Talk:Interstate 164

message: According to the AASHTO approval of the change, it still exists west of US 41. "The overall route length of I-164 is 21.39 miles. The segment of I-164 that is proposed to be eliminated, renamed and resigned as I-69 over an existing facility is approximately 20.70 miles long." --NE2 21:42, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reworded the article to clarify the a small part of I-164 still exists. However, its existence will likely be invisible to anyone traveling on it since as far as I know it is not signed as I-164. There are a number of segments of old routes like this that still exist only on highway department records. Indyguy (talk) 05:21, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 

message: I've thought about merging this article with I-69. We could move I-164 into I-69's history Section.
-EBGamingWiki  — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBGamingWiki (talk • contribs) 14:24, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe in the near future, but not in the way you've done it. There are all sorts of attribution-related issues to just copying and pasting text, , and I don't think you have the skill set at the moment to properly handle such a merger. Also, it should be open for a bit more discussion before you move forward unilaterally. Imzadi 1979 →  19:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

text: It is my understand that the stub end in Evansville, albeit unsigned, has not been renumbered or de-numbered yet. It might be unsigned, but I-164 still exists in much-truncated format in that case. Imzadi 1979 →  19:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the introduction to saying that it's mostly former, but I used the verb is to indicate the fact that it is partially current. Georgia guy (talk) 20:01, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

text: One examination it appears that nothing in this article is needed for the I-69 article, I'll propose article deletion.  InsertCleverPhraseHere InsertTalkHere  21:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Deletion is a bad option; any merger requires that the full page history of the resulting redirect be kept for page attribution purposes. Imzadi 1979 →  22:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: A proper merger in this case is not necessary or recommended anyway, as the material in this article doesn't reflect the material that the other article needs... at al. All the mile markers at the exits are different now, meaning that the lower table is incorrect and out of date, and not suitable for a merger. The material in the 'history' section is already covered in the I69 article and the material in the 'route description' section is unsourced and needlessly detailed, especially for the I-96 article that necessarily has a much larger scope. that leaves us with nothing to merge at all. Although yeah I guess we should probably just turn it into a redirect.  InsertCleverPhraseHere InsertTalkHere  22:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Another consideration is that just because it is a former designation, we don't necessarily delete the article. Otherwise  U.S. Route 16 in Michigan, U.S. Route 25 in Michigan, U.S. Route 27 in Michigan and U.S. Route 33 in Michigan should not exist, among hundreds of other examples, including U.S. Route 66. We can, and should, cover former highway designations up to the point they ceased to exist with a bit of an epilog for pertinent after-decommissing content. Imzadi 1979 →  22:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Interstate 164. 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/20110615200707/http://www.in.gov/indot/files/StateWide_2004.pdf to http://www.in.gov/indot/files/StateWide_2004.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified