Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York State routes/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

Capitalization

I disagree with the capitalization of "New York State route" here. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Understood, however it is proper English. I know you would prefer to capitalize every word in the title like a song name or book title but whereas that is proper for titles, that would be improper for this entry, just like the lists and categories. --Censorwolf 16:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
A New York State Route, however, is part of a specific highway system, which is a specific classification. Therefore, capitalization is needed. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Stubs

Don't we already have {{NewYork-State-Highway-stub}}? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes this is a proposal to standardize the name in accordance with the project. --Censorwolf 17:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Then take it to WP:SFD or move the stub template but don't have 2 stub templates for NY State Routes. It's just an excuse for the SFD people to delete both. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

the frigging california routebox

oh my god, this thing is back to haunt me again, and this time right here in my home state. I propose cutbacks, similar to those that happened to {{routeboxint}}, but obviously not the same, since these roads are different --Chris 01:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

New York State Highway 17's is a bit long, I will say that. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes. There is no need for every single other NY highway it intersects. On the other hand, you got some like 132 which should definetely list all of them (US 6; Old Yorktown Road merge (this is debatable); Taconic Pkwy; and US202/NY35). I also noticed that my removal of cities/towns might have fucked over 17 a bit, since they are listing exit #s, but those should probably be switched to towns anyway. I'll admit that NY 17 is an extreme (is it the longest?) though. Very few (if any) other routes with signed numbers have exit numbers. (unless they are Interstates, which 17 almost is) --Chris 01:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Let's have the naming conventions be dependent on Wikipedia:Naming conventions/Numbered highways. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

It's only proposed, and therefore I think it's best to keep them as-is for now. And thanks for pointing that out to me. My biggest problem with it is that it has stuff out of order. It is first and foremostly a NY highway, not a highway with a certian number. No I'm not suggesting that we do stuff like "New York Interstate 895". That's because 895 is more an Interstate highway than it is a highway in New York. But NY 132 is the 132nd highway in the NYS highway system. In addition, the "Route 132 (New York)" form is not necessarily disambiguation. Suppose they make some route called 987654321. It's highly unlikely that this exists anywhere else in the world. Should this be called "Route 987654321 (New York)"? No, because it makes it look like a disambiguation when it isn't. What about "Route 987654321"? No, because that is missing the essential part that no, this isn't just some road with a number, it's part of the NY highway system. Anyway, this isn't the place. I guess I'll bring this up over there. --Chris 03:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Naming conventions in Wikipedia:Naming conventions/Numbered highways will have to be state dependent.
  1. The problem with keeping the current "State highway..." for NY is that this is not an official name and they are not referred to (outside of the WP articles) as "highways". In NY, the DOT refers to them mainly as "Route" (although they refer to the system as DOT highways so they are not consistent), published maps refer to them as "Route", and they are locally referred to as "Route". Calling them "New York State Highway N" doesn't make sense from this perspective. "Route 17" is how it is named by the DOT and referred to in NY, not "New York State Highway 17". (You would need to tell someone you are actually refering to "Route 17" in order to alter the strange look they would have on their face after you said that mouthful).
  2. As far as the hypothetical non-disambiguation you refer to, this is possibly true in some cases, so if there is only one "Route 17" in the world, then there is no need for "(New York)" to be part of the article name. In most cases I believe the disambiguation will be needed.
  3. I would NOT suggest we change the Interstate articles as that is beyond the scope of this project and they are known as "Interstates".
I think the articles should be renamed and the project should coordinate this process. --Censorwolf 17:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I did not know that they were technically "routes." If so, then why not "New York State Route" or even shorter, "New York Route."
Sure, everyone around here does just call it a "route," but this isn't a New York encyclopedia. I don't just start talking to people in other countries or states about "Route 132," because they don't know what the fuck it is. In articles about other state routes, it might make sense to just call it "Route 132". For instance, in NY 35's junction list, perhaps it could just say Route 132, because logically it would be another NYS route, not a Connecticut one or anything else.
Then there's the issue about that this is an encyclopedia. The little road near my house is most associated with the number 132 by me, but to someone else in another state, they think of it as a road in New York, and if they know more about it, then they'd know it's #132.
But anyway, that's relevant because in an alphabetical listing, New York, not 132, should definetely come first. It's not (to anyone) the road numbered 132 that's in New York. Its the road in New York numbered 132.
To me, it's really all about putting things in order. Anyway, I'll have to bring this up at that conventions page. Until that is settled over there, I say the NY routes should stay as-is. --Chris 18:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Chris: This has nothing to do with being a NY encyclopedia, etc. The only reason I would go with "Route 132 (New York)" as opposed to "New York Route 132" is to comply with the WP dismbiguation guidelines.

If we have a page for "John Hall", that might mean John Hall the poet from Ireland or John Hall from the US. If it is John Hall from the US it might be John Hall the musician or John Hall the politician? If it is John Hall the musician, it might be John Hall the musician from Orleans or John Hall the musician from Bromley Corners. So do we create the following pages?:

  • Orleans Musician John Hall
  • Bromley Corners Musician John Hall
  • US Politician John Hall
  • Irish Poet John Hall

No, WP already has the guidelines to set up these article names instead as:

  • John Hall (Musician Orleans)
  • John Hall (Musician Bromley Corners)
  • John Hall (US Politician)
  • John Hall (Irish Poet)

I think we should not apply or deivse new guidelines to naming articles about roads/routes/highways, but instead use existing WP guidelines.

But if the consensus is to go with New York Route 132, I'll go with that (I'm not sure how many people are actually interested in forming a concensus about roads since it appears to be just 3 or 4 of us involved). I am, however, strongly in favor of correcting the current mis-named articles for NY. Saying "That's the way we always done it" or "Most articles are already named..." are not adequate reasons for using the current incorrect names. --Censorwolf 21:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "New York Route X" or "New York State Route X". "Route X (New York)" is the proper method of disambiguation. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 22:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Consensus does not support that. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Even if somehow there is consensus for that, consensus does not trump truth. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
However WP works by consensus not by bullying. If you are not going to follow the procedures, you should probably spend your time on another hobby.--Censorwolf 12:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

parkways

I noticed some WP stuff on some parkways I'm working on. Does this mean that this project is covering anything with a reference route #? I have no problem with that, but the project page should make that clear. --Chris 18:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Problems editing shields

I have been trying to make my own shields for the articles I've been creating, using Illustrator (which I admit I'm not that good at yet). Firefox will only let me save the blank as a .png, which seems to ruin all the info (like the layers) I would need to edit properly as described at the Commons, even if I resave it as an .svg once it's downloaded. Anyone got any ideas on this? Daniel Case 06:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

See who made the other NY png's and contact them thru their talk pages. --Censorwolf 16:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
User:WhosAsking] made some good SVG shield templates: Image:NY Route Shield Template (2 Digits).svg and Image:NY Route Shield Template (3 Digits).svg --Chris 05:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit wars

For the information of all: Revert wars have broken out at the California and New York State Highway/route WikiProjects. Mass moves of pages and removal of routeboxes have occurred. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:37, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Correction: mass reversions to too-big infoboxes have occured. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 00:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-12 U.S. Roads has been opened. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Naming

Term NYSDOT (via Google) Laws (doesn't search by phrase, so inexact)
New York State Route 137 96
State Route 468 247
Route 26900 324
NY Route 330 1
NYS Route 287 2
NY State Route 2 1
SR 252 6
Route 104 49 7 (2 relevant, both just Route 104)
New York State Route 104 0
State Route 104 6
NY Route 104 8
NYS Route 104 1
SR 104 7
Route 17 505 I won't even try to weed through these
New York State Route 17 4
State Route 17 26
NY Route 17 12
NYS Route 17 47
SR 17 9

Note that for instance results for "NY State Route" will be in "State Route". There really seems to be no one common term; if anything, the simple "Route X" is used most often, though, looking through the laws, "State Route" seems to come up the most.

There are two separate issues here: (1) what is the name (for bolding in the first line of the article, when linking, etc) and (2) how do we disambiguate. Please don't argue (2) here, as we have to come up with (1) first. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 18:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, it has always been reported as "Route X" in the local TV news. Also, it looks like the NYSDOT site uses "Route X" more often than any of the other names (even if you add all the rest together, plain "route x" is still the most common term). There are also "bike routes", btw. But even if you remove those, plain "route x" still wins out. That still doesn't necessarily tell us what the official name is though. Polaron 20:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
A quote from the Goals section of the project page: Route articles should be named "New York State Route N" where N is the route number assigned by the NYSDOT. Since there is already a naming convention (and thus, a clear method of disambiguation via the naming convention), I fail to see why the question of naming regarding the articles is being asked. --TwinsMetsFan 03:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
This came up because SPUI changed the name of a couple of pages again, something which has ... well, scroll up and follow the links.
He insists that NYSDOT usage and state law support a naming convention of "State Route N (New York)." I left this message explaining why my research led me to believe that NYSDOT cannot be a considered a good source for what to call our state roads, as their terminology (based on their archived press releases) varies considerably. Nor do I consider the statutes, particularly the Highway Law, controlling as they do not seem to achieve any consistent usage either.
So, in the absence of any good official signs, I felt that the existing consensus name was the best choice.
And looking at the above, I'm resting my (ahem) case. Counting the acronymized uses, there is no clear consensus on NYSDOT's part for "State Route" over "New York State Route." I would, in fact, argue that "State Route" is only used anyway when it is widely understood by writer and reader that the road being referred to is in New York. And thus the rationale for putting the state name first in the (still-unsettled) road-naming conventions, that it is preferable for an online encyclopedia with a global audience to understand that there are "state routes" in countries other than the U.S., seems OK to me here.
Would be interesting to know what DOT uses in its contracts, though.Daniel Case 04:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Contract descriptions use multiple names, for example:
  • "Replacement of Route 30 Bridge Over West Stoney Creek In the Town of Benson"
  • "Bridge Replacement (prestressed concrete) of NY Route 149 over the Mettawee River, Village Of Granville"
  • "NYS Route 28 Curve Flattening in the Town of Middletown"
Maybe "New York State Route X" is correct. I'm certainly open to that possibility, more so than I was the other day. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 10:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
You're dealing with part (2). Please don't yet. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 09:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to let this lie so long. As for statutory usage, I do think the Highway Law, which has a section entitled "State Routes", is controlling on this. Also, I was going over an address list for the town I live in, where after 911 renumbering addresses were changed so that state highway route numbers were used instead of road names outside of cities and villages, and I noticed they take the form "XXX State Route YY". Daniel Case 15:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, OK, but just so when we do get there, you know where I stand. Daniel Case 02:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I see this topic is refusing to go away. In light of the fact that the articles are so named "New York State Route X", please let's come up with a solid justification for any NEW standard, not just because there is another way to name them. As I have said elsewhere, I'll go with the majority even if it is bizare as "The route known as X in the state known as NY", but all please keep off of the soapboxes with "My way is the only right way" because that degenerates into childish bickering on all sides.--Censorwolf 17:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Routebox Formatting

