Talk:U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keysers Ridge–Cumberland, Maryland)

Assessment

• I'm putting at C only because there is a single unsorced paragraph in the History section. Add a source and it's easily a B. Dave (talk) 04:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
• I'd keep it at C until....

someone realizes that there is a lot more to Alt US 40 than what is described so far. Pull up a good map and examine the section from Frederick to Braddock Heights to Boonsboro. Then travel the Old National Pike Road (which, incidentally, parallels Interstate 70 (appx. 1500 feet to the west), and also is only six minutes slower from Frederick to Hagerstown than US 70 !). Leave Frederick around noon, stop for lunch at John Hagan's Tavern, then visit the Washington Monument State Park for an afternoon of history (there's even a lake for swimming !), and finally enjoy fine dining at the Old South Mountain Inn(where deer are plentiful around dusk). These are just a few of the missing attractions from a portion of Alt US 40 worth mentioning... Then you can give it a B. :)

I would even add in the live traffic cam from the Maryland Department of Transportation's section of I-70 (west of) I-270 for thoughtful travelers: when they see all the traffic, they'll want to travel the Old National Pike Road instead. Hag2 (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The road you're describing is written about at U.S. Route 40 Alternate (central Maryland) - there are two separate roads named Alternate US 40 in Maryland. - Algorerhythms (talk) 18:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I'm not trying to be rude... the article on the Alt US 40 highway in Washington and Frederick Counties does need some help, especially in the history of the route. I haven't been able to find much about the history of that road, but if you can, you should definitely add it to that article. - Algorerhythms (talk) 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Algorerhythms, why do the maps appear, then disappear within miliseconds? Does it have something to do with coding, or is it a factor of browser? Hag2 (talk) 20:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That's probably your browser. - Algorerhythms (talk) 21:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I suppose so. I checked various places, but found nothing by way of an explanation. I'm on Internet Explorer ver 6.0, on Windows 98 SE. Que sera sera (whatever will be will be). It's too bad. There should be a much longer delay, or a radiobutton e.g. [Show] [Hide] Hag2 (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keyser's Ridge-Cumberland)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

This article is beautiful in all parts. However, I think a stub on Keyser's Ridge may be necessary. How is someone gonna know where it is, if it has no article? I won't hold for it, but I feel it is necessary. Congratulations, you got a GA.Mitch32^(UP) 01:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Notes

Possible alternative sources for route description

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]

Notability discussion

I am concerned that this article does not meet WP:NOTABILITY because there are no sources that discuss it directly and in detail. Could someone here explain to me how the Roads project decides if a road is notable? Thanks. Awadewit (talk) 16:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Notability to answer your question directly (admittedly this page was hidden well). My $.02 this passes the nobility test on a few grounds. It was historically part of mainline U.S. Route 40, which was one of the original coast to coast U.S. Highways, also part of the National Road, one of the earliest highways period (although called an auto trail in those days). Dave (talk) 16:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Does being part of other notable roads make this road notable, though? That is where I am confused. The notability guideline for the project says "the article should still make some claim of the highway's individual notability, such as historical significance, press coverage". What is notable about 40 Alternate in MD? What is historically significant about it? What press coverage has it had on its own? Awadewit (talk) 16:38, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, since there are whole books that trace the National Road, including considerable detail about this section, yes, it has had coverage. (To Dave: the National Road predates the auto trails.) --NE2 16:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to answer the "part of" question, because you're right, it's debatable. However, US-40, being over 3000 miles long at its historical peak, would of course have to be broken up into sub-articles (and is, including this one). The National Road was covered in my 7th grade US History Class, and at the time I lived far, far away from this portion of the country. As to is there enough significance to the National Road to deserve breaking into sub-articles, I suppose again that's debatable. It sounds like either way, the nominator for FAC needs to show some of this notability in the history section, if it's not clear. Dave (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Also, this newspaper article refers to Alternate US 40 - not the National Road - as a historic road. --NE2 17:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I think you're put off by how the article is titled, which is the numeric route designation. If this article were renamed to "National Road in western Maryland", would that make why this road is notable clearer? --Polaron | Talk 17:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, notability is essentially a quick way to determine whether a comprehensive reliably-sourced article can be written. Here the answer clearly is yes. --NE2 17:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It is clear to me that the National Road is notable, but I'm not sure 1) why subarticles on that road would have to be written and 2) why subarticles for each state would have to be written (why, for example, couldn't it be regional?). How much material is there on the National Road? Do we need to include all of it in Wikipedia? Finally, to respond to NE2, I don't feel that the question of a "comprehensive" or "reliably-sourced" article has been answered at all. If all we can do is point to one source that focuses on this road, I don't see an entire article being written, really. Furthermore, what is a "comprehensive" article on a road? Only the history and the description? That seems quite thin to me, especially since the descriptions seem to dominate the articles that I have seen so far. If these articles are going to stand on their own, they are going to have to be much more than word-maps with a bit of history attached. Awadewit (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Layout issues

Would the anonymous editor that keeps violating consensus please comment here on why? This article is a Featured Article, meaning it has been reviewed as one of the highest-quality articles on all of the English Wikipedia. The image layout was vetted as a part of that process. Please explain your reasoning here, or desist in making further changes. Furthermore, as it stands now, moving that image up to your proposed location violates the Manual of Style, specifically MOS:IMAGES, "Images should be inside the section they belong to (after the heading and after any links to other articles), and not above the heading." That image belongs inside the "Route description" section, not above it where you are placing it.

Also, your edits to the paragraph to insert a link to the Eastern Continental Divide have been deemed vandalism by a number of editors. To make your changes, you've inserted a Google Maps reference, and removed a USGS Quadrangle Map. Consensus appears to be running against you on this matter, so the correct thing to do would be to bring the dispute to the talk page for a discussion, and possible compromise. That's what I've done here, hoping to help broker a compromise. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

A little further North...

I was confused when I first read the article, wondering why Pennsylvania landmarks were mentioned but hadn't paid attention to the article's title. Anyway, the first National Road/National Pike tollhouse in Pennsylvania still stands outside Addison(Petersburg). Also, near where the National Pike crosses into Pennsylvania, there's a stone-arch bridge that emerges from the bottom of the Youghiogheny Reservoir (or Youghiogheny River Lake), during droughts or when the Reservoir is being drawn down. Used to be a village there called "Somerfield" (1999 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story), "National Road in Pennsylvania" (photos). I was poking around Wikipedia to see if there was a related article about the part of the Pike that ran through Pennsylvania, but maybe I just didn't look it up under the correct WP-title. Does anyone know if there are similar articles about the section that runs through Pennsylvania? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

There is the National Road article and U.S. Route 40 in Pennsylvania roughly overlaps with the National Road in that state. Dough4872 04:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Seems to me "the drowned bridge" and its village of Somerfield belong in Wikipedia somewhere... After all, how many bridges dedicated by President Monroe are still around? (plus President McKinley used to vacation in Somerfield). I think a template of something like "articles related to the National Road/National Pike" (similar to the templates at the bottom of George Washington to place on the various US Route 40 Alternate/National Pike/National Road/Old Route 40 articles would be really useful for readers. Shearonink (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keysers Ridge–Cumberland, Maryland). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080826164148/http://www.mdhighwaycentennial.com/images/template/gallery/maps/1979-80SIDE1.jpg to http://www.mdhighwaycentennial.com/images/template/gallery/maps/1979-80SIDE1.jpg

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) 22:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keysers Ridge–Cumberland, Maryland). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090308073648/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=271&ResourceType=Structure to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=271&ResourceType=Structure

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) 23:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)