Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maryland/Archive 1

message: I have just created Portal:U.S. Roads.  If you have any feedback, please place it under "Portal" at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads.Rt66lt 03:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Portal

message: Here's an idea I've been playing around with.  There seems to be alot of minor state highways in MD (some less than a mile long) that aren't worth writing an entire article about but still should be part of the project.  So, to cover these I figured we could put them under a single article (say, List of minor Maryland state highways) that would inlclude a short paragraph on each of them.  Sound like a good idea?-Jeff 13:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 03:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Makes sense to me.  I've added some actual pages on a couple of short but interesting routes.  I'm guessing the distinction is a judgement call. --Dpv 00:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

text: As long as the redirects exist then it sounds good. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  00:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How detailed do we want this list to be? If you see my pending edits, I'm looking to add all current of 8xx and 9xx state roads in PG County. I may include 7xx, as well. My intentions are to do the same for Montgomery County. I will likely start adding these in on Wednesday or Thursday if no one objects. Note that these streets are *very* minor, in most cases being only a couple dozen feet long, being without any signs indicating state maintenance, and could very well be mistaken for someone's driveway. Oftentimes even the SHA staff do not realise that the roads are property of SHA, unless the MAARS Location Reference Guide is consulted. --Thisisbossi 20:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Routes 

message: Just a heads up, I've started working on the SVG shields.  The only problem with the current templates is that the word "MARYLAND" is too small.  That should be fixed in a few days as soon as I can upload the new versions of the images to the Commons.-Jeff 04:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In case anyone is wondering, they're comming.  I've been a bit busy lately but they should be here soon.  Also the blanks are fixed.-Jeff 16:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shields 

message: I've been planning a routebox.  A prototype can be found at user:Jeff02/test page, I'd like to know what eveyone thinks about it and how it can be improved.  Note that I plan on using this not only for numbered routes but for other major highways such as the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.  The planned parameters are:
*image: image of shield/sign for the route (:Image:MD blank.svg for routes that don't have one)
*route: Route abbreviation (ex: MD 2, MD 100 , ICC, etc.)
*name: Name or names of the route (ex: Governor Ritchie Highway, Solomon's Island Road; Paul T. Pitcher Memorial Highway)
*length_mi: Length in miles
*length_km: Length in kilometers
*direction: either "North/South", "West/East" or "Special, see article" (for MD 32 for example)
*from: City or town nearest to northern or western terminus
*to: City or town nearest to southern or eastern terminus
*junctions: bulleted list of junctions with other routes (preferably limiting it to the top 4 or 5), as well as the temini, if a terminus is not a junction with another route, describe it in parentheses (ex: (state line), (end of state maintenance)).  Temini are always included and are bolded.
:I like it but just two things, the parkway is a numbered route MD 295, and the box contents seem off-center. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 03:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I see what you mean in the route data section (maybe we could shift that a little to the left).  As for the junctions list, I just centered it (doesn't make much of a difference though since "(end of state maintenance)" takes up nearly the whole width).  As for the B/W Parkway, I actually meant the federal portion which has it's own article that we could add this to.-Jeff 02:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what the problem is now. The padding-left: 2em needs to be changed to padding-left: 1em, this is only for the lsting at the start of the box, you'll see what i mean once you preview the change. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 06:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I wouldn't have noticed that without you pointing it out.  It's fixed now.-Jeff (talk) 07:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: N/P --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I added style="font-size:9pt;" to both heading cells, hope that fixes it.-Jeff (talk) 07:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Routebox 

message: If you haven't heard about this yet, User:SPUI is on a renaming rampage and although he has not hit Maryland yet, he has proposed at Talk:List of Maryland state highways that we move the articles to MD X.  However, this convention is not used by the general public and therefore we should opt for a more commonly used convention per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names).  Indeed the current convention is not commonly used either, but we should wait until Wikipedia:Naming conventions/Numbered highways is decided before moving pages (which is basically what I told SPUI, so hopefully he won't be moving the pages).
I just wanted to let everyone be aware that we might be hit, and that SPUI (as far as I know) is under probation.  Also, please be aware that articles under this wikiproject (and other US road wikiprojects) cannot be moved without consensus per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive84.  So, if anyone moves one of the pages under this project without consensus, please tell them about this on their talk page, and if it was done by SPUI it should probably be reported to an admin. -Jeff (talk) 01:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your response, which is probably the best one out of all the WikiProjects. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  01:57, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible page moves ahead 

message: Like I said in my last post, we need a new naming convention for route articles since the current one isn't commonly used.  Most people over at WP:NC/NH seem to agree that the general consensus is to leave this task to the individual states.  So I've come up with a few conventions that I think would be good:
;Maryland Route X: Commonly used by newspapers and has been observed at at least one website. 
;Route X (Maryland): "Route X" is what people usually refer to many state routes as, but many routes are usually refered to with just the number (such as 295), so it's actually not quite as universal as the first.
;Maryland State Route X: Simmilar to the first but more complete, not sure if it's as common though.
So please let me know what you think of them, massive edit wars have taken place at other projects over what is the "correct" name so I figured we should decide right now what convention we are going to use for this project and stick with it until we get a consensus to change.-Jeff (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well conisdiering i rellay am not a fan of any fo them, i would have to go with the first selection. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 05:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have any other ideas then? -Jeff (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I kinda have to say il like the way some of them are already named, Maryland State Highway XX. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 02:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

text: note: results for Maryland State Highway X come mostly from Wikipedia and its mirrors, Wikipedia has no article for MD 140
They pretty much eliminate Maryland State Route X and Maryland State Highway X as common names.  Also, I don't think Route X (Maryland) is a good idea due to the potential for it to be ambiguous (to someone unfarmiliar with Wikipedia's conventions, does Route 222 (Maryland) mean MD 222 or US 222 in Maryland?), so right now the best choice does seem to be Maryland Route X.-Jeff (talk) 16:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds fine with me. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 03:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I was lokking at the naming convention pages of the higways, concerning the mov of a road in Pennsylvania, and nocied that the listed naming convention for Maryland is not tha same as here as it is their, for the sake of consinastancy and to keep some users from defining their onwn naming conventions, i am gusessing that it should be updated to reflect the decision? Also might be a good idea to place the convention on the main page for this project as well, just a thought.--Boothy443 |  trácht ar 21:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated this project page to reflect the new naming convention right after changing it, but yeah, the others should be updated as well.-Jeff (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I would like to start adding redirects for MD xxx.  Good idea?  Bad idea?  If you folks agree, how should 0xx routes be treated: MD 97, MD 097, or both? --Thisisbossi 20:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea I say, analogous to I-X redirecting to Interstate X.  Also, I think it's better to not add a leading zero to the MD xx form, since most people usually abbreviate that way.-Jeff (talk) 19:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming convention 

message: I added MD Ends to the State Highways list.  If you want additional images of anything along roads in Montgomery or Prince George's Counties, just let me know.  Chances are good I might already have them; or I could photograph them while out in the field.  --Thisisbossi 11:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, we could use some state highway images.  Commons:Category:Maryland state highways is completely empty, save for the subcat, so whatever you think we could use you should upload it and put it there.-Jeff (talk) 01:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I got some uploaded a few weeks ago, but then I got lazy and stopped.  I'll get up a whole bunch more someday (but first I gotta move and take a vacation).  Probably around mid-July or so. --Thisisbossi 22:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: As proof that I have way too much time on my hands, I've been working on a new look for the project page.  I added a useful links box at the very top so they are easily accesible to anyone who's contributing, I also split a lot of the info to the new editing guide subpage, and I moved the  template up so you don't have to scroll way down just to get to the top of the thing.  Maybe I'm going a bit overboard putting the intro in its own pretty box, but I wanted it to stand out for anyone visiting the page for the first time.  Hopefully this new interface makes the page better organized, and also I plan on reorganizing some more stuff on the main page and editing guide later on.-Jeff (talk) 04:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New look 

message: We should come up with a list of items an article needs to have for it to not be considered a stub. Ex. History, Names, major junctions etc. For instance,  MD 10 in my opinion should be considered a stub, but who am I to say what is and isn't. Hollowman512 23:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True.  While there is WP:MDRD/EG#Structure, that's pretty much something I threw together based off of some US highway articles.  It would make a good starting point though to decide what should be in an article.  Basically what we should do is decide which sections from there should be required and which should be reccomended, and possibly even ammend it to include more sections.  Then, any articles that do not have all of the required sections will be marked as stubs.-Jeff (talk) 02:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, one thing that should be in the structure is the route box. I was also thinking exit list would be a good thing to add too, but if we do that we should come up with an official way to list them.Hollowman512 21:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, "Major junctions" can also be named "Exit list" for freeways.  Also, for routes that are freeways for part of thier length, exit list could probably be a subsection of major junctions.  I've rearranged the reqiurements now under WP:MDRD/EG#What makes a full article? and the section on the routebox is now grouped under there.  Another thing I think should be reqired is the counites traversed and  cities and towns sections, as long as the route passes through more than one.  MD 10, for example wouldn't need a counties traversed section since the whole thing is in Anne Arundel County.  Junctions should be listed west to east, or north to south, however, they are usually numbered south to north, so the question is, do we go with the natural ordering or do we go order according to exit number?-Jeff (talk) 23:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a way to take a poll, or is it even necessary since we dont have that many participants.Hollowman512 21:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm hoping some more people will take part in this discussion so we can come up with more of a consensus.  I put up a news item on it, so we'll have to wait and see if anyone else wants to contribute to this.-Jeff (talk) 01:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It is 6am, so I could probably think up more if it were later in the day; but I would particularly like to see the length and alignment (North-South; East-West). Regarding Jeff's points, I agree with them all: specifically in providing information on the termini; but we may wish to keep the Cities and Towns section restricted only to incorporated cities.  There are a number of neighborhoods which have their own zip codes and often refer to themselves as their own towns, but are otherwise just a typical residential subdivision.  Good example: Ashton, which even drafted its own Master Plan; or a more well-known example: the Kentlands.  --Thisisbossi 10:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One restriction I would definitely place on this is that if a place is a neighborhood of an incorporated area it is not its own town to be listed under the cities and towns list.  If a route passes through Baltimore we won't list the neighborhoods it passes through, we just say it passes through Baltimore period.  And if it passes through the Kentlands, we will say it passes through Gaithersburg.  When it comes to unincorporated places though, that's a bit more tricky.  In rural areas there are some unincorporated places that do have characteristics of towns, they have a downtown area (usually a Main Street) and are surrounded by rural land, there's no mistaking that they are "towns", despite being unincorporated.  I think we should include areas outside of corporate limits that consider themselves "towns", but be conservative in which ones we list if necessary to keep the sizes of the lists down.-Jeff (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think images are nessessary for non-stubs, but if an article is in need of an image, I'd stick an  template on it.-Jeff (talk) 01:53, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stubs 

message: If anyone here hasn't seen the oversized link in the news box, or simply hasn't decided to take part in the debate (which I wouldn't blame you for), here's what's going on:  First of all, it doesn't seem like we are going to have to move our articles no matter how this turns out.  There are two main "principles" that are being decided between, the first favors preppending the state name to route names, and the second favors Wikipedia-style disambiguation (route name (state)).    Our naming convention already follows the first principle, and the second has already allowed Maryland and some other states as exceptions.  This will soon come down to a state-by-state debate and the debates will be held at each wikiproject (starting Sept 4).  I don't know if we are supposed to have another discussion on this or if we can just cite the old one, but we'll worry about that when September 4th comes.-Jeff (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "You can leave them out if you can link to the discussion. Just make sure that the convention is not stable because all the pages are there or they were moved there (for example, CA and WA). --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And now it's official, we will be keeping our current naming convention: Maryland Route X.-Jeff (talk) 19:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming conventions debate 

message: Your state is invited to participate in discussions for its highway naming convention. Please feel free to participate in this discussion. If you already have a convention that follows the State Name Type xx designation, it is possible to request an exemption as well. Thanks! --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  00:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll/Part2]]

message: Should the Route description, Cities and towns list, and Major junctions follow the same order convention (i.e. North to South, West to East) as the Infobox? –Shoaler (talk) 11:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, for consistency I'd say it makes sense.-Jeff (talk) 17:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Route description order

message: It doesn't seem to be linked on their site, but the SHA has a 2005 Baltimore City Highway Location Reference at . --NE2 20:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, nice find, didn't even know that HLR existed.-Jeff (talk) 01:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baltimore City

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 22:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory