Talk:Interstate 476

message: SECTION 300 - CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY IN MARPLE WOODS AREA-- Is there any good reason to have this unexplained, non sequitur, and hard-to-read detailed history of the procedures from the construction of a short segment of this highway?  Unless someone posts a plausible defense of this section in the next few days, I will delete this section. Spikebrennan 02:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion of construction chronology 

message: When the infobox was cleaned up, why were the junctions reorganized from north to south, in violation of common practice of using south to north? --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 22:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My bad. Didn't realize that the junctions were listed north to south previously. In any case, I've fixed the order to read south-north. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why north to south? 

message: I think this page could use some improvement and cleaning up. It mostly consists of information on the Blue Route with a few Northeast Extension-related bits tacked on, however now that Northeast Extension redirects here I think more information on the history Northeast Extension should be integrated somehow. Also a lot of stuff could be moved around or consolidated; the Description section pretty much just repeats info described later in the article plus some weird nonsense about I-476 "becoming part of a multi-county beltway" (?). Perhaps History should be where Description is now. Same with the Notes section, everything else in the section is found somewhere in the article, except for the one bullet point about it being longer than I-12/I-19/etc. which would still be better integrated elsewhere. (One thing that also puzzles me is why the Pennsylvania Turnpike/Interstate 95 Interchange Project is mentioned no less than three times in the article, including in "See also"? It's not related to either the Blue Route or the Northeast Extension at all.) Krimpet 12:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some improvements 

message: I'd like to see this article along the long road to featured article status. It was rated as a stub last September when it looked like this, an apt rating IMO, but I'd say it's greatly improved since then. I'm curious, does anyone have any ideas or suggestions on how this article could be improved further? Krimpet 04:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A route description would work wonders for this article. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I also requested a map for the article, which I think would be good to have. Krimpet 05:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like where this article is going. I guess my only comment at this point would be to expand the lead a bit to cover the history of I-476 - not in-depth, but an overview. An expanded lead will help to push the route description farther down, and will make the article appear more robust. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say it's B-class now. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, I expanded the lead as you said, including information on the Blue Route controversy (and a juicy quote from the Inquirer) to encourage the reader to read on as per WP:LEAD. I figure I'll follow in the footsteps of Interstate 290 (Illinois) and request a peer review to get some more feedback on how this article could be improved for the next step up to GA status. Krimpet 16:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The road to featured article status

message: The article is quite good and close to GA status but I was concerned by the lack of sources in the Route description section.  This section is the most likely to be infected with original research and the best way to counter that is sourcing.  If some sources, even general ones, could be added that would be great.  I didn't see any other issues and the sourcing in the rest of the article is adequate.  Eluchil404 13:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, done. I cleaned up a couple of the OR-leaning statements and added sources. Krimpet 21:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article was left on hold for awhile, and it does appear the original nominator's concerns were addressed as citations do seem plentiful in the section in question, so therefore, i'm passing this article. Homestarmy 16:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA on Hold

message: This has a GA and a High For all!
Neptunemusic (talk) 00:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm so glad! 

message: I find "There is also a small dirt road near the Haverford Township exit ...".  What does this have to do with I-476?  The only other Haverford reference I find is a reference to Haverford College.
Are you sure the Taylor and Clarks Summit exits had old numbers 38 and 39 respectively?  This would have been a change from even older exit numbering in that area (Taylor exit did not exist yet, and Clarks Summit was exit 38). (I have put in a remark just ahead of the I-476 exit list to explain old exit number 25A and also old exit numbers 31 and upward.)
Also I remember a remark somewhere that the Northeast Extension was posted as I-476 because the Interstate system in this part of the U.S. was out of 2-digit odd numbers.  (99 was taken for the U.S. 220 expressway much further west in Pennsylvania, and 67 is thus the highest currently-unused 2-digit odd number in the system.)
:I clearly remember Taylor and Clarks Summit having exit numbers of 38 and 39.  Both originally had toll booths, to be replaced by the toll barrier south of both exits. Bill S. (talk) 14:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  More feedback on exit list etc. 

message: The article says that the non-toll section of I-476 (locally known as the "Blue Route") is  long.  However, the exit list shows the toll barrier at 19.97 and the overpass of the main line of the Pennsylvania Turnpike is at the 20.3 mile marker.  I also remember the bridge being around the 20 mile marker as well.  The toll barrier is considered the dividing line, and is numbered as Exit 20.  Therefore, the lower section should be listed as  in length. Bill S. (talk) 14:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed to to reflect the length as being 20 miles. Dough4872 23:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual mileage of "Blue Route" 

message: Interstate 476 allows access to Interstate 78 via US 22. I have seen other road articles include interstates in the infobox that the interstate does not have a direct interchange with. For example, Interstate 78 has Interstate 476 in the infobox. I think that Interstate 78 should be added to the infobox. Any thoughts? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 00:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Only direct interchanges should be included in infoboxes. Dough4872 01:40, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm only suggesting this for consistency. Some infoboxes list indirect interchanges, others don't. There is nothing in the infobox standards that mentions whether indirect interchanges should be listed or not. I guess it is up to the article manager. I still think the Interstate 78 indirect interchange should be listed though. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interchange with Interstate 78 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Interstate 476. 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/20070820120212/http://www.radnor.com/department/division.asp?fDD=9-108 to http://www.radnor.com/department/division.asp?fDD=9-108
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) 17:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified