Talk:Interstate 27

Interstate 27 was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 21, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed

U.S. Roads: Interstates / Texas Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Topics	Interstate Highways
Locations	Texas
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Interstate 27 be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in the following regions may be able to help:
Lubbock County, Texas Randall County, Texas	Hale County, Texas Potter County, Texas	Swisher County, Texas

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Bridge dates

1970: over FM 1585
1970: over 114th
1970: over 98th
1970: over 82nd (1)
1988: under SL 289 and frontage roads (1A)
1988: under SL 289 east to I-27 north ramp (1A)
1988: braided ramps (1A)
1988: under 66th
1988-89: under US 84 and frontage roads (1B)
1992: under ped bridge
1992: under 50th
1992: under 42nd
1992: over 34th (2)
1992: over turnaround
1992: over US 62 (3)
1990: braided ramps (3/3A)
1990: over Broadway Avenue (3A)
1990: over US 82 (4)
1990: east frontage over creek
1990: over Municipal Drive (5)
1990: west frontage over creek
1990: under railroad
1990: under Erskine Street
1988: west frontage over SS 326 (6A)
1988: under SS 326 (6A)
1966: over ditch
1990: under SL 289 and frontage roads (6B)
1978: over creek
1978: braided ramps (6B/7)
1978: under Yucca Lane (7)
1978: over ditch
1978: over FM 2641 (8)
1978: over ditch
1978: over airport (9)
1978: over Keuka Street (10)
1978: over FM 1294 (11)
1978: over railroad
1978: over CR 58 (12)
1967: over SL 461 (13)
1967: over FM 1729 (14)
1967: over SL 461 (15)
1980: under CR 53 (17)
1980: over FM 597 (20)
1980: under FM 2060 (21)
1962: over SL 369 (22)
1981: over FM 54 (24)
1981: under CR (27)
1982: under FM 37 east (31)
1982: under FM 37 west (32)
1982: over FM 1424 (36)
1962: over Main Street
1982: under FM 1914 (37)
1962: over 12th Street
1982: under CR (41)
1982: over creek
1982: under FM 2337 (43)
1986: under BL 27 (45)
1986: under FM 3466 (48)
1986: over creek
1967: over US 70 (49)
1986: under 24th
1986: over SH 194 (50)
1986: under Quincy Street (51)
1986: under BL 27 (53)
1984: under FM 3183 (54)
1984: under FM 788 (56)
1986: under US 87 (61)
1986: under FM 145 (63)
1986: under CR
1987: over creek
1986: under FM 928 (68)
1987: over ditch
1987: under CR
1987: over ditch
1987: under CR
1987: over creek
1987: under SH 86 (74)
1987: over ditch
1987: under 6th (75)
1987: over ditch
1987: over US 87 (77)
1987: over creek
1987: under FM 214 (82)
1987: over creek
1987: under FM 2698 (83)
1987: under CR
1983: under FM 1881 (88A)
1983: under US 87 (88B)
1983: over creek
1983: under FM 1075 (90)
1983: over drain
1983: under Haley Road (92)
1983: over creek
1983: under FM 285 (94)
1981: over drain
1981: under Dowlen Road (96)
1981: under Hungate Road (99)
1981: under Cemetery Road (103)
1986: over drain
1986: over SH 217 (106)
1986: under FM 3331 (108)
1986: over fork Red River
1986: under railroad
1986: under Buffalo Stadium Road (109)
1986: under US 60/US 87 (110)
1959: under Rockwell Road (111)
1959: under FM 2219 (112)
2005: over McCormick Road (113)
1986: under Sundown Lane (115)
1986: over SL 335 (116)
1983: over Bell Street (117)
1985: over Hillside Road (119A)
1961: over Western Street (119B)
1961: over 45th (120B)
1961: over Georgia Street (121A)
1958: over Parker Street (122A)
1958: over FM 1541 (122B)
1989: under Tyler Street (122C)
1989: under 34th Street (122C)
1958: over 26th Avenue (123A)
1965: under I-40 east ramps
2001: under IH 40 (123B)
1965: under I-40 west ramps
1994: over 15th
1960: split
1961: Taylor over railroad
1931: Fillmore under railroad
1996: Pierce over railroad
1936: Buchanan under railroad
1963: split north of downtown

Some suggestions before a GAN review is started

The references need updating. Several have dead links that need repair.
The citations should all be updated as well to make them consistently formatted.
- Online citations should have access dates; if they do, we can attempt to resurrect them through Internet archival services when they go dead.
- Maps should indicate that they are maps and which is the publisher and which is the cartographer.
- Certain titles should be placed in italics, some should be in quotation marks.
The exit list doesn't conform to the latest requirements of MOS:RJL.
- There ideally should be a milepost column.
- The exit number column should be titled "Exit", not "#" because that symbol isn't universally recognized as a shortcut for number, nor does it provide enough context as to what is being numbered.
- Once expanded, this table will need the missing table footer to provide the conversion formula for miles to kilometers for our international readers.
The lead doesn't summarize the History or Future sections, a failure to meet minimum criteria for Good Articles.
Speaking of the Future section, how current is the information there? Does it need to be updated?
The prose is going to need some copy editing just to update it to modern expectations. Things like highway designation abbreviations should be used consistently are currently they are not.
There are disambiguation links that need repair.

