![]() | 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 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The article on Transportation is currently nominated on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for Transportation there.-- Fenice 09:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Is there any reason that Template:Routeboxint is prefferred over Template:Infobox road? -- Engleman 06:33, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
I am trying to get the proper abbreviations on all of the highway-related articles. This may sound trivial, but such information is still considered valuable in an encyclopedia. -- Ixfd64 01:11, 2005 September 1 (UTC)
So... wait... I'm still not sure what the Legend is for... is that for the junction box/list?
If so, doesn't that mean something like Interstate 90 will end up being ridiculously long? -- Rob 02:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Just a thought/question... do you want the articles to have a driving guide, in order from west to east south to north?
Something like the famous Milepost (distances not correct, just here for example):
Distance from Los Angeles (LA), followed by state milepost (MP), followed by distance from Dallas (D), followed by distance from Jacksonville (J). Additional intermediate cities: Phoenix (P), El Paso (EP), New Orleans (NO), Mobile (M).
LA 0 . MP 0 . P 385 . EP 886 . D 1499 . J 2690 - junction of Interstate 10 with Interstate 5 in Los Angeles
LA 217 . MP 217 . P 168 . EP 669 . D 1282 . J 2573 - California/Arizona border; westbound travelers must stop for agricultural inspection
LA 385 . MP 168 . P 0 . EP 501 . D 1114 . J 2305 - Phoenix, Arizona at junction with I-17
LA 442 . MP 225 . P 57 . EP 444 . D 1057 . J 2248 - Tucson, Arizona at junction with I-19
LA 886 . MP 4 . P 501 . EP 0 . D 613 . J 1804 - El Paso, Texas
LA 1499 . MP 617 . P 1114 . EP 613 . D 0 . NO 603 . M 771 . J 1191 - Dallas Texas
LA 1877 . MP 995 . D 378 . NO 225 . M 393 . J 813 - Louisiana/Texas border
LA 2102 . MP 225 . D 603 . NO 0 . M 168 . J 588 - New Orleans
LA 2270 . MP 26 . D 771 . NO 168 . M 0 . J 420 - Mobile, Alabama
LA 2334 . MP 49 . D 834 . NO 232 . M 64 . J 356 - Tallahassee, Florida
LA 2990 . MP 405 . D 1191 . NO 588 . M 292 . J 0 - Jacksonville, Florida, at junction with Interstate 95
That's the general idea. Progressive distance from assorted key points along the route. Since mileposts are up in every state, an additional indicator (MP) could follow the first place on the highway to indicate which mile in that state the driver is at. Assorted other waypoints (like Mount Rushmore, the Alamo, etc.) would be shown as intermediate points. GBC 23:52, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Some of the cities listed under major cities are hardly "major cities." For example, the I-90 page lists Chamberlain, South Dakota as a major city along its route. Chamberlain has a population of just over 2,000 people. I think there needs to be a standard for this, perhaps a major city is any city with at least a population of 100,000. -- Holderca1 02:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Can someone here confirm or deny that interestate highway signs are in the public domain? 68.80.134.151 21:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
I can take high-resolution pictures of the H1, H2, H3 in Hawaii where I'm stationed in the military and any road going through Houston, my home town, especially I-45, which I even have pictures from Hurricane Rita. What criteria should I think about when taking pictures? Since highways are usually very long roads, it may be pretty far to drive to get to a major landmark on the road to include in the photograph. Is there anything additional I should think about or does anyone have any additional comments regarding this?
What is the point, what shoulod we be directing people to browse to? I don't get it. TimL 05:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I think the Routebox template would look better if the shields led the text. Scaling the shield images down to 20 px looks good, however the article for Interstate 84 has them at 30 px. I've also tried them at 25 px, which may be a good compromise. I also like the layout for the Routebox currently used on the article for Interstate 5.
There should also be some attempt to standardize the appearance of Interstate shields in terms of size, color and font. From what I've seen so far, there seem to have been two main sources of Interstate shields: versions initially uploaded by Denelson83 in May of 2004, and the larger, darker versions uploaded by Kamlung last month. Both sources claim the shields to be the work of the U.S. federal government. Many shields have been replaced with Kamlung uploads, but many Interstates are still using the Denelson83 uploads. I think the shields uploaded by Kamlung are of higher quality, more readable, and more aesthetically pleasing. His source should be identified, and the rest of the Interstate shields on Wikipedia should be updated with this model. -- Fogger 01:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
I found this site hlepful. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/interstate.html
There is a need, on this site, both for truckers and those of us who travel in recreation vehicles, for a linear chart which shows highway elevations (in feet) and grades (%) for the entire Interstate system.
