# Talk:Ontario Highway 427

Would the 427 by being Ontario's second busiest highway (~320,000 AADT at Burnhamthorpe Rd), de facto be Canada's second busiest highway? Unless some Montreal/Calgary/Vancouver highway has more.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ontario Highway 427/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MuZemike (talk · contribs) 22:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Prose issues
...this is the only at-grade access along the length of the freeway, which thereafter divides and descends beneath Evans Avenue. → I'm not very comfortable with how this is worded. Is there a way that it could be made more concise, especially with that second part?
The collectors provide access to and from Eglinton Avenue then become Highway 27... → Seems like there is a word missing between Eglinton Avenue and then become.
MoS issues
There are so many pictures in the article, the layout is rather borked. Are there ways in which you can cut down on the amount of pictures used so that the layout is not as cumbersome (i.e. keep the most important images but cut out some of the others).
A few of the citations need to be written out (namely #15, #32, and #33) for consistency.
Captions need to be fixed per WP:CAPTION; captions that are not complete sentences do not get periods, while those that are complete sentences do.
Conclusions
Only went through roughly half the prose, but New Year's is getting in the way at the moment. Hopefully I will finish it as fast as I can. --MuZemike 22:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
On hold – Finally finished after putting it off for a while; my apologies for not getting to it earlier. Aside from a couple of prose issues and some MoS issues (I already saw that you removed one image, and I moved another one to another section, so that is better. I'll give the standard week from today for corrections to be made, which there aren't many. --MuZemike 23:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the review :)
I've taken care of the refs and tried rewriting that sentence a bit. The captions I believe are fixed (added a period to one and removed a period from another one or two)... I don't believe that captions that read "A photo of foo" are full sentences but I could be wrong. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 22:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 Passed – everything looks in order and to my expectations. Nice work! --MuZemike 03:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

[http://web.archive.org/web/20020814171935/http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/news/regional/2000/2000-0080.htm QEW/427 interchange inmprovements (inc. SB 427 to EB Gardiner)

-- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢

Regarding this external link, which Floydian has been adding and I've been removing: Lost Road: Indian Line Road
What to do when the guidelines are contradictory?  As Floydian has pointed out, the guidelines say that "links to be considered" include sites that are not reliable sources.[1]  But as I've pointed out, the guidelines also say that "one should generally avoid ... links to ... discussion forums."  [2] To me, "consider" is weaker than "avoid," and thus we should prefer the second guideline over the first. Similarly, "no" is stronger than "maybe" (the first guideline is abbreviated as WP:ELMAYBE and the second is shortened to WP:NO). Can anyone suggest a way of resolving the contradiction? 99.224.54.167 (talk) 21:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally I feel the heart and soul of avoiding forums is to avoid pointless jibber jabber on a subject, or to avoid hordes of forums that discuss a specific topic (say, HTML) from being tacked onto those articles. In this case we have a very well researched post on a lost road that includes numerous pictures and inquiry into something that I would love to include in the article if reliable sources were available. It offers an in-depth examination and isn't a personal forum that needs our traffic to succeed or get noticed; it just happens to be a post on a forum as opposed to a freely hosted website. I think these reasons give this specific link an exemption from the no forums point. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 21:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
That makes sense to me.  Thanks for explaining. Really, the guidelines need to be rewritten. 99.224.54.167 (talk) 01:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Any idea when or why it was decided to follow indian line instead of widening and following highway 27?
Also curious about the history of the 401,427,27 interchange -- now seems to be a major bottleneck on the 401Feldercarb (talk) 02:56, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the former, this is likely because an end target for the 427 is Bolton, as well as the fact that by the 1990s, Highway 27 was well developed north of Toronto... not to mention the proximity of Highway 400. This is just speculation on my part however. The Airport Expressway was built in the late 50s and already provided for a route north of the 401.
Regarding the second, that ties in with the Airport Expressway, which was built when Highway 27 and 401 were a four-lane freeway north of the QEW known as the Toronto Bypass. The new interchange was built alongside the construction of the 401 and 27 into their current configurations and tied into the Airport Expressway (see the diagram I made for the article for the configuration). At that time, it was expected that Highway 403 would tie into that mega interchange and that the 401 wouldn't need to be rebuilt as it now is west of there. By the 1980s, it was decided to tie into Highway 410 and widen the stretch between the 427 and 403/410 to handle the traffic. Really the answer comes down to the unprecedented growth of Mississauga from the time the interchange was built (67-71) and when the 401 was expanded (c. 1987). Personally I believe it is still possible to reconfigure the interchange and the section up to the 409 to accommodate the collector-express system... but it would require removing the Carling brewery. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Ontario Highway 427. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150611074210/http://kingsentinel.com/news/2008-04-23/news/003.html/ to http://www.kingsentinel.com/news/2008-04-23/news/003.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:46, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ontario Highway 427. 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/20150611074210/http://www.kingsentinel.com/news/2008-04-23/news/003.html to http://www.kingsentinel.com/news/2008-04-23/news/003.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.427corridor.com/427corridor/pdf/427%20Transportation%20Corridor%20EA%20Report%20FINAL%20Jan%2029%202010%20%28FULL%20MAIN%20REPORT%29.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) 15:17, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Same beef with the use of this photo on the Highway 409 article. The focus on this shot is more on the GTAA-built ramps rather than the MTO's 427-409 interchange, hence the caption has been changed to more accurately reflect this.

This picture shows the collector-express system of Highway 427 better than any other existing photo in the article, I'm using it in a manner similar to the one in the Highway 401 page.[Ontario_Highway_401#/media/File:King's_Highway_401_-_Ontario_(4118738546).jpg].

This photo doesn't really show a good shot of the collector-express system as one can barely see the southbound collectors, but if it is to be kept in the article, then describe it more accurately. FobTown (talk) 03:43, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Wouldn't "lanes" work better than "carriageways" as a substitute here?   Aloha27  talk  05:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Carriageway refers to the sets of lanes that form a single roadway, not the lanes, but we link the term in the few articles where it is needed.
Fobtown, the entry exit ramps are still part of the interchange, regardless of who built them or if they're direct ramps between the 409 and 427... however, I'm hoping the adjustment I made is satisfactory.

I disagree entirely that File:Highway 427.jpg shows the collector-express better, as the only visible part of the southbound lanes is the windshields and roofs of the traffic. The quality level difference is also markedly apparent. File:427 south of Eglinton.png also benefits from the shield, but that's simply a bonus. I literally spent hours on several different days going around and capturing high-quality images from every ideal vantage point... but you probably aren't aware of what worthwhile photos we have because you've been choosing to communicate through edit summaries. I leave no stone unturned; you'll find I'm far more useful as a resource than as a supervisor. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:28, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The same criticism applies to File:427 south of Eglinton.png as a showcase of the collector-express system, as it doesn't have a much better view of the opposing traffic carriageway, plus there isn't any there isn't any collector/express signage visible. It is a nice shot for artistic purposes with the 427 shield, so I'm not opposed to its continued inclusion as long as the caption is amended.
File:427 South of Rathburn.png is an improvement but the portrait format is somewhat odd. I did see File:Highway 427 at Burnhamthorpe.jpg in an older version of the article and considered using it to showcase the collector-express system. As I noticed that there isn't a photo of the elevated section between the QEW and Dundas, File:Highway 427.jpg was selected instead. FobTown (talk) 13:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
There is no elevated section... I'm assuming you're referring to the CPR overpass where there are no earth slopes. The Burnhamthorpe image suffers from either terrible white balance or (more likely) terrible weather. I'd rather stick to sunny day photos that are of good quality. The Rathburn image can be cropped to square. If the images are portrait, I've done it just to avoid cutting off the top of a light standard. Point is, please don't use the article history to dig up images because I went out and took high quality replacements for almost every photo from the 2010-era articles, and we have an entire repository of images for every 400-series highway. There's no need to settle for poopy 2.6 megapixel photos over 12-14 megapixel photos. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:01, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I'll agree that the recent photos have artistic value and high resolution, but after a look at the repository I found that some of the older photos are actually better at depicting Highway 427's features to be showcased, since Google Street doesn't go that far back. I'm fine with old scanned photos from the archives too. FobTown (talk) 21:39, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Which features? Space is tight, and when you consider the historical imagery we have (and as an aside, what I will be able to upload at the end of this year when the 1971 annual report photos of the mega-interchange construction become public domain!), there is absolutely no "features" from the mid-2000s that are worthy of a photo. 30 year old crumbling concrete pavement and beaten up guardrails more like it. - Floydian τ ¢ 00:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
If space is tight, remove photos that have less informative value even if its artistic from a photo-taking standpoint, so this File:409-427 Interchange.jpg could be on the chopping block.
Main feature of Highway 427 is the collector-express system with regards to signage and carriageways, which is not shown in File:427 south of Eglinton.png. The concrete pavement and steel guardrail is also part of the history of Highway 427. FobTown (talk) 13:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
"Main feature of Highway 427 is the collector-express system" - yes
"with regards to signage" - no
"The concrete pavement .. is also part of the history of Highway 427" - yes, and I believe it is covered in the prose
"The .. steel guardrail is also part of the history of Highway 427" - no, its a guardrail
At this point it is clear that the absolute only reasoning you have behind including a terrible quality photo is having a side by side pic of green and blue signage. No. Go out and take a recent picture or talk with User:Sonysnob about getting one of the photos from asphaltplanet.ca from 2008. The photo of the mass of interchange ramps has far more encyclopedic value. You are not going to get Image:Highway 427.jpg in the article, end of story. - Floydian τ ¢ 15:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Back to reverting and shoehorning your changes in? This still hasn't concluded. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)