Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways/Archive 8
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject Highways/Archive 8 Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 18:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Using Mapframe and maplink
Hi all, any thoughts on using mapframe(not released) and maplink in highway projects ? I have updated couple of maps for Indian National Highways in list. -- naveenpf (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- A recently arrived template {{Graph:Street map with marks}} gives access to Open Street Map base maps and annotations etc. I made a derived template {{OSM Location map}} which is a bit more standard to use, puts the map in a frame, etc, and provides a link to a full screen 'maplink'. It may not be ideal for highways maps, but may be useful for particular locations, where editors want show a map with locator marks and labels. There are some example uses in the documentation. RobinLeicester (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Please see this discussion regarding changes to the navbox template and the categorization system of all roads in Ontario. Commenting is appreciated before April 30, 2017. - Floydian τ ¢ 03:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Need help in creating 200 articles for Indian National Highways .
National highways list has to be updated and new articles has to be created. Current National highway list in is here, about 200 NHs doesnt have article in en wiki. OSM has all new the NHs the list is here. Can anyone help in updating the list and creating the articles ? -- naveenpf (talk) 12:44, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
The Center Line: Spring 2017
Volume 9, Issue 1 • Spring 2017 • About the Newsletter
|
|
- —delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 on 01:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Archive 8/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Highways.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
- The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
- The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
- The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Highways, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Unused subpages of Template:Infobox road
there are currently about 812 unused subtemplates of Template:infobox road. which of these should be kept? which should we have deleted? I would imagine we want to keep the testcases subtemplates? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 21:52, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- Correct about the testcases. The ones in the format /shield, /link, and /abbr templates can be deleted. –Fredddie™ 00:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- I have a sandbox here: User:Rschen7754/IBRdelete. Could someone double-check this before I mass delete them? --Rschen7754 01:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- Rschen7754 that list looks good to me. I checked and all the items in that list (except for the browselinks one at the end) match the pattern '/shield_', '/link_', and '/abbr_'. once all of those are deleted we can re-examine to see if there are more that can be deleted. Frietjes (talk) 17:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- I have a sandbox here: User:Rschen7754/IBRdelete. Could someone double-check this before I mass delete them? --Rschen7754 01:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Forth Road Bridge
Forth Road Bridge, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Canadian Provinces for Template:Infobox road
Hello,
I was wondering if it would be possible for Canadian provinces to be listed on Template:infobox road for inter-provincial highways? There is currently the ability to list states for American inter-state highway articles. Thank you.
MuzikMachine (talk) 04:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- @MuzikMachine: that should be
Done. Imzadi 1979 → 04:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Can someone here validate my feeling that the above article's table is a mess/not in best practices? I came across this wanting to clean the linting errors, but this one is to the point of crazy-making. --Izno (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- Seems to be a problem with much of Category:Highways in Malaysia. Maybe this is the general state of roads articles outside the West? --Izno (talk) 18:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Discussion pages for task forces
I propose that we redirect the talk pages of task forces here, because there are currently several queries going unanswered for months at pages like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways/Asia. Thoughts? --Rschen7754 20:52, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Good idea, this page is not active enough to warrant having other talk pages.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 23:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- A few notes: this would include pages like WT:HWY/ACR (which are departments I think?) but of course not pages like WT:USRD where the project is independent. --Rschen7754 04:17, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Highways
Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 15:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposed A-Class Review rule changes
It has been almost 3 years since the last discussion about ACR, and there are several stale reviews (on the order of months and a few over a year), and we've hit a record low number of FAs this year, so I think we should reevaluate how we are handling ACR, to be more realistic with both the decreased number of reviewers, and the road projects' other priorities. I've made a few proposals below. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Remove source reviews as a requirement
It was a good idea, but pragmatically, there's only a few editors who can do these, and 1 editor who can do these well. I can't think of a time when FAC has accepted one of these instead of doing their own. I see no need to do these in house. Of course, we should always be eyeballing the reference list to make sure self-published sources aren't used. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Getting rid of the requirement sounds good, but we should leave the option of doing one if requested. –Fredddie™ 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I think we can get rid of this requirement. If needed this can be done at FAC. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Agree with removal, but allowance of one if requested. Duplicating the FAC process just slows down ACR. SounderBruce 03:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- Unless there are further objections I plan to remove this requirement from the ACR page in about a week. --Rschen7754 03:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Remove the once a year spotcheck as a requirement
Similar to the above; while FAC has sometimes accepted our spotchecks, I don't see a need to do this in house. Of course, if reviewers are concerned, they can do a spotcheck on their own initiative. Also, the "once a year" means that practically every ACR gets a spotcheck since only one ACR per editor passes a year. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Getting rid of the requirement sounds good, but we should leave the option of doing one if requested. –Fredddie™ 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I think we can get rid of this requirement. If needed this can be done at FAC. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Unless there are further objections I plan to remove this requirement from the ACR page in about a week. --Rschen7754 03:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Number of supports
