User talk:Rschen7754

Archive pages:

/Archive
/Archive2
/Archive3 (use next time)

Stubs and project spam

The problem with including the phrase " support the Kentucky State Highway WikiProject" in stub templates is that you're implying that the WikiProject owns the pages in question. If you want to link to the WikiProject's page guidelines, fine, but don't simply link to the WikiProject. --Carnildo 08:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I-70 and 76 multiplex

I do have to ask that I-76 remain in the I-70 routebox as a multiplex or duplex, since it they do come together in Pennsylvania, as part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike for approximate 90 miles. I did not prefer the term "Shared routing with I-55", I prefer Duplexes or Multiplexes but that's fine if you want to be that defensive about it. I also know a lot about roads, and I live on the east coast and have travelled many of the roads I work on, including Interstate 70 and 76. But I do hope that we're cool. MPD01605 07:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I-75 junctions

You might want to update WP:IH to be more clear -- currently only I-80, I-90, I-40, I-10, and I-95 are included as part of the limiting to 2di junctions that end in 0 or 5. Seems rather arbitrary in any case. older ≠ wiser 23:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Milestones

Out of curiousity, how do you do the article counts? I haven't found a way to get a count of total edits, and I wondered if you did it with a lot of scripting, or some clever trick, or how. It's a neat bit of information! C.Fred 03:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye

Just wanted to let you know that I'm leaving. Please try to make the naming conventions happen. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NJ road stub

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for clearing up those categories for my newly-created {{New-Jersey-road-stub}}! I was a little confused myself when setting all that up. Lensovet 02:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NY route stub

Added {{NewYork-State-Highway-stub}} to Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#February_14th for renaming --Censorwolf 16:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should be User:CapitalEnforcer instead since this seems to be the most important thing to you here! In this case however {{New-York-State-route-stub}} you are correct, my bad. Some friendly advice (and I do intend this without malice), you should learn to use proper capitalization rules outside of WP however. --Censorwolf 02:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taking this outside of Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BNewYork-State-Highway-stub.7D.7D for discussion, you state that the WP capitalization guidelines are "not technically correct". Please explain, with references. --Censorwolf 15:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but refering to http://dot.ca.gov is a fallacy of logic: an irrelevant appeal to authority. While CA's DOT is certainly an authority on roads in CA, they are not an authority on capitalization, so it does not matter what format they use. I looked at a few of their pages and their webmaster seems to insist on capitalizing every title, which is incorrect.

Re Talk:List_of_California_State_Routes, the argument positions presented by User:Squib and User:BlankVerse are indeed compelling; your counter arguments for the most part are again appeals to authority, appeals to popularity, appeals to local convention (e.g. it's been that way for a long time, that's the way we've always done it...), and insistence that only people who have contributed to road pages have any say or voting authority. All of these are fallacies of logic.

Only two authorities can be validly applied:

A style manual such as the Chicago Manual of Style and
The WP guidelines.

On WP, the WP guidelines hold more authority for this case because the guidelines have already been debated and decided on for this media. Just like the CA DOT site has already decided to capitalize all page titles, it wouldn't be a good idea for someone there to start changing the style for some pages; it is better that they all agree with each other. So here, on WP, if the guidelines are to capitalize lists and categories one way, then that is the way it should be done. Unfortunately, not all pages have followed the guidelines, but even if more don't follow them than do, this again would be appeal to popularity and an invalid argument for doing the same.

I asked for an explanation of why you stated the WP guidelines are "not technically correct", but you didn't provide any. --Censorwolf 14:32, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appeals to authority are valid ONLY when the authority has expertise in the matter being referenced. For example, you would refer to the CA DOT for authority on highway systems in CA, but not on rules of grammar and likewise capitalization style. You would refer to CMOS for capitalization style but not on how highway systems are set up. It's a matter of domain. I have found one of the most educational things I did was to learn the fallacies of logic when I was about 19. WP's pages on them and some of the external refs there are very well done and worth your time. Valid references to authority are useful, invalid references to authority, on subjects outside their domain, are misleading and just plain wrong.

"New York State Route 17" is capitalized because it is a proper noun, NOT because it is "part of a specific system"; just like you should capitalize "The Eiffel Tower" not because it is part of a system of towers but because it the name of an object. If you want to refer to the collection of towers of France, whether they are part of a "system" or not, the correct reference would be "The towers of France" not "The Towers of France" (you would title a song using the latter method, but we are not writing songs).

