User talk:Sable232/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Re: Marquis

The LTD was originally a trim for the Galaxie, too, but the LTD has its own page. The same principle applies here; even though the "Crown Victoria" was techincally a trim package, it did eventually branch out to its own model. I guess that the article should reflect that. I'll write that bit tomorrow. By the way, I like Ford/Mercury products too, especially the Sable.  :) --AndreniW 05:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

the condensed version That would be nice. You can email it to me if you want. Thanks for fixing the page. --AndreniW 22:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


Ford Ranger Page

Hey man I just wanted to thank you for the job that you are doing on that page. Glad to see that they are leaving it alone, and letting you do it aswell. I've tried to do similar in the past only to have people (names will not be mentioned) that were supposed to know better come in and undo everything. Don't let them get to your head the way they did me, that's the reason I never got anywhere on it. Like I said thank you for putting your time into it, and doing a good job. I can't speak for everyone but I really appreaciate it. Josh 03:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Aerostar

Hi, I'm just curious what was wrong with my "warning note"

to AWD aerostar owners about them jacking up their vehicle without chocks? AllanDeGroot


Wondering why you reverted my edit of ", starting" back to ". Starting"? Go look again, this leaves a sentence fragment: "However, for those requiring more traction, Ford provided." This sentence fragment is essentially meaningless. mmerlinn

I agree that the sentence should be broken up to make things more understandable. However, breaking it this way leaves the first part hanging. If you extract the noun and verb from the fragment, you have "Ford provided" which makes no sense whatsoever. The verb "provided" requires an object and there is no object. The object for "provided" in the comma delimited sentence is "Aerostar" which is further modified by the adjectives "an all-wheel drive". But once a period is inserted between the two, there is no object left for the verb "provided". If you want to break this sentence up where you reverted the period, please provide an object for that sentence, telling us WHAT Ford provided. As far as the rest of the changes that you made with this revision, those changes look excellent to me. All that is now needed is to know what Ford actually provided. mmerlinn
To the best of my knowledge one cannot use implied objects in a sentence, only implied subjects. By including the 'it' you have provided an object for the sentence which now makes sense to me. The pronoun 'it' forces me to look for an antecendant, which is 'traction' found earlier in the same sentence as you have noted. Thanks and have a good day.mmerlinn

WPMN

Welcome to Wikiproject Minnesota! FYI right now Minnesota and History of Minnesota are on their ways towards Featured status so any help would be appreciated. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 15:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:North Dakota 11.png

Thanks for uploading Image:North Dakota 11.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

North Dakota signposts

Thanks for putting up the highway shields! Just a note though - there is a long form of the North Dakota sign for 3+ digit highways. Atanamir made up some samples you could work with; see Image:North Dakota 5.svg and Image:North Dakota 180.svg. --AlexWCovington (talk) 05:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Taurus

Sorry for the length of time in the response. I feel that since the sedan was manufactured more and also manufatured long, and had more options, that it should be in the template.--Josh 20:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

North Dakota shields

Yes, but they are png files, I created svg versions, which is the prefered format. --Holderca1 20:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean they aren't showing up? They are showing up fine for me. --Holderca1 20:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
svg images scale properly and are the prefered format. See WP:USRD/S.--Holderca1 20:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

What browser are you running? --Holderca1 20:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

How do they look here? Category:North Dakota Highway shields --Holderca1 20:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Which part do you not seeing making the difference, the browser or format? Different browsers render things differently. I can clearly see a difference between png and svg, svg is crisp and clearer than the png. --Holderca1 20:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Which lines don't look right? Which numbers are out of position? Are they out of position vertically, horizontally, both? Do you have the specs for the shields? I used your png files as a guide. --Holderca1 20:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Where are the numbers suppose to be centered on? Do you have a spec guide that you are using or just from visual comparison with the real signs? --Holderca1 20:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as the image of the indian head, I used the image from your png files, where did you get your image, maybe if I used the source, it would be clearer. --Holderca1 20:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, that is an svg image, give me a minute to see if I can work something out. --Holderca1 20:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, how does this look: --Holderca1 20:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay great, I just fixed all of the ones I created, will upload here in a minute. Do you know how to create svg images? I can walk you through it if you want. It is fairly easy, not sure about png, I have never created them in png, so I can't really compare the difficulty between the two. --Holderca1 20:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I use inkscape for the svg files, you can download it for free at inkscape.org. To see the difference between png and svg, click here. It is easier to see the difference when you blow them up. --Holderca1 21:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, upload your images to the commons rather than wikipedia since they are public domain. Also, ensure that you put them in a category so that they don't get lost. --Holderca1 22:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Town Car