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Require 4 net supports but allow drive-by votes
This is basically returning ACR back to how it was around 2010. I think that we've had a lot of instruction creep over the years and we need to get back to basics. It allows us to basically set a sliding standard of how much we will review, depending on how experienced the editor is, and to drive-by oppose if we feel a nomination needs more scrutiny. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Go down to two net supports
If we don't want to go that radical, I'd propose getting rid of the two-tier system, which has some arbitrary limits separating the tiers, and where the third review might not be so necessary. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- I think we can cut down to two net supports based on the amount of reviewers available right now. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- USRD/HWY is a bit too small to require that many votes. I think most editors in the project can be trusted in not supporting an ACR without a thorough look. SounderBruce 03:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Hybrid system
Rather than have a hard requirement of supports, I'd like to see a hybrid system based on having quality reviews. By that, I mean that when someone reviews an article, another editor comes along and reviews the review; mostly to judge that the reviewer isn't phoning in a review or isn't being unfair to the nominator. Sometimes one long review will be sufficient, other times three shorter reviews will be needed. I think most of us who have reviewed articles in the past know what to look for in a quality article. –Fredddie™ 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- It sounds good, but I'm not sure I understand how it would work in practice. --Rschen7754 04:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Fredddie: Could you clarify your proposal? My concern is that we would either have to elect a delegate like FAC does, or have some objective way of determining when a review is done. I don't think my original proposal is that different from this one - I see the 4 net supports as more of a "move to close" sort of deal rather than a hard count of reviews. --Rschen7754 03:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think that electing delegates is the way to go; flexible rules work better than hard and fast rules, in my opinion. My idea of reviewing the review wouldn't be too far from spotting a terrible review at GAN and calling out the reviewer. A review should be a discussion anyway, not simply a checklist of things to fix. I have massive headache right now, so I might chime in more later. Discussions good, drive-by reviews bad. –Fredddie™ 22:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Fredddie: Could you clarify your proposal? My concern is that we would either have to elect a delegate like FAC does, or have some objective way of determining when a review is done. I don't think my original proposal is that different from this one - I see the 4 net supports as more of a "move to close" sort of deal rather than a hard count of reviews. --Rschen7754 03:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
General discussion
Route marker specifications
I have started a list of shield/route marker specifications that can be found online at c:COM:HWY/L. If you know of any, feel free to add them to the list. My hope is to keep this as a list to help those making shields, and to assist those keeping everything organized at Commons. --Rschen7754 06:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
FYI. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 14:26, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Move request for a bunch of highway portals
Editors here may wish to be aware that there is a proposal to retitle a number of highway-related portals here. Bermicourt (talk) 19:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Swiss motorway vignette
It appears that User:ZH8000 who appears to be from Switzerland has taken offense to me pointing out on the Vignette (road tax) page that the Swiss motorway vignette for cars is the most expensive transit vignette in Europe, given that everybody else offers one for durations shorter than a year and that at prices less than 40 CHF. Since the claim is doubtlessly true and arguably interesting, can anyone help me find some more references that will satisfy user ZH8000? 93.139.89.201 (talk) 01:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- A search for "swiss vignette most expensive" on Google turned up no useful reliable sources through 3 pages. Barring any such sources, your claim (even if true) constitutes original research and will be removed. In fact, comparing the annual vignette price in Switzerland (currently about €34) to the range in the linked vignette article, you could argue that, despite there not being a shorter-term option, the Swiss vignette is among the cheapest in Europe. Therefore, calling it the most expensive is not "doubtlessly true", and I don't fault ZH8000 for removing it from the page. -happy5214 22:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Strange output by junction templates
I would normally investigate and fix myself, but my keyboard is prone to errors and so that is not a good plan. On Ontario Highway 403, there is a random "t" showing up below the header text. I've checked a few random articles and the problem seems to be unique, and not within the article. Can someone perhaps see if there is a misplaced "t" in the coding for {{jcttop}}? - Floydian τ ¢ 11:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- This is weird. I copied ONinttop from ON 403 into Special:ExpandTemplates and it works as intended, no T. If I copy the entire jct list, the T appears. And it only happens on this article. I'm stumped. –Fredddie™ 15:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you. — The Transhumanist 10:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Discussion on old numbered NHs in India
HI, Need help in consense on having standard naming for NHs which have old numbering system. Government of India changed NH naming in 2010. There are few national highway article which have old numbers. We have to follow a standard pattern for the naming. See the category Category:Indian_National_Highways_(old_numbering). 15 NHs names should be changed. I had changed earlier. It is getting reverted saying precision. Can someone help ? -- naveenpf (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- I agree that the article names should be consistent, but I do not like the double disambiguator that is in use (India, old numbering). I would suggest renaming the old highway articles to "Former National Highway <number>" e.g., National Highway 1 (India, old numbering) → Former National Highway 1 (India), National_Highway_1B → Former National Highway 1B, etc. That way the scope of the article titles is precise and disambiguation can occur by location as needed, which I would say is ideal. –Fredddie™ 11:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Seeking advice and help
