment "international in nature" does not seem to be factual. — Brianhe ( talk) 03:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
It's signed as To I-75 South, Petoskey. Why should that not be included? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 05:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Imzadi1979, thanks for finnishing my recent contribs. Not easy to find and pending on knowing the areal or using streetview, is there something in the US similar like the German de:Blockumfahrung which could be translated with square detour, meaning guide around the block of houses? It is used to handle indirect left turns similar to jughandle intersections but with buildings btwn the carriage ways and slip roads. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 07:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
How pleasant to see such fast and high-quality fixes to my latest new article, Education Action Group Foundation. You are awesome, thank you! Safehaven86 ( talk) 03:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
How pleasant to see such fast and high-quality fixes to my latest new article, Education Action Group Foundation. You are awesome, thank you! Safehaven86 ( talk) 03:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
What does copy editing for flow mean? -- ACase0000 ( talk) 01:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
), it prevents a browser from using that space as a place to break a line of text. In other words, the "SR" and the "290" can't be on separate lines because the browser has to treat "SR 290" as a single word. You don't know if a reader will be using a smartphone, a tablet, a computer with a regular display, one with a widescreen display, what typeface/size their browser is set to use, or if they're printing the article. All of those can affect how wide each line of text is displayed, which means that the text can break at any point in any paragraph, so it's just best to use non-breaking spaces to keep the two halves of a highway abbreviation together.
Imzadi 1979
→
02:52, 12 March 2015 (UTC)|scale=1:70,000
or |scale=1 in = 10 m
in {{
cite map}}. ("1 in = 10 mi" can also be converted to "1:633,600" if desired because in that scale, 1 inch on the map equals 633,600 inches on the ground.) If the map doesn't give its scale, and there isn't a graphical bar scale you can measure (don't do this on a scanned map unless you're sure that the map isn't being zoomed on your display), then you should add |scale=Scale not given
. In rare cases, the map isn't drawn to scale, so |scale=Not to scale
is the appropriate detail.
Imzadi 1979
→
03:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Are you interested in fixing {{ cite map}} templates with unsupported parameters that are showing up in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Pages with citations using unsupported parameters? I thought you might want to see what has surfaced, in case there are adjustments to be made to the template.
As the database refreshes over the next month or two, we'll see articles showing up in that category due to the cite map template update, along with the usual assortment of unsupported parameters that editors add for a variety of reasons.
I have already fixed a bunch of straightforward misspellings ("cartography" is a challenge for some editors), but I left a dozen or so articles that seemed less clear to me. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:44, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
I really struggled figuring out a way to describe the route of the Fort Walla Walla-Fort Colville Military Road. If this was your wiki page, what would you recommend doing?
Sue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srichart4 ( talk • contribs) 23:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
It's also very nice to include ISBNs (books, maps), ISSNs (many magazines, newspapers or journals) or OCLCs (any source cataloged in a library). Older books won't have an ISBN, and ISSNs are optional for periodicals, so if those aren't available, I find the OCLC on http://www.worldcat.org/.
When dealing with sources that I've read online, I separate them into two categories: those that originate online and those that are republished. For both types, I supply the URL for the webpage. The access date for the source is important a) if the website's content is impermanent and subject to change or deletion, or b) if the source lacks a publication date.
|via=Google Books
to let readers know I accessed it "via Google Books". If the website requires a paid subscription, then |subscription=yes
lets a reader know. If an unpaid registration is required, |registration=yes
.|year=
and the original publishing year in |orig-year=
while citing the location and publisher for the reprinted edition, not the original because you're citing the reprint, which could have been changed from the original and the page numbers almost always don't line up...), books published in a series, authored chapters in an edited book, etc.This is exactly what I wanted in a reply. Now, I have a clue where I should go with the article. I'd written it, because the road, although very important during its time, has disappeared from most history books and even local stories. Your explanation will help with some other articles that need improvement like the Franklin D Roosevelt Lake article. Thank you for taking the time to help. Srichart4 ( talk) 13:37, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Question on book citation. Let's take the Anne Streeter book as an example. If I'm reading the Cite Book example correctly, I don't include the page numbers or the publisher, which seems strange to me. And, it should look like this: [1] I did citation number 21 in this style. Is Anne P. Streeter's name as author in red, because she doesn't have a wiki page? Also, I'm viewing this book on my Kindle. The ISBN check didn't like the ebook ISBN, so I used the hardcopy ISBN, which I do have access to. Awaiting your response. I've made a list of all my citations and will update them after I know I'm doing it correctly. Srichart4 ( talk) 15:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
|page=1
. If you're citing a range of pages, or multiple separate ones, then |pages=4–6
or |pages=3, 9, 27
.|authorlink=
unless the author has an article.|asin=
.
|edition=Kindle
to note that.References
Any thoughts on whether User:Interstate 285 is the same as User:2006 December? Looking at the user pages and the poor edits thus far, the editing idiosyncrasies are much too coincidental. -- Kinu t/ c 05:09, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Since you had contributed an extensive and informed keep argument to the TFD, I think you would be interested to know that it has just been closed as delete from what seems like a very sketchy reading of the TFD. Several editors have been discussing this on the closing admin's talk page, if you'd be interested in joining in. Daniel Case ( talk) 04:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Here is a URL link to what the Tomball Tollway signs from the Harris County Toll Road Authority will look like
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 23:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes. Have you added this shield to the template {{
Jct}} so that it can be used to produce that shield instead of using {{Jct|state=TX|Toll|249|name1=[[Texas State Highway 249|Tomball Tollway]]}}
to produce
SH 249 Toll (
Tomball Tollway)?
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 01:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
{{jct|state=TX|Toll|249|Toll|Tomball}}
→ Thanks, the Toll|Tomball
was what I was looking for --
User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Originally, the
Montgomery County Toll Road Authority (MCTRA) was the entity that was going to operate the two Tolled Direct Connector ramps (DC's) located at
I-45 /
SH 242. Now, in a recent television interview with one of the County Commissioners of
Montgomery County, he said that "The
Harris County Toll Road Authority" (HCTRA) will be operating the DC's.
I am speculating that the two TRAs have worked out a deal to where the HCTRA will collect the tolls and giving them to the MCTRA and that the signage will be that of the MCTRA's design and not of the HCTRA's?
I guess we will find out in a few weeks, barring any further delays, when the DC's are supposed to open?
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I found my answer in an older newspaper article stating that the two agencies are partnering up to work together "Flyover project delayed, toll cost still undecided". The Courier.
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I followed the same pattern used on other FM Roads as my pattern for use on FM 1485 and FM 1314 - when I created those pages and infact you reworded the History on FM 1314 which was the new pattern that I used on FM 1485 -- so now you have to make up your mind on which way to go on how to use the Histories from TxDot on the wiki - history is history, I can not reword it too much or it becomes a made up history.
