User talk:Imzadi1979/Archive 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
← Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 → |
Image:Connector plate.svg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Connector plate.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why do you want this deleted? It is used in about 10 articles. Could you please reply at the IFD? Thank you. MECU≈talk 16:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:M-103.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:M-103.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 08:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I also listed dozens of similar old GIF shields at the IFD. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 10:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Images etc. on interstates
Thanks for the info.
Lpanelrob already wrote me, including:
- Yeah, there's a link to current standards. WP:USRD/MOS. They change a lot, but not enough to merit too much concern. —Rob (talk) 21:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
In any event, I don't care about interstates and roads, and recognize that there are people who have specialized in that. This is not one of my areas of primary interest.
Best regards.
You won't have 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC) Stan to kick around anymore.
Mid-Michigan and West Michigan
Dear Road warrior:
The sections on highways and roads in those two articles don't list anywhere near all the major roads. Maybe you have someone who is a specialist in those areas that can help out?
Thanks 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
M-25 in the Thumb
Lpanelrob:
A controversy has come up about one of the endpoints on M-25 (Marysville or Port Huron). Any assistance you can render would be appreciated. Thanks7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
Muskegon, Michigan and Muskegon County, Michigan
I didn't know how to do County road signs. This is a new one on me. Can you help? Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- Thanks for doing Muskegon. Don't forget Muskegon County, Michigan, because that's the one that has the county signs. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
Ludington
Thanks for following me around. I run across forms of roads that I've never tried to "sign" before, and then I just wind up making it up (I always try to remember a prior example, but sometimes there hasn't been one.) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
County Road signs
I put in F-41 F-41 in Alcona County, Michigan, and a similar set up in Iosco County, Michigan. Part of what I love is that when you click the image, you get the sign. Awesome! And F-41 is actually a really important road in those parts. Now I've got a new tool in my bag o' tricks 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- I put in F-30 in Alcona County, Michigan, and I'm getting red on the link. I don't know why. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
Lodge Freeway question
Thank you for all the work you have done on the Michigan Highways articles. I came across one of your edits that I don't understand: On March 29, 2007, you added the following sentence to the Lodge Freeway article: "US 12 ran along the long from the Edsel Ford Freeway (now I-94) into downtown Detroit." I'm not sure what you meant by "along the long". Can you please clarify or correct this?Thomprod (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
U.S. Roads Newsletter, Issue 1
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
Volume 2, Issue 1 • January 19, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —Mitch32contribs 20:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Jackson, Michigan and Kalamazoo, Michiganand Paw Paw, Michigan
Please help with the road signs there. The state road signs didn't work, even though I put in the 'magic words.' Thanks.7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- On Paw Paw, there are some roads on the map that look kind of important. I thought maybe they were county roads, but I'm not sure.
- I put them in as state roads, which was plainly unsuccessful. Are these "A=series" roads? Those would be 358, 653 and 665, based on my reading of the map.7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- The roads in Paw Paw would be Van Buren County Roads. They aren't part of the County-Designated Highway program so they don't have pages. The CDH roads are special county roads in participating counties. The state assigns a single number to them that remains the same across county lines, and these numbers are part of the grid system with the letter and number used. I just removed those links from the page and cleaned up the other links. You missed a "." before the svg on a few (which I've done myself) so the Jackson graphics were easy to fix. Keep up the good work and feel free to keep asking me questions! --Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Those were very were very weird numbers in Paw Paw/Van Buren County. Because of the paucity of roads they are actually relatively important connectors. You don't think we should indicate them somehow?7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- That's up to you, but ther'e just Van Buren County Roads, CR 358, etc. --Imzadi1979 (talk) 17:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Those were very were very weird numbers in Paw Paw/Van Buren County. Because of the paucity of roads they are actually relatively important connectors. You don't think we should indicate them somehow?7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
- The roads in Paw Paw would be Van Buren County Roads. They aren't part of the County-Designated Highway program so they don't have pages. The CDH roads are special county roads in participating counties. The state assigns a single number to them that remains the same across county lines, and these numbers are part of the grid system with the letter and number used. I just removed those links from the page and cleaned up the other links. You missed a "." before the svg on a few (which I've done myself) so the Jackson graphics were easy to fix. Keep up the good work and feel free to keep asking me questions! --Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Flint/Tri-Cities
We did a bunch of importation of materials from the Northern Michigan article, but it could use and edit for this particular article. Also, I-475 and I-675 are not specific to the cities where they actually are. HELP. Thanks. Flint/Tri-Cities Corrected link. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Stan
Thanks for making the Sheild
It's up on the exit list for U.S. Route 163 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davemeistermoab (talk • contribs) 05:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 2
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
Volume 2, Issue 2 • 17 February 2008 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —O bot (t • c) 03:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar!
I, Scott5114, do hereby award Imzadi1979 the Tireless Contributor's Barnstar for the huge amount of work that went into propelling the Michigan highway project into uncharted levels of quality. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 05:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
M-209 (Michigan highway)
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Same to you.... =-) Yes I know, I promised you a review.Davemeistermoab (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments on M-102
Imzadi, You had asked me to look over M-102. Here are my observations:
- Be consistent, you have both "8 Mile Road" and "Eight Mile Road" used in the article.