After looking at some route articles against my own, I see that there are two schools of thought regarding two areas of the routeboxes. One of the areas involves the listing of the junctions. While some place every route number in bold, I have a tendency to make only routes that end at the route in question (termini) and concurrencies bold (as specified in the routebox legend). Also, in the second column of the routebox, while some place the name of the road that's being intersected, I prefer to place the milepost of the junction in that column. In an attempt to standardize the routebox, which of the two methods for each discrepancy should be the preferred one? --TwinsMetsFan 19:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I saw your comment in the infobox code for NY 252A and I'm glad you brought it up here.
I've been doing it with all the routes in boldface because the early examples I had to follow were that way. But I believe the coding suggested in the legend is a little obtuse. You can indicate a terminus just as easily with a parenthetical (XT) as with boldface. It's easier for non-roadgeek users to figure that out without having to click on the legend. And as for concurrencies, we already back them with aqua ... is it necessary to confuse them with termini by bolding them?
Also, many of these routes are backed by color, and bolding them all IMO just makes them easier to read.
As for the street names ... we never got clear at the outset what was supposed to go under "Location." I had started with mileages too, but then I saw some for the Albany area that used towns, and frankly that made more sense to me as far as making the whole thing more accessible to lay readers. So not only did I change what I'd already written, I did all my new ones that way.
I used street names for roads through the highly-developed Buffalo suburbs, where those would be more informative, I think, then repeating something like "Cheektowaga" or "Amherst" seven times or so. Daniel Case 15:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
All valid points. Actually, I agree with your method (regarding the boldface text and termini) after reading the paragraph above.
My new proposal for the routebox:
  • All junction routes will be placed in bold typeface (as, I agree, placing them in bold does make them easier to read).
  • All routes that have termini at the route that is the focus of the article will be marked (XT), with X being the terminus direction (southern terminus, northern terminus, etc.).
  • On the right side of the box, street names, town names or mileposts can be used, depending on the preference of the author.
  • Shading will be used in accordance with the legend.
  • The legend page should be updated to correspond with bullets one and two.
As for the location, the reason that I use mileposts is that, in most cases due to the article format, the junctions are relisted in the Major Intersections subsection along with the town that contains that intersection, thereby giving the reader the location of the junction both by its milepost and its town. --TwinsMetsFan 18:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Minor formatting edit:TwinsMetsFan 18:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

What is the proper way of putting in concurrencies? Is it you make the route name bold when it joins the article route and make it not bold when it leaves? Also, I prefer not to indicate concurrencies if they are really short (<0.5 miles). For the location, my preference is actually town/village/city names but street names are ok if the entire route is wholly or mostly in one town/village/city. Mileposts by themselves are not as useful to casual readers. If only major junctions are to be placed in the infobox, what is the criteria for a major junction? Polaron 20:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

According to the legend (and my new proposal), the route name is bold both when it joins and when it leaves as the aqua background indicates the endpoints of the concurrency. As for the mileposts, as I said earlier, I use them because the name of the town the intersection is in is already mentioned in the article (see NY-253 for an example of the concurrency and for the milepost/town junction locations). However, for longer routes (Routes 5, 15, 21, etc.) where not every junction is mentioned in the article, I can see the relevance of using both mileposts and towns. --TwinsMetsFan 21:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Route 231/Babylon-Northport Expressway

An article needs to be added on the Babylon-Northport Expressway.

I don't know who wrote this, but I agree, and it happens to be one of the projects I'm working on. ---- DanTD 15:34, 9 June 2006 (EST)

Completion list

I've worked on a completion list for New York State Routes (including U.S. Routes and Interstates), and it can be found at User:Kuroki Mio 2006/New York Routes. --Kuroki Mio 2006 17:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

On a related note, I've created a checklist of routes by county on my Routes sub page. This list will be expanded as I continue to create/modify articles for routes across western New York. --TwinsMetsFan 19:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I've made some New York State shields from the Shields Up website, after waiting a long time for somebody else here to make the ones I want, because I can't work with the templates here. --DanTD 11:49, 20 June 2006 (EST)

New York State Route 17

For me, an extremely disturbing move occurred last night when the exit list on NY 17 was removed. In my opinion, this should not have occurred. While I have no problem with an exit list being placed on I-86 in response (as it should have its own anyway), the list should not have been removed from the NY 17 article. NY 17 and I-86 are separate entities and, for the most part, forever will be. Thus, each article should have their respective exit list (which, BTW, on the I-86 list right now, features exits that will not technically be on I-86 for at least another 5-10 years). Another note is that the NY 17 list was not a "copy" of a potential I-86 list as it also included the free-access portion of NY 17 between Harriman and the NY-NJ border (so really, it was not an exit list but more of an intersection listing), plus the list on NY 17 also matched the formatting designated for the routebox and contained much more information than the list compiled on I-86. I believe that the list should be returned to NY 17 as soon as possible.

Also, as for the tag that has been placed on NY 17 regarding the routebox: How thin do you expect a routebox to be? This box is slimmed down as much as it possibly can, to Interstates and US highways! Any further reduction would be nothing short of an undermining of the purpose of the box. --TwinsMetsFan 19:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Every freeway part of NY 17 is covered by the I-86 list. The rest can be covered easily with text. The only thing that was in the NY 17 list but isn't in the I-86 list is the mileage, and that was unsourced.
As for the infobox, I have cleaned it up. --SPUI (T - C) 02:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with SPUI, it can be covered with text, the infobox was too large Jaranda wat's sup 02:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I have no problems with the routebox now used as long as this box is only used on routes in New York State that are excessively long, i.e. over 300 miles in length. Otherwise, the standard box should be used.
Also, on the note of the box, there is a cited source for the mileage; the Gribblenation.net link at the bottom of the page.
As for the exit list, I'll give a text summary for the Harriman-NJ portion of NY 17 with a message preceding the section that the NY 17 portion between Findley Lake and Harriman is covered on the I-86 page. My only complaint about the I-86 table would be its unpolished look (the repeated use of New York State Route XXX as a link when a ...|NY XXX could be used, for example, to avoid excessive repetition) when compared to the similar NY 17 table.
And as for the exit mileage citation: [1]. The mileposts not found on this page were derived by myself using maps of the metro areas in question. --TwinsMetsFan 05:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Exit mileposts can also be derived from the NYSDOT traffic counts pages. Although, not all exits are listed. I'll add this information later unless somebody does it first. Polaron | Talk 14:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in New York

Many articles covered by this WikiProject lack photographs. As part of a subcategorization of the requested photos category, there is now a category for NY articles needing photos - to use it, just add {{reqphotoin|New York}} to the article's talk page. I have only added a few articles to the category so far, but it would be an easy way to make an extensive list NY-related articles lacking photos. I hope you find it useful!TheGrappler 06:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

This actually brings up an issue that had been on my mind for a while, that no one at any of the road projects seems to be considering but, since I have added images to several road articles (NY 208, for example, has several), I would like to know: What's an appropriate picture for a road article? Can we discuss some image guidelines?

I don't consider termini photo to be needed or encyclopedic. They make great fodder for roadgeek sites, but we don't need them here. OK, I put one in New York State Route 300, but that a) illustrates the busy nature of the Vails Gate intersection at the southern end and b) was already in to illustrate the Vails Gate article.

And shots of the road itself, like that nice one in New York State Route 22, look good but don't add much of encyclopedic value to the page, I think.

I do suggest the following images be encouraged in highway articles:

  • Anything illustrating an interesting claim made in the article (for example, someone could stand at one end of NY 437 and shoot the entire length of the road to bring home the point that it's our shortest signed touring route at 1,500 feet).
  • Points of interest along the road (historical monuments as shown in my above-linked 208 article; scenery in NY 214 (and NY 73 should really have a photo of Cascade Pass and the lakes once it gets green again). But they must be right on the road, not even a short distance off it.
  • Images illustrating the history of the road itself. The old Newburgh-Cochecton Turnpike milepost I took for New York State Route 17K, for instance. Or old rights-of-way if they're still visible.
  • Unusual signage or other aspects of the road. There's a few out there, can't think of what. Daniel Case 05:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I've already added dozens, if not hundrends of roadgeek sites that contain photographs of the roads. If we go by Daniel Case's criteria, we could easily use the Big Duck on the page for New York State Route 24. The problem is, I'm not sure if it would be right to upload a photo of it on the NY 24 article, or in the article on the Big Duck itself. DanTD 10:45, 22 June 2006 (EST)

You can do both ... it's not a problem. Quite a few of mine are used in other articles (see the McKinley status in NY208. Daniel Case 04:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Userbox proposal

This is an idea I have for a userbox for participants of the project:

Image:NY-blank.png This user is a member of the New York State Roads WikiProject.

Comments? Good idea? Bad idea? JB82 01:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


Nice one. If I join, can I add that as of my userboxes? DanTD 21:31, 20 June 2006 (EST)
That looks great. It'll become my first userbox. :) --TwinsMetsFan 05:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Upon second glance, the link in the box should point to Wikipedia:WikiProject New York State routes, not Wikipedia:WikiProject New York State Roads. Otherwise, it looks great. --TwinsMetsFan 15:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Image:NY-blank.png This user is a member of the New York State routes WikiProject.

Revised userbox. JB82 00:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks excellent. It has my support for becoming the official userbox for WP:NYSR. --TMF T - C 01:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
JB82, I hope you don't mind that I've created a userbox template ({{User NYSR WikiProject}}) that uses your design. I did, however, give you full credit in a comment code that is part of the template. --TMF T - C 06:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Routebox Discussion, Part 3

Well, it seems as if SPUI has taken manners into his own hands regarding the routeboxes on New York State Route 352 and New York State Route 17. Instead of asking for consensus on whether or not to replace {{routeboxny}} with {{Infobox road}} on these articles, he has done so regardless of consensus. So, the question is what does everyone prefer? The {{routeboxny}} as specified by the project guidelines or {{Infobox road}} as used by SPUI?

For me, what stands out is the lack of individuality that is given to the NY articles with the replaced routebox, the loss of junctions by county, and, in the case of NY 352, the loss of junctions (as its intersections with the Southern Tier Expressway at exits 47 and 48 are no longer listed).

I'm not saying that I don't like SPUI's routebox, I just don't like the way it was shoved down our collective throats.

