Talk:I-95 exit list

message: What is the difference between this new template and the traditional AFD template?? Georgia guy 19:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

message: Pending the outcome on the I-95 talk page, should we begin organising the exits in a table by state?  MPD01605 08:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes—pending the outcome of the discussion. Based on the current results, I'm going to check the by-state articles this afternoon and throw a merge-to template up on any with exit lists saying, "Hey, we're moving them off to the exit list article!" Then we can use any of those that are already wikified tables and edit the sections that aren't already set up. --C.Fred 13:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Um... please cite your sources. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  18:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The source of the information is not the issue in the debate. The issue is that some editors are of the opinion that the exit list is not notable and within the scope of Wikipedia. I disagree; I hate how hard it is to find an exit list online. I think it's a good resource. But yes, cite where the information came from. --C.Fred 00:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah yes, and I'm in the process of creating shields for both state and county route shields of Virginia, state shields for Maryland, and missing delaware shields.  These will be included into the tables when they're done.  I'll make NC and SC shields as well.  They're all simple geometric shapes.  --MPD01605 17:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table? 

message: I don't want to rain on anybody's parade, but before we start tabling and formatting everything, we have to flip the entire list upside-down.  I'm not going to start anything, as this is a pretty big project and I think we need to know what has to be done, and have it all planned out.  MPD01605 01:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Well there's a lot of things wrong with it really. Tables, wikify links, etc. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  03:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes. Flipping the lists is probably easier done now while it's in one-line-per-exit format. Then, it's a trivial unix command, if not a basic perl program. Build the table, and then it gets more fun. —C.Fred (talk) 04:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I put a table in New Hampshire's section.  I think that will work very well.  I...don't know how to flip the list.  The table may complicate things, but no worries you can revert the article, flip it, and we can do it again (that's why I did the shortest one).  When we do get into these, though, I would like to table the Virginia section.  MPD01605 06:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What will happen is, I'll flip everything but New Hampshire, and then that one will need to be done by hand. If I'm lucky, the data is in a manageable enough way that I can build a rudimentary table automatically. —C.Fred (talk) 01:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exits 

message: Please stop converting this page to a redirect. I've done work on exit lists too. It is salvagable. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  04:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not without completely rewriting it. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 04:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to put in tables, but I disagree with completely rewriting. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  04:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirecting

message: There already exist more accurate exit lists on several articles such as Interstate 95 in New Jersey, and thus the page was edited to link to those to avoid a content fork. Several editors are reverting this for no apparent reason. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:RFC]]