- The article is light on sources. For the Route description I would advise to cite a road atlas. For the history section, I'd at a minimum provide a link to the US census figures cited.
- The Urban Renewal section is interesting, but needs sources.
I would not worry about "Cultural Impact" being a level 1 heading. IMO the article structure on WP:USRD should be a guideline not a procrustean rule.Davemeistermoab (talk) 06:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
well done
--Victuallers (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: M-28 GA
Upon first reading, boredom doesn't strike me as a unique quality for a road. Neither source identifies the road as "infamous" (although to be fair, both sources also qualify as reliable sources in my book, in spite of the fact MEDC doesn't say how they determined it was Michigan's most boring road either. If it's boring because it's flat and straight, I've got hundreds of miles of state roads in Illinois surrounded by corn as opposed to trees to point out. :-p If, on the other hand, it's boring because other roads are curvy, hilly, or otherwise... that might make for a good mention. "Mind-numbingly monotonous" would be a good start in the article. —Rob (talk) 02:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I eliminated some repetition in the section... let me know what you think. —Rob (talk) 04:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you regarding M-6
If you see anything you want to recommend to me about improving my techniques, please let me know. I was unaware of the guideline, so thanks for setting me straight. I highly enjoy driving Michigan highways. Their designs are some of the oldest and newest in country, with a huge variety in between. Signage in Michigan is also very consistent and readable and presents great photo opportunities. I hope my personal photos for the Michigan highways can stay! Feel free to edit the headings under the photos to your desire.
Retaildesigner (talk) 14:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 3
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
Volume 2, Issue 3 • 22 March 2008 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —О бот (т • ц) 21:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Trunklines
I replied to you on my talk page. older ≠ wiser 12:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
M-63
I am about to reply to you on my Talk page. Mapsax (talk) 18:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
WP:USRD/A/S
You may not have noticed that the note at the top of the page had changed. There's really no need to update the page constantly, especially if people are in the business of updating only their own states. Updating the entire page all at once once a week makes it slightly more accurate in the sense that it may not be quite as up-to-date, but it ensures that it will be more accurate in the sense that all the states will be equally up-to-date. If people need perfectly up-to-date numbers, they can look at the individual state pages, such as the one you just updated Michigan from.
I'm not in the business of reverting. I just think it's minorly inappropriate that the top of the page says it was last updated at such-and-such time – ph, but certain states may have been updated more recently than that. -- Kéiryn talk 00:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
DYK for H-58 (Michigan county highway)
--BencherliteTalk 10:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Template:Michigan I-196 business connections
I was categorizing Michigan-related templates and came across a few that you have created such as Template:Michigan I-196 business connections, Template:Michigan I-69 business connections, Template:Michigan I-75 business connections, and Template:Michigan I-96 business connections. These appear not to be in use. Were you planning on using them? If not, can they be deleted? older ≠ wiser 13:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- they were in use but the pages that used them have all been merged together. They should go now. Imzadi1979 (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Leaderboard
The leaderboard was just updated on Friday, so no, they do not need to be updated again. Except for the fact that now certain states are now more up-to-date than others -- which is exactly what we're trying to avoid with having one person do it once a week. So you know, thanks for doing that again, even though I've asked you not to twice. -- Kéiryn talk 04:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
History of I-275
Thank you for cleaning up my attempt to change the History section into prose. I am relatively new at editing, but I knew I should include some links and references. You made it much better. Thomprod (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: M-35 ACR
Not a problem. We just both happened to be in bad places with our wikistress at the same time, and it turned into a bad combination. Oh well, it happens sometimes. -- Kéiryn talk 00:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: GA reviews and roads
Oh. I thought sources would be needed for every part of the article. In any case, we'll wait and see what the consensus is at WT:GAN. D.M.N. (talk) 17:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: Passed NY 308
Thanks a million for the review! Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter, Issue 4
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
Volume 2, Issue 4 • 30 April 2008 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the Barnstar, and your help in getting I-70 in UT to featured status.Dave (talk) 05:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Talk:M-35 (Michigan highway)
Impatient much? I was working on finishing updating the banners; it just took me forever and a day cuz I couldn't remember the correct link for the ACR. :-P
Just teasing of course. My sincerest congratulations on finally getting through the review. -- Kéiryn talk 21:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
|
||
Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
|
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Rush Street FAC