If the rewording on FM 1485 is a copyright violations then so is the history that YOU reworded for me on FM 1314.
( M o r p h | C | T) 13:26, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Some of us are not Rhode Scholars or writers by nature and can not think of prolific ways to reword something - so I guess I will no longer include the histories on pages and let you or others fill it in so that it will not be considered plagiarized. -- ( M o r p h | C | T) 14:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Texas Farm to Market Road 1314 needs to be moved to Farm to Market Road 1314
P.S. The other Farm to Market roads do have
Texas Farm to Market Road #### as well, but they are redirected to the
Farm to Market Road #### along with
FM ####,
Farm to Market Road #### (Texas) and several others variations based on this page
Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Texas/Completion list/Farm to Market and Ranch to Market Roads/txfm
which is used to produce:
-- ( M o r p h | C | T) 17:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
You're invited to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Guidance_on_commas_before_Jr._and_Sr. Dohn joe ( talk) 02:11, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Imzadi1979,
You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you,
Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB ( talk) 14:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
{{
TxDOT|US|59}}
to get the following:
Transportation Planning and Programming Division (n.d.). "U.S. Highway No. 59". Highway Designation Files. Texas Department of Transportation.
but when you try to use {{
TxDOT|BS|59l}}
for the US 59 Business Loop L located in Splendora, Texas - it give me this message
Transportation Planning and Programming Division (n.d.). "Business State Highway No. 59-l". Highway Designation Files. Texas Department of Transportation.
so I replaced that with the following {{
Cite web|url =
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/BU/BU0059l.htm%7Ctitle = BUSINESS U. S. HIGHWAY NO. 59-L|website = Highway Designation Files.|publisher =
Texas Department of Transportation.|publication-place = Transportation Planning and Programming Division.}}
to produce the following
"BUSINESS U. S. HIGHWAY NO. 59-L". Highway Designation Files. Transportation Planning and Programming Division.:
Texas Department of Transportation.
>As you can see it is not displayed in the same order as the {{
TxDOT}}
displays and I do not know the proper parameters to make it match
Nevermind! I figured it out after I viewed the code for the template {{
TxDOT}}
- I did not know about the 3rd parameter for when they have letters -- (
M o r p h |
C |
T)
23:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
{{TxDOT | type | number | X | accessdate= }}
For the various business routes, Interstates 35E and 35W, or Interstates 69E, 69C and 69W, substitute the necessary letter suffix for X.
![]() | On April 16, 2015, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cuban Thaw, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. |
ThaddeusB (
talk)
14:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
The original exit on the north side of the Zilwaukee Bridge connected to Westervelt Road, but the current exit since 1987 connects to Adams Street. Is this enough of a change to note Westervelt as a former interchange, or should it be considered a reconstruction of the same interchange?
Also, the M-59/Adams Road exit in Rochester Hills was relocated significantly east of where it used to be. Is that enough to consider the old exit a former interchange or not? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Just because. Pine ✉ 08:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
Hi there. Recently, User:Riiga has tagged the Logo sign article for globalization. However, are logo signs really used on highways in other countries? The only other country that I know that uses them is Canada, and only in the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia (a fourth province, New Brunswick, has had a logo sign program in the past but has since discontinued it). Perhaps we can include a Canadian section if we could find some sources on their history in Canada, however, I don't know if logo signs are used in any other countries other than the U.S. and Canada. ANDROS1337 TALK 21:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Sweden uses these signs, with logos in the squares. RL example. Riiga ( talk) 22:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
I cannot remember ever falling out with you, so I don't know why you feel it necessary to be so rude to me. I would be grateful if you treated me with the respect that you would prefer to receive yourself.
DrKiernan (
talk)
13:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
|format=
to put the format next to the output of |map=
and |map-url=
(and used to put |url=
on the |map=
output), so there a few lingering formats that need to be shifted to |map-format=
hanging out there. That is all.
Imzadi 1979
→
14:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey I was wondering if you could take a look at the last paragraph of Ontario Highway 3#Connections with the United States and add citations from your article as need be? I'm not the least bit familiar with histories on the other side of the river. Cheers, Floydian τ ¢ 00:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 7 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 25 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the original route of US Highway 25 between Detroit and Port Huron, Michigan, followed Gratiot Avenue (pictured), named for Fort Gratiot that was built in the aftermath of the War of 1812? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 25 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
—
Crisco 1492 (
talk)
21:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Look at Interstate 440. The highways are 3 that are currently I-440 and one that was formerly I-440. However, as a definition of I-440, all 4 meanings are current. (The sense of the word "current" here is current as a definition, not a thing with a name.) An example is:
Soviet Union = A former country in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia.
The country being talked about in this definition is former, but the definition is still current because of the word "former". So the definition is current; it is (not was) a definition of Soviet Union. Similarly, A highway in Oklahoma is a former definition of Interstate 440. But "A former designation of a highway in Oklahoma that's now part of Interstate 44" is a current definition of Interstate 440. So all 4 meanings of Interstate 440 are current. Georgia guy ( talk) 21:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Following the closure of a recent RfC you participated in, I have started an RfC on the separate but related issue of commas after Jr. and Sr.. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr. and feel free to comment there. Thanks! — sroc 💬 06:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
My name is Cordes Hoffman and I am a photo researcher for an educational textbook publisher, Pearson Education.
We are are interested in using an image that you own. I found it here on Wikipedia, and it says that you have marked it as public domain. May I ask your specific permission to use the image within the book?
You can reply to me here, or thru my email, cordes.hoffman@qbslearning.com
I greatly appreciate your time and attention!
Sincerely,
2602:306:CDAE:8540:8506:3C7E:5069:9421 ( talk) 14:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)Cordes
Thanks for the catch. BMK ( talk) 02:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Since you commented on the recent FDR infobox linking, there is a broader based RfC going on at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC concerning the infobox linking of all political offices. Please comment if it is of interest to you. Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 07:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. —
{{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)
06:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 24 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 33 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that for its first 25 years of existence in Michigan, US Highway 33 did not have an independent routing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 33 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
07:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Contributor Barnstar Congratulations on getting Michigan de-B'ed and to become the first state to have all articles at GA or better! Dough 4872 03:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC) |
You are the only one using User:Gadget850/ExternalLinkIcons.css. I will be deleting this in a few weeks, so please copy it over if you wish to continue to use it. -- Gadget850 talk 23:07, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
U.S. Route 12 in Michigan at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —
Gasheadsteve
Talk to me
20:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I believe that either your last changes or the previous change by Fredddie to Template:Infobox road/shieldmain/IND caused a lot of missing shield issues - not sure if this was intentional and your going to create the new images or if it was a mistake?
