Talk:California State Route 17

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

/Archive

Contents


[edit] Re: proposed move (June 2005)

  • Support. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:43, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • We've been through this before. Please see the above discussion. NO! Nohat 15:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Gene Nygaard 16:50, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Highway 17 is six times more popular than State Route 17 (see discussion above). Gentgeen 17:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • What proposed move? I thought this was done and over with. --Rschen7754 20:06, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
If that is true, there should have been some mention on this talk page of what was decided and what action was taken.
This is currently listed on Wikipedia:Requested moves#22 June 2005, even though the proper notice of that fact, according to the rules of that listing, does not seem to appear on this talk page, so the issue is not really properly presented yet--unless somebody improperly deleted a notice to that effect. Gene Nygaard 12:51, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. violet/riga (t) 10:57, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Naming convention

  • This is still not good. California State Highway 17 is compromise, but still too awkward. It would be much better to call it Highway 17 (California), if the local name is to be preferred. Joydawg 23:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
    • We're working on conventions, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:53, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
      • OK. That discussion has gotten a bit long winded, but it seems to be approaching a standard. Using a name like State Route 17 (California) is perfectly fine. Redirects can take care of Highway 17 or Highway 17 (California). I just see no reason for the article name to be some sort of halfway mix. Can't wait for the backlash when it's implemented though Joydawg 00:09, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
        • Yeah... well this is the only CA highway article not at "California State Route". It just looks tacky to have one that is not at the standard. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Anybody know what year the center divider went in?
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) 20:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed move (March 2006)

This is the correct name. Disambiguation is to be done with parentheses to allow for pipe trick usage. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Oppose We've been through this before. Please see the discussion in the /Archive. "Route" is just not a word that anyone but a few bureaucrats in Sacramento use to describe this highway. Nohat 05:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
    • "State Route" is the proper term, and is abbreviated "SR". --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
      • "Proper term" is not relevant to article titles. Articles are titled by their "common name", which is decidedly NOT "State Route" or "SR". Nohat 05:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
        • Articles that fall into a system should be named according to that system, not by what the local idiots decide to call it. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
          • There is no consensus support for a policy like that. If you dislike Wikipedia naming conventions, then you should make your own encyclopedia. Nohat 05:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • How very cute *rolls eyes*Gateman1997 02:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • How very cute *rolls eyes*Gateman1997 02:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
    • The "California State Route X" naming is only used by Caltrans on its Cal-NExUS pages, suggesting that whoever wrote that part of the site preferred that. Everything else on the Caltrans site uses State Route or SR without the California. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, it's the more appropriate name. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
    • May I ask in what sense it is "more appropriate"? Because it's certainly not the name that anyone who actually drives on this road other than bureaucrats uses for it. Nohat 06:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Well they're obviously talking about California State Routes though. So maybe they omit it. But who would think to type in "State Route 17 (California)"? The common internet user would not! Although if this is the only way that we do get unamity and consistency with a touch of being technically correct then I'll support it. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 06:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Speedy move to the correct title, use redirects for all other titles. — Mar. 1, '06 [06:12] <freakofnurxture|talk>
  • Oppose - it makes much more sense for this article to be named California State Route 17. - Chadbryant 06:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral, but shouldn't the move be made to California State Route 17 since all other California state routes use that format? AjaxSmack 06:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
    • That format does not fit naming and disambiguation conventions, as the route is "State Route 17", not "California State Route 17". --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
      • It may very well be "State Route 17" by legal definition, but a standard has been established by the naming of nearly every other article on Wikipedia concerning a state route/highway that said article should follow a "<State> State Route <number>" scheme. - Chadbryant 07:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
        • I disagree with that standard, as it uses incorrect disambiguation, and as such does not allow for pipe trick usage. I have moved Florida, Massachusetts, and New Jersey's articles to proper disambiguation. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
          • Meanwhile, the state route articles for forty-seven other states still maintain the "<State> State Route <number>" scheme. If anything, insisting on adding the state name in parentheses at the end of the article name will only succeed in confusing the reader performing a search. - Chadbryant 07:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I always call it Highway 17. A Google search for "State Route 17" California comes up with 536 hits, while "Highway 17" California has 103,000 hits, so the other local idiots seem to agree with me. As can be seen at Talk:Kiev, Wikipedia doesn't let governments dictate what we title articles. Gentgeen 07:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose it should be renamed California State Route 17 132.205.45.148 18:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I would support California State Route 17, but ideally it should be kept here.JohnnyBGood 23:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose either bring it in line with the rest of the state or leave it be. Do not move it to the State Route XX (CA) model.Gateman1997 02:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I agree with Gateman1997. Locally we call it Highway 17 but that's unfeasible. We should either leave it be or conform to convention. -- ProveIt (talk) 18:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. "to allow for pipe trick usage" - talking about a hair on the tail wagging the dog. -R. S. Shaw 03:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

For future reference, this road is most commonly called "Highway 17", not "Route 17" or "State Route 17":

  • Google shows a 2.5 to 1 ratio of results for "Highway 17" vs. "Route 17" and a 17 to 1 ratio for "Highway 17" vs. "State Route 17".
  • There is a published book about the road. It is called Highway 17: The Road to Santa Cruz (ISBN 0962997404).
  • There are actual state-installed signs posted on Highway 17 that say "Highway 17".
  • The government-run bus line that goes over the highway is called the "Highway 17 Express". [1].
  • Caltrans sometimes calls it "Highway 17" [2], so even they aren't consistent.
  • A Web site concerning it is called Highway17.com
  • The Bay Area traffic information line, 5-1-1, calls the road "Highway 17" when giving information about traffic. In fact, you cannot get traffic information about Highway 17 if you say "route 17" or "state route 17". You must say "highway 17" or just "17" to get information about traffic conditions on the highway.

This road is very clearly most commonly called "Highway 17". Anyone who lives in the area can tell you that. Any page move proposal that would move this page to a title which does not contain "Highway 17" would be a move in violation of one of Wikipedia's longest-standing policies concerning the naming of articles, the use common names naming convention.

Nohat 23:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Everything you've said is correct, and I would definitely agree that Highway 17 is the de facto name (it's what I use :P), for the portion in and around the Santa Cruz mountains, but to reiterate, this does not include the segment between Los Gatos and San Jose, which is usually referred to as just 17, like most other Bay Area freeways, and which has construction signs that refer to it as "Route 17". Historical portions such as the Nimitz and Richmond Bridge aren't "Highway 17". If the consensus is that is *has* to be Highway 17, then I suggest it should be Highway 17 (California). Joydawg 18:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)