Hi. Ford hasn't made any press releases yet as to how long Town Car production is going to continue in Ontario. There are however sources indicating that the Corwn Victoria and Grand Marquis will be made until at least 2011. As the Town Car is still a highly profit vehicle, with the limo makers depending on it as the only body on chassis luxo sedan, it is reasonable to assume that the Town Car will now have the same "life expectancy" as the other Panther models. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 20:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:2nd-Sable-GS.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:2nd-Sable-GS.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Ford Ranger Page links

Many have tried to add another link to the page but it keeps getting removed. It is a Forum just like The Ranger Station, Ranger Power sports. I've been to all of the Pages listed and this one is just like the ones listed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Super.ford (talk • contribs) 19:23, 30 November 2006.

Ford Ranger Links

I recieved a warning for adding Ranger-Forums.com to the link when it is EXACTLY the same as the other forums you have on there. I just wanted to know how the others got there and whats wrong with Ranger-Forums?

I'll post it here too, since I expect everyone else from that forum to ask. The Ranger Station and Ranger Power Sports have tech resources, Ranger-Forums.com does not. If you disagree, see Talk:Ford Ranger and you might work something out.
Also, before someone asks, I've had two Rangers, a '94 and a '97. --Sable232 23:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Mercury Marquis

It's fine - do what you need to to make it work. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 19:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Pontiac Grand AM → Pontiac Grand Am

It's been about a week, and I will close this debate in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, unless you can decide for the results yourself. What do you think? --Gh87 22:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Postwar North American automobile templates

First of all, thanks for creating those timelines! It really takes such a long effort, and Wikipedia needed them.

Secondly, we need some tiemline naming standards. I invite you to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Templates. Thank you! -- NaBUru38 01:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hideous Ford Ranger page

Nonsense. None of the sections "line up", resulting in a page that violates the manual of style for readability. To be more specific, sections below the "North American Ranger" section heading do not align with the tables; on my FF2 browser, there are very large gaps that when viewed, can give the effect of an empty content page. If you wish to implement other measures, you should tabalise the page. Leave the imagestackleft in for the very least since the current images were breaking page layout and were haphazardly placed. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:MOS under "Legibility" was what I was referring to. The problems with the old versions stem from the "attach heading to the template" method which wasn't giving optimum results. I think this is a larger issue since I've seen this in other pages, where I would see "First Generation" then a huge blank for about 30 to 40 returns before starting "Second Generation." That gives the impression to the reader that there isn't enough content or there is no content after "First Generation." I'll try to see if there is a workaround this - perhaps a table for the entire page might achieve better results? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 23:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Masts

In response to you comments on AfD:

  • FYI, I tried speedying a bunch of towers a week or so ago, but an admin accused me of vandalism and reverted. So I'm working through AfD, and continuing up the the tower heights until consensus says to stop. Ohconfucius 02:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Automobiles Notification

Hi Sable232, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.

To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting {{Wiki Auto Project}} where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add [[Category:WikiProject Automobiles members|Sable232]] to your userpage.

If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086Talk | Contribs 04:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Chevrolet

If you had checked the history more thoroughly, you would have found that I'm not the one who vandalized it. 24.13.203.76 20:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I see what you mean. It wasn't me, but I see where you're coming from. Must have been a glitch somehow. If you see the earlier edits, you see that someone removed history, then someone fixed it, and then something happened to it again when I edited another section. 24.13.203.76 20:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Am I Just Copying You?