Cheers KylieTastic ( talk) 16:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Վաստակավոր ադմինիստրատոր |
abrikos Boturyan ( talk) 18:36, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | On 5 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Interstate 94 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Interstate 94 in Michigan, completed 1960, was the first toll-free interstate highway completed border to border in a U.S. state? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Interstate 94 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
—
Chris Woodrich (
talk)
13:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Per your request, I wrote my reasoning for removing the Chicago freeway segment on the U.S. Route 12 page in the talk page, please review. Thank you! NBA2030 ( talk) 15:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 14 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 12 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that U.S. Highway 12 followed the route of the St. Joseph Trail until 1962, and since then it has followed the Sauk Trail, two former Indian trails in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 12 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
On the I-69 page there is a problem with the bullets showing in the middle of the mileage table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkbngr ( talk • contribs) 06:32, June 15, 2015 (UTC)
I drive 41 every day into green bay, although I know reading webpages I-41 was supposed to terminate at I-43, the first reassurance shield is at the Lineville road exit. If that is in error then I assume the WisDOT will correct that soon enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gr8daynegb ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
If I add a photo of the first reassurance shield by Lineville Road(the ones you kept undoing), will that be good enough that you won't undo that edit I make?(I get that people may amend it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gr8daynegb ( talk • contribs) 22:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
References
'It will actually start south of the Wisconsin-Illinois border, where U.S. 41 currently joins in with Interstate 94, and it'll follow Interstate 94 and run concurrently with 94, then 894 around Milwaukee. And then it will follow U.S. 45/41 up to Green Bay, and it ends at the 43 interchange on the north side of Green Bay,' said [Tammy] Rabe [from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation].(emphasis added)
schlicht
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Hello. Perhaps the Yooper dialect (or sub-dialect, really?) should be its own section on the "Upper Midwest American English" page. I don't really see why it gets its own page. There are a few lexical features and phonological characteristics listed, though none are cited. The citations that appear at the bottom of the page have no links and in no way clearly explain all the supposed dialectal information on the article itself; it all appears to be original research. And how many sub-dialects earn their own page? I think a section within the Upper Midwest dialect page would be a better fit. Thoughts? Wolfdog ( talk) 02:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Be careful with User:Equazcion/OneClickArchiver and other tools. About 18 months ago, you archived a bunch of stuff from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads to Talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/Archive 2. I moved that page to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/Archive - out of sequence 2009-2012 and added a link to it at the top of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads. I've also verified that the search function works as expected. I haven't taken the trouble to update the headers in the existing archives or the navigation header that will be automatically pre-pended to new archive pages, because honestly, it's probably not worth the effort. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 01:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 16 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John D. Voelker, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that John D. Voelker (pictured) wanted to be appointed to the Michigan Supreme Court because he "needed the money", but he resigned two years later to be an author instead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John D. Voelker. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass (
talk)
12:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. It mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank ( push to talk) 01:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@
Dank and
Crisco 1492:
commons:Category:M-28 Business (Ishpeming–Negaunee, Michigan) is what I have. I'm especially pleased with
File:Bus M-28 Negaunee Silver Street Y South1.jpg because it shows the fork in Silver Street where Bus. M-28 curves westward (right) and the eastward branch of the fork which used to carry M-35. I'm planning on playing with color corrections, and in the case of the one photo, a slight perspective correction, later tonight. If there are any you'd like cropped a bit, let me know. There's one more spot in Negaunee I intent to photograph here, which I may have done before you see this message.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@ Dank: a last-minute thought on the blurb. A link to Marquette Iron Range might be in order, if possible. Imzadi 1979 → 05:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
If you're bored and need something to work on, I started a bulleted junction list for European route E30 in my sandbox. The table that is there now is untenable. – Fredddie ™ 02:12, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
{{
INDOT map}}
has similar problems to {{
Ohio road map}}
.
![]() | 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I'm a little confused by several changes:
1. The article name for New Mexico Scenic Byways. 1) It seems quite clear from the searching that I've done + the name as I found it on the Federal Highway Administration and NM DOT sites before I created the article that the current program name is New Mexico Scenic Byways.
2. Regarding use of WP:Plural, it seems to me that this is not a dog/dogs situation, but one where the name is actually the plural version. There is not one New Mexico Scenic Byway. So, using Byway is wrong - that's not it's name.
3. Scenic byways template. It's been confusing to me why the scenic byways template could not be on the individual scenic byway article pages -- but I tried to go with the flow to find a way that readers could get to the lists. It seems that creating the article made the most sense - and I'm confused why that has been removed from the See also list. Is it really going to hurt to have it in there? -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 05:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I added the former exits with a source. If you want to get more accurate mileage on them, please do. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 00:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I was just reading some changes made to the M-1 Rail page, and had some thoughts. Barring very major events like the scheduled completeion of a project, you rarely want to write too far into the future. For instance, the July 3 documentation of the bridge reconstructions over the freeways is something that you'll have to come back and correct, and it's really not that major of an event in the grand scheme of the project. We do not want the page to become a weekly or even monthly documentation of the progress of the project. Major events like ground-breaking major changes in the scope of the project, and things like securing major funding are fairly relevant on a case-by-case basis, but I'm not sure we need to be doing future tense about freeways bridge reconstructions. Just my two cents. You thoughts? -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 06:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
|class=future
and don't even begin to assess an article's content and organization as a project until the roadway is open to traffic.