P.S.: Every mileage tally does have a citation: the Gribblenation.NET link! --TMF T - C 14:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Minor edits TMF T - C 14:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

SPUI's routebox looks a great deal like a Florida State Road Routebox, FYI. It has good and bad points, and one of the bad ones is that it excludes too many other intersections. DanTD 10:52, 22 June 2006 (EST)

Exactly. It's too generic for my tastes and, as you said Dan, it is decent in areas but lacks detail (counties, intersections, etc.) in others. --TMF T - C 15:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
There should be specified criteria for what to include in the junction list in any case. Listing all the junctions in the infobox is not a good idea I think. Only selected junctions with main thoroughfares (whose definition we should clarify) should be included. For many short roads, this will result in no junctions listed. All other intersections (listed by county) can be in the main text under an "Intersections/Junctions" section. Polaron | Talk 15:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
When I speak of junctions missing, I'm referring to SPUI's routebox on NY 352, where two exits with the STE were omitted. I am not referring to routes like NY 17, where a complete list would be longer than route 17 itself.
I'll hold off on commenting on listing only major junctions in the routebox until we develop a consensus on which routebox to use. As for the complete list in a section, a section does exist for this purpose, "Major intersections". The 'major' in this case means all state and federal (US) routes as well as Interstates.
To start the consensus discussion, I favor the previously existing routebox ({{routeboxny}})--TMF T - C 15:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Blah, not again. I'm doing cleanup to remove a bad infobox. The whole idea of putting counties and mileposts in an infobox - meant to give a general view of the route - is flawed. --SPUI (T - C) 20:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your point that mileposts have no reason to be in an infobox and I suppose the counties could be moved to the "Major intersections" portions of the articles. The main reason that I'm questioning this change to the other routebox is mainly that there is no consensus to do so and there was nothing technically wrong with the existing one.
On the other hand, if the new routebox could be configured so that the shields would display next to the previous and next route names (instead of a Noimage.png), then that would be an improvement over the existing one and would tilt my support to the new infobox. The only thing that concerns me about the new box is if exits 47 and 48 with I-86/NY 17 are not considered major intersections with NY 352, then what is a major intersection? --TMF T - C 22:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
The browse is definitely designed for images - the only problem is that some have not been made, and thus it will look messy with redlinks. I've changed Template:Infobox NY State Route shield/State to "NY-{{{num}}}.png", but New York State Route 352 currently has a redlink. --SPUI (T - C) 22:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
As for the "major intersections" - sure, those can be added, but I see major intersections as ones that help define the route and give a general idea of where it goes. The fact that a surface route has several junctions with its replacement freeway doesn't really do that. --SPUI (T - C) 22:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, the redlink for the NY 351 shield has been taken care of. As for the major intersections helping to describe it goes, I don't want to start a debate, but I do think that listing interchanges with interstates, even when the interstate is its replacement, can give the reader an idea of where it travels (in this case, it gives the reader the impression that NY 352 parallels I-86/NY 17 at a glance without having to looking at the article). But otherwise, your points are valid and I would now support the new infobox. --TMF T - C 22:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, despite my distaste for SPUI's doing this without consensus, I have to admit the generic routebox is nicer-looking than the NY routebox. The color coding on the NY routebox looks haphazard, and combined with the (seemingly, even if not actually) random bolding of some intersecting routes, it makes the NY routebox look amateurish. My concern with changing over to the generic routebox is loss of the intersection information (including mileposts, exit numbers, and whether the intersecting route terminates at that junction) -- we should be sure to move that information out of the routebox and into a table in the article proper. Powers 02:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Addendum: I'd also like to find a way to continue listing the traversed counties in the infobox. The NY box includes that, but the generic one apparently doesn't. I agree it's not necessary to intersperse the county names with the junction list (although it would be useful in the table in the article proper), but a list of what counties it covers would allow a quick-glance understanding of where the route goes, perhaps even moreso than the junction list does. Powers 02:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
That's a very valid point regarding the listing of counties of the infobox. I couldn't agree more, the counties don't need to be listed with the junctions, but they do need to be mentioned somewhere in the box. If that occurs, then I see no reason to object to the new routebox.
For the table in the article proper regarding the junction info if the new routebox becomes the standard, here's my proposal for a revamped Major Intersections section of the articles, based loosely on the former exit list table of NY 17. I'll use NY 441 as an example in action, and I'll explain the method behind the madness in a bit.

Template:NYSRIntTop Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRInt Template:NYSRIntBottom

As you can see, I'm in favor of retaining the color coding present in the current routebox and bringing it over into the Major Intersections table. However, with the meanings now available underneath, it'll become obvious to everyone what the colors mean. In terms of length, NY 441 is not terribly long, so it's a good example to use. My proposal is explained better by way of the example than by any way I could describe it. Comments? Questions? --TMF T - C 07:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Tweaking of the legend table, TMF T - C 07:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC) More tweaking TMF T - C 17:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Do we put villages in the "Town" column as well or should we stick to towns and cities only? Also, my opinion is that very short concurrencies (maybe less than 0.3 miles?) that have no intervening junctions with other roads should not have to be indicated. Polaron | Talk 15:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
In this case, "Town" is just a generic header. Villages, towns and cities should be listed depending on where the junction is located. For example, take the intersection of NY 31F with NY 250 in the village of Fairport. Instead of placing Perinton (the town that Fairport is located in) in the table, we would use Fairport. So, to answer your question, Polaron, villages may be used as well. Regarding concurrencies, I agree. If a concurrency is less than 0.3 miles, it should not be shown as a concurrency and should be shown just as a normal junction. --TMF T - C 17:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Did 253 used to go up Five Mile Line Road, or did you mistype "3.1" instead of "2.1" for the mile marker? =) Anyway, I have no problem with that junction table, although I'm still not a huge fan of the color choices. Lacking alternative ideas, though, they'll have to do. A template to display the legend would be advisable, however, and I may even suggest using a template to color code the junctions, to facilitate changing our minds in the future. =) Powers 19:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Yep, 253 went down Linden Avenue to Whitney Road, then went up Five Mile Line Road to the Four Corners where it ended at 441. That was 253's last alignment before it was routed onto present-day 153. As for the legend template, I'll create one. The template for the color coding itself will be a bit tricky, though, but I'll see what I can do. In the meantime, I left a message on SPUI's talk page about placing a county list in the infobox, so we'll see what he says. --TMF T - C 20:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

