# Talk:New York State Route 3

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York State Route 3/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
Are we okay here with using "interchange" as a verb? I never have, but I'm not about to say no one else can.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

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): 
Consider adding an image of the historical alignment and adding it into the History section for bonus FA points.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Thorough, and with comparatively good prose (considering I've read a lot of articles in the past 3 days) to boot. Congrats! —Rob (talk) 22:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

/Sufficiency

Some comments toward getting this ready for FAC.  I also made some fixes as I spotted them.

"NY 3 traverses eight counties and is a lakeside roadway from Mexico to Sackets Harbor, a mountainous route in Adirondack Park, and an urban arterial in Fulton, Watertown, and Plattsburgh."  Something is amiss here, lacking parallel structure.  You have a "from x to x" statement followed by an "in x and x" statement and it is quite hard to follow.
"In 1924, NY 3 was assigned to the segment of the Theodore Roosevelt International Highway within New York."  Do you mean "In 1924, the segment of the Theodore Roosevelt International Highway within New York was designated NY 3."?  I changed it in the lead but it recurs in the "Original alignment" heading.
Can you say "width" instead of "east-west length"?
I'm not sure if there is any better way of stating this, but I'm not crazy about the section where you have "The route was moved onto its modern routing" and "the route was truncated ... and rerouted" because you have routing happening to a route.  It's confusing.  I do understand the quest for coming up with various synonyms for "road".
That being said, "NY 3" and "Route 3" are repeated too much in the "Route description" section.  Too many sentences begin the same way.
Why are various route names bolded in areas of the text other than the lead?  If they are really important alternate names of NY 3, mention them in the lead and bold them there.  Readers will have no idea why they are bold all the way down there. --Laser brain (talk) 05:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's an attempt to make some sense of this jumbled topic, particularly in relation to F and G (and D if it ever existed). If anyone has any information that can supplement/clear up what I have below, please add it. – TMF 05:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

3A
alignment 1
assigned in 1930 renumbering, Middleport-Medina on modern 31 (1930/31 GBs)
redesignated as NY 3B by 1932 (1932 RMcN)
alignment 2
assigned by 1932 to at least Lower Mountain-Gothic Hill-Upper Mountain Roads between NY 425 and NY 3; definitely overlapped NY 93 and may have also overlapped NY 425 to reconnect to NY 3 on the west end (1932 RMcN)
routing was originally part of NY 3 prior to 1930 and may have remained part of 3 for a short time after 1930 (1929 and 1930 GDs)
designation removed by 1935, leaving just NY 93 on the alignment (1935 RMcN)
alignment 3
assigned in the early 1950s to the former 3G (1952 RMcN, 1954 GD)
3B
alignment 1
assigned in 1930 renumbering, Clarendon?-Sweden (@ 63/modern 19) on modern 31A/31 (1930/31 GBs)
redesignated as NY 3C by 1932 (1932 RMcN)
alignment 2
assigned by 1932 to the first 3A alignment plus an extension east to Knowlesville (1932 RMcN)
redesignated as NY 31A when US 104 was assigned ca. 1935 (1934 and 1935 RMcNs)
3C
alignment 1
assigned in 1930 renumbering, Sterling-Watertown on modern 3 (1930 NYT, 1930/31 GBs)
redesignated as NY 3D by 1932 (1932 RMcN)
alignment 2
assigned by 1932 to the portion of the first 3B alignment within Monroe County (1932 RMcN)
redesignated as NY 31D by 1938, probably when US 104 was assigned (1938 GB)
3D
assigned by 1932 to the first 3C alignment (1932 RMcN)
incorporated into a rerouted NY 3 when US 104 was assigned ca. 1935 (1934 and 1935 RMcNs)

3E
alignment 1
assigned in 1930 renumbering, Red Creek-Oswego on roughly modern NY 104 (1930 GD)
redesignated as NY 3F by 1932 (1932 RMcN)
alignment 2
assigned by 1932 to CRs 6, 1, and modern NY 104B in New Haven and Mexico (1932 RMcN)
redesignated as NY 104B when US 104 was assigned ca. 1935 (1934 and 1935 RMcNs)

3F
alignment 1
assigned by 1931 to modern 3 from Deferiet to Carthage (1931 GD)
3 appears to have been routed via Deferiet-Carthage-Wilna (Fargo) in 1930, but it's not clear (1930 GD)
redesignated as NY 3G ca. 1932 (1931 GD, 1932 RMcN)
alignment 2
assigned by 1932 to roughly modern NY 104 between Red Creek and Oswego (1932 RMcN)
incorporated into US 104 when it was assigned ca. 1935 (1934 and 1935 RMcN)

3G
assigned by 1932 to the first 3F alignment (1932 RMcN)
at the time, 3 went right from Deferiet to Fargo on modern 3A (1932 RMcN)
between 1935 (1935 RMcN matches the 1932 RMcN) and 1938, the routing became unclear:
1938 GD marks 3G as Deferiet-Carthage-Wilna. 3's routing from Deferiet to Wilna isn't shown but is probably modern 3A. Carthage-Wilna overlapped 26.
1938 GB marks 3G as Deferiet-Wilna (modern 3A) and 3 as Deferiet-Carthage-Wilna
1940 is better but still inconsistent:
1940 RMcN and 1940 GD imply NY 3 is routed via Deferiet-Carthage-Wilna; 1940 Gousha definitely shows NY 3 as Deferiet-Carthage-Wilna
1940 RMcN and 1940 GD show modern NY 3A but don't mark it with any designation; 1940 Gousha matches 1938 GB (NY 3G as Deferiet-Wilna)
1942 GD matches 1940 Gousha
NY 3G removed by 1947, as highway is unmarked (1947 GD; could have been as early as 1946 as 1946 RMcN does not show the Deferiet-Wilna direct route)