Imzadi 1979
→
19:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)I am trying to make an article on U.S. Route 24 in Ohio since I feel it needs one. I've gotten a start on it at User:TenPoundHammer/US 24 Ohio and I would appreciate some help on the route's history, as well as the exact mileage of each junction. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 12:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Apologies. That was an inadvertent deletion, as I was trying to (too quickly before work) do an ⌥ Option+drag copy, which obviously didn’t work correctly. Useddenim ( talk) 21:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
When I open the .sid files, it tells me I need a plugin, then links me to a page that doesn't help at all. Any idea what plugin I'm missing to open them? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 04:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Imzadi1979 I am sorry for putting the r Shield request in the wrong place. ACase0000 ( talk) 02:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering if you were able to provide some feedback at the Sleeping Dogs FAC? It would be hugely appreciated. Thanks! URDNEXT ( talk) 19:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Why did you delete my message? URDNEXT ( talk) 19:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Why did you remove North Street/Larch Street? This is a grade separation/interchange, no less of one than US-24/Orchard Lake or M-25/JFK Drive, and according to MOS:RJL, all grade-separated exits should be included. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 13:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a ramp from EB 94 to WB 69 to me (ETA: This is the EB 94-WB 69 ramp]). How are you getting incomplete access out of this? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
So when do I include, and when do I omit, the street name? (E.g., US-23 being Lake Street at M-55's eastern terminus and US-31 being Parkdale Avenue at its western terminus, both of which were omitted.) Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
MOS:RJL says "If two interchanges with different roads have the same number with different lettered suffixes, they generally should not be combined." By that rule, shouldn't Rosa Parks and M-10 be listed as separate exits? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:41, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I was just wondering what the reasoning is behind the removal of the North-South Arterial Highway article. Given the fact that it is an expressway with junctions that would be repeated on multiple articles and is also undergoing a major reconstruction, shouldn't it warrant an article for itself? In addition, I was still actively editing the article so it was going to be improved rapidly. -- Dekema2 ( talk) 01:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
This is to inform you that Capitol Loop, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 13 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
"Links should not be placed in the boldface reiteration of the title in the opening sentence of a lead:
The Babe Ruth Award is given annually to the Major League Baseball (MLB) player with the best performance in the postseason. ( Babe Ruth Award)
Many, but not all, articles repeat the article title in bold face in the first line of the article. Linking the article to itself produces boldface text; this practice is discouraged as page moves will result in a useless circular link through a redirect. Linking part of the bolded text is also discouraged because it changes the visual effect of bolding; some readers will miss the visual cue which is the purpose of using bold face in the first place."
OK, fair enough.
But - without meaning to sound snotty here - there are definitely no rules that say that the descriptions of the plates in the tables should have the state/province/territory names, slogans and years in quotation marks; that the dates of issue should be in the format "(year X)–(year Y)" with no wrapping allowed; and that multiple notes should not be separated using ˂br˃ tags, bullet points or whatever.
That said, not everyone can or ever will entirely agree on how the things that go in these tables should be formatted. Bluebird207 ( talk) 23:51, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
OK, this will be the very last time I post on this talk page, and then I will leave you alone regardless of how you respond.
When you said, "You should be using this energy to improve the other mediocre examples to match, not tearing apart improvements and driving away interested editors; if that was your desire, to push people away and enforce mediocrity, you've achieved your goal", I honestly thought you were talking about Wikipedia in general - I did not think that you were only talking about the Vehicle registration plates of Michigan article (which I've chosen not to link to here).
So consider that a simple misunderstanding. I've already admitted that I can be a bit selfish and a bit misguided at times - and now I will admit that I'm capable of misunderstanding things now and again, too.
I have not, do not and never will have any intentions of driving fellow editors away from Wikipedia - and nor have I had, do I have and will I ever have any intentions of driving them away from individual articles, like the Vehicle registration plates of Michigan one.
You might find that I have not reverted your edits to this article. Well, all right, I partially reverted one - but that was merely because I didn't think the rules regarding the use of bold text in the lead section were that strict. (That was an example of me being a bit misguided, BTW.)
But I have not reverted any of the edits you made to the tables. I may not entirely agree with them, but I don't completely disagree with them either - and hence I've allowed them to stand. And I promise you, I will continue to allow them to stand.
And if you do edit the article again in the future, I promise you I'll let those edits stand too. Do not feel that you don't want to edit the article any more just because the two of us had a disagreement.
I myself will continue to edit the article - but only to update it (that is, when several new serials have been issued) and to put in additional information (like more detailed descriptions of some of the bases) as and when I see fit, and nothing else.
I will sign off by apologizing, one last time, for everything that has taken place over the last two days or so - for the disagreement, for the misunderstanding, for the report (which I'll admit now was an irrational decision - another example of me being a bit misguided), and above all for coming across as being a bit of an asshole. (Well, I do like to think that I am my harshest critic.) Bluebird207 ( talk) 08:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
This is in response to your query on IRC, which I was away from at the time. The reason for the lack of updates is not because I have forgotten or failed to keep up with them, but rather because the most recent QGIS contained several bugs that made generating the map impossible. Whereas on Windows it is trivial to "downgrade" by uninstalling and reinstalling an older version, this is more difficult on Linux because it uses a software-installation tool somewhat like the app store found on mobile devices. Downgrading is made even more difficult because applications depend on linked libraries which other programs also rely on, so incompatible versions of these libraries can become an issue. I will check next week to see if the bugs have been corrected in a newer update, but it is possible that I will still run into crashes while generating the map. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I saw you reverted my edits to the infobox because you thought the 10 junction limit included the termini. I always thought it was 10 major junctions plus the termini that are allowed in the infobox. The US Roads article standards do not mention this detail. Perhaps they should be updated? PointsofNoReturn ( talk) 20:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Imzadi1979, thank you for your thoughtful recommendations at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.
Per your helpful suggestion, I've gone ahead and modified the blurb text to only have one (1) instance of the word diff. Further, in subsequent days the link may simply be to the book's subtitle, Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties, as it has been referred to secondary sources, for example The Washington Post.
Hopefully this is now satisfactory for you to reevaluate your position at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.
— Cirt ( talk) 16:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Will you have another look at the TFAR discussion. I'm trying to compromise between multiple different editors's comments and suggestions here, please understand that. I've trimmed the amount of usage of that word in the blurb as much as possible.
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 18:04, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, if you think this is not a stub (via talk page assessment), please remove stub tag on talk page. Thanks! — revimsg 01:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I have cited it and given a link for more information-- ChristianOlson0214 ( talk) 16:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I guess I have a case of rude editing here. What is your opinion? Background: I got some behind editing on my contribs after posting some critisism of a oranisation based in Germany and Nevada. Groups of this oranisation supports this and that. As the only reason "UGH" of the removal of my contrib is strongly focussed on my name by IP users, makes it more suspect, even one of the IPs is form Vegas. -- Hans Haase ( talk) 10:21, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Please explain why the new article Multi State Route 92 was removed and replaced with the list of routes numbered 92. What could be done to improve that article to make it acceptable? I'm asking here, because after its removal, it does not have a talk page on which to discuss it. RogerD ( talk) 07:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Good late night early morning. I made some improvements to the
Transportation in South Florida article, including a thorough review of your written suggestions from the GAN, and have
submitted it at FAC. As a constructive critic, your comments on the matter are welcomed.
B137 (
talk)
07:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I would also invite you to leave a comment here: Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of tallest buildings in Miami/archive1 as this FLRC has stagnated, despite my several points about it being far from featured material standards. I know it may be out of your area of interest content-wise, but as a user with a long history of dealing with featured content, GANs, etc, I find this notification appropriate. B137 ( talk) 17:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I can't help feeling that this editor means well but for whatever reason can't figure out how to get to the article talk page. Thanks for your help, maybe we can still get him on board. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 22:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
This was regarding the freeways/expressways. When push comes to shove I would be hard pressed to tell you the difference between the two. What I am interested in is the "toll-free" part. Explained (with dedicated citation) further down in the lead is that Michigan actually has no tolls on any roadways. Given the reality of the toll situation (and the dedicated citation later on) would you mind if we just left any mention of tolls in that later sentence? Juno ( talk) 07:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I just put in a note on the Common's de-flag request requesting to keep the bot.
If you are having issues with the script I would be interested to know what they are.
There have been some enhancements that I wanted to do with the bot, so I am planning to do a test run this weekend. I sent a message to Freddie to see if his requests were still applicable, or if you have other suggestions I can try those too. After I finish the run, I will update the code on the bots page, as well as provide some example files. -- Svgalbertian ( talk) 23:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, someone is interested!
I have a question concerning presentation, now that I have worked out what is going on. It's to do with inclusion of |res=
or |HR=
. I assume they are mutually exclusive, but there is no documentation anywhere I can see. Any, if we take for example {{Cite California statute |1966|94|631|ex=1|res=true|section=4}} then that produces
California State Assembly.
"Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 17—Relative to delaying relinquishment of a portion of Interstate 80 leading to the State Capitol". 1966 Session of the Legislature, 1st extraordinary session. Statutes of California (Resolution). State of California. Ch. 94 § 4 p. 631.
or {{Cite California statute |year=1959|chapter=144|HR=true}} produces
California State Assembly.
"Relating to the Seaside Freeway". 1959 Session of the Legislature. Statutes of California (House Resolution). State of California. Ch. 144.
The thing is, the fact there was a resolution about this statute isn't actually shown in the citation. My feeling is that it could be shown as the leading part of the |volume=
in {{
cite encyclopedia}} – here something like "Resolution of the 1966 Session of the Legislature ..." or "House Resolution of the 1959 Session of the Legislature". Do you have any opinions?
BTW do you actually know what is the difference between a resolution and a House Resolution?
-- Unbuttered parsnip ( talk) mytime= Wed 10:01, wikitime= 02:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
|type=
parameter, which would then appear in parentheses, not the volume, which should be which book or subsection/department of the website contains the specific legislation.{{
cite web|author=California State Assembly|year= year|title=title of the legislation|type=statute or resolution, etc|department=the session, including extraordinary ones|work=Statutes of California|publisher=State of California|at=chapter and page location|accessdate=accessdate}}
.|format=
because it seemed to put it in a more logical place in the output.
Hello,
You reverted my edit to List of U.S. Highways in Michigan, I assume it contained one or multiple errors. But did you really have to delete everything, helping is a bit hard if an edit that contains errors is fully reverted. TheWombatGuru ( talk) 21:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of U.S. Route 45 in Michigan to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 10:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean by me oversimplifying here. It's just a half-Y interchange with Grand River. Or are you referring to the fact that it also incorporates an intersection with Freedom Drive and an at-grade turn into the Target plaza to the north? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 20:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Why do you re-add the scope="col"
and / or the scope="row"
to tables? - I have been editing wiki, primarily on
Wikia, for over 9 years and have never seen a case where you had to use those table parameters, if removed the table works and looks exactly as it did before they were removed. (
<span=help title="Morph">M o r p h |
<span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C |
<span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T)
19:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
! scope="row"
isn't in there, the plainrowheaders
class won't unbold and left-align the row headers. That class won't touch headers scoped as columns, so they still appear centered and bolded as normal. So, no, it didn't "look[] exactly as it did before they were removed"I know about "Transclusions" as well, but every time I have transcluded anything in the past,
Fram, who likes to delete pages and just say they are copyrighted and not give an editor a change to edit and remove such information while still leaving the rest of the page intact, or others would remove it so I quit doing that. As to the scope=
issue, those tags are still not needed unless you use the plainrowheaders
and I am sure there are some other classes that I do not know about. Otherwise, using the !
tells the screen readers and other software which cells labels are headers (column or row) and the or |
tells them that the data is a non-header cell.
BTW - it is no wonder no one can follow the Manual of Styles! The MOS rules to it, new editors or those that do not edit frequently can not find anything there -- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 20:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
!
will only tell the screen reader that the cell is a header, but the software won't know it is specifically a row header or a column header, just a generic header. It is my understanding that such specific attributes are recommended by the W3C, and it does not hurt to add them and leave them in place. As for the MOS, an editor can write and create content and learn the more specific rules as he or she goes. If editors stick to sentence case and emulate other articles, they'll be fine until they want to polish an article for GA or FA.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)Do you know if there was ever an exit from northbound I-75 to John R. Street in downtown Detroit? I ask this because I can't figure out why the I-375/M-3 exit is 51B and 51C if there's no 51A. I thought I could make out a ramp to John R. on an old aerial, and the 2003 Michigan map shows a ramp there, but do you know of anything more concrete? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 03:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
(
edit conflict)Can you stop half-assing edits to Featured Articles? A "?" is not a milepost. If you do not know the milepost to use, leave it blank. Additionally, former exits really require the year(s) when the interchange or ramps were removed. I cannot just comment it out because of the |cspan=
and |lspan =
elements further up. Also, please stop editing before I can reply. Go fix yourself a beverage and stop editing. I'm on my third edit conflict of the night, and your crappy editing technique is about to drive me into an early retirement, leaving you to finish improving the last of Michigan's highway articles.
Imzadi 1979
→
04:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Just to let you know
-- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 13:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea as to what to directly ask for but I sent the following email to the FBCTRA, HCTRA and the NTTA:
My name is James E. Rooks, Jr. and I am a editor on Wikipedia and was working on their page that lists all of the Tollways in the state of Texas. I noticed that they did not have the shields for the < name of toll road authority > toll roads. When I asked why, I was informed that they are not in the M.U.T.C.D. nor are they in the Public Domain, so we can not use them without permission to use them.