I downgraded the assessment to C-Class temporarily. Once most of these items are addressed, I would be willing to come back and revert that change. Imzadi 1979 → 21:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Interstate 27/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 05:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

There's a disambiguation link to Wayside, Texas, that needs repair in the article. Additionally there are several dead links in the references that should be fixable.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
See below.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
See below.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
See below.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
In a sense, this actually counts against the article because I see something that's C-Class that wasn't prepared for the nomination. The article is too stable, even when the content of the Future section likely needs updates (I believe the Trans-Texas Corridors were cancelled, for instance; if they weren't the article needs some updates anyway.)
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
The map should have a caption in the infobox.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
For all of the issues in this article, I will decline to pass it, and I will decline to hold it. Take the time needed to fix things up and renominate it when ready. Imzadi 1979 → 06:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead issues

The lead is not long enough to adequately summarize the content of the article. There should be at least two good paragraphs, one summarizing the RD and one for the History/Future based on the length of the article.

RD issues

This section is essentially only sources to one map, and that's Google Maps. I would recommend that at a minimum that the section receive supplemental citations to a good paper map or atlas as well.
There is inconsistent or lacking abbreviation usage.
- The first time an Interstate is mentioned is the first sentence of the lead. The I-27 abbreviation is given in parentheses right away, which is a good thing. However after that sentence, all other mentions of Interstate Highways, even of different numbers, can be abbreviated.
- US Highways aren't abbreviated in the text, but they are in the exit list and infobox. The first time a US Highway is mentioned, the name should be given in full with the abbreviation afterwards in parentheses, just like the Interstate example. All subsequent mentions of US Highways should be abbreviated.
- Same thing with State Highways and Farm to Market Roads. Give the first mention in the text in full, and abbreviate all subsequent mentions.

History issues

More of the same issues related to abbreviation usage.
I would divide the section into subsections, say one for everything before it was designated an Interstate and after.

Future issues

This section needs to be updated to account for changes since it was written.

Exit list issues

The table should be updated to include a mileage column, and ideally, it should also be converted to the templates to improve formatting
The header doesn't comply with MOS:DTT or MOS:RJL by including the accessibility formatting required. Using {{jcttop}} will rectify that.
The required table footer is missing.
The business route's table is missing its mileposts as well.

References issues

The footnotes should be giving complete or nearly complete citation information.
- Maps should be indicated as such with full publisher, cartographer, dates, accessdates (for online sources), etc.
- Other sources should have authors, dates, titles, publishers, etc.
- Newspaper names should be in italics (the work parameter, not the publisher if using templates. The publisher is the company that owns the paper.)
- All online sources should have accessdates
- Dead links should be repaired if possible under the aegis of WP:DEADREF.
There is quite a bit of WP:OVERLINKing in the footnotes. A publisher need only be linked the first time its mentioned in any footnote. Since FN1 is to the TcDOT Highway Designation Files (best to use {{TxDOT}} for that), TxDOT doesn't need to be linked any other footnotes.
Some of the map citations are confusing the cartography company that prepared them (HM Gousha) with the oil company that published them for distribution in their gas stations.
FN 10 is "Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. of Bethesda, Maryland under contract with the Federal Highway Administration, Economic Development History of Interstate 27 in Texas, accessed August 2007". Jack Faucett Associates would be the author and FHWA would be the publisher. "Economic Development History of Interstate 27 in Texas" would be the title of this source, and there should be a date provided in addition to when it was accessed/retrieved.

Summary

The article needs a good copy edit throughout the prose to address various issues mentioned above in my review. This copy edit should also work on tweaking the prose to a bit better quality. There is missing information (mileposts, updates on the Future section) that I would expect to see in the article. The references need a good review to make them consistent with each other and roughly complete. If additional photos can be added, I would add them. As it is, the photos present only present the image of an urban Interstate in the Lubbock area while the rural sections, which make up most of this highway, are not represented. More photos spaced throughout the article would be a good thing to present a better visual picture of what I-27 is.

Photos

I'd like to echo something brought up in the GA review. The reviewer mentioned that the scope of the images needs to be broadened (i.e., more images from outside the Lubbock area). I'd like to reinforce that by pointing out that neither of the photos in this article focus on the subject of the article; in one, I-27 is not even visible, and in the other, the only bits of I-27 you can see are the Jersey barrier and a sign (that isn't an I-27 sign, and is at a rather oblique angle that makes it hard to see). They both feel like they were meant to be Lubbock skyline shots that were selected for this article because I-27 just happened to be near where the camera was. Images in a road article should be of the road—and if you can get one with an I-27 shield present somewhere (here is one way to do it), so much the better! —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 15:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Interstate 27. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes

This article has been requested that its protection level would be changed to Pending Changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.254.163 (talk) 03:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Interstate 27. 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/20121008085140/http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sl/sl0369.htm to http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sl/sl0369.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 00:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Auxiliary Routes

It is likely too early to create separate articles for the proposed auxiliary routes that was announced in 2023. I thought I could bring it up. I-227 and I-327. Source: [1]https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/news/politics/government/2023/03/28/cruz-cornyn-introduce-legislation-to-name-i-27-extension-project/70056698007/ Cwater1 (talk) 02:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The auxiliary route suggestions have changed to I-27E, I-27W, and I-27N; the last one should honestly stay as the original suggestion of I-327, but what do I know? ChessEric 21:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]