Please keep an open mind to the new plethora of images. Please reconsider your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Did you have any reply to my comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rush Street (Chicago). Are there particular images that you don't think help the reader?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- The template was created last month at my request for use in Trump International Hotel & Tower (Chicago), Jesse Jackson, Jr. and a few other articles. It is not well-known/widely-accepted. I have dozens of other photos related to this street that I would include if the article had more text. The real question is are there images that you think the reader would be better without. I understand that you might not need to see the start of Rush Street both from across the river and from down the river or that you might not need to see a diagonal intersecton from a distance and its park close up, but if there is no text squeezing is there a reason not to.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- I guess the other question is whether such images make the article higher quality.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- How do you think it looks in those other articles and at Prairie Avenue?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- I just figured out how to use the Library of Congress search engines to access the Chicago Daily News image collection this month. So I just started adding things to Prairie Avenue. I do not claim that {{multiple image}} is ratified by its presence in the article. I just suddenly had a lot of photos that I thought were worthy of inclusion in the article. Note that {{triple image}} was in the article before WP:FAC2. In fact, it was one of the big differences between FAC1 and FAC2, IMO. I think most people see the value of triple image. The question is whether a fourth and fifth image add or detract from an article, especially in places where there is no other way to squeeze the extra images in. Mulitple image also has more sophisticated layout parameters that can incorporate individual image captions, plus template header and footer. I think it is better. I also view at 1680x1050. Five wide may be a problem for some readers. 1024x768 and 1280x1024 are the most common resolutions so others may see squeezing where I do not. If squeezing is not an issue, I don't see that five wide should be a problem. If Trump International Hotel & Tower (Chicago) passes GAC it will come to FAC and we will get some more opinions. I hope you saw my not on another topic below.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- How do you think it looks in those other articles and at Prairie Avenue?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
WP:LOTM
Also, since I have you engaged, this month the voting is sparse at my experiment WP:LOTM. Would you consider voting at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200806.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- As far as suggestions on your article goes, I will look some more tonight or tomorrow.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- Lists aren't my thing, sorry. I've declined so far to comment on USRD-related FLCs since my emphasis is on prose/articles, not lists. Imzadi1979 (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Washington infoboxes
Please see my admittedly brief reply at Talk:Washington State Route 531. The infobox used there is very much standard. It is used by every non-primary Washington state route article, and is simply a version of {{infobox road}} tailored to handle WA's numbering system and the law link. -- Kéiryn talk 02:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
USRD participants list
As discussed at WT:USRD, the participants list at WP:USRD is being split by state. Due to any of the following factors- your extended participation in WT:USRD discussions, your IRC participation, or your extended participation in Shields or Maps, I have guessed that you are a nationwide editor and have designated you as such in the USRD partiicpants table. This is part of the lengthy process. If this is in error, please let me know immediately. This is especially likely with this group as I have to guess whether you are a national or a state editor. Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 22:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
M-35 (Michigan highway)
Yes, I took a quick look and made three small proofing changes, and I'll try to get to it more seriously this evening. Finetooth (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Done with everything that I could see. I made quite a few prose-flow changes in the Henry Ford section and minor changes here and there in other places. I'm no expert on highways or on Michigan, so it's possible that I missed things involving geographical details or special highway terms. For example, I had never run into "concurrent" as a highway word before, and I was glad to see it wikilinked. "Cosigning" also stopped me, and I couldn't find anything to link to that would explain it. I attempted a clarification of my own, but you might see a better way. Good luck with the continuing FAC. I found the Henry Ford stuff to be really interesting, by the way. Finetooth (talk) 19:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
-
Yes, congrats on the barnstar. However, I've reverted your addition to the Henry Ford article. One paragraph and a link to the M35 article is sufficient. six paragraphs is entirely too much. ThuranX (talk) 04:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Congrats
The First FA Barnstar | ||
Congrats on your first WP:Featured Article, Woot!!!Dave (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC) |
If it is your first you will need one of these:
This user helped promote the article M-35 (Michigan highway) to featured article status. |
--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
I, Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone, officially award Imzadi1979 the original barnstar for working endlessly on M-35 (Michigan highway) which promoted it to FA status. Congrats! Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC) |
Rush Street
Please come assess the new image arrangement.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- I added the photo back to the infobox in a new place. Does it look O.K.? I don't know if you noticed I have been adding text to improve the text/photo ratio. Am I pushing you over the fence?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Deleted articles in userspace
Hi, Imzadi. Regarding this edit, could you point me to the policy that states deleted content should be removed from userspace? Powers T 23:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: Cite map
I know, which is why I set it up that way. It follows the scheme used by most of the other Citation systems...if author and year is not available, title comes first. As far as I can recall, Cite map (originally) and Cite press release are the only ones that use publisher first. This seems highly irregular. Except for the year issue, I based the new scheme on the suggested citation format here and on various other suggested map schemes, which all seem to agree with each other. However, I melded those with the formats typically seen on-wiki...after all, we use neither strict MLA or APA formats on wiki, just a blend of everything. Now, I'm not trying to simply defend the changes, just stating my rationale for changing. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- Replied on Template talk:Cite map. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 01:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
5/29 DYK
--Bedford Pray 00:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
|
||
Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
|
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
M-28 (Michigan highway) Copyedit
Sorry I only had the chance to do one minor copyedit, hope it was useful. Do you mind if I return and copyedit the rest of this? Just so you know, the prose is pretty good already, so well done. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)