Are they public domain? -- Chris 02:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Should the categories called Category:Interstate highways in California be renamed to Interstate Highways in California? See Talk:List of California State Routes/Archive2 for the why. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 02:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
This is really wierd, but the sign I came up with by following SHS exactly leads me to have a 3di sign that looks like this File:Interstate 469.svg. You'll notice that the word INTERSTATE is much bigger on that than on the others. ( File:Interstate-287.png, File:Interstate-684.png, etc) SHS says to use type E writing for 3dis. It appears that most of the other 3di signs on wikipedia use the type C, which is what ought to be used for 2dis ( File:Interstate95.png). It also says that the word INTERSTATE should take up 72% of the total width of the sign. It's not a big deal; I just want to make sure that I am correctly interpreting SHS (I can't seem to find an example 3di shield anyplace in MUTCD; the dimensions are just listed beneath those for a 2di shields in M1-1.)
By the way, I plan to make signs with state names by using the dimensions from M1-2 and M1-3 (except P, which will change for each state). There doesn't really seem to be any mention of using state names in SHS, but MUTCD section 2D.11 clearly states that: "Interstate Route signs may contain the State name in white upper-case letters on a blue background.", so it is certianly OK; there just doesn't seem to be any official way of doing it. Therefore, I'll be just replacing the words LOOP and SPUR; since those are placed similarly.
As far as H201 (I mentioned it earlier.), it seems that the official shield is just a 3di shield with B lettering since "H201" won't fit as C.
I'd really appreciate your thoughts on the above. I could simply be misinterpreting the SHS book. -- Chris 23:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The New Jersians have a nifty thing that can be put on all state routes, which might be better than trying to incorporate a state-by-state thing into an interstate routebox. Just wanted to point that out. -- Chris 02:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I thought that allowing these templates to exist would be a problem from the start. However, I decided to leave them uncontested. Here is the problem: editors have been putting them on Interstate and U.S. Highways... we can't have those on there. Here is the reason: If every state had one and put theirs on every Interstate they have, then Interstate 95 would have 15 templates- that's way too many. Even 3 or 4 is too many to have on one page... we already have U.S. Highway 1 with 3 on them and the page looks cluttered. Please share your thoughts. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 06:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
There is some dispute as to its usefulness. See the talk page. -- Chris 19:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
What if we stole their idea and had these templates on everyone's user page who edits U.S. road articles... and put stuff like the debates? That way everyone can give their input; they don;t have to search around for the info. Like for example, I'm only posting this notice here; none of the other WikiProjects know about this. If we had a shared template, everyone would know about this discussion, and we could all discuss this on one page. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 07:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
![]() | 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 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The article on Transportation is currently nominated on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for Transportation there.-- Fenice 09:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Is there any reason that Template:Routeboxint is prefferred over Template:Infobox road? -- Engleman 06:33, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
I am trying to get the proper abbreviations on all of the highway-related articles. This may sound trivial, but such information is still considered valuable in an encyclopedia. -- Ixfd64 01:11, 2005 September 1 (UTC)
So... wait... I'm still not sure what the Legend is for... is that for the junction box/list?
If so, doesn't that mean something like Interstate 90 will end up being ridiculously long? -- Rob 02:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Just a thought/question... do you want the articles to have a driving guide, in order from west to east south to north?
Something like the famous Milepost (distances not correct, just here for example):
Distance from Los Angeles (LA), followed by state milepost (MP), followed by distance from Dallas (D), followed by distance from Jacksonville (J). Additional intermediate cities: Phoenix (P), El Paso (EP), New Orleans (NO), Mobile (M).
LA 0 . MP 0 . P 385 . EP 886 . D 1499 . J 2690 - junction of Interstate 10 with Interstate 5 in Los Angeles
LA 217 . MP 217 . P 168 . EP 669 . D 1282 . J 2573 - California/Arizona border; westbound travelers must stop for agricultural inspection
LA 385 . MP 168 . P 0 . EP 501 . D 1114 . J 2305 - Phoenix, Arizona at junction with I-17
LA 442 . MP 225 . P 57 . EP 444 . D 1057 . J 2248 - Tucson, Arizona at junction with I-19
LA 886 . MP 4 . P 501 . EP 0 . D 613 . J 1804 - El Paso, Texas
LA 1499 . MP 617 . P 1114 . EP 613 . D 0 . NO 603 . M 771 . J 1191 - Dallas Texas
LA 1877 . MP 995 . D 378 . NO 225 . M 393 . J 813 - Louisiana/Texas border
LA 2102 . MP 225 . D 603 . NO 0 . M 168 . J 588 - New Orleans
LA 2270 . MP 26 . D 771 . NO 168 . M 0 . J 420 - Mobile, Alabama
LA 2334 . MP 49 . D 834 . NO 232 . M 64 . J 356 - Tallahassee, Florida
LA 2990 . MP 405 . D 1191 . NO 588 . M 292 . J 0 - Jacksonville, Florida, at junction with Interstate 95
That's the general idea. Progressive distance from assorted key points along the route. Since mileposts are up in every state, an additional indicator (MP) could follow the first place on the highway to indicate which mile in that state the driver is at. Assorted other waypoints (like Mount Rushmore, the Alamo, etc.) would be shown as intermediate points. GBC 23:52, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Some of the cities listed under major cities are hardly "major cities." For example, the I-90 page lists Chamberlain, South Dakota as a major city along its route. Chamberlain has a population of just over 2,000 people. I think there needs to be a standard for this, perhaps a major city is any city with at least a population of 100,000. -- Holderca1 02:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Can someone here confirm or deny that interestate highway signs are in the public domain? 68.80.134.151 21:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
I can take high-resolution pictures of the H1, H2, H3 in Hawaii where I'm stationed in the military and any road going through Houston, my home town, especially I-45, which I even have pictures from Hurricane Rita. What criteria should I think about when taking pictures? Since highways are usually very long roads, it may be pretty far to drive to get to a major landmark on the road to include in the photograph. Is there anything additional I should think about or does anyone have any additional comments regarding this?
