This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
Email this user
This user has file mover rights on the English Wikipedia
This user has MassMessage sender rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Imzadi1979

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Imzadi1979's talk page!
If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page,
then place {{talkback|Imzadi1979}} on your talk.

Note: Please start a new talk page thread either by clicking the New section link above or using the box below. This will make sure that the edit summary that appears on watchlists accurately shows your edit as a new topic, and not related to another topic. Thank you.

    Post a new message    

Threads older than seven days after the last reply will be archived. Thank you.

A brownie for you![edit]

Brownie transparent.png Just because. Pine 08:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Pine! Imzadi 1979  05:54, 28 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)

@TenPoundHammer: frankly, a lot of former interchanges need not be listed in these tables. Your level of attention to detail in them borders on the obsessive. That level of detail is also very specialist-oriented when we are writing articles for a generalist audience. I really wish you'd concentrate your attention on Michigan highway articles differently. MDOT does periodically do major resigning projects which have resulted in control city changes, so it is nice that someone takes the time to audit and verify them, but you should take a step back and think about the potential impacts of both of your questions above.
The Zilwaukee Bridge realigned I-75 in that area, and any milepost information for a former interchange would be meaningless at best, or impossible to determine at worst, because of the realignment. Noting the name in the notes for the current interchange that supplanted the function of the old one would also be a trivial detail that's meaningless to all but the most die-hard roadgeek, In short, nothing of value comes from obsessing over the first situation.
As for the second one, you need to consider whether adding a redundant row to the table benefits a general reader, whether adding a note that the interchange was relocated with date(s) adds value, or whether the status quo would satisfy that general reader in the context of the exit list. Since this is a matter of history that did alter the design of I-75 somewhat, maybe the best solution is to find the timeframe for the interchange reconstruction, and add that into the appropriate part of the history section. Imzadi 1979  05:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)