Jump to content

Portal talk:U.S. roads

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Portal talk:U.S. Roads)
Featured portalThe U.S. roads Portal is a featured portal, which means it has been identified as one of the best portals on Wikipedia. If you see a way this portal can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, please feel free to contribute.
Portal milestones
DateProcessResult
March 29, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
May 29, 2010Featured portal candidateNot promoted
September 1, 2010Featured portal candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured portal

2580 articles

[edit]

Is that number still correct? I was managing stubs yesterday and we might have more than that. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't be shocked if the actual number is now double that figure, honestly. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Headline of the netherlands motorways are all wrong

[edit]

Because there is no portal for roads but only for US roads, I want to ask here: I would be thankful, if the road specialists could have a look here: Portal talk:Transport#Headline of the netherlands motorways are all wrong Thank you -- 84.132.101.93 10:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Roads or North American Roads

[edit]

In the early morning of September 21, I moved this page to Portal:North American Roads and enlarged the scope. (The portal currently reflects the expansion, despite the name.) My thought process was sparked by Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads#Possible "news" page?, where I was told that the portal needed a "steady maintainer". With the interconnectedness of North American roads, it seemed like a logical move. As other editors (presumably) woke up, they objected, and Rschen7754 started moving pages back in preparation to split. That explains the present state, left as a "compromise" to stop the threat of an edit war. --NE2 23:42, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be three options:

  1. Change it back to U.S. Roads
  2. Keep it changed to North American Roads
  3. Split it into two portals

Please discuss the benefits and drawbacks of each below:

U.S. Roads only

[edit]
Advantages
  • Status quo
  • More of a focus can be placed on U.S. Roads
  • Portal was adequately maintained by one familiar with the subject
Disadvantages

North American Roads only

[edit]
Advantages
  1. Expands the scope so more people may be interested in helping
  2. Combines interconnected road systems
  3. Encourages improvement of Mexican and Canadian road articles
Disadvantages
  1. Groups the "crappy" Canadian Roads WikiProject with the supposedly better U.S. Roads WikiProject
  2. There are less than 20 Mexican road articles
  • But it would create 'CookieTemplates' for them to draw ideas from when they do get larger

Both portals

[edit]
Advantages
  • Supposedly a compromise
Disadvantages
  • Splits effort among two portals, when one was apparently not being maintained well

Discussