Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/California/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Improvement drive

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)

Naming convention

I think that for encyclopedic purposes it would be better to call these routes "California County Route A1", etc. The routes are numbered on a statewide, not a county, basis; very many of them cross county lines; not all of them are as important within their county of origin as they are in another county they pass through (consider J7 or J14); and out-of-state readers (the majority) don't care about our counties all that much, or about which agency maintains the roads, but they will want a way to look up, say, Route G4 (having seen it on the map they got with their rental car), without knowing what county it's in. We could keep the county-by-county names as redirects.--Dell Adams 08:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

  • I would support that if not for the fact that they are not labeled as "California County Routes" on the actual routes or their official designations. They are maintained and controlled and designated by their counties. Counties are a key part of California's makeup, much more then any other state. Counties are arguably more important then state gov't in California for most gov't functions.Gateman1997 14:17, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree with Gateman1997... since they are county routes then they should be "San Diego County Route S11" or whatever county. If they were state routes that would be another story... if there was a such thing as a city route then I would call it "Santa Ana City Route 123". However there isn't such a thing but you get the idea. --Rschen7754

I yield to the consensus. --Dell Adams 05:01, 31 August 2005 (UTC), three blocks from Santa Clara County Route G5

New Naming reasoning

The choice of the new names for these route articles is three fold

  1. I'm eventually going to move all routes to this scheme to better unify them under one common naming scheme for the state per some of Dell's arguments from last year.
  2. The old CountyName County Route LX scheme worked fine for some routes in one county but about half of county routes in California are cross county and currently the article resides at one counties name w/redirects for the other counties. That is something that had been bugging me since I started the Wikiproject and writing these articles. I had considered common names like Lawrence Expwy as a solution, however that was even worse as most of these routes have multiple names along their lengths. Also I considered seperating them out giving each county it's own article, however most of the roads have too little info to warrant an individual article for each county.
  3. After deeper searching I can find no evidence for the routes actually being named something like Santa Clara County Route G2. The state and counties refer to them as just County Route G2 or by their colloquial names like Lawrence Ex/Quito Road. My choice of the original name was based more on original research then actual fact like the new names are. Gateman1997 02:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California

Many articles covered by this WikiProject lack photographs. As part of a subcategorization of the requested photos category, there is now a category for California articles needing photos - to use it, just add {{reqphotoin|California}} to the article's talk page. I have only added a few articles to the category so far, but it would be an easy way to make an extensive list California-related articles lacking photos. I hope you find it useful! TheGrappler 04:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Navigation template

I started a navigation template, California County Route SD, for the San Diego routes. I'm putting it in the articles we have. If you guys think it's a good idea, I can make more for other counties, too. (I'd probably start with counties that share routes with San Diego.) I used the S1 image in the template because it is numerically the first one in the county; I didn't want to use the blank county shield because it doesn't say "San Diego" on it. Any future templates I'd make would include the "first" route number in the shield. Let me know what you think about the template. -Branddobbe 20:58, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Might be good as long as it's not too big. Might be good to put in San Diego County, California as well. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:01, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I made the remaining navigation templates for the rest of the counties listed on List of county routes in California, and have put them at the bottom of every article that already exists. It looks a little silly for counties that only have one or two county routes, but it would be weirder still to have the template in some counties but not in others, I think. So, uh, any thoughts? -Branddobbe 05:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Roads in multiple counties

This isn't a question, just a place for me to put a list of CA county routes that traverse multiple counties. Mostly it's to help me in putting the appropriate county navigation templates in an article, but I imagine there are other uses for it as well, so here it is.

If there is a better place to put this, let me know or feel free to move it. -Branddobbe 04:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions and questions

I have some general questions and suggestions for articles in this WikiProject. Some questions:

  • The infobox calls for "major junctions", and I was wondering what exactly constituted that. What I've been assuming is any road that has a number (Interstates, state routes, county routes), but I don't know if this is too wide (or narrow) a scope.
  • Does anyone know where we can find some sort of official definitions of the routes? I've just been going off the definitions listed on CAHighways.org, but I have no idea where that guy gets them. (I've also been using my Thomas Guide for confirmation.)

Some suggestions:

  • The official structure requries articles to be included in Category:California County Routes. When I looked at this category, most were sorted under "County Route xxx (California)"; I moved them to, for example, S14, so they'd be sorted alphabetically. Also to this end, for routes with a one-digit number, I sorted them as, say, S02, so it would sort correctly within the appropriate letter. I propose making this official policy in the WikiProject (I don't really know what the procedure is for this).
  • Not to toot my own horn, but maybe using my county templates (as explained above) could be official or something. Just sayin'.

