Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Standards/Infobox archive

message: Here's some ideas for standards. I think most of these are common practice, but I'll mention them for the sake of covering all the bases. If anyone else has any others, or concerns regarding anyone's ideas, please voice them.
*The infobox should be Infobox road or a state-specific routebox calling Infobox road, such as Infobox NH Route.
*"Headline shields" (the shield of the article route) in infoboxes should be 70px in height. "Headline plates" should be 70px in width.
*Shields for infobox junctions should be 20px in height, if possible.
*Displayed text for links to routes in the infobox should be an abbreviated form.
*Lists of cities or counties should be a comma-delimited list. Lists of junctions should be a  (line break)-delimited list.
*Segmented routes can be reflected in the junction list with a  (horizontal rule).
*Do not include the state abbreviation with town names for the junction list for a state highway (as it is implied that the town in question is in the same state as the road). Do include the state abbreviation in every other case.
*Use three-letter abbreviations for bannered routes ("BUS", "BYP", "ALT",...). These save typing and space.
*All items addressing the infobox in WP:USSH apply here as well. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 05:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Would IL have to switch over? As has been mentioned, they have a routebox incompatible with ... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 06:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eventually, they (as well as the other four states not using Infobox road in some way) should switch over, but I wouldn't worry about it right now. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MO used to have an infobox incompatible with Infobox road, but I had to work my butt off on converting...maybe IL can convert just like MO did. V60 VTalk - VDemolitions 22:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK can be converted since its structure is almost the same... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

text: MN didn't take too much effort since it was practically the same as MO - all fields supplied in the old one were covered by . •  master_sonLets talk 14:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideas

message: I assume that we are not to use the  template anymore due to WP:MOS •  master_sonLets talk 17:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Short answer, no. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: short response - ok. •  master_sonLets talk 00:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  scaps template 

message: *Support. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensus

message: See Template talk:Infobox road for an idea relating to font size. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Font size

message: I've added the 10 junction rule that was apparently missed when the proposal was proposed.  Nonetheless, WP:IH uses the rule everywhere; we should be doing this for all of USRD. V60 干什么？ · 喝掉的酒 · 路 19:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, this has been here for a while. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  10 junction limit 

message: I'm wondering if something regarding major multiplexes could be added to infoboxes.  For example, U.S. Route 81 has significant and lengthy multiplexes with Interstate 135 and Interstate 29.  Interstate 90 has two with Interstate 94 and one with Interstate 80.  It would unclutter some of the major intersection listings I've seen to add a major multiplex section.  DandyDan2007 04:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding a concurrency section to the infobox would eliminate the west-east and south-north progression in the infobox. Also, adding multiplexes to its own area in the infobox wouldn't clear out the major junctions as the idea of keeping junctions to a minimum stems around keeping the infobox a reasonable size. So, in other words, for every theoretical concurrency that is added, one junction would have to be removed to compensate sizewise, so there'd be no point. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major multiplexes 

message: See the current edit war reinstated at Interstate 75.  What was compromised a year or two ago was that the Infobox, since it is an at a glance chart would put the major city of the termini, while the text ("near Miami, FL") would put the actual suburb (Hialeah).  One anonymous editor from Miami Dade College keeps changing it siting non-reasons like WP:OR -- it is of note that the FHWA master list says it terminates in Miami.  Now, however an established editor changed it back.  I think we need some agreement and for it to be put into the Infobox standard.   -- KelleyCook 16:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Termini debate in Infoboxes rears its ugly head again