Talk:Ontario Highway 77

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Ontario Highway 77's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "2010 mapart":
From Ontario Highway 27: 
From Ontario Highway 140: 
From Ontario Highway 16: 
From Ontario Highway 61: 
From Ontario Highway 132: 
From Ontario Highway 403: 
From Ontario Highway 402: 
From Ontario Highway 67: 
From Ontario Highway 405: 
From Ontario Highway 125: 
From Ontario Highway 20: 
From Ontario Highway 72: 
From Ontario Highway 148: 
From Ontario Highway 136: 
From Ontario Highway 124: 
From Ontario Highway 127: 
From Ontario Highway 137: 
From Ontario Highway 401: MapArt 2010
From Kawartha Lakes Road 8: 
From Ontario Highway 50: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Ontario Highway 77]] 

message: The use of  (described in deletion discussion as a test) in this article renders multiple instances of the same icon linking to different targets. This is a breach of our and WCAG accessibility guidelines, an effect known as "mystery meat" navigation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accessibility concern 

message: It's sad to see the usual culprits - one an administrator, the other a candidate for adminship - edit warring to remove coordinates from this article, without responding to requests to first discuss the matter on this talk page. Arguments that they breach "WP not an indiscriminate collection of information" are facile; not least because the coordinates of key features are not "indiscriminate information". If some editors think otherwise, I invite them to start an RfC to remove all coordinate lists from Wikipedia. Also, the claim that they are "not useful" is clearly a matter of personal prejudice, as several editors have stated in previous discussions that they do find them useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Invitation politely declined. The coords are redundant to the geographical information already provided in this article, which provide a more detailed linear rendition of the linear subject of the article than point-based coordinates. The coordinates were supplied as a test case of an alternative prior to the discovery of the ability to use a kml file. I'm happy to await the consensus on this individual article talk page. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny, you didn't think them "redundant to the geographical information already provided" when they were hidden by your experimental template, whose design was so unpopular it got deleted. The coordinates are not redundant, because they identify the precise location of specific features to our readers, with links to maps, which nothing else on the page does. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That was before the kml feature was implemented, which I previously indicated. "whose design was so unpopular it got deleted" - This is a complete misnomer; it was deleted because it served no useful purpose, and I was one of those who voted to delete it. The precise location of the features in question is not very important, but easily determined with a single map that showcases the entirety of this short route. I'll allow others to comment however, as we knowingly have conflicting opinions. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates