Talk:U.S. Route 395

message: Sorry I let this sit for a while. But yeah, the article U.S. Route 395 North Spokane Corridor needs to be merged and pruned.I just drove a good portion of the 395 corridor and counted no fewer than 5 sections of US 395 that were being widened to a freeway as we speak, not counting this one. It's simply not noteworthy in the big scheme of things. Davemeistermoab (talk) 04:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not do the merge alone, I would wait until a few more editors chime in and a consensus is formed. With that said, at least 2 other editor have put the "merge" tag in place. So there's 3 of us that have gone on record in one form or another with a vote of merge. I don't agree with the logic presented. By comparison Interstate 580 (Nevada), which is a complete reconstruction of US 395 in Nevada on a new alignment built to Interstate standards, has 3 official webpages dedicated to the project: http://www.ccfreeway.com http://www.freewayextension.com and http://www.nevadadot.com/projects/us395northbound/ It did have 4, but the re-construction between I-80 and Clear Acre Lane in Reno was just finished and pulled from NDOT's website. I don't see anybody creating 4 different pages about those construction projects. You're welcome to convince me otherwise. However, with the evidence currently presented I'm not convinced. Davemeistermoab (talk) 01:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  There aren't four Wikipedia articles for that project because it is just one major project.  The T-REX I-25 project in Metro-Denver has a whole article about it - Colorado T-REX Project (TRansportation EXpansion).  Maybe the problem is that the the US 395 NSC page isn't developed and comprehensive enough to meet Wikipedia's "standards"?  If that's the case, I would be more than glad to expand the article with some good information. I'm from Spokane, so I know a lot about the project. Jdubman (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think your second reply is a much better argument. I agree that the T-REX article is well done. However, I suspect that as the light rail system ages the name of the expansion project will be long forgotten and this article will be eventually deleted or merged with the main RTD article. For the record, if I were the king of Wikipedia I wouldn't have an Interstate 580 (Nevada) article until NDOT actually nails a 580 sign to a post =-). But, I'm not the king so.... If you can make it a good article, Yeah I'd support it, but until then I still vote for a merge. Good luck on improving it. I'm more than willing to change my vote when that happens. Davemeistermoab (talk) 03:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:   To Merge or not to Merge 

message: I am proposing that the 2 mile long BC 395 be merged into US Route 395 in Washington. There is no need to have a microstub for a 2 mile long highway and it is just an extension of US 395. --Admrboltz (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  BC 395 Merger 

message: This edit  introduced the infamous "in popular culture" section to this article. In this case I have two reasons for opposing this addition:
#These sections in general tend to be a crap magnet, and often lead to a downward spiral in the quality of an article
#This fact specifically, IMO, isn't noteworthy. US 395 does not play an integral part of the movie. In the case of BTTF, the US 395 signs are just props placed on the filming location. If the situation were more like, say Cars or Rain Man or The Stand, where specific highways are mentioned AND specific highways or features along highway corridors are an important element of the story, I would have a different opinion. However, that is not the case with Back to the Future, where highways have no significant part of the story. Am I alone in this opinion, or should this section go? Dave (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Dave and I once discussed this in relation to US 8, since that MN–WI–MI highway is shown in Southern California. I tend to agree that the highway isn't significant enough to the movie. However, if other movies featured this highway, then it would be appropriate to include BTTF as part of a larger section. BTW, the source used is a WP:SPS and so it can't be used. A better option would be to rent the movie and find the time index for the scene that shows the signs and use the movie itself as the source. Imzadi 1979 → 20:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with these statements...the section can go. -- LJ ↗ 07:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  In pop culture.... 

message: Recently, the Spokesmen Review of Spokane Washington published a story and photos covering the route of the highway through town on present day Sunset Blvd.  Here is the link:  http://www.spokesman.com/picture-stories/three-flags-highway/  I enjoyed reading this entry for further information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.117.212.38 (talk) 22:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article and pictures from Spokane Washington newspaper....