Talk:I-35W/US 10/I-694 North Central Corridor Reconstruction Project

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discussion area[edit]

If there is anything I should be made aware of regarding this article, here's the place to do it! Thanks! Joe Mikkelson (talk) 02:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've started making a few changes to the article to help reformat it to follow our Manual of Style. MOS:HEAD specifies that section headings are supposed to be in "Sentence case", not "Title Case", so we only capitalize the first word and any proper nouns, not all nouns, etc. The biggest issue though is that all of the sources in the article are primary sources, namely the different parts of the EIS. Has this project received any coverage in the local press? If it hasn't, this may not be a notable subject that merits inclusion as a separate article in the encyclopedia. Imzadi 1979 → 03:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notability, prose and sourcing concerns[edit]

I have major concerns about this article on three levels:

  1. Notability: Quite possibly, this article fails notability requirements. As a comparison, the Capitol Loop in Lansing, Michigan, had a controversial major reconstruction in 2004–05. That Featured Article on the roadway contains all of the pertinent details related to both the controversy before the project and the reconstruction in five paragraphs. This article is overly reliant on DOT sources, both the EIS and press releases, which don't help demonstrate notability. The WP:GNG, general notability guideline states that:

    If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.

    This article may have citations to reliable sources, but it does not currently have citations that show the significant coverage nor citations from sources independent of the subject; they're all the EIS or press releases, both of which are created by Mn/DOT. I cleaned up the citations to complete the information present for the sources. Several didn't have their proper titles, let alone the publishers or authors.
  2. Prose: I did a copy edit, and I found a lot of minor prose issues. Once we introduce an abbreviated form for a highway designation to the reader in the article, we don't need to spell out the full name each time it's mentioned. Highway name abbreviations are very common in everyday language, which is why we should use them; because they aren't common to non-American readers though, we have to introduce them once. News articles don't use the full names of people at every occurrence, instead they'd say "Mitt Romney and Barack Obama were on the campaign trail today. Romney was in Foo, and Obama was in Bar." Good highway articles use the same concept for highway names. Also, we shouldn't use jargonistic abbreviations for words like "through" or "southbound". I'm concerned that this article is overly detailed on the minutiae of construction activities, and it's including more details than are necessary to cover this topic, making the text a bit tedious to read.
  3. Sourcing: As I stated above, this article is overly reliant on DOT primary sources (EISs, press releases) and I would seriously advocate that this content needs to be sources through secondary sources like the metro area newspapers and TV stations. If this project is such a big deal, surely they've covered it. If they haven't, then this isn't that big of a deal.

Based on the Capitol Loop example, I think that it would be be better to summarize and merge this into the parent highway article, using secondary news sources as much as possible. If the goal was to emulate the Unweave the Weave article, well, all of my comments here apply to that article as well.Imzadi 1979 → 05:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed[edit]

Construction on this section was completed in November 2013, so the article needs an update. I see that construction progress was listed in this article until the last time it was edited, so does anyone want to enter more construction progress? Or is that even necessary? --Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on I-35W/US 10/I-694 North Central Corridor Reconstruction Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I-35W/US_10/I-694_North_Central_Corridor_Reconstruction_Project&oldid=1201975939"