" 

 == List format == 

 I see you reverted changes I had made to List of state routes in Arizona.  I don't quite understand the rationale behind your reversion.  With the template, it's both readable and organized, so I reverted back to my version.  I am trying to avoid making lists of routes look like List of Interstate and U.S. Highways in Washington, which I think is ugly and unreadable.  can take the same information found in the Washington example and lay it out differently so it's readable.   
 :I disagree with the notion that it is organized, unless you mean organized by number.  The original format of the list makes it clear, at a glance, which routes are extant, which are historical, and which simply never existed; your version of the list would imply to the casual reader that Interstate 410 exists in Arizona, which it never has.  Note as well that this is a list of state routes and the previous version of the list emphasised this fact by placing state routes first and foremost in the list.  As far as readability/usability is concerned, the old list clearly separated U.S. Route 95 in Arizona and Arizona State Route 95 - they were in separate sections and there could be no confusing which was which.  The current iteration of the list places them next to each other and makes the likelihood of a misclick much higher.  Finally, the current version of the list takes up a lot of real estate on the screen and loses the TOC, both of which add up to a lot of unecessary scrolling to get through the list to a specific entry.  I understand your issues with List of Interstate and U.S. Highways in Washington but the old version of the Arizona list does not suffer the same issues.  I am going to have to revert back to the original version until it can be explained in what way the templated version is superior.  I'm also copying this conversation to the list's talk page for trancparancy to other users, and it would probably be best to continue dicussion there.   
 Note: the above is copied from ."