What is the point, what shoulod we be directing people to browse to? I don't get it. TimL 05:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I think the Routebox template would look better if the shields led the text. Scaling the shield images down to 20 px looks good, however the article for Interstate 84 has them at 30 px. I've also tried them at 25 px, which may be a good compromise. I also like the layout for the Routebox currently used on the article for Interstate 5.
There should also be some attempt to standardize the appearance of Interstate shields in terms of size, color and font. From what I've seen so far, there seem to have been two main sources of Interstate shields: versions initially uploaded by Denelson83 in May of 2004, and the larger, darker versions uploaded by Kamlung last month. Both sources claim the shields to be the work of the U.S. federal government. Many shields have been replaced with Kamlung uploads, but many Interstates are still using the Denelson83 uploads. I think the shields uploaded by Kamlung are of higher quality, more readable, and more aesthetically pleasing. His source should be identified, and the rest of the Interstate shields on Wikipedia should be updated with this model. -- Fogger 01:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
I found this site hlepful. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/interstate.html
There is a need, on this site, both for truckers and those of us who travel in recreation vehicles, for a linear chart which shows highway elevations (in feet) and grades (%) for the entire Interstate system.
Are they public domain? -- Chris 02:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Should the categories called Category:Interstate highways in California be renamed to Interstate Highways in California? See Talk:List of California State Routes/Archive2 for the why. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 02:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
This is really wierd, but the sign I came up with by following SHS exactly leads me to have a 3di sign that looks like this File:Interstate 469.svg. You'll notice that the word INTERSTATE is much bigger on that than on the others. ( File:Interstate-287.png, File:Interstate-684.png, etc) SHS says to use type E writing for 3dis. It appears that most of the other 3di signs on wikipedia use the type C, which is what ought to be used for 2dis ( File:Interstate95.png). It also says that the word INTERSTATE should take up 72% of the total width of the sign. It's not a big deal; I just want to make sure that I am correctly interpreting SHS (I can't seem to find an example 3di shield anyplace in MUTCD; the dimensions are just listed beneath those for a 2di shields in M1-1.)
By the way, I plan to make signs with state names by using the dimensions from M1-2 and M1-3 (except P, which will change for each state). There doesn't really seem to be any mention of using state names in SHS, but MUTCD section 2D.11 clearly states that: "Interstate Route signs may contain the State name in white upper-case letters on a blue background.", so it is certianly OK; there just doesn't seem to be any official way of doing it. Therefore, I'll be just replacing the words LOOP and SPUR; since those are placed similarly.
As far as H201 (I mentioned it earlier.), it seems that the official shield is just a 3di shield with B lettering since "H201" won't fit as C.
I'd really appreciate your thoughts on the above. I could simply be misinterpreting the SHS book. -- Chris 23:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The New Jersians have a nifty thing that can be put on all state routes, which might be better than trying to incorporate a state-by-state thing into an interstate routebox. Just wanted to point that out. -- Chris 02:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I thought that allowing these templates to exist would be a problem from the start. However, I decided to leave them uncontested. Here is the problem: editors have been putting them on Interstate and U.S. Highways... we can't have those on there. Here is the reason: If every state had one and put theirs on every Interstate they have, then Interstate 95 would have 15 templates- that's way too many. Even 3 or 4 is too many to have on one page... we already have U.S. Highway 1 with 3 on them and the page looks cluttered. Please share your thoughts. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 06:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
There is some dispute as to its usefulness. See the talk page. -- Chris 19:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
What if we stole their idea and had these templates on everyone's user page who edits U.S. road articles... and put stuff like the debates? That way everyone can give their input; they don;t have to search around for the info. Like for example, I'm only posting this notice here; none of the other WikiProjects know about this. If we had a shared template, everyone would know about this discussion, and we could all discuss this on one page. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 07:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)