Hey, new here. I came across an article about one of the main highways in Israel (Highway 2 (Israel)) and was wondering if there is some kind of MoS that I can follow to improve it. The Highway 2 (Israel)#Interchanges section specifically is half nonsense. The "meaning" part is mostly wrong (seems like a bad google translate) and the "type" part to me means nothing. I have no idea what those pictures mean. Would appreciate advice on this. --Gonnym (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Gonnym: there is MOS:RJL, the MoS section on "road junction lists" that details how such sections should look. I agree that the icons are meaningless, and the table needs a good cleaning/overhaul. As for the rest of the article, the best practices that have developed for US roads involve the "Big Three": route description, history and junction list. There are other sections that get used from time to time, but almost all good highway articles will have some prose section that describes the route of the roadway along with the landscape (natural and artificial) plus a prose section that details the historical development of the subject. The article then naturally concludes with the junction list table before the standard appendix sections (see also, references, external links). Imzadi 1979 → 22:16, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Highway 2 (Israel)#RFC: Which table should be used
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Highway 2 (Israel)#RFC: Which table should be used . I've opened an RFC which concerns this Wikiproject and among other things, the implementation of MOS:RJL Gonnym (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
IAM RoadSmart listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for IAM RoadSmart to be moved to IAM RoadSmart. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:33, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
List of colours
Can I add other country's shield colour here? Thanks! --hueman1 (talk) 07:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @HueMan1: could you provide an example of what you want to add? –Fredddie™ 01:13, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
"Chris' British Road Dictionary" now known as "Roads.org.uk"
I wanted to just bring it over to the attention of editors who may have missed the memo, since there was an old link on the WikiProject Highways/United Kingdom project page. Chris' British Road Dictionary changed its name and URL on 11 August 2018. Going forward the site is known as Roads.org.uk. Old URLs using the former CBRD.co.uk address will still work for the foreseeable future.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 02:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Can somebody here perhaps help us along with this issue?--Neufund (talk) 15:35, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Taiwan highway naming discussion
A discussion is ongoing at User talk:Szqecs#"National Freeway" vs. "National freeway" regarding the naming of Taiwan highway articles. You are invited to comment on the issues being discussed. -happy5214 12:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Discussion at talk:A45 about the level of detail to give in the route description
See talk:A45 road#Route description has too much obsessive detail for discussion. Participation welcome. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Trafikkalfabetet (Norway)
If someone needs a copy of Trafikkalfabetet (the Norwegian sign font), perhaps for route markers or such, I've just spent the last week and a half recreating it from standards and SVG files here on Wikipedia. The glyphs are at File:Trafikkalfabetet teksttegn.svg. I hope to make an OTF next. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 10:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Template:JPNinttop
I'm working on a junction list for an expressway in Hokkaido right now. Using Template:JPNinttop I'm having a problem when placing Hokkaido the template. The template wants to automatically change Hokkaido to Hokkaido Prefecture, which is a redirect, but it displays as a red link. Here's an example of the top of the list:
The entire route is in Hokkaido Prefecture.
| Location | km | mi | Exit | Name | Destinations | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomakomai | 0 | 0.0 | 6 | Tomakomai-higashi |  Hokkaido Expressway– Muroran, Sapporo | |
| 1.000 mi = 1.609 km; 1.000 km = 0.621 mi | ||||||
Mccunicano (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Mccunicano: I don't see a red link anywhere in this sample. Has the issue been fixed? If not, please point us to where the error is. -happy5214 12:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Happy5214: The red link was at where the template automatically generates the text "The entire route is in Hokkaido Prefecture." The template specifically wanted the link Hokkaido Prefecture, Japan, so I created a redirect from that name to the page Hokkaido to get rid of the red link; however, the text that the template generates is a bit of a misnomer, as Hokkaido is a special category of prefecture in Japan and by name already has the idea of a prefecture built into its name. That's why the article exists simply as Hokkaido. So if the template could be changed to allow this, I think that would be best. Mccunicano (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Input requested - Split of Warning sign
Input is being requested on a proposed split to take the topic of 'safety signs' out of the warning sign article and form a new article 'Safety sign' using Draft:Safety sign. Refer to the linked talk page for more information.
(Please do not make your input here, go to the linked talk page, at Talk:Warning sign and provide your input there.)--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 21:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
List of the world's longest highways or numbered roads?
Is there somewhere on Wikipedia a list of the longest highways or numbered roads in the world? 85.76.33.104 (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Route Description
Just a quick question to any informed members of Project Highway. Concerning: Structure of Articles: Route Description. Any suggestion on how one has referenced that section in other articles as most descriptions of the routes come either from map books or open source mapping sites? Bots keep placing banners on this section of selected articles. Regards Paul. Conlinp (talk) 12:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Conlinp: I have a simple formula for the citations in a RD section for American highway articles. Take U.S. Route 8 for an example. That highway passes through three separate states: Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. For the paragraphs about US 8 in Minnesota, I cited the text I was writing to the then-current edition of the Minnesota state highway map published by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Google Maps driving directions (in the satellite view) of US 8 in the state. The first citation verifies the official routing as published by the agency that owns and maintains that section of highway. The second citation gives the ability to zoom in for specific details that wouldn't appear on the paper map, and more importantly, it shows the landscape for the physical description attributes of the environment surrounding the roadway.
- The same pairing of citations occurs with the Wisconsin and Michigan sections: then-current official paper map from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation paired with Google Maps for Wisconsin, and the then-current official paper map from the Michigan Department of Transportation paired with Google Maps for Michigan. For Minnesota, there are some legal definitions that apply that are cited to the applicable state statutes.
- On U.S. Route 45 in Michigan, I had to use the map in the Rand McNally atlas to cite some details that MDOT omits from its paper map. Other details are cited to specific sources as appropriate because not all information will appear on maps.
