User talk:Rob1315

Welcome!

Hello, Rob1315, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Luksuh 21:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Louisiana Highways

Rob, good work on the Louisiana highway articles. A few things to help you're editing. When you create exit/junciton lists, please use 20px for 2-digit shields and 25px for 3+ digit shield images. These are the standards agreed upon in the Exit list Manual of Style. In fact, take a look at the whole style guide, it'll help you in getting the junction lists to the uniform appearnce across all highway articles. Take a look at Louisiana Highway 47, I made some changes to the list to bring it up to the guidelines. Thanks and keep up the good work. VerruckteDan 22:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new at this, so thanks for the link to the sytle manual. I've already done several of the "junction lists" in the same manner before getting your message, so I'll have to go back and fix those pages.

Three questions that I'm not clear on though (if you can clear them up):
1) Can the "Exit number" column be omitted on highways that have only grade crossings?
2) If a highway intersects an interstate and does not connect to it, should it be noted on the junciton list?
3) If an junction results in the terminus of another route, should that be noted?

Thanks again.Rob1315 19:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, let me try to answer your questions.

The exit number column is optional, and is used only when there are actual numbered exits, typically limited-access highways. When there are only at-grade junctions, the column is not needed.
I'm not aware of a clear consensus on this issue, as the style guide was created for exit lists. All the issues that might arise in a junction list have not been followed fleshed out and incorporated, though I would imagine that the style guidelines for junction lists will simply build on the existing guidelines. My suggestion would be to list it similar to how a major river crossing is listed (a "colspan" across the table, but not including the Parish or Location columns, with text like "Highway 1 crosses Interstate 10").
Another issues in which there is not really a firm guideline in place, but I see not reason that it could not be listed in the notes section.

Hope these answers help. If you have any other questions, I'd be glad to answer them. VerruckteDan 20:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. If you see anything that I've done since that isn't up to par, please let me know.Rob1315 21:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two quick things I've noticed. You added directional shields (

) back to LA 47, the shields should not be used in the exit/junction lists. And second, try not to include links to redirects. When including a link to a city/town, spell out Louisiana instead of using LA and then pipe it (New Orleans) and the same for the links to highways (I-10, US 90, LA 1). VerruckteDan 17:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK...I fixed the directional shield issue, but I still don't understand the second part. Could you please elaborate? Thanks. Rob1315 18:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I realize now after reading it again, that what I said could have been much clearer. What I was trying to explain is this:

when linking to a city type the code like this [[New Orleans, Louisiana|New Orleans]] instead of [[New Orleans, LA|New Orleans]]

or when linking to a highway [[Louisiana Highway 1|LA 1]] instead of [[LA 1]]

This avoids creating links to redirect pages. VerruckteDan 21:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LA-81

You did some pretty good editting on this article. The only thing I'd change, is that odd numbered highways, such as this one, run north/south and typically start (by mile post counting) at the southern end and stop at the north end. Also, even numbered highways typically run east west, with the beginning (by milepost counting) starting on the west end and stopping on the east end. Would you be opposed to me swapping that info around on the LA-81 article? Sf46 (talk) 00:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. I see that you were the original writer of the article, and I'm assuming that you provided the map showing how the miles are "officially" designated (I've actually never seen those; you must have connections!). In fact, I'm thinking I will have to show all junction points based on tenths of a mile because (even though one of the sources gave total route distances to hundreths of a mile) I can't find it in smaller increments.

LA 81 is a particularly crazy example (as you noted). If you are the person who provided those maps and they are official, you may want to check ALL of the articles I have written. So if you've got something that's official, please do correct it. I understand about the 0.0 mile post SUPPOSEDLY being at the southernmost/westernmost point of the route. Unfortunately, as you are probably aware, Louisiana DOTD is infamous for several things:

1) Designating routes with a single number that run in no particular cardinal direction (leading to confusion regarding where the starting point is) or even circles (see LA 75 or LA 27) 2) Not bannering routes at all 3) Changing the bannering direction in the middle of the route 4) Either not placing mileposts on many routes at all or not replacing them when they are stolen/destroyed

LA 3127 fits all four of those criteria I just mentioned (LA 81 would too if it were bannered). Because I don't have the official mile marker information, I just guess about where mile marker 0.0 is based on the overall direction of the route (if it's more west to east, or if its more north to south). Sometimes, that's even a bad guess. And I'm not even accounting for a route that's mileage is determined from where it was initially built (see I-310/LA 81) and ends up being backwards upon completion.

Let me know what you think.--Rob1315 (talk) 01:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

--Rschen7754 (T C) 03:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]