# Talk:New Jersey Route 55

Where did all the images go????  Why do you keep drasticly changing things on this page?  Things were just fine (and untouched) the way they were and had been for months!!!  The article provided the images with the information... no one is gonna see that media icon and click on it for the images...  it needs to have the gallery like every other page included on it.Route 82 00:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

There was a discussion on WT:USRD a couple of weeks ago, and it was decided to put galleries on Commons instead of in the articles.  The reason is twofold.  First, having the gallery disrupts the flow of the article too much.  Second, Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files.  To quote, "Wikipeida articles are not mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles. If you are interested in presenting a picture, please provide an encyclopedic context, or consider adding it to Wikimedia Commons."  Collections of photographs don't add any encyclopedic context to the article. -- NORTH talk 00:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
To answer your question, they're now on Commons; click the link in "Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Route 55" in the infobox. --NE2 14:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Never mind; I see that you realized that. --NE2 14:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I have contacted the copyright owners of the vintage maps "R R Donnelley & Sons Company"
I was given a reply from the Vice President, Associate General Counsel that I have their permission to use these maps for Wikipedia purposes.  Now how do I go about putting that on the page for the map? Route 82 21:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

It's more than getting permission for Wikipedia, as Wikipedia content has to be able to be re-used for any purpose. What you will need to do is get them to agree to license their content under an acceptable license like the GFDL, an acceptable Creative Commons license, or release the map into the public domain (i.e. nullify their copyright). They are less likely to do this, but if they do, that'd be great and we could definitely use the map. Until then, however, just use {{cite map}} to use the map as a reference for your article. —Scott5114↗ 14:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Where is citation for the fact that this route was formed in 1967? I see no source indicating this claim besides another wikipedia article and a pdf file which was used as a quote for references 1 a-g, but only the pdf file is being used.
Reference 2 is also wikipedia and a pdf file, but only the pdf file is being used.  *Reference 3, The Daily Journal article, is no longer accessed on the WWW.
Under future developments there is no mention of upgrading signage, as I tried to google info from the Department of Transportation and Route 55.  FY 2007-10 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM New Jersey ... Regarding the improvements, instead of just citing mileposts, could the location regarding a locality - county or placename be mentioned as well for easier reader understanding about why the improvements need to be made there in particular.
Reference number 7 refers to the South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) which mentions upgrades needed for traffic flow because of the two main uses of the highway - as a primary recreational corridor, and as
a primary emergency evacuation corridor, but there is no mention made of tourism / recreation in the whole article.  The only mention of Route 55 being used as an emergency evacuation corridor is this statement The Cape May Peninsula and surrounding area does not have a proper evacuation route and Route 55 may get built to accommodate that.v.  If there are other state transportation planning authjorities involved with this route, perhaps their plans could be mentioned as well, and the reader informed that there is such a thing.
Reference 8 is no longer accessed on the WWW, The Daily Journal, sounds like a newspaper. It may be better in the future to quote it as a newspaper rather than a WWW online citation, as newspapers are quite often again found as a primary source document on microfilm at libraries, archives and newspaper offices.
Abbreviations such as PATCO need to declare the meaning of the abbreviation of the acronym in its first use.
 It would likely be years if not a decade or more before anything happens is not substantiated in reference 9 anywhere.  Reference 9 refers to an investigation to improve traffic flow in an east and west direction for economic development in this region.  This investigation involves Route 55 between Vineland and Bridgeton by folks referred to as the SJPTO, CCDPO and CDC.  Another side note- the Highway 55 does not mention anything exciting such as economic development going on.  With highways presently providing a major mode of transport for economic developers.  This is mentioned as such,  The freeway has been instrumental in bringing economic development to southern New Jersey, Vineland in particular. .  Perhaps what economic development could be mentioned.  Is it gold mines, shopping malls, whale fishing, or oil drilling?  What is this area of New Jersey up to in its economic sector that Route 55 could help out with?
 It would likely be years if not a decade or more before anything happens. is not substantiated in reference 10  anywhere.   This citation is about legislation allocating $8,000,000 to develop a concept design to follow up on the 1998 Corridor Transportation Study.
Reference 11 is about phase I and II of the PATCO Speedline which is a rapid transit system according to its wikipedia article.  Please tie in involvement with Route 55 which is how the map is marked.  Not seeing a PATCO ever before, how does highway vehicular traffic on Route 55 tie into a rapid transit system, and why do they have the same name on the map?  Would I have to leave my car and hop on the speedline to continue the journey, and yet I would still be on New Jersey Route 55 which is defined as a State highway?  Would I see the rapid transit zinging alongside my car as I travel on the highway, much as I would see a train?  Where I am located geographically I wouldn’t write about the CPR rail line with the highway article, unless mentioning about the survey placing the two routes simultaneously for traffic flow, or that the CPR predated the highway. They seem to be oranges and apples without a way to bring them together.
Somewhere in the section “Exit List” should be mention of the fact that the exits are listed south to north, which is the convention, but should be stated.
The notable places names should have citations to prove they exist as a fact.  Perhaps the claim to fame or notability about each place name could also be mentioned so the reader knows the purpose of Route 55 connecting them up.
The lead has a statement about  routine traffic tie ups which could be a wonderful lead into a blurb about future developments to help summarize the article.  As well there is no mention of the history in the lead.  What makes this road notable such as  Route 55 is the longest continuous state route freeway in New Jersey.  If only the lead was used in for instance a portal. Or if the article made it to FA and only the lead was used to introduce the article would the reader know everything about the entire article, and be induced to click on the wikilink to further read the sections.
There are several facts in the history section without citations-such as the name of Cape May Expressway,  the fact that it was proposed as a toll highway, etc. etc.
There is an external link about speed limits, but no actual facts in the article about speed limits.  Can anything be added about Volume information; Service centres such as weigh scales, gas stations,  RV dump stations, stop over areas; Traffic cameras; Major Attractions; police patrol and highway markings.
The first two sentences in the section named Future developments are identical except for the mile post numbers.  Can they be re-worded it looks like deja vu or perhaps a typing error, until they are re-read to find the difference in the sentences.
According to the semi automatic peer reviewer - 
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, SriMesh | talk 23:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC) updated one point.  SriMesh | talk 06:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  See above  b (MoS):  See above notes.
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.
a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
It is stable.

