Talk:Interstate 290 (Illinois)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interstate 290 (Illinois) has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

	This article is part of the U.S. Interstate Highway WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Interstate Highway System in the US. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
	This article needs a map. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add assessment comments)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

This article was the selected article of the U.S. Roads Portal in March 2007.

Shouldn't Category:Interstate highways in Illinois be on this one? Sure, it's not an interstate number, but Interstate 290 (Illinois) now redirects here, and there's a I-290 sign displayed on the page... seems enough an Interstate for Wikipedia. Gws57 July 1, 2005 13:59 (UTC)

It was added when I merged Interstate 290 (Illinois) with this. -- BMIComp (talk) 1 July 2005 18:00 (UTC)

Hmm. I wrote the article thinking they would be separate, but I guess it makes sense to merge them... the question is, should the name of the article be Interstate 290 (Illinois) or Eisenhower Expressway? The former is standard throughout Wikipedia, the latter is descriptive of the former. --Rob 16:21, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Please use Interstate 290 (Illinois) for consistency and per the WP. Thanks! --Rschen7754 00:46, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Needs a template 2 1972? 3 Post Office 4 Interchange diagrams 5 Reassessment request 6 The lingo section

[edit] Needs a template

A summary box for 3DIs would be good at this point.

I'm thinking...

Interstate 290
State	Illinois
Date of Construction	1957
Length	30 miles
Western Terminus	Schaumburg
Eastern Terminus	Chicago

Can anyone with an exit guide fill in the # of exits westbound and eastbound? Thanks. ---Rob 16:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Changed my mind... number of exits is hard to determine and not really of any value. --Rob 08:48, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 1972?

I think this article needs to be sourced a little better. I specifically remember I-90 shields on the Ike up until at least 1979 or 1980. I'm not sure where the 1972 date (for the switchover to I-290) is coming from, and I'd like to be able to check up on that. Gws57 14:42, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

I've seen a host of ideas. From Rich's good page...

I-290 is the Eisenhower Expressway, from I-90 downtown Chicago to I-90 at Schaumburg (Woodfield), about 32 miles. West of the Tri-State it is commonly known as the "Extension" This route was once I-90 from the Loop to I-294, and was renumbered I-290 after it was extended to Schaumburg.

The Ike was built from 1955 thru 1960 and extended to the NW Tollway by 1972.

From Kurumi's page...

29.84 miles, Eisenhower Expressway. Starts at I-90/94 (Dan Ryan Expwy) in downtown Chicago; west to where I-88 meets I-294; then northwest to I-90 again in Rolling Meadows. IL 53 continues north as a freeway to Lake Cook Road in Long Grove.

The Eisenhower Expressway portion (east of I-294) was the first major route of the 1940 Comprehensive Superhighway System of Chicago. Construction began in late 1949, and the first section opened to traffic on December 15, 1955. The rest opened on August 10, 1956. On January 10, 1964, the road was renamed from the Congress Street Expressway to the Eisenhower Expressway.

The outer freeway (west of I-294) was done in the early 1970s. However, I-290 was marked as part of I-90 until about 1979.

I don't know where the previous 1978 came from. I remember seeing it somewhere... probably the other Illinois Highways page that's floating around the net that I'd have to google for. I will add the sources. Thanks! --Rob 15:19, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Re: US-20 multiplex -- Duh. Sorry about that! Gws57 14:44, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Post Office

The Post Office building in the article is now being redevoloped for commercial purposes, as the USPS moved all operations to a new building further south. Should the article mention this? Mrschimpf 09:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

If anything, the Post Office should be wikilinked to something, if availible. But since this is not that building's article, there's no reason to discuss it's redevelopment here. The building is only relevant because it's a landmark still referred to in traffic reports as "The Post Office". So I think I'd argue no, it doesn't need to mention it. Gws57 14:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Interchange diagrams

Trying to explain in words how interchanges 0, 7, 13 and 15 work is nearly impossible. Does anyone who likes doing diagrams want to do some for the table? —Rob (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reassessment request

Not sure why a reassessment was requested...B-class is about as high as an article can go without going through a peer review/GA evaluation. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 16:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was A, depending on whether or not GA process is still a mess. I've also sent it through peer review, though - probably the first of more than one. —Rob (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The GA-A-FA hierarchy is tricky, probably because of the way they're ordered in the chart. If A was listed below GA, then I'd give the green light for this article to be moved to A-class in a heartbeat. However, upon looking at the quality scale, I don't feel that the article is "At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status" (A-class criteria), as some of the lingo section appears to be unreferenced. Everything else looks pretty good; although I would rewrite some of the route description paragraphs so that they don't start with "The" or "This section" and so that they don't appear to be repetitive in structure. The lead could also be expanded some, and hopefully the MTF will get a map for this pretty soon. This is definitely a high B-class article, and could easily be A if the above concerns are met. Hope that helps, and hope that the peer review comes up with more ideas. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 16:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The lingo section

Thanks a lot for the clarification in the lingo section. It's a really good thing you put it in there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paul the map guy (talk • contribs) 18:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC).