User talk:Rschen7754/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

California State Route 241

You recently contributed a message to my talk page, telling me how I had incorrectly used the NPOV template. I don't understand how you believe that the "Future Aspirations" section of the article is neutral. It obviously presents one side of the argument concerning whether to put in the toll road to San Clemente, avoiding the benefits and making assumptions(TCA has certain means that they believe will be able to prevent negative effects and possibly bring positive effects. Although this is possibly untrue, it is not mentioned at all.) The 241 Toll Road argument is a huge issue in South Orange County, especially in San Clemente, and displaying one side of the argument as true is not right.

(IP 68.5.128.55 18:29,18 December 2005 (UTC) )

California State Route 79

It uses Image:Interstate-80.png and neither me nor the robot can find an obvious way of removing it or switching it to Image:Interstate80.png. It is somehow part of the {{routeboxca2}}, so I figure that you know how to change it. Thanks. --Chris 18:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

It's not easy to do? I just figured you guys had it set up in such a way that it wasn't obvious, but you can't just change it? (all you need to do is get rid of the dash between "Interstate" and "80") --Chris 22:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Yep, you got it. You're an admin, right? If so, feel free to go ahead and delete Image:Interstate-80.png. I've already fixed the other 5 articles that used it. If you want, you can redirect it to Image:Interstate80.png when you're done deleting it. --Chris 22:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea what you just did. You seem to have deleted the page, but not the image itself. So I put it back on WP:IFD. --Chris 13:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Macintosh

Thanks for joining! Our current focus is Apple Computer. Our former focus and current FAC is Apple Macintosh; you can vote here. Don't forget to put {{Project Macintosh}} and {{user WikiProject Macintosh}} on your userpage! We’re all honored that you want to join our WikiProject. --HereToHelp (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

SFD

I'd like to think it was possible, but I'm far too biased in this debate to make that judgement. It's reached the stage where SPUI's simply making more evidence against himself for a potential rfc (I suppose you saw that he deliberately edited out someone's comments during the debate?) Grutness...wha? 05:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

well, it looks like SPUI was the first person to use the word idiots, referring to people at W-talk:SFD, and he also seems to have accused BL Lacertae of being a dick on her talk page before she mentioned it on MFD. That and the editing of her comments which seem to be like fair comment, all things considered, well... Grutness...wha? 05:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

and now he's calling me a dick as well. Ah, well. Grutness...wha? 06:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I've commented your personal attack out per WP:RPA. Also WP:NPA. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 06:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I've uncommented it, as it is not a personal attack. It is an attack on your actions, not yourself. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 06:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

See his talk page for my reply. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 06:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Being a dick is an action, much like clubbing baby seals or kissing babies. Please don't be one, as you have been in the MFD discussion. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 06:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

"Don't be a dick" is a well-accepted phrase. You are attempting to move the conversation from your assumption of bad faith to my classifying that as being a dick. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 06:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it is. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

user:Interstate96

I see you have reverted this user's edits a few times. The user did another edit to Interstate 96, using the article like a talk page to question the previous reversion, which I reverted, and I warned as well, suggesting that discussion ought to be on the talk page. The I96 page is on my watchlist too, but you've been catching the edits before I did. Thanks for your help! ++Lar 06:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm willing to cooperate, but I'm just saying that bands should have the right to add themselevs to wikipedia, due to the fact that they exist. There are plenty of bands on Wikipedia, such as Coheed and Cambria. The page excesively promotes the bands, offering links, information, etc. I'm sorry about talking to you on the content page, I didn't know how to talk.

Oh ok, I'm sorry for the hastle. I didn't know of those guidelines. Sorry again, I'll make sure I read into things next time. Take care.

U.S. Routes

You stated that they are known as U.S. Highways - by who? AASHTO, the agency that assigns them, calls them Routes. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 08:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and Route is typically in the south and northeast? How about Route 66? --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 11:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 76 (east)

Greetings, User:Beirne asked the Mediation Cabal to mediate on the use of infoboxes on Talk:Interstate_76_(east). Now, Beirne has withdrawn from Wikipedia (see User talk:Beirne ), so I was wondering if you consider the dispute closed or open (it appears that you agreed with Beirne). I am partially trying to determine the status of the dispute, and I am partially curious if someone remains to carry forward the recommendations of the RfC. In other words, should I close the mediation or continue? Thanks, SteveMc 23:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Inquiry

Is this how to talk to you? I have no idea. Thanks

Yup. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

OK so what's the deal on links? They are relevant to the topic. Some specifically on each. And there are actual commercial links there (Armageddon Books for example). That was a non-profit web site that does link to other sites that sell stuff, which is pretty normal.

There is a specific criteria on external links- Wikipedia:External links. It is frowned upon to go to several articles and insert the same link. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure and I can understand that, so what about specific pages that address specific content? (general content was what was intended). For example, there is a page on that site specific to the Gog and Magog war (one of the interpretations). Would the correct thing to do be to link to that page specifically? (that was also the intent on the Rapture page which came with a page-specific link). Thanks.

I suppose... but I looked at the Rapture page and it's just a bunch of Bible verses that anyone can get off biblegateway.com. There is nothing unique in this article. Also, are you connected in any way with this web site? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:58, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering what is different since there are several links to a non-specific Rapture Ready URL on several pages as I have noted. Why is the site subjected to more rigorous criteria than the other links? I don't understand what's different? Oh yeah it is my site. But again what does Armageddon Books have specific since it is a purely commercial site. The links seem rather random, I've noted, on several pages.

You cannot add a link to your own site- another person ran into that on Talk:Jesus. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Well, it's a small site but I have 40,000-50,000 unique people that come through each month. Somebody will probably do it someday, anyways. Have a nice weekend. 8)

U.S. Interstate Highway WikiProject

Thank you for adding the {{U.S. Interstate Highway WikiProject}} template to the Talk pages I-35E and I-35W articles I did yesterday/today. I thought I had everything else set up. I guess I got it for the article but forgot the Talk pages. Oops! Again, thank you! C.Fred 23:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

FLSR-stub

I believe it's already fixed - the old category is now blank. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Noteworthy Interchanges category

As I've been working on the highways pages, I'm coming across a number of named (and noteworthy) interchanges, like the Springfield Interchange, Kennedy Interchange, and Bruckner Interchange for starters. I'm wondering if you know of more such interchanges. I'm thinking of introducing a category for "Noteworthy Interchanges", where they can all be gathered together. --WhosAsking 17:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 4

Please do not use rollback when not reverting vandalism. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 00:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

West Virginia

Hey Rschen7754! I nominated the West Virginia main article as a candidate for US Collaboration of the Week...it's in dire need of help and if it is chosen as a US Collaboration of the Week, it'll definitely be up to par with other U.S. state articles. Since you expressed an interest in the state's highways and in the state's representation on Wikipedia in general, I would strongly urge you to vote for West Virginia to be the next US Collaboration of the Week. Thanks! --Caponer 17:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I-4 and I-76

I'd like to say the same to you. Please stop reverting them. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 00:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Missouri Route Boxes

I've created a new route box for the Missouri highways. It's at Template:MORoutebox. I modified the interstate template to create it and it's easier to use and will modify all the boxes on the various highways. I went ahead and created a seperate entry for the sign images because some of them are not title consistently and I was considering using the old outline forms of signs (if I can make them) for the decommissioned routes and that wouldn't require a new template for those. See what you think, I've already used it for Missouri State Highway 43, Missouri State Highway 13, Missouri State Highway 76, and Missouri State Highway 125.Rt66lt 03:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 76 (east) and Interstate 4

Hi, Rschen. I've been out with school for a little while. It doesn't seem like the routeboxint template issue has been resolved. Let me know how I can help. >: Roby Wayne ^Talk 21:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

State name shields

I did the two you mentioned, and they seem to be working fine now. Please put all future request on the shields talk page. Thank you. --Chris 03:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

TfD notification

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 January 25#Template:Interstatedis TFD:Interstatedis and Intdis Tedernst | talk 20:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Not-with-standing Ted, I've tried to be careful in the deletion process, keeping all information and using both old and new categories, so that no information is lost.

When removing the old news from the {Project U.S. Roads} template, it was reverted within the hour by the next edit. At this point, the template reference is the primary remaining reference, showing up in all the project pages. As the template maintainer, would you kindly remove the old reference?