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
Overall:
a Pass/Fail: 
Wrote a few notes.  Uh, sorry about that, but they should be very easy to fix, and address.  The article can achieve GA or even FA after updates are done.  I wish you every success with your article, as highways are an important institution, and I would very much  like this article to achieve GA or FA! Good luck and kind regards SriMesh | talk 23:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:New Jersey Route 55/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wizardman 20:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
The article is good overall, though I did find a couple issues:

"Route 55 is a state highway in the southern part of New Jersey, United States, built to freeway standards." Is the built to freeway standards part necessary? I would think this is a given.
Will finish review tonight. Wizardman 21:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The above was the only issue I found, and since it's basically a cosmetic change I'll pass the article as a GA. Wizardman 16:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

This article has a statement, "To save on maintenance costs, the NJDOT removed these call boxes in 2005."
There are 2 cited sources for this statement:
1. Cichowski, John, Reducing highway safety completely uncalled, The Record, June 26, 2005
2. Barlas, Thomas, Last call for N.J.'s roadside call boxes, The Press of Atlantic City, February 28, 2007 
The cited Record article makes absolutely NO mention of removal of any boxes on Route 55.  It should be removed as a citation.
In fact the Record article states:

"Only seven New Jersey highways have call boxes - Routes 295, 195, 80, 280, 47, 55 and 208 -and on average, each box is used only once a month."
The cited Press of Atlantic City article mentions removal of these boxes on Route 55. It should remain in as the citation for this statement.
I had removed the Record citation on 2/28/13 and kept the Press of Atlantic City citation for that statement for the reasons noted below in my Edit Summary.

"Kept Atlantic City Press article reference for this item since it mentioned removal of these boxes. Deleted Record article reference since it did NOT mention removal of these boxes."
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 haneʼ undid my change without any explanation. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 haneʼ needs to explain why The Record citation, which makes NO mention of removal of these boxes on Route 55, should be reinserted when the Atlantic City Press article fully covers the referenced statement.Wondering55 (talk) 20:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll post this only once instead of everywhere you've been re-reverting. This (your starting a discussion here) is indeed the way to do it because after the first time you've been reverted, it is on you to make your case for the changes you wish to see. Now you have to wait for a response from Alansohn, the first editor who reverted you; if he does respond, he'll give you further insight into his rationale. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:05, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Alansohn (talk), who undid the original changes, needs to explain why The Record citation, Item 1 above, which makes NO mention of removal of these boxes on Route 55, but mentions that call boxes are still being used, should be kept when the Atlantic City Press article, Item 2 above, fully covers the referenced statement about call boxes being removed.Wondering55 (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I will update the article based on Alansohn's acceptance of these changes based on my explanation.  See Alansohn response at Teahouse/Questions.Wondering55 (talk) 02:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on New Jersey Route 55. 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/20100527093603/http://www.cccnj.edu/pdf/CCC%20Web%20site%20maps.pdf to http://www.cccnj.edu/pdf/CCC%20Web%20site%20maps.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091214222520/http://www.gccnj.edu/information/directions/index.cfm to http://www.gccnj.edu/information/directions/index.cfm
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/cgi-bin/diglib.cgi?page=37&collect=njleg&file=188&zoom=80
Added archive https://archive.is/20130204071725/http://www.thedailyjournal.com/article/20090301/NEWS01/90404015 to http://www.thedailyjournal.com/article/20090301/NEWS01/90404015
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720204054/http://newjersey.sierraclub.org/njs_sierran/Sierran_09D_Supplement.pdf to http://newjersey.sierraclub.org/njs_sierran/Sierran_09D_Supplement.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 04:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)