-Branddobbe 08:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Major junctions in my mind would be any numbered routes the Co. Rte crosses, ie Interstates, State Hwys, and Co Rtes. Or if there is a particularly large arterial road that a Co. Rte crosses that would also be a major junction. Gateman1997 03:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Award

There is curently a proposal for a WikiProject California Award. I proposed expanding it to include this WP. Check out the link and feel free to comment. --evrik (talk) 21:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

There is currently a final vote being held on a WikiProject Award for all California related projects. You may wish to give your input here. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:USRD/A

I'm still not in support of this lame brained idea and would prefer that it not be included in this wikiproject as I see it as a waste of resources. However if consensus is to rate articles rather then spend time writing them I'll let whomever wants to bother with it waste their time. First however I'd like to take a quick straw poll on the issue. Gateman1997 03:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose, obviously. Gateman1997 03:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
    • With all due respect, you have not been active in U.S. Roads for a period of time. Please become more informed about the issue before starting such a biased straw poll. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually I've been active in certain areas of US Roads all along and I've been silently watching other aspects for some time. However I've been vocal in my opposition to this from the start. That and I was the one who started this project so I'd like to think my opinion counts for something. Gateman1997 04:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
        • However, the assessment program has been backed from the start with consensus. Furthermore, whatever WP:USRD goes with must take place here. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Not necessarily since this wikiproject predated and is not subject to that one. But if you all want to waste your time who am I to stop you. Gateman1997 05:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
            • However, WP:USRD states that all subprojects are subordinate to that project. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
              • Who decided that? And who decided this was a subproject of that since it had no direct connection. I'm just saying I don't see the point of assessment and never have. And I'm not happy it's unilaterally being added to the wikiproject I started. Gateman1997 05:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
                • California County Routes are U.S. Roads. And all the U.S. Roads projects are subordinate to that project. Also, the founder of the WikiProject doesn't really get special priveliges. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
                  • Not special priveliges, but definitely a say. And my say is that assessment is horse pucky. Gateman1997 05:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
                    • The bulk of the assessment work has already been done. Why do you have a problem with this? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
                      • As I explained above I see it as a waste of resources and largely inaccurate as it's completely subjective. But again as I said if people feel the need to do it *shrug*. I just don't agree with it. I know we haven't disagreed in the past Rschen, but this is one thing that I've been opposed to since day one, and not just int he roadspace. I find it a largely useless tool, and moreso on road articles since the lists are overly large to the point of uselessness. Gateman1997 05:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy support. All of the other U.S. Roads projects are online with this one. Let's go with the flow. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. When I made cosmetic changes to the WikiProject template some time ago, I noticed the mini-revert war that had occurred regarding assessment, and, frankly, was puzzled by it. No other project under the USRD umbrella has complained about the existence of the assessment system. At worst, the system allows for a semi-accurate inventory of the amount of road articles that exist and their current state. As Rschen said above, the rest of USRD is fine with assessment and if you don't want to perform the assessment of the articles, that's fine. Other editors, including myself, are more than willing to handle this task. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 05:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and close this section. Since I'm alone in this I'm going to drop my opposition. I won't help with Assesment, but I won't stop those that feel it's worthwhile. Gateman1997 04:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of All USRD Clean-up Templates

All of the USRD Clean-up Templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. master sonT - C 16:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Reminder from USRD

In response to a few issues that came up, we are giving a reminder to all state highway wikiprojects and task forces:

  1. Each project needs to remain aware of developments at WT:USRD and subpages to ensure that each project is aware of decisions / discussions that affect that project. It is impossible to notify every single project about every single discussion that may affect it. Therefore, it is the state highway wikiproject's responsiblity to monitor discussions.
  2. If a project does not remain aware of such developments and complains later, then there is most likely nothing USRD can do about it.
  3. USRD, in most to nearly all cases, will not interfere with a properly functioning state highway wikiproject. All projects currently existing are "properly functioning" for the purposes mentioned here. All task forces currently existing are not "properly functioning" (that is why they are task forces). Departments of USRD (for example, MTF, shields, assessment, INNA) may have specific requirements for the state highway wikiprojects, but complaints regarding those need to be taken up with those departments.
  4. However, this is a reminder that USRD standards need to be followed by the state highway wikiprojects, regardless of the age of the wikiproject.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 05:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Decided to help

I wanted to help out so right this very moment, I am woking on J132. I'll help on some others to.

Wilburthepig 23:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Me, too. I just found the project, and have created Siskiyou County A12, and fleshed out Siskiyou County A10. -- Elaich talk 20:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Merging?

There are a lot of very short articles like County Route E2. Would it make sense to merge these, possibly by letter, and leave the more notable ones (like County Route S80) alone? --NE2 04:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Might make sense for some of the less notable routes. Either by letter or by county. I'd say county just because I've never found a real good reason of what denotes what letters are assigned where. Gateman1997 (talk) 05:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Letters are assigned in loose regions; counties don't work because some routes cross county lines. --NE2 06:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Good point. Letters would be my recommendation then. Perhaps a description of the "regions" the letter is assigned to might help. Gateman1997 (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I would oppose such a merger. It's better to flesh out the articles than try to collapse a bunch of them into one. -Branddobbe (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Ax routes merger

Someone went through and merged a bunch of Ax route redlinks into "List of Ax roads" for some reason. I turned one into an article (CR-A1), but there are several more that are still redirects. They are:

Hopefully we can work together to clear this up. -Branddobbe (talk) 05:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the future of this project

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Roads#WP:CACR_discussion. --Rschen7754 09:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Roads/California/Archive_6&oldid=1137361454"