I'm beginning to delink the years now, as one good part of Wikipedia. I'm tryna copycat you now, and when IFCAR gets new images, I edit for him (before or after he puts an image), and I LIKE to delink years now! -- Bull-Doser 02:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Honda Accord

You didn't violate anything, but you did revert a bunch of edits I made on the specifications. Most notably was removing all of the non-breaking spaces used with the units. Those need to be there. Roguegeek (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's really always a good idea to use non-breaking spaces on units simply because we can't predict what changes will happen with the template in the future. I believe the style manual says to always use them no matter what. Roguegeek (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Minnesota Highways - Shield images PNG to SVG

Are you still working on the MN highway shields? If so, what format are you currently working with? I see the ones on the articles are PNG format, and WP:USRD calls for them to be SVG format as the infoboxes and related items will only work with them in that fashion (per WP:USRD/S). If you could give a heads up on this since I would like to help out that would be appreciated. Thanks. • master_sonLets talk 02:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

If you take a look at your MN218 article

I updated the infobox if that is ok. I am putting the old one into TFD

Everything is set exactly the same as the old one. made the conversion easy• master_sonLets talk 05:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I should have that article completely finished soon. Thanks for taking care of those links on the new template too. Just curious, but why did the routebox need to be changed? --Sable232 05:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Per WP:USRD all of the infoboxes need to be consistent with the standards that are being put in place. The standards are being developed and as they are added they can be referenced at WP:USRD/INNA. It didn't affect too much - the new box has everything the old box had. but now it's a bit more flexible and more stuff can be added. see {{infobox road}} for information on what is available It has a whole bunch of subtemplates that are used in other applications (browse boxes) and it can be tailored to use Interstate and U.S. Routes for intrastate routes. (warning: its documentation is pretty outdated at the moment.) Yeah I'm rambling, hope this answers the question. • master_sonLets talk 06:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:MNroutebox

Template:MNroutebox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --• master_sonLets talk 05:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Needed

Hi Sable232, can you please clean up the Ford Thunderbird page? - Bull-Doser 16:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

After 1600 high quality edits

You deserve a...

The Automotive Barnstar
I, Signaturebrendel hereby award you the Automotive Barnstar for your continuous efforts to improve car related articles, especially those pertaining to American cars, here on Wikipedia. Your commitment to providing Wikipedia's readers with the information they seek truly deserves recognition. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 20:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ford Five Hundred spam, I think not

This is important information relating to confusion about what spam is.

Recently you have deleted a "list of options" which was in the Market section of the Ford Five Hundred article because you thought it was advertising. My intentions were not to advertise but to inform what options and features the car was available with. I got the idea from an article (which at the moment is a good article and is trying to become a featured article) called Holden VE Commodore in the relevant section there is a link which takes you to a page could Specification levels of the Holden VE Commodore. I wanted to make a page similar to this but with the Ford Five Hundred information instead of the Holden VE Commodore information. In conclusion, I will not add the info that you took out but I want you to see that my intentions and ideas were good. If you want to contact me about this message go to my talk page. I wish you well in the future, sorry for any confusion about this issue. SenatorsTalk | Contribs 02:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I have read the message you left on my talk page. SenatorsTalk | Contribs 06:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Please Expand The Buick Electra Page!

Hard enough to know that, but I just recently added infoboxes to the Buick Electra page. Can you please expand it like the Ford Thunderbird page? -- Bull-Doser 22:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Ford Five Hundred question

The answer to the qeustion you left on my talk page is as foilows It's what the automated program does, in otherwords it cleans the infobox up so the wikipedia severs can indentify it more easliy.SenatorsTalk | Contribs 08:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Request

Can you please do a cleanup on the Toyota Celica page? -- Bull-Doser 16:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Fixing Engines & Transmissions To Various Pages I Edited

Hi Sable232, can you please fix the engines & transmissions to the Pontiac Firebird, Chevrolet K5 Blazer and Oldsmobile Toronado pages (all those pages on which I've added infoboxes on)? -- Bull-Doser 04:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Crown Victoria image caption

How can you tell that the car is 1992 LX? IFCAR 00:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


Two individual handbrakes

You wrote that you have two individual handbrakes. That's what I'm particularly interested in. Which car are you using? You can lock only one wheel in a turn, which is loaded, leaving the second (inside) unloaded wheel connected to the engine. This is a great benefit, since you don't have do disconnect the transmission to produce handbrake oversteer. On AWD with permanently locked front-to-rear axles (no interaxle differential) you can apply the handbrake to a rear wheel without locking a front wheel. --Maxim Masiutin 19:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. ViridaeTalk 23:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