- I hope this helps. Imzadi 1979 → 14:35, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Imzadi1979: Thanks for the guidance, will take a look.Conlinp (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Peru
According to the Peruvian Ministry of Transport (MTC) as of 2011 there were 393km of expressways in Peru. As of 2016 there were 1180km. The figure you have is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.126.72.34 (talk) 17:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- Welcome to Wikipedia! Could you please tell us which article has the incorrect figure, as well as point us to a page on the MTC website which lists the values you provided? Thank you! -happy5214 01:08, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Tag
I have a problem with the highway tags such as 
O-53 or 
D.200 which were working quite fine up until recently. Any help would be appreciated. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Nedim Ardoğa: Sorry for the late reply. What exactly is the issue with the templates? Has the issue been fixed since your original post? -happy5214 01:13, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
New bot to remove completed infobox requests
Hello! I have recently created a bot to remove completed infobox requests and am sending this message to WikiProject Highways since the project currently has a backlogged infobox request category. Details about the task can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PearBOT 2, but in short it removes all infobox requests from articles with an infobox, once a week. To sign up, reply with {{ping|Trialpears}} and tell me if any special considerations are required for the Wikiproject. For example: if only a specific infobox should be detected, such as {{infobox journal}} for WikiProject Academic Journals; or if an irregularly named infobox such as {{starbox begin}} should be detected. Feel free to ask if you have any questions!
Sent on behalf of Trialpears (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon
Hi. The Wikipedia:The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon is planned for March 2020, a contest/editathon to eliminate as many stubs as possible from all 134 counties. Amazon vouchers/book prizes are planned for most articles destubbed from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and Northern Ireland and whoever destubs articles from the most counties out of the 134. Sign up on page if interested in participating, we have over 44,000 stubs! A good opportunity to improve stubs for your area!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:14, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
- I was just about to suggest this. There are a few hundred stubs related to this project (Category:England road stubs) that could be improved. You can always participate even if you do not want any prizes. Kees08 (Talk) 19:39, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Length citations in road infoboxes
Coming here from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Interstate 82/archive1 - it appears that WP:INFOBOXCITE now discourages citing facts in infoboxes when the same information is repeated in the article. Is this something we should consider? It would be a change across a lot of articles that are already FA/A/GA, for example. --Rschen7754 04:11, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've never seen a problem with citations in the infobox, or the lead for that matter. Generally we cite the first occurrence of a fact so if the first occurrence is the infobox, why not cite it there? It does seem inconsistent if we cite some figures in the infobox and not others. either way, I don't see that it would be necessary to change existing articles in bulk. Change them as they are noticed or implement for new articles. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
- This is nothing more than being consistent with the policy that citations are not usually required in the lead, as that info is in the body of the article too. For the articles I've worked on, the source used for the length is also usually used in the junctions list. So the only scenario I can see where this is a problem is where the citation for the length in the infobox is unique to the citations for the length in the junctions list. That's a small number of articles, usually national articles, and as AusssieLegend says can be handled on a case by case basis. Dave (talk) 15:28, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Scope
Does the scope of the project include articles about major incidents that occurred on highways, such as pile-ups, planes, trains etc. crashing onto them, bombings, police stopping vehicles & finding a load of corpses in them etc.? Jim Michael (talk) 10:49, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- I would say that it doesn't. Normally, the project (and its subprojects) have focused just on articles about the highways themselves. Imzadi 1979 → 11:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
It's been about 2 weeks since I got a response on this article's PR and the discussion I tried to open at the Canada Roads Project is eligible for archive. I would like some opinions on this article, as 400-series highways risks being demoted from good topic status (The grace period ended on March 9th (15 days ago)).
Is the article B-class yet? If yes, would this have a good chance at GAN? Is there any need for major improvement at this time?
I know Floydian (who appears to be inactive at this time) said some things here. A ribbon-cutting ceremony was mentioned, but I didn't find a reliable source that more than passively mentioned it. Just a tweet with a picture of said ceremony. If the article appears to have a good chance at GAN, you may close the PR and mention it here.
Thanks, Username6892 21:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Tolling
I managed to get a reviewer for the PR. The main problem (as of now) is that the tolling table should not be as detailed as it currently is. I've held off on doing it because this revision of Ontario Highway 407 passed GAN with a slightly more detailed table. I pinged the user who approved the article, but I haven't heard anything from them yet.
My main question is this:
How detailed should our articles be on tolling?