Hence you have "List of state routes of New York" or "List of New York state routes" or "List of routes of New York State" (first letter always being capitalized for a title). I could go along with "List of New York State routes" since "New York State" could be considered the full place name, just like you could instead say "List of towers of the Republic of France" or "List of towers of the French Republic", but debate on whether to capitalize "state" is splitting hairs more than the rest of this discussion already is!

If you want the road system titles to use improper capitalization and you can get enough people to agree with you, then those who know better will just think "Oh well, I see those road geeks don't know enough about proper capitalization, grammar, spelling, etc. just like we thought". It will make this part of WP look "unprofessional" and/or done by "style-ignorant" editors, and since you are one of the main contributors of this section, it will be a reflection on you.

Since I see you are currently in school, why don't refer this matter to your language instructor and get his/her opinion? If you are really sure the WP style guidelines are incorrect, then you should take your arguments over to the dicussion page(s) there. That will remove any perceived bias in the argument from the "road crew". --Censorwolf 14:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NY Routes project

Why I removed the US roads news: I just didn't think the US roads project news belongs on the NY project page. It is already on the US project page, no? Since the link as parent to WP:USRD is already on WP:NYSR, what purpose does it serve to repeat the box here? --Censorwolf 02:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enuf, if it everywhere else. Don't want NY to be left out. --Censorwolf 14:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maine State Routes cat

I suggest one of us renom it for transition to "Maine State Route System". The move was done in blatant violation of consensus.Gateman1997 08:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US Route

I can understand why US 422 does not belong on the US Routes template; however, it is a unique case that the highway violates the AASHTO numbering. US 422 starts at King of Prussia, PA, ends in Hershey, PA, then starts again in Evansburg, PA (at least 150 miles apart) and ends in Cleveland, Ohio. I think this deserves the significance the other highways (101, 400, etc.) have.

--myselfalso 01:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. The template should say that it is primary routes, though. Is there a template for spurred highways? --myselfalso 02:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SPUI at it again...

Please visit the talk page of California State Route 15. SPUI has been moving the article and has now proposed the current CA routebox used to great effect and maintained by dozens for deletion claiming it's too long... He wants to replace it with a short uninformative POS box.JohnnyBGood 19:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your voice might be helpful in this debate man. They're getting crazy.Gateman1997 02:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are fast approaching RFC time for SPUI don't you think? He's been given ample warning and continues to act unilaterally. Gateman1997 05:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then we should bring him there again. I've witness multiple violations of WP:CIV, WP:3RR, and edit warring on his part today. I think it's time he was thrown to them and hopefully gets a nice long vacation. He's doing nothing to improve the project lately.Gateman1997 05:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you're probably too close to this to impartially rule, even though I do trust your judgement. However if you could bring this to the ArbCom's attention it may do some good here. He's moved well beyond "disruptive" and into purposely destructive. Not to mention rude and uncouth.Gateman1997 05:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, but be sure to make note of his current probational status.Gateman1997 05:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He also seems to be following the same MO in his actions on I-95 exit list. The article survived AfD this week, yet he's unilaterally turned the article into a redirect to I-95, because he doesn't think it can be salvaged without a full rewrite. Every time it gets restored, he reverts to his redirect. He's missed 3RR by the barest of time margins, with four reverts over the last thirty-some hours. —C.Fred (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm looking at WP:AN/I right now. That looks to be the more valid venue for pursuing this. —C.Fred (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious admin help is out of the question, and SPUI won't budge on using his userbox (I think he takes affront that we don't like his box rather then editing the project box). I think our only recourse at this time is to continue to revert him if he makes unilateral changes until enough time or incivility has passed for an RFC.Gateman1997 03:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should make a few edits to the project box and see if that placates the guy. Maybe remove the legend section and merge the "state law" section into the route number in the box?Gateman1997 03:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:US-blank.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:US-blank.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting vandalism

Thank you for mentioning the {{test1}} and {{test2}} tags. I hadn't been using them on IP addresses, for fear of biting the newbies with respect to them being shared addresses, but now that I see that {{sharedwelcome}} exists, I'll do that more. —C.Fred (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

California State Route 15 and Interstate 605 (California)

Can you set these two up for protection from SPUI? He's reverting both to his userbox which has been rejected thus far by consensus.JohnnyBGood 01:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]