So removing misinformation is now against the rules? Thanks for the heads-up. --Sable232 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Repeatedly removing it is a violation of 3rr. I have blocked you for 24 hours. ViridaeTalk 02:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

ViridaeTalk 02:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Bull-Doser here. With Sable232 being blocked temporarily, I will probably be cleaning up most pages. -- Bull-Doser 05:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks BD. Could you keep an eye out on Mercury (automobile) for me? --Sable232 05:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

As the blocking admin I cannot review the block, however what I saw was a content dispue, not vandalism, hence why it was removed from WP:AIV and hence why you have been blocked for 3RR. If you don't think the information is correct, reference the information you provide. As it was neither version was referenced there appears to have been no attempt to discuss the matter and stop reverting each others changes. You made many many more than 3 reverts before I even saw the article and gave you the 3rr warning, that you continued afterwards made your block well and truly warranted. If even just for edit warring. ViridaeTalk 06:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I have notified other admins of your unblock request here, so that is dealt with quickly. I have also asked for a review of the block and events surrounding it so you can have other opinions. ViridaeTalk 06:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the trouble here is that you got into a revert war and wouldn't stop even when you were warned. No matter how much you may think you were right and that you were editing out vandalism or just mistaken edits, or whatever, you can't just ignore warnings. I'm sorry to see a user with a clean block record have it marred, but there's no necessity that you either revert war or let someone "run rampant". That's the wrong attitude to take in a situation like this.
Note that there is no way for an admin who is not expert to tell who is right with something like this. We can't just take your word for it that what looks like a dispute about content is actually disguised vandalism, and I still have no way to know that ... though I do see that you're a well-established good-faith editor. Calling it vandalism doesn't help - that just makes you look uncivil - unless it's pretty clear to an objective but non-expert observer that that's what it is. And that is just not the case; I have no way at the moment of knowing who is right or whether the other user was acting in good faith. I'm convinced you were, but we're supposed to assume he was, too, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary.
As a bit of leniency, I'm going to shorten both blocks to run for 3 hours from now - it's already been some hours. Use the time to work out how to demonstrate that your position was correct and can be sourced - assuming that's the case. The place to do that is on the talk page for the article. If you want other suggestions as to what you could have done, and how Viridae might have been able to help you, we can discuss that later. Metamagician3000 13:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I shouldn't be assuming that the information is clear to everyone else and it would be my word against his/hers. Either way, I'll put my reasoning on the talk page and get input from the WikiProject if need be, and be more clear about things in the future.
And Viridae, sorry I overreacted. You are just doing your job. --Sable232 16:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
No problem, I am glad this has been worked out and I hope you sort the article problem out. ViridaeTalk 20:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My IP is autoblocked, what do I do?

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 131.212.159.34 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: 210physicq (c) 20:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

User: Essjay has blocked the user and isp in question. the admins are now aware of the situation and if anything further happens they can be notified. Hope this is the last we have to deal with this fool. Thanks for the support. --Tainter 15:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Hi. I just received a message from you about vandalism, but I haven't made a single edit to a wiki page for months (and only then it's within a very limited subject pool). I don't think I've even ever *viewed* an auto page ... I signed up just now to find out where this came from. Thanks. User:Winterglaive

WP:USRD Newsletter Issue 1

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 1 10 February 2007 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project News Notability of state highways is challenged
Important deletion debates
Featured subproject
Featured member
From the editor
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/N
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.  V60 VTalk · VDemolitions 20:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Ford taurus edit

".....However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Ford Taurus, are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. --Sable232 01:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)"

The edit I made was on the Ford Taurus page on the right sidebar. The line in question states "Production: 1986-Present" I changed it to "Production: 1986-2006" The Ford Taurus is no longer being produced correct?

TfD nomination of Template:Mnclink

Template:Mnclink has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --• master_sonLets talk 18:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Mnclist

Template:Mnclist has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --• master_sonLets talk 18:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 2

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 2 24 February 2007 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project News Notability of state highways is upheld
Deletion debates Kansas Turnpike is now a Good Article
Featured subproject U.S. Roads IRC channel created
Featured member Infoboxes and Navigation subproject started
From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Minnesota state highways

A question regarding...

You reverted an edit on 7 Jan 2007 that took U.S. and Interstate highways out of the article on the basis of this being a state highways page, I can see the justification in your actions, however I would like to make a proposal.

Seeing that based on Riner's page I can see Interstates and U.S. Routes have been included in some way within the state highway system with few duplications (MN 169 and MN 61 are two exceptions I know of). The list I speak of may have been improperly named. I really should have been named "List of Minnesota numbered highways." I also propose re-adding the US and Interstate lists, but instead putting them after the current list of state routes (which will remain as-is) as their own sublists. (See List of South Dakota numbered highways for an example of such.

The list also contains an infobox describing the naming conventions and info about the state routes. and a small article like discussion of the highway schema.

An alternative would be a list for each type. This IMHO is not feasible since there are not enough interstates to justify its own list for Minnesota. see List of numbered highways in New York for such an example

Please inquire on what is the best approach to this - for the record I agree with your reversion as mixing the I/US highways in with the state highways is not the right way to implement the list

Thanks in advance • master_sonLets talk 04:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You wrote:
I suppose including the U.S. and Interstate routes at the bottom of the list would be okay. Actually, it seems like a good idea now. But I'm not sure I like having the U.S. and Interstates in the routebox navigation bar. It says "Minnesota State Highways" directly above that, so it looks strange to have a U.S. route pop up there, especially since there are some cases where the routes numbers are duplicated.

Unfortunately the standards for WP:USRD/INNA include US and interstate routes in the browse and supercede any set by state WPs. You can suggest such if you feel otherwise as we're trying to make something uniform to all 50 states. • master_sonLets talk 20:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You wrote:
Also, on some of the routes that were renumbered to another highway in their entirety, I have redirected and tried to make note of the old route in the new route's article.

cool • master_sonLets talk 20:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You wrote:
There are a few svg images that still need to be made. I thought I had gone through and put every state highway ever in use on that list long ago, but I guess I didn't. Anything with a blank new-style shield next to it on the list needs a svg. However, there are cases where there are two (or three!) decommissioned routes on one number. For example, Highway 17 had three different routes, all used in different eras and therefore different shields. On Highway 116, I used the old shield because the later route was a temporary designation. Let me know what you think about this.

I don't see a problem with it. however since many items such as the standard infobox and the browse templates are automated - and uniform I believe that the modern shields should be used in these sections - along with the list. The older shields I see as fine on the article itself - preferrably in a gallery. • master_sonLets talk 20:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You wrote:
One last thing: Would you say the MN-218 article I have been working on in userspace is an acceptable article? I don't want to stick that out there if there's a chance it will attract more deletion debates. --Sable232 18:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Outside of removing the shields from the article proper and trimming the major cities in the routebox to 10 cities and population > 2000. I've seen articles that have towns of as little as 16 people in the major cities section of the routebox and thought to myself "that's a major city?"
Also citations need to be done by footnote per WP:MOS using <ref></ref> tags. then put {{Reflist}} in the references section • master_sonLets talk 20:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Say-bull

I am with you. I don't like them reading like lists, so I reverted. If he puts them back, I will kindly ask for cease-and-decist. Karrmann 21:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Automobiles

Thanks for helping fix the various importances / classes of the automotive talk pages I tagged. I was taking a best guess and didn't want to overestimate. Thx — MrDolomite • Talk 17:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Aha, didn't know about the caps part. Thanks for the note, I'll be sure get it right from here on out. — MrDolomite • Talk 17:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Pautlorius: hey.

What can I do if i want to use these images?

thanks. thatll be fun, except im in canada and all we get is ford-lincoln. get good ones ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pautlorius (talk • contribs) 02:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

station wagons

okay, they're back. don't forget to put them back in the articles! —Angr 20:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 3 10 March 2007 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project news Inactivity?
Deletion debates Article Improvement Drive
Featured subproject Good and Featured Articles
Featured member
From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Active user verification

Hello, Sable232. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks.  V60 VTalk · VDemolitions 20:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)