Also, I'm thinking about a RfC about Ted, as this is not the only place he closed categories, redirected templates, and slashed articles without following consensus procedure first. I'll let you know when I've had some time. (I have a major motion for summary disposition next Wednesday, so won't really have much time until afterwards).

--William Allen Simpson 00:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll remove the link, but the other project members need to know about the deletion. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I suggest news about using the categories:

• Category:Lists of roads sharing the same title
• Category:Lists of Interstate Highways sharing the same title

--William Allen Simpson 00:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

OMG

omg... what did people do to the ROUTBOX!?! wHY DOES IT LOOK LIKE PAIN

AND THE SHIELDS... WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT SAVE IT!!!

atanamir 09:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization debate on "state highways" etc.

Rschen, I don't particularly care about init caps. I did read some of the debate yesterday you folks have been having, and it is one of those things that I can work with either way. Sorry, but I am more interested in getting all the info in there and arriving at a standard routebox. I saw that a few states had them but not NY sdo I worked on that. First I copied the US box, then realized it was different from the other states so I made NY like the other states altho I can't say I'm completely happy with it, but just like in progamming (my profession) any standard is better than none, and we can always tweak the standards as we go along. If we can build up the route info - I was going to focus on NY - then go back and tweak them according to an accepted standard after it (hopefully) gets settled, that would be my goal. I'll add my two cents in were needed. Where is the debate about routeboxes occuring if any? --Censorwolf 14:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

{{routeboxus}}

I don't see the problem - I changed {{routeboxint}} and it was fine - now I changed {{routeboxus}} the same way and everyone's complaining. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 01:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm honestly not sure how useful junctions would be. Interstates are now the primary system, and so a lot of the U.S. Routes that would be listed in the junctions no longer exist. As for the California shields, why? There aren't any routes that are only in California, and even if there were, it's probably best to use the standard shield for uniformity. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 02:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

re: routebox

where was this discussion? I can't find anything on the on the wikiproject pages atanamir 01:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Did he not like my shield shape or something? I feel like the new ones are wayyy too long.

atanamir 03:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

CA/SR 17 titles again...

As SPUI is very honourably fighting for the article name, did we ever put an official proposed move vote up? If not, I think we should put one up. We have enough people to vote move to beat nohat I think, unless he can muster up enough of his friends to block it again.

atanamir 03:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

• Nohat isn't the only one who thinks it should stay as is, I happen to agree with him. Common usage policy overrides all others when dealing with naming articles.Gateman1997 01:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

And if you're going to be engaging in conspiracy, you'd be best advised not to do it on a public wiki. Nohat 07:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Routebox changes

Do you know if there are people working on a new route box design? If so, I could coordinate my desired changes with them Joydawg 18:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Routeboxca2. Sorry, I just discovered the WikiProject talk page, I'll post there. Joydawg 18:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Maine

I didn't use the MDOT. Since the state refers to them as Route XX I added Maine State to distinguish them from other states. However we could move them to Maine Route XX if you'd like since obviously "Route XX" can't be used as it is too general.Gateman1997 01:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• Oh you mean for the recat. They are refered to as Maine Routes on the MDOT page when I examined it or just Routes. Both with capitals.Gateman1997 01:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Breaking...

Just replied on the WPJ sub-page, before noticing your message. No worries; nothing drastic'll happen, take care of your studies, and I'm medium-certain wikipedia'll be here when you come back. (Unless agents of the Chinese government car-bomb Jimmy Wales, or some such.) Alai 07:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Stubs and project spam

The problem with including the phrase " support the Kentucky State Highway WikiProject" in stub templates is that you're implying that the WikiProject owns the pages in question. If you want to link to the WikiProject's page guidelines, fine, but don't simply link to the WikiProject. --Carnildo 08:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I-70 and 76 multiplex

I do have to ask that I-76 remain in the I-70 routebox as a multiplex or duplex, since it they do come together in Pennsylvania, as part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike for approximate 90 miles. I did not prefer the term "Shared routing with I-55", I prefer Duplexes or Multiplexes but that's fine if you want to be that defensive about it. I also know a lot about roads, and I live on the east coast and have travelled many of the roads I work on, including Interstate 70 and 76. But I do hope that we're cool. MPD01605 07:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I-75 junctions

You might want to update WP:IH to be more clear -- currently only I-80, I-90, I-40, I-10, and I-95 are included as part of the limiting to 2di junctions that end in 0 or 5. Seems rather arbitrary in any case. older ≠ wiser 23:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Milestones

Out of curiousity, how do you do the article counts? I haven't found a way to get a count of total edits, and I wondered if you did it with a lot of scripting, or some clever trick, or how. It's a neat bit of information! C.Fred 03:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Goodbye

Just wanted to let you know that I'm leaving. Please try to make the naming conventions happen. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

NJ road stub

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for clearing up those categories for my newly-created {{New-Jersey-road-stub}}! I was a little confused myself when setting all that up. Lensovet 02:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Maine State Routes cat

I suggest one of us renom it for transition to "Maine State Route System". The move was done in blatant violation of consensus.Gateman1997 08:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

US Route

I can understand why US 422 does not belong on the US Routes template; however, it is a unique case that the highway violates the AASHTO numbering. US 422 starts at King of Prussia, PA, ends in Hershey, PA, then starts again in Evansburg, PA (at least 150 miles apart) and ends in Cleveland, Ohio. I think this deserves the significance the other highways (101, 400, etc.) have.

--myselfalso 01:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. The template should say that it is primary routes, though. Is there a template for spurred highways? --myselfalso 02:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:US-blank.png listed for deletion

SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Thank you for mentioning the {{test1}} and {{test2}} tags. I hadn't been using them on IP addresses, for fear of biting the newbies with respect to them being shared addresses, but now that I see that {{sharedwelcome}} exists, I'll do that more. —C.Fred (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Route bot?

I was working on the I-95 exit list, and I saw that suddenly there were many changes. This included links of "VA Route 895.svg" and even "Philadelphia, Pennsylvania" to "Philadelphia, PennsylVirginia State Highway". Just a Heads Up that it does this and caused quite some work to fix it. Also, I prefer abbreviations- PA 450, VA 895, I-66, US 30- as opposed to the longer versions, because it keeps everything short and rid of unnecessary words. But that part's fine maybe I'm missing a guideline somewhere. Anyway, just a heads up. Also, I'd like to take this time to complain about SPUI, in Interstate 95 in Virginia, his facts are wrong regarding VA 895, which I've corrected and he's reverted, and also he had a tendency to do whatever he wants regardless of what's been decided, and what looks good to him (i.e. Exit table in I-95 in VA). This isn't my first run-in with him, the last was on the routeboxes and...that was a mess. Anyway, just my complaint. I don't mean to be a bother. But thanks for the Exit List help. --MPD01605 05:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Shield image formats

Should any new shield images created be in svg? I have noticed that most other highway systems have been converting to svg. Station Attendant 23:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:MNSH

I just saw your message updated to my User Talk. I'm relatively new at updating pages on Wikipedia.

Did you see my updates for MN-371, is that how you got my name? I'm a big road geek who lives in Central Minnesota, and would be willing to help out on the Minnesota State Highways WikiProject if you can give me more details on what I can do (since I haven't done anything involving a WikiProject before). --SpaceJunkie 05:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I see you noticed my updates to MN-371 and MN-301. Thanks for fixing them up for me. If you, or anyone else, wants me to keep working on trying to update other Minnesota highways in my area, let me know on my talk page. Thanks!

--SpaceJunkie 02:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I added the banners back to the talk pages.

--SpaceJunkie 02:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I created a page for MN-115. I'm hoping that the "Background / Improvements" format is fine for right now. I changed the MN-371 page I worked on yesterday to reflect that format as well.

One questions I have about MN-115 though, is that, excluding its western terminus in Randall, it doesn't pass through any cities. However, as I mentioned in its article, it passes by the Camp Ripley Military Reservation (just west of MN-371). Therefore, should I just leave the "Cities" portion blank? Also, I used Camp Ripley as the eastern terminus, although it's not a city (but the significant landmark in the area). If it has to be a city, then it terminates 7 miles north of Little Falls). Let me know about these things. Thanks!

--SpaceJunkie 22:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I would say that this is fine. If there are no cities on the route, then just leave it blank or put "--" or something to signify that there are no cities. Camp Ripley works for the terminus, unless it terminates at a highway junction, then I would put that. --Station Attendant 01:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)