You may participate in the PR discussion or comment here. Username6892 20:25, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Question about a road in Catamarca Province, Argentina
I have a question about the Provincial Route 34 (Catamarca). A source I used on User:Jo-Jo Eumerus/Cerro Blanco claims that as it runs between Antofagasta de la Sierra and Fiambalá it passes close to the volcano. Anyone familiar with the road network there to know if that is correct? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
- According to Google Maps, it's 43 and not 34. I'll have to find an official map to find out for sure. –Fredddie™ 17:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Discord
I was wondering if we should start a WikiProject channel on Discord? There's quite a few of us who are interested in highways, and I think it would be a good idea to help the WikiProject recruit more members. Of course, this is an addition to the IRC channel we already have, that channel won't be going anywhere. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 03:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
The article for a road junction was deleted and I don't have time to figure out how to suppress the redlink. How do I eliminate the redlink for Shaniko Junction at U.S. Route 97 in Oregon? Valfontis (talk) 01:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Fixed But this is generally under the purview of WP:USRD. SounderBruce 01:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- Sweet, thanks. I will study your solution to fix U.S Route 197. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 02:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Costa Rica National Road Network
Hi, thanks a lot for all the help so far with establishing the National Road Network of Costa Rica content in Wikipedia, I'm working now on adding the stubs for all the national routes in the country! Then I will continue editing those files through the years, and I'm preparing a CSV file to add all of them to Wikidata. I saw some edits reverting adding an user to the members of this task force, so I would like to add permission to add or to be added to the list. I also use this stub template for the articles: {{CostaRica-national-route-stub}}, so that can be added too. (Noticed the name might not be aligned to other countries?). Roqz (talk) 23:22, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- No permission is needed to add your name to the participants list. If an editor is banned though, his or her name will be removed to help keep the list updated. Imzadi 1979 → 23:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Traffic signs article
Hello, I would like to ask about the project's stance on traffic signs in country X articles. Does the project want to include every signs possible (in the corresponding country) or just show examples of every major one? If it's the first case, I wonder if it constitutes WP:NOT? Thanks. --Horus (talk) 06:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Something the Highways project is really good at is the what of a specific topic, such as road signs. We're great at describing what everything is, but we're not so good at the why things are that way. That being said, I think the pages listing every single traffic sign are better suited for Commons. I don't necessarily have a problem with an article about the document that describes the road signs, like the MUTCD in the US. But again, those articles should focus more on the concepts behind the road signs and not the signs themselves. –Fredddie™ 14:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Wikidata proposal for road names within route networks
I've proposed a road name formatter property at Wikidata so that some of the information that's currently stored in individual {{Infobox highway system}} infoboxes or Module:Road data/strings modules can be reused more easily. It would pair with the recently approved road number formatter property. I previously mentioned these proposals over in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads, but it occurs to me that the property would be of interest to editors outside the U.S. as well. I'd be happy to answer any questions folks may have about the proposal or how the property could be used. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 03:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Are there any members who would like to answer what MGA73 is concerning? Because this affects our values of Category:Diagrams of Australian highway markers, means, the enwiki contributors consider them non-free but Commons don't think so. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: Might want to bring up at WT:AURD. --Rschen7754 18:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
E-roads in the UK post-Brexit
If you are interested in this and similar topics ("the A1 is also the E15, discuss!"), please have a look at my rather trivial query here and see if you would like to help. It's not a big deal and I suspect that the answer is obvious, but a bit of help from an expert would be very very welcome. Cheers DBaK (talk) 09:15, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Maps in infoboxes
I've encountering an issue where the map in the infobox displays the route in while previewing an edit, but as soon as the edit is saved the route does not show up - just the base map. This is happening at Japan National Route 112 and Japan National Route 114, but this wasn't an issue for me when using this layout previously. Does anyone have an idea of what's going on here? ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 06:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds like phab:T269984 - if so, it should fix itself in an hour or two - Evad37 [talk] 06:54, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Subject matter knowledge required - Indian highways
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 30#National Highway 45C (India)(old numbering) that would benefit from the the input from one or more editors familiar with the subject area. Thryduulf (talk) 14:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
The ever unfolding love-hate relationship with GIS
So I've been pretty absent most of the last 5 years, and for the most part missed the aftermath of Google trashing yet another immensely useful innocuous tool. I'm not sure what the preferred method is now or if any thought has gone into ways of moving forward given that:
- Internet Explorer 6 is no longer used (regarding the issue with uploading KML data)
- The proliferation of online GIS services, including ESRI webmaps, Geohub, etc., that are compatible with KML and shapefile datapoints. I have no idea if these are compatible with GeoJSON, but perhaps there is some intermediary converter.
I see mapframe is used, although I cannot find any documentation on how to go about using it (ie. how can I convert KML to GeoJSON and get maps that display. The old javascript KML map display in articles is completely antiquated and ignores linestyles. Again maybe this was all ironed out several years ago... but coming back in having missed the show, I can't find any user friendly instructions that are along the lines of "Save place from Google Earth, upload file (convert if necessary), place template in article for map and/or links to map services." Beyond that is also the separate utility of an infobox map, and an interactive map that contains historical routes and information (something like this). - Floydian τ ¢ 19:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
- I've got a userscript that can convert from KML to GeoJSON: User:Evad37/kmlToJson - Evad37 [talk] 16:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ah cool. So two things: 1) Do you know if draw order be set?
2) At Ontario Highway 37, I've copied your Iowa Highway 192 setup. When I'm editing the article, the map shows up correctly in preview, but when I save the article it shows up zoomed out to the whole Earth.Nevermind #2. Despite purging and hard refreshing, apparently this just needed some time to work itself out. - Floydian τ ¢ 18:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ah cool. So two things: 1) Do you know if draw order be set?
Oxford Cambridge Expressway
There is a discussion at Talk:Oxford to Cambridge Expressway#Name changed with no debate that would benefit from a few more voices, please? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Anyone familiar with Australian roads...
...who can check this issue? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: you might have better luck asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian Roads. Imzadi 1979 → 01:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I just created
and we also have 
. Both of which were made to Standards Australia specs. In short, use these, not the file you found. –Fredddie™ 02:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- The thing is that file is widely used on enwiki and elsewhere. I don't write or dabble with roads articles but I didn't feel like simply ignoring the issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I just created
Missing maps and junctions
I have seen that other road projects, for example the US road projects has a category for missing maps, KML and junction lists. See Category:Wikipedia requested maps of roads in Mississippi What about if we have one for Asian roads? Adam080 (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for merger of Template:Motorways and Trunk Roads in England
Template:Motorways and Trunk Roads in England has been nominated for merging with Template:Motorways in the United Kingdom. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Dr Greg talk 22:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
IRC
Since this happened, what should we do about the #wikipedia-en-roads channel? Do we just abandon it and head for the WP:DISCORD server (which some of us already did), or do we try to create a new channel on Libera.Chat or some other IRC server? Nova Crystallis (Talk) 01:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm shutting down the Freenode channel right now. A lot of us have gone over to Discord. If there's a need for an IRC channel on whatever Wikimedia migrates to we can always set one up. --Rschen7754 01:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Lists of numbered highways assessments
Some of these are assessed as list-class and some are disambig-class. What should they be?
I have no preference for either one, but they should all be one or the other. –Fredddie™ 02:14, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- I don't have strong feelings either way, but functionally they are used more as (and IMHO have more encyclopedic values as) disambiguation pages. Dave (talk) 14:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
request on Indian Route 9, etc
Request regarding vandalism on 'Purvanchal Expressway' and 'Agra Lucknow Expressway'
Hi! Hope you are doing well. Just would like to bring to your kind notice of an incidence regarding the article Purvanchal Expressway. A user namely Aakash Singh India has been continuously and constantly removing sourced data from the page. In the past, he has several times, inspite of being notified thoroughly of the edit war rulings of Wikipedia on his talk page, constantly broken 3 revert rule and engaged in edit war, while reverting and editing referenced info, making it one sided and biased, apparently inviting sockpuppetry allegations which now I believe is inevitable. Recently, he deleted the entire controversy section of the article Purvanchal Expressway which was sourced and put in by an unknown editor, I just restored the data citing unexplained sourced info removal, he has yet again responded with reverting, and mentioned this in my talk page, ”Good to see u back here. Tomorrow I will create criticism section in Agra-Lucknow Expressway with sources. This is just for your information.” I totally welcome if any editor edits or contributes to Wiki but am offended with the way he has responded, as if anyhow I was related to Agra Lucknow Expressway and by doing this he will probably take revenge, totally indicates that he is engaged in edit war. Also, there is already a section of controversy on article “Agra Lucknow Expressway”, I don’t understand what he meant to express by saying that he will create criticism page with sources, and at the same time removing criticism page of another expressway article. What I supposedly assume is that both expressways are built by different Chief Ministers of different political parties, and somehow or the other he has been violating Wiki neutrality guidelines with his edits being kind of sockpuppetry towards a political party. Secondly, on Agra Lucknow Expressway article he has been continuously editing the mentioned source info and presenting it biasly by adding his own views. Need your help, as his engagement in edit war has been far more number of times, he has been continuously broken the three revert rule and rarely engaged in discussions on talk page. Any user would be far disappointed with such behaviour from fellow editors. Kindly look into this. Thank you! Shresthsingh71 (talk) 10:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Shresthsingh71:, this is not an appropriate forum for your concerns. You should aim to resolve this issue first on the article talk page, which seems to have had very little discussion. If that fails, take it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, especially if the wp:edit war and the wp:3RR violations continue. But be aware of wp:boomerang: make sure your own actions are defensible. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Yes, will do that! Shresthsingh71 (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Requesting inputs
Greetings
Requesting (brainstorming) inputs regarding Manual of Style proposal @ Chronological listing of coastal townships
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Cleaning up some 'manual' routes/junctions
I am working on MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do (currently wikitable/toc hlist) and I came to a batch of roads articles that could use templated junction/routelist bottom and/or general templating, located at this search. If there is anyone interested in picking those up, please go for it and leave me a ping when you're done. Izno (talk) 19:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
"Services" or "MSA"?
On 30 July 2020 User:Crookesmoor moved the Charnock Richard services article to Charnock Richard MSA, saying that this was an experimental change as "motorway services area" was more descriptive than plain "services".
Over the following few days, they moved the Cobham, Donington Park, Heston, Leicester Forest East, Oxford, Pease Pottage, Tebay, Tibshelf, Trowell and Woodall services articles in the same way.
Over a year later, however, all the other service area articles (with the exceptions of Scotch Corner, which is about both that service area and the junction it marks, and Todhills Rest Area) remain at "X services", whether "services" is spelled with a small or capital first 'S'.
So... should all the other service area articles (with those two exceptions) be moved to "X MSA", or should the eleven that were so moved be moved back to "X services"? There certainly should be *some* consistency here, IMO. 2A02:8084:F1BE:9180:F419:5990:6EDC:6737 (talk) 12:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Speaking from a "USA centric" point of view, to me when I see MSA, I think of Metropolitan Statistical Area. That's the danger of using acronyms in the title. However, as long as Motorway Service Area is linked in the first sentence, I don't think it matters which is used for the title. Dave (talk) 22:41, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Problems from 2008 move
The now-blocked editor User:Nono64 moved A6 road to A6 road (England) on 13 August 2008 and redirected A6 road to List of A6 roads but seems to have made no attempt to fix the links which linked to that page: see Special:WhatLinksHere/A6_road, for the list of previously-good links which now link to that list instead of to their intended target. It appears from their editing history that they did a lot of moving of road articles around that time, so there may be vast numbers of other incorrect links now in the system. I note further that the same editor created List of A6 roads, which is perhaps an unnecessary partial duplication of List of highways numbered 6? Someone interested in roads might like to try to tidy up the mess? Over to you, the road enthusiasts. PamD 18:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have, I think, reduced the number of incoming links by dabbing the 2nd appearance of the A6 in {{Motorways and Trunk Roads in England}}. PamD 18:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- But I note that the above-mentioned template has various other links which are showing up as redirects to lists, rather than links to roads, as fallout from the same set of edits - A1, A13, etc. PamD 18:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- I did a JWB run to clear up most of the links in the article space. Some articles are
[[A# road]]while others are[[A# road (England)]]or[[A# road (Great Britain)]], which makes it confusing. There should be some standardization in article names, but that's a discussion for another time. –Fredddie™ 20:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- I did a JWB run to clear up most of the links in the article space. Some articles are
- But I note that the above-mentioned template has various other links which are showing up as redirects to lists, rather than links to roads, as fallout from the same set of edits - A1, A13, etc. PamD 18:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
E-road standardisation
Just noticing looking through the articles on the E-roads a wildly inconsistent way of writing route itineraries. I've added a route itinerary to European route E7, where there previously was none, and I was thinking of standardising the route itinerary list to something similar for all E-roads (except the predominantly Norwegian & Swedish ones where there isn't really much of an alternative numbering system to denote). Any objections? (Please, if I'm doing something wrong, I've never worked in this project before so feel free to call me out!) Dflint0505 (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Dflint0505: good articles on highways have a prose route description and a proper road junction list table that follows the requirements of MOS:RJL. A list like the one that appears in the E7 article is pretty much useless, in my opinion, because it's devoid of much content and context. Imzadi 1979 → 00:47, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- On a side note, shouldn't the single-digit routes (except E4 and E6) have leading zeroes? They're certainly written that way in the standard and have been since around 1992. 137.220.97.154 (talk) 19:10, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Motorways in Switzerland - bad subst
It would seem a bot edit to subst a template on motorways in Switzerland went wrong, and replaced all numbers to 1. [1] I've fixed A1 motorway (Switzerland) but it looks like there might be a bit of a cleanup job to do here. 137.220.97.154 (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Mass Vandalism on Road Sign Related Articles
A wave of vandalism on numerous articles relating to road signs by country was recently detected. The principal perpetrator was someone most recently operating in the 114.122.128.0/18 range. I have imposed a long-term block on the range however it is possible they may also have operated before that or concurrently using another IP/range. I would encourage anyone who works on or watches any road sign related articles to be alert to possible vandalism either past or potentially in the future. This vandal was highly prolific and almost all of their last 500 edits going back years were disruptive. I have reverted all but a few about which I am uncertain. I hope the block will stop them, but I am afraid they will try to find a way around it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:18, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem: Can you show some specific edits that were problematic? I clicked a few edits and only saw constructive edits. –Fredddie™ 02:08, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Fredddie. Hold up. I am double checking now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fredddie Ok. Some of look problematic to me 1, but I am also seeing others that do look constructive. Ack. I am going to have to audit this IP range's edits carefully. Thank you for your closer look. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- For now I am striking the above until I can examine this more closely. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fredddie Ok. Some of look problematic to me 1, but I am also seeing others that do look constructive. Ack. I am going to have to audit this IP range's edits carefully. Thank you for your closer look. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Fredddie. Hold up. I am double checking now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Interstate 110 and State Route 110 (California)#Requested move 17 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. It has been proposed to move Interstate 110 and State Route 110 (California) to Route 110 (California), as well as the similarly titled 238 and 710 articles to Route 238 (California) and Route 710 (California), respectively. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Completion of all Highways in Namibia
All redlinks regarding Highways in Namibia have now been turned blue! All pages will be stubs so any additional help would be very much appreciated. Just thought I'd share this with the Project community! --TheObservantOne (talk) 16:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Discussion on improving our management of geostubs
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) regarding improving our management of geographical stubs. The thread is Future discussion on improving our management of geostubs. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Permastubs. Thank you. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 11:37, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of motorways in the United Kingdom#Requested move 16 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 00:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy) has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 11:08, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
List at AfD
Note Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of highways numbered 1055. PamD 08:09, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Highway designations
Hello. We have a new enthusiast in highways. I'm a roadside spectator, but please take a look at this other user's edits and verify if that's how it's supposed to be done. Surely the infobox is not supposed to be a wall of traffic signs, and is supposed to be a collection of wikilinked text, right? And by some inclusion criteria, right? Do we list every highway that traverses every city limits, either in the infobox or in prose? Where are the criteria or a good general small-town example and a metro example? What are the valid uses for these SVGs of road signs? I would assume it's only for identifying them on their own articles, one time. Thank you very much, and I hope you can bring in a new user. — Smuckola(talk) 09:25, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- The graphics of highway markers are used in many places on Wikipedia, not just on their respective articles. The big revert is correct because we typically have one article on a state's highway system (i.e. Michigan State Trunkline Highway System) and then list articles on the various designations within that system (i.e. List of Interstate Highways in Michigan, List of U.S. Highways in Michigan. etc.). There's no need to add the marker for every highway in the state into the system article like that.
- Further more, they shouldn't be added to the infoboxes on cities like that. While it's technically possible to use
|link=to point a reader clicking on a graphic to an article, this is a bit of an easter egg and should not be done. The typical method I have seen is to use {{jct}} and list them in the body of the article, if they're going to be listed at all. Otherwise, I've seen prose written out that describe the highways and no graphics are used. Imzadi 1979 → 02:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@Imzadi1979: maybe you'd be so good as to elucidate for my edification, because you noticed one of my supermassive reverts. I am a mewling babe on the info superhighway. — Smuckola(talk) 01:07, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Another observation I could add is that this would have received more attention at WP:USRD, the US Roads WikiProject, and not here at the Highways project. Imzadi 1979 → 02:12, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've brought up this issue a few times at WT:Cities but never got enough momentum to make it a project standard. The shields and other unnecessary garbage tacked onto already long infoboxes aren't exactly helpful to readers. Mentioning the basic highways should be done in the lead and in the Transportation section of the body, not as graphics in the infobox. SounderBruce 06:59, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.— Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 19:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Can anyone help me pipe a link on this template? AH6 links to a dab page, but it should point to AH6 (highway). I cannot figure out a way to do this. Schierbecker (talk) 03:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- MOS:ICON instructs us to not use inline images in the middle of things, so just use plain wikilinks. –Fredddie™ 02:38, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
"Major junctions" (UK)
Roads4117 has been adding to the list] of "major junctions" in many articles. Their view [Roads4117, correct me if I have misunderstood] is that if the joining road is an A-class road, then by definition that makes it major. My view is that only national ['green'] routes are notable enough to be listed, but as a minimum the joining road has to be notable enough to have its own article. But, apart from WP:general notability guidelines, I can find no policy statement either way. Am I being too picky? Does anybody really care if Wikipedia becomes a simulacrum of Sabre Roads? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Edits by IP range on multiple list of road signs by country articles
I've noticed the IP range 114.122.128.0/18 made changes on road sign meaning multiple articles of road signs by country. However, some contains errors, and/or are incorrect, meaningless, and/or disruptive. For example:
- Changing the sign's meaning to literally describe the sign pictogram, rather its legal meaning, which is often incorrect or meaningless (and may mislead readers, since it may mean more or different in legal sense, rather than just what the pictogram means). (Examples: [2], [3], [4], [5])
- Changing the images of the sign to different one than used in the country, and/or add signs not existing in the country. (Examples: [6], [7], [8])
- Confused the dangerous curves sign direction by changing i.e. right to left, and vice-versa. (Examples: [9], [10])
- Changed the roundabout sign description from "Roundabout" to "Circle road" and "Detour" (maybe took the sign pictogram too literally, or maybe due to they translated too literally from their native language). Roundabout (or traffic circle) is a type of junction, not literally a road going just in circle.
- Removes entire section, or most of the info, without any reason. (Example: [11])
- Changing English variation, like from "Pedestrian crossing" to "Crosswalk", and "Give way" to "Yield", and "level crossing" to "railroad crossing". (Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Road_signs_in_Iceland&diff=next&oldid=1096565257]
- Shortening "bicycle" to just "bike", which means the same.
Can someone please check the edits, and if necessary, rectify the errors made by the IP range? I've fixed the errors (and did revert as it's too large to simply correct it).
Please assume the IP range did most of the edits in good-faith. I've notified the IP range to this discussion.
Also IP range is currently partially blocked from Road signs in Malaysia for similar reasons. See Talk:Road signs in Malaysia#Disruptive editing by 114.xxx.xxx.xxx for relevant discussion. Stylez995 (talk) 13:24, 25 July 2022 (UTC) (Edit: typo. --Stylez995 (talk) 13:35, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- IIRC, there is a WP:LTA editor who is obsessed with road signs. Just revert and WP:DENY. –Fredddie™ 02:19, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Fredddie: I don't think this is an LTA, based on consistent typos, letter case errors, and using words that doesn't make any sense, like "Lokomitif railroad Crossing Ahead [sic]", "Doubletipel / Multiplayer railroad Crossing [sic]", and "No entry Mopped", which I think the operator of this IP range isn't a native English speaker.
Road templates
U.S. Route 287 in Texas and Kentucky Route 80 are running into parser limits with "too many expensive parser calls". Fredddie has made some related changes; I don't know if that is the cause or not. MB 23:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- @MB: I had been messing with the backend of
{{Jct/sandbox}}to get rid of the code that caused this, so I went ahead and applied those fixes. I got the expensive parser function count down to 14/500 on US 287. –Fredddie™ 00:35, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
How best to reflect the real-world in an infobox
At talk:A508 road, John Maynard Friedman asked The A508 ends at a roundabout with four other exits: A5 southbound, local road into Old Stratford, A422 westbound, A5 northbound. So the last junction
[on the A508] is with the A5 and the A422. To list the A422 after the A5 implies a sequence that doesn't exist.
No doubt there are other examples of roundabouts with diverse exits. How are they shown? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- I have been wondering this for a while too. Whenever I have come across something like this, I just make it look the same as the rest of infobox, however that does not reflect on the real-world. Thanks, Roads4117 (talk) 06:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