I am inquiring to see what needs to be done to gain permission or what license is required to be able to use the proper shield markers on Wikipedia
Yours truly,
so we will see what they reply back ( if they do ) -- ( <span=help title="Morph">M o r p h | <span=help title="See what Morph has Contributed to Wikipedia">C | <span=help title="Morph's Discussion Page">T) 00:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
This version I contributed a typical circuit diagram to give a practical information. The digrams are based on GM vehicles, but show typical variations of VW also. An IP 24.n came along, removed my edits 3 times, began an never ending discussion, but had no real alternative to give this information. Interpreting is would be rated as theory finding. The only argument was WP:UGH. What do you think? --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 23:27, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed you nominated Yount Road (Fairview Alpha, Louisiana) for a speedy delete. I occasionally edit articles about Louisiana, and have encountered the creator of this article before. I suspect there is an issue of competence, but am not sure how to address it. I offered help when the user went by User talk:Dragonrap2. Every time I encounter this editor I need to do cleanup. Not sure how to help. Cheers. Magnolia677 ( talk) 12:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
You reverted the contrib of the citation note of the inverted SPUI. A citation is not neccessary it map material already shows it. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 16:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
See my previous edit in interchange (road). I fixed samples from unexperienced users. This is what I was talking about the article SPUI. Result: We are experienced, already. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 12:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
was already references, by google earths historical images. I did not revert that. Thanks. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 16:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I withdrew from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Savile Row/archive1 when Savile Row became unstable. The article has now been stable since August so I am considering nominating it again. You made some pertinent comments in the FAC; do you feel your concerns have been addressed, or should I be paying more attention to formatting before re-nominating? Regards SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
So noting a left exit is fine? And "Xbound exit and Ybound entrance" should have an "only" after it? Just wanting to make sure. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 02:04, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
I made a page for U.S. Route 35 in Ohio without realizing that the main page at U.S. Route 35 had a junction list already. However, the junction list on the main US-35 page is incomplete, and goes against the conventional west-to-east due to the configuration of the route. Is there a precedent for highways that change directions in a way that counters the traditional west-to-east, south-to-north format for junction lists? Or would I be better off getting rid of the junction list on U.S. Route 35 and splitting off the Indiana portion into its own article too? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edits on List_of_auxiliary_Interstate_Highways regarding interstate highways in Florida? All information I changed or added was verifiably correct. I removed the part about the I-295 beltway around Jacksonville that said, "Since this isn't a full circle, proper termini should be listed." It is a full circle beltway as of 2011. This can be verified on its page: Interstate 295 (Florida). The termini I listed for I-795 in Jacksonville are also correct. The ones currently listed are both incorrect. And it is in fact under construction, not only proposed. Both the proper termini and construction status can be verified on the page Interstate 795 (Florida). I have added my changes again. There is no reason to go back and forth over this; the information that you reverted it to was incorrect and not verifiable. 24.127.240.127 ( talk) 06:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
So you're okay with me using the old Sunoco map for the Greenlawn exit but not the former John R exit in downtown Detroit off I-75? Is this because I-75 is a featured article? What would be your suggestion for citing the John R exit, since the MDOT maps didn't usually show it? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 20:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
the captions overlap, making them unreadable. Frietjes ( talk) 15:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Might I suggest that this sentence shouldn't use "many"? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't agree that South Pole Traverse should use British style dates. It is funded and built by U.S. government entities from one American base to another American base. U.S. is a signatory of the Antarctic Treaty, but I don't think that makes the project any less American from start to finish, your comment "international in nature" does not seem to be factual. — Brianhe ( talk) 03:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
It's signed as To I-75 South, Petoskey. Why should that not be included? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 05:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Imzadi1979, thanks for finnishing my recent contribs. Not easy to find and pending on knowing the areal or using streetview, is there something in the US similar like the German de:Blockumfahrung which could be translated with square detour, meaning guide around the block of houses? It is used to handle indirect left turns similar to jughandle intersections but with buildings btwn the carriage ways and slip roads. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 07:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
How pleasant to see such fast and high-quality fixes to my latest new article, Education Action Group Foundation. You are awesome, thank you! Safehaven86 ( talk) 03:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
How pleasant to see such fast and high-quality fixes to my latest new article, Education Action Group Foundation. You are awesome, thank you! Safehaven86 ( talk) 03:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
What does copy editing for flow mean? -- ACase0000 ( talk) 01:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
), it prevents a browser from using that space as a place to break a line of text. In other words, the "SR" and the "290" can't be on separate lines because the browser has to treat "SR 290" as a single word. You don't know if a reader will be using a smartphone, a tablet, a computer with a regular display, one with a widescreen display, what typeface/size their browser is set to use, or if they're printing the article. All of those can affect how wide each line of text is displayed, which means that the text can break at any point in any paragraph, so it's just best to use non-breaking spaces to keep the two halves of a highway abbreviation together.
Imzadi 1979
→
02:52, 12 March 2015 (UTC)|scale=1:70,000
or |scale=1 in = 10 m
in {{
cite map}}. ("1 in = 10 mi" can also be converted to "1:633,600" if desired because in that scale, 1 inch on the map equals 633,600 inches on the ground.) If the map doesn't give its scale, and there isn't a graphical bar scale you can measure (don't do this on a scanned map unless you're sure that the map isn't being zoomed on your display), then you should add |scale=Scale not given
. In rare cases, the map isn't drawn to scale, so |scale=Not to scale
is the appropriate detail.
Imzadi 1979
→
03:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Are you interested in fixing {{ cite map}} templates with unsupported parameters that are showing up in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Pages with citations using unsupported parameters? I thought you might want to see what has surfaced, in case there are adjustments to be made to the template.
As the database refreshes over the next month or two, we'll see articles showing up in that category due to the cite map template update, along with the usual assortment of unsupported parameters that editors add for a variety of reasons.
I have already fixed a bunch of straightforward misspellings ("cartography" is a challenge for some editors), but I left a dozen or so articles that seemed less clear to me. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:44, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
I really struggled figuring out a way to describe the route of the Fort Walla Walla-Fort Colville Military Road. If this was your wiki page, what would you recommend doing?
Sue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srichart4 ( talk • contribs) 23:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
It's also very nice to include ISBNs (books, maps), ISSNs (many magazines, newspapers or journals) or OCLCs (any source cataloged in a library). Older books won't have an ISBN, and ISSNs are optional for periodicals, so if those aren't available, I find the OCLC on http://www.worldcat.org/.
When dealing with sources that I've read online, I separate them into two categories: those that originate online and those that are republished. For both types, I supply the URL for the webpage. The access date for the source is important a) if the website's content is impermanent and subject to change or deletion, or b) if the source lacks a publication date.
|via=Google Books
to let readers know I accessed it "via Google Books". If the website requires a paid subscription, then |subscription=yes
lets a reader know. If an unpaid registration is required, |registration=yes
.|year=
and the original publishing year in |orig-year=
while citing the location and publisher for the reprinted edition, not the original because you're citing the reprint, which could have been changed from the original and the page numbers almost always don't line up...), books published in a series, authored chapters in an edited book, etc.This is exactly what I wanted in a reply. Now, I have a clue where I should go with the article. I'd written it, because the road, although very important during its time, has disappeared from most history books and even local stories. Your explanation will help with some other articles that need improvement like the Franklin D Roosevelt Lake article. Thank you for taking the time to help. Srichart4 ( talk) 13:37, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Question on book citation. Let's take the Anne Streeter book as an example. If I'm reading the Cite Book example correctly, I don't include the page numbers or the publisher, which seems strange to me. And, it should look like this: [1] I did citation number 21 in this style. Is Anne P. Streeter's name as author in red, because she doesn't have a wiki page? Also, I'm viewing this book on my Kindle. The ISBN check didn't like the ebook ISBN, so I used the hardcopy ISBN, which I do have access to. Awaiting your response. I've made a list of all my citations and will update them after I know I'm doing it correctly. Srichart4 ( talk) 15:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
|page=1
. If you're citing a range of pages, or multiple separate ones, then |pages=4–6
or |pages=3, 9, 27
.|authorlink=
unless the author has an article.|asin=
.
|edition=Kindle
to note that.References
Any thoughts on whether User:Interstate 285 is the same as User:2006 December? Looking at the user pages and the poor edits thus far, the editing idiosyncrasies are much too coincidental. -- Kinu t/ c 05:09, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Since you had contributed an extensive and informed keep argument to the TFD, I think you would be interested to know that it has just been closed as delete from what seems like a very sketchy reading of the TFD. Several editors have been discussing this on the closing admin's talk page, if you'd be interested in joining in. Daniel Case ( talk) 04:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Here is a URL link to what the Tomball Tollway signs from the Harris County Toll Road Authority will look like
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 23:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes. Have you added this shield to the template {{
Jct}} so that it can be used to produce that shield instead of using {{Jct|state=TX|Toll|249|name1=[[Texas State Highway 249|Tomball Tollway]]}}
to produce
SH 249 Toll (
Tomball Tollway)?
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 01:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
{{jct|state=TX|Toll|249|Toll|Tomball}}
→ Thanks, the Toll|Tomball
was what I was looking for --
User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Originally, the
Montgomery County Toll Road Authority (MCTRA) was the entity that was going to operate the two Tolled Direct Connector ramps (DC's) located at
I-45 /
SH 242. Now, in a recent television interview with one of the County Commissioners of
Montgomery County, he said that "The
Harris County Toll Road Authority" (HCTRA) will be operating the DC's.
I am speculating that the two TRAs have worked out a deal to where the HCTRA will collect the tolls and giving them to the MCTRA and that the signage will be that of the MCTRA's design and not of the HCTRA's?
I guess we will find out in a few weeks, barring any further delays, when the DC's are supposed to open?
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I found my answer in an older newspaper article stating that the two agencies are partnering up to work together "Flyover project delayed, toll cost still undecided". The Courier.
-- User:Jrooksjr/Sig1 02:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I followed the same pattern used on other FM Roads as my pattern for use on FM 1485 and FM 1314 - when I created those pages and infact you reworded the History on FM 1314 which was the new pattern that I used on FM 1485 -- so now you have to make up your mind on which way to go on how to use the Histories from TxDot on the wiki - history is history, I can not reword it too much or it becomes a made up history.
If the rewording on FM 1485 is a copyright violations then so is the history that YOU reworded for me on FM 1314.
( M o r p h | C | T) 13:26, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Some of us are not Rhode Scholars or writers by nature and can not think of prolific ways to reword something - so I guess I will no longer include the histories on pages and let you or others fill it in so that it will not be considered plagiarized. -- ( M o r p h | C | T) 14:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Texas Farm to Market Road 1314 needs to be moved to Farm to Market Road 1314
P.S. The other Farm to Market roads do have
Texas Farm to Market Road #### as well, but they are redirected to the
Farm to Market Road #### along with
FM ####,
Farm to Market Road #### (Texas) and several others variations based on this page
Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Texas/Completion list/Farm to Market and Ranch to Market Roads/txfm
which is used to produce:
-- ( M o r p h | C | T) 17:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
You're invited to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Guidance_on_commas_before_Jr._and_Sr. Dohn joe ( talk) 02:11, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Imzadi1979,
You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you,
Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB ( talk) 14:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
{{
TxDOT|US|59}}
to get the following:
Transportation Planning and Programming Division (n.d.). "U.S. Highway No. 59". Highway Designation Files. Texas Department of Transportation.
but when you try to use {{
TxDOT|BS|59l}}
for the US 59 Business Loop L located in Splendora, Texas - it give me this message
Transportation Planning and Programming Division (n.d.). "Business State Highway No. 59-l". Highway Designation Files. Texas Department of Transportation.
so I replaced that with the following {{
Cite web|url =
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/BU/BU0059l.htm%7Ctitle = BUSINESS U. S. HIGHWAY NO. 59-L|website = Highway Designation Files.|publisher =
Texas Department of Transportation.|publication-place = Transportation Planning and Programming Division.}}
to produce the following
"BUSINESS U. S. HIGHWAY NO. 59-L". Highway Designation Files. Transportation Planning and Programming Division.:
Texas Department of Transportation.
>As you can see it is not displayed in the same order as the {{
TxDOT}}
displays and I do not know the proper parameters to make it match
Nevermind! I figured it out after I viewed the code for the template {{
TxDOT}}
- I did not know about the 3rd parameter for when they have letters -- (
M o r p h |
C |
T)
23:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
{{TxDOT | type | number | X | accessdate= }}
For the various business routes, Interstates 35E and 35W, or Interstates 69E, 69C and 69W, substitute the necessary letter suffix for X.
![]() | On April 16, 2015, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cuban Thaw, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. |
ThaddeusB (
talk)
14:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
The original exit on the north side of the Zilwaukee Bridge connected to Westervelt Road, but the current exit since 1987 connects to Adams Street. Is this enough of a change to note Westervelt as a former interchange, or should it be considered a reconstruction of the same interchange?
Also, the M-59/Adams Road exit in Rochester Hills was relocated significantly east of where it used to be. Is that enough to consider the old exit a former interchange or not? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Just because. Pine ✉ 08:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
Hi there. Recently, User:Riiga has tagged the Logo sign article for globalization. However, are logo signs really used on highways in other countries? The only other country that I know that uses them is Canada, and only in the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia (a fourth province, New Brunswick, has had a logo sign program in the past but has since discontinued it). Perhaps we can include a Canadian section if we could find some sources on their history in Canada, however, I don't know if logo signs are used in any other countries other than the U.S. and Canada. ANDROS1337 TALK 21:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Sweden uses these signs, with logos in the squares. RL example. Riiga ( talk) 22:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
I cannot remember ever falling out with you, so I don't know why you feel it necessary to be so rude to me. I would be grateful if you treated me with the respect that you would prefer to receive yourself.
DrKiernan (
talk)
13:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
|format=
to put the format next to the output of |map=
and |map-url=
(and used to put |url=
on the |map=
output), so there a few lingering formats that need to be shifted to |map-format=
hanging out there. That is all.
Imzadi 1979
→
14:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey I was wondering if you could take a look at the last paragraph of Ontario Highway 3#Connections with the United States and add citations from your article as need be? I'm not the least bit familiar with histories on the other side of the river. Cheers, Floydian τ ¢ 00:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 7 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 25 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the original route of US Highway 25 between Detroit and Port Huron, Michigan, followed Gratiot Avenue (pictured), named for Fort Gratiot that was built in the aftermath of the War of 1812? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 25 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
—
Crisco 1492 (
talk)
21:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Look at Interstate 440. The highways are 3 that are currently I-440 and one that was formerly I-440. However, as a definition of I-440, all 4 meanings are current. (The sense of the word "current" here is current as a definition, not a thing with a name.) An example is:
Soviet Union = A former country in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia.
The country being talked about in this definition is former, but the definition is still current because of the word "former". So the definition is current; it is (not was) a definition of Soviet Union. Similarly, A highway in Oklahoma is a former definition of Interstate 440. But "A former designation of a highway in Oklahoma that's now part of Interstate 44" is a current definition of Interstate 440. So all 4 meanings of Interstate 440 are current. Georgia guy ( talk) 21:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Following the closure of a recent RfC you participated in, I have started an RfC on the separate but related issue of commas after Jr. and Sr.. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr. and feel free to comment there. Thanks! — sroc 💬 06:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
My name is Cordes Hoffman and I am a photo researcher for an educational textbook publisher, Pearson Education.
We are are interested in using an image that you own. I found it here on Wikipedia, and it says that you have marked it as public domain. May I ask your specific permission to use the image within the book?
You can reply to me here, or thru my email, cordes.hoffman@qbslearning.com
I greatly appreciate your time and attention!
Sincerely,
2602:306:CDAE:8540:8506:3C7E:5069:9421 ( talk) 14:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)Cordes
Thanks for the catch. BMK ( talk) 02:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Since you commented on the recent FDR infobox linking, there is a broader based RfC going on at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC concerning the infobox linking of all political offices. Please comment if it is of interest to you. Thanks. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 07:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. —
{{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)
06:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 24 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 33 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that for its first 25 years of existence in Michigan, US Highway 33 did not have an independent routing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 33 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
07:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Contributor Barnstar Congratulations on getting Michigan de-B'ed and to become the first state to have all articles at GA or better! Dough 4872 03:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC) |
You are the only one using User:Gadget850/ExternalLinkIcons.css. I will be deleting this in a few weeks, so please copy it over if you wish to continue to use it. -- Gadget850 talk 23:07, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
U.S. Route 12 in Michigan at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —
Gasheadsteve
Talk to me
20:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I believe that either your last changes or the previous change by Fredddie to Template:Infobox road/shieldmain/IND caused a lot of missing shield issues - not sure if this was intentional and your going to create the new images or if it was a mistake?
Cheers KylieTastic ( talk) 16:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Վաստակավոր ադմինիստրատոր |
abrikos Boturyan ( talk) 18:36, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | On 5 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Interstate 94 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Interstate 94 in Michigan, completed 1960, was the first toll-free interstate highway completed border to border in a U.S. state? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Interstate 94 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
—
Chris Woodrich (
talk)
13:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Per your request, I wrote my reasoning for removing the Chicago freeway segment on the U.S. Route 12 page in the talk page, please review. Thank you! NBA2030 ( talk) 15:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 14 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Route 12 in Michigan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that U.S. Highway 12 followed the route of the St. Joseph Trail until 1962, and since then it has followed the Sauk Trail, two former Indian trails in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 12 in Michigan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
On the I-69 page there is a problem with the bullets showing in the middle of the mileage table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkbngr ( talk • contribs) 06:32, June 15, 2015 (UTC)
I drive 41 every day into green bay, although I know reading webpages I-41 was supposed to terminate at I-43, the first reassurance shield is at the Lineville road exit. If that is in error then I assume the WisDOT will correct that soon enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gr8daynegb ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
If I add a photo of the first reassurance shield by Lineville Road(the ones you kept undoing), will that be good enough that you won't undo that edit I make?(I get that people may amend it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gr8daynegb ( talk • contribs) 22:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
References
'It will actually start south of the Wisconsin-Illinois border, where U.S. 41 currently joins in with Interstate 94, and it'll follow Interstate 94 and run concurrently with 94, then 894 around Milwaukee. And then it will follow U.S. 45/41 up to Green Bay, and it ends at the 43 interchange on the north side of Green Bay,' said [Tammy] Rabe [from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation].(emphasis added)
schlicht
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Hello. Perhaps the Yooper dialect (or sub-dialect, really?) should be its own section on the "Upper Midwest American English" page. I don't really see why it gets its own page. There are a few lexical features and phonological characteristics listed, though none are cited. The citations that appear at the bottom of the page have no links and in no way clearly explain all the supposed dialectal information on the article itself; it all appears to be original research. And how many sub-dialects earn their own page? I think a section within the Upper Midwest dialect page would be a better fit. Thoughts? Wolfdog ( talk) 02:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Be careful with User:Equazcion/OneClickArchiver and other tools. About 18 months ago, you archived a bunch of stuff from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads to Talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/Archive 2. I moved that page to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads/Archive - out of sequence 2009-2012 and added a link to it at the top of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada Roads. I've also verified that the search function works as expected. I haven't taken the trouble to update the headers in the existing archives or the navigation header that will be automatically pre-pended to new archive pages, because honestly, it's probably not worth the effort. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 01:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() | On 16 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John D. Voelker, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that John D. Voelker (pictured) wanted to be appointed to the Michigan Supreme Court because he "needed the money", but he resigned two years later to be an author instead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John D. Voelker. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass (
talk)
12:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. It mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank ( push to talk) 01:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
@
Dank and
Crisco 1492:
commons:Category:M-28 Business (Ishpeming–Negaunee, Michigan) is what I have. I'm especially pleased with
File:Bus M-28 Negaunee Silver Street Y South1.jpg because it shows the fork in Silver Street where Bus. M-28 curves westward (right) and the eastward branch of the fork which used to carry M-35. I'm planning on playing with color corrections, and in the case of the one photo, a slight perspective correction, later tonight. If there are any you'd like cropped a bit, let me know. There's one more spot in Negaunee I intent to photograph here, which I may have done before you see this message.
Imzadi 1979
→
20:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@ Dank: a last-minute thought on the blurb. A link to Marquette Iron Range might be in order, if possible. Imzadi 1979 → 05:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
If you're bored and need something to work on, I started a bulleted junction list for European route E30 in my sandbox. The table that is there now is untenable. – Fredddie ™ 02:12, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
{{
INDOT map}}
has similar problems to {{
Ohio road map}}
.