(shift back to the left)As a follow-up to the 253 Five Mile Line alignment, a 253 reference marker still exists on Five Mile Line near the Five Mile-Belvedere Heights intersection heading south on Five Mile. Hopefully I'll get a pic of it one of these days. --TMF T - C 20:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, the template for the legend has been created. I'll work on the color coding template(s) later tonight. --TMF T - C 20:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
SPUI just added the counties to the routebox template. With that done, my full support is now with SPUI's routebox.
I also rewrote one of my articles to use the new routebox and the Major Intersections junction table. Check out New York State Route 153. Questions, comments? --TMF T - C 20:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Looks OK to me. The "Overpass" comment is unclear, though, on which road is an overpass over the other. Powers 22:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I just rewrote New York State Route 116 using the new standards. It could use a few shields (NY 116 and NY 121 shields). Also, I wasn't sure about whether to include county route junctions. There is a 0.07 mile overlap with NY 22 which I didn't mention at all. If this looks OK, I'll work on the rest of the Westchester routes. Polaron | Talk 22:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
LtPowers, I just corrected the Overpass note on NY 153 to read NY 153 crosses over I-490 on an overpass.. Polaron, that article looks fine. For county route junctions, since they're no longer in the infobox, my opinion would be to go ahead and include them. Also, for the 116/121 duplex, if you want, you could split up the two termini into two rows, one for the start at MP 5.9 and one for the end at MP 7.0. Otherwise, it looks great. Also, I just created NY 116 and 121 shields, so the NY 116 article can look complete. :) --TMF T - C 01:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, I created some templates to make the shading of rows and the tables easier to enter. Check out the 153 article for the code. --TMF T - C 02:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I've also updated the NY 441 table on this page, so the correct code is also available above. --TMF T - C 03:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
And for yet another example of coding, see the revamped NY 15, which utilizes virtually all of the color and layout templates. --TMF T - C 08:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Probably the last issue that needs to be resolved regarding the new template: should we include Interstates and U.S. highways as part of the browse feature (example, for NY 21, would the next previous route be US 20A or NY 19?). Also, should we include decommissioned routes in the browse as well (if they have their own article, such as NY 1A or NY 20C)? --TMF T - C 20:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
NY-21's "previous" link should go to NY-19 (or one of the decommissioned NY-20x routes), not US-20A. The reason is because if we have it go to a US route, the user is left with no way to continue browsing NY routes. Powers 23:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
That was the main concern I had as well. One case where a non-NYS route was used is on New York State Route 878, where I-890 is listed for the "next" link. I'll fix that to read NY 890. --TMF T - C 03:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Project Standard Changes

All points regarding the routebox should be noted in "Routebox Formatting, Part 3" until that topic has reached its conclusion. Thank you in advance. This sentence is no longer necessary. --TMF T - C 01:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

This section is for any changes that should be made to the project standards in the article attached to this page.

  • I am going to add "Route description" to the Structure section as many users, including myself, Daniel Case, Skudrafan1, and others, use this description in the NYSR articles, and rightfully so. I am also changing the heading "Trivia" to "Miscellanea" to better describe the items that should be placed there (also, many of the articles that used "Trivia" as a heading were later changed to "Miscellanea" by another user, which, IMHO, makes sense anyway.) In reality, these changes will not affect any of the articles; it will, however, make portions of the articles not part of the standards right now official. --TMF T - C 07:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Would anyone object to the adoption of the new routebox and the Major Intersections junction table into the project standards? If not, I'll go ahead and make the change. --TMF T - C 01:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I'd like to give it a bit more time before doing so, maybe give a few more folks a chance to comment. Powers 03:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, I'll give it a week or so. That should be enough time for anyone who objects to comment. --TMF T - C 03:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the proposed changes introduced above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made below this debate in the Project Standard Changes section. No further edits should be made to this debate.

The result of the debate was Agree to new standards. - TMF T - C 04:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Structure

Infobox information
Articles should use Template:Infobox road, and all known info should be supplied. See the Infobox section on applicable flags as well as standards for the routebox.
Main Section
Keep the same.
Route description
Keep the same.
Towns along the route
Keep the same.
Major Intersections
List of the state routes, U.S. routes, Interstate routes and, optionally, county routes that this route intersects with in table form. See the Major Intersections section below for instructions and usage.
History
Keep the same.
Miscellanea
Keep the same.
See also
Place all internal links here.
References
Place all references here, using the <ref></ref> tags in the article and the <references/> tag in this section.
External links
Place all external links which are not references here.

Infobox

The following tags are available for the routebox:
Flag What should be entered
state= NY
type= NY
route= Route number (number or number-letter combo (i.e. 20C) only, no NY- prefix)
marker_image= See New York State Route 878 for an example where this flag becomes necessary (two shields for one box). Otherwise, do not use this flag
alternate_name= Use in situations where the entire route has another name (i.e. NY 590 is called the Sea Breeze Expressway for its entire length)
length_mi= Length of route in miles with source using <ref> tags
length_km= Length of route in kilometers/kilometres
established= Year route was commissioned and, if the article is about a decommissioned route, mention the date of decommissioning here
direction_a= Beginning of a route's direction, usually either South or West
starting_terminus= Southern or Western terminus of the route
junction= All junctions this route has with U.S. highways, parkways/expressways or Interstates. All other junctions, such as county routes, state routes, or locations where a route passes over/under a U.S. highway/parkway/expressway/Interstate but does not intersect it should not be listed here
direction_b= End of a route's direction, usually either North or East
ending_terminus= Northern or Eastern terminus of the route
counties= Counties a route travels through. Separate county names using commas
previous_type= Since there is duplication of numbers between federal highways and NYS routes, this tag must read State to keep the browse function working across the entire NYSR project
previous_route= Previous NYS route. This can be either the previous current route (i.e. NY 151 would be the previous route for NY 153) or a previous decommissioned route that has a stand-alone article (i.e. NY 20C would be the previous route for NY 21)
next_type= State
next_route= Same usage as previous_route=, but regarding the next highest route in number
Any tags that do not apply to a particular route can either be omitted or left blank.

Major Intersections

This section is for listing all of the intersections, both actual junctions and over/underpasses, that this route has with roads specified in the Major Intersections portion of the Article Structure. This is an in-depth description and is not nearly as difficult to use as it may seem.
This section begins with {{NYSRIntTop}}. This produces the table header, which creates the columns Mile, Road(s), Municipality, and Notes automatically.
Route listings should begin immediately afterward. To begin a row for the first junction, type {{NYSRInt, which is the template for the rows of the Major Intersection table. Make sure that you do not include the second set of brackets.
The following tags are available for the Major Intersections table:
Flag What should be entered
All types
type= NoAccess, Concurrency, Decomd, Unbuilt, Closed or County - the latter will generate a 4-cell row with the county shading. Regardless of what value is entered, the type that is entered MUST be capitalized
County only
name= Name of the county (i.e. Monroe) - link is automatically generated
All types except County
mile= Milepost of the junction
road= This entry is for routes that the road intersects. If the road has a shield, it should precede the link to the road. For example: 
| [[Image:NY-153.png|25px]] '''[[New York State Route 153|NY 153]]'''</nowiki>

Three-digit shields or other shields of comparable width should be 25px. Two-digit shields or shields of similar size should be 20px. If the route intersects two or more routes here, this should be represented by

| [[Image:NY-5.png|20px]] '''[[New York State Route 5|NY 5]]'''<br>[[Image:US 20.png|20px]] '''[[U.S. Route 20|US 20]]'''

where routes are separated by <br> tags.
town= Municipality where the junction is located - link is automatically generated
notes= For any notes. This can include (a) an overpass note, (b) an underpass note, (c) an exit number of the junction (if the junction is with a highway with numbered exits), (d) anything else regarding the junction or (e) be blank. 
(a) | I-86/NY 15/NY 17 passes over NY 415.
(b) | I-86/NY 15/NY 17 passes under NY 415.
(c) | Exit 37 (I-86/NY 17).
(d) | Southern terminus of NY 153.
(e) | Type (removing the space between the & and n) & nbsp;
}} Closes the row.
At areas where the route crosses a county line, a county row should be inserted using "County" as the type and as explained above. This will create a standalone row for the county name. All routes that pass through more than one county should have a county row immediately following the header indicating what county the Southern/Western terminus is in.
Finally, to close the section, use {{NYSRIntBottom}}, which will end the table and display the legend.
For an example of a completed table, see New York State Route 17.

As for the Links section as it is in the current standards, it is in violation of the Wikipedia Manual of Style (at least, in the eyes of numerous bots who have reverted my changes in articles to match the current standard) and the List of State Routes in New York link is now in the routebox, making its inclusion in these sections unnecessary. With that said, the current Links section is well represented in the proposal as parts rather than a whole (in order to avoid bot edits).

With the proposal outlined, let the official voting begin (please vote Agree to show support for the proposal, Disagree to express dissent, or any other vote to not show support or dissent to the proposal but to comment on it). Regardless of what way you vote, you may comment on the proposal (such as possible adjustments, fixes, ideas, etc.) This vote will conclude on July 4 at 10:00 PM EDT. --TMF T - C 04:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC) Clarified end time TMF T - C 04:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC) Finalized proposal TMF T - C 06:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

After a few hours of coding with templates, I have finally completed the template for the entire Major Intersections table. The explanation of it all is given above. For everyone who has voted, rest assured that this change will only make things easier in terms of formatting for the table. --TMF T - C 03:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Polling is now closed. --TMF T - C 03:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Voting

  • Agree with the new project standards. --Polaron | Talk 15:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Agree with few reservations. --JB82 20:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
With two votes in favor of the new proposal and the overall approving consensus for this proposal throughout this talk page by other users including LtPowers, the proposal above is now part of the official standards for WP:NYSR. Please update all articles to the new standards ASAP. Thank you. --TMF T - C 03:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made below this debate in the Project Standard Changes section. No further edits should be made to this debate.

US 20A Shields

An SVG version of "US 20A.png" is now available (US 20A.svg). If you see a 20A shield pointing to "US 20A.png", please correct it to point to "US 20A.svg". --TMF T - C 01:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Similarly, an SVG of the Robert Moses State Parkway shield is now available thanks to WhosAsking. The PNG versions (Robert Moses State Parkway.png) should be changed to the SVG version (Robert Moses State Pkwy.svg). --TMF T - C 19:15, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Routebox Junctions

Since it appears that everyone is fine with the proposed routebox and Major Intersections changes in "Routebox Discussion, Part 3" (though, as I said above, I will wait until July 4 before making the change to allow others to comment on the proposal), it's time to bring up a point that Polaron discussed early in that section: what should be listed in the junctions box in the new routebox.

Between SPUI's edits to routes 17 and 352 and Polaron's edits to Westchester County routes, the standard has pretty much been set by example (and good examples at that!). Here's what I believe should be included:

  • Junctions/interchanges with parkways, expressways, or interstates.
  • Junctions with U.S. routes.

Anything else can go in the Major Intersections table along with the above junctions. Any comments regarding this proposal are welcomed.

Secondly, should we include places where the route in question passes over but does not intersect an expressway/U.S. highway (i.e. NY 15 passing over I-390 without interchanging with it? --TMF T - C 19:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Not in the routebox. Powers 14:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
There's also the question of junctions of a state route with a closely parallel expressway. Do we include some, none, or all such junctions? Polaron | Talk 15:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
My opinion would be to include all of them, just to stay consistent with listing all junctions with expressways and Interstates. --TMF T - C 16:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'm still getting used to using the routeboxes we've been making before, and will do so for some of the other roads I plan on doing articles on in the future. But if you feel the need to convert any of them(unless they don't have so many major intersections, like NY 114), feel free to do so. If you decide to make a major junction box for NY 111 though, don't forget to add Suffolk CR's 100, 67, 17, and 76. DanTD 10:21, 2 July 2006 (EST)

NY 25A Former Sections & Bypasses

Okay, what's the idea of deleting most of the info about former sections and would-be future sections of New York State Route 25A? I had to go through older versions to bring them back. --DanTD 13:57, 30 June 2006 (EST)

From the way it looks, the editor who made a change on the page a while ago was using a tabbed Firefox with the Google Toolbar, which often cuts off articles unexpectedly. This happened a while ago on New York State Route 17 and it looks like that's what happened on NY 25A. I wouldn't fault the editor, I'd fault Google for causing Firefox to glitch in that situation. --TMF T - C 18:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Best-Practice Articles

I admit, I've glanced around at the other route WikiProjects lately and one thing that nearly all of them have that we don't (at least, not visibly) is a best-practice article. While I can't think of any off the top of my head (maybe NY 15?), there's probably a few somewhere out there.

We should probably compile a (preferably short) list of best-practice articles to post on the main page of the project to serve as models for the other articles. --TMF T - C 16:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Once someone writes a Route description for NY 5, I think that NY 5 could be the "best-practice" article. --TMF T - C 06:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Mileposts

Just a question. How do we obtain the info for mileposts on NY state routes? I've ben having a good deal of trouble figuring out what happens where. --JB82 18:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

For the mileposts themselves, I believe Polaron calculates them using the official NYSDOT traffic counts (do a Google search for any county in the state and you can find them, very good resources for References Routes too, BTW). Me, I use a variety of methods, like using paper maps, trip planning software that can calculate mileage, and, sometimes, the traffic counts as well.
However, it's when you say you've been having trouble figuring out what happens where that leaves me a bit puzzled. If you mean that you're having trouble with the junction lists, check out this link: [2]. Also, some of the newer junction lists on the site have the mileposts already calculated, see this link for which ones are done: [3].
I hope I was able to answer your question above. --TMF T - C 19:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Link for NYSDOT traffic counts main page. They are sorted by county so to get mileposts for a particular route, go to the county where the terminus of the route is and start from there. You would need to add up the segment lengths to get cumulative miles. In some cases, you may need to look at maps to see exactly what is going on though. --Polaron | Talk 01:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Junctions with parallel route in infobox

I hope that people don't mind that I am including only the first and last junctions with a route which is closely parallel for long stretches to a given route. It just looked strange to me to have so many I-88 junctions in the NY 7 infobox. In addition to the first and last, I would probably also include a parallel junction if it occurs in a major city. What do others think about this? --Polaron | Talk 00:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I remember that my first answer to this a while ago was to list them all. But I agree wholeheartedly, the continual repetition of I-88 on NY 7 needed to be taken care of and your method of using the first and last junctions seems like the best way of doing it. Maybe we should set a guideline that if a parallel route has 1-3 junctions with the article route, then all junctions should be listed; however, for 4 and over, only the first and last junctions should be listed. --TMF T - C 01:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
That works for me. --Polaron | Talk 01:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"N.Y.S.T." or "New York Thruway"?

While doing the major intersections infobox, I have often found myself in a mental debate when it comes to the New York Thruway. Some have the thruway listed as "N.Y.S.T." while the NY 8 article lists it as "New York Thruway." I hope you can settle this matter. --JB82 22:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been consistent across the articles I've updated/written, using "NYST" for the infobox and "N.Y.S.T." in the Major Intersections junction table. Of course, now that I look at NY 8, I used "NYST" in the junction table, so I'll fix that to maintain consistency. --TMF T - C 02:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
There's also a new Thruway template for the junction table. Check out the project page. --TMF T - C 21:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

What about just plain Thruway. It's short and unambiguous. I don't think there are any other thruways in the country. (Even if there are, these are NY routes we are dealing with here.) --Chris 16:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

If you feel the urge to change the 50 (?) articles that refer to the Thruway to use "Thruway", go ahead. Once all of the links are changed over (if they are), I'll change the NYSRInt/TH junction table template. Until that point, I still support my comments above. --TMF T - C 16:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Table of Contents

I noticed the TOC has been removed from the main project page. I found it quite useful. Any chance we could get it back? =) Powers 21:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed it because I felt personally that it was unnecessary. However, I'll gladly restore it. --TMF T - C 21:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Shields

Shields for every New York state route, past and present, have been created and uploaded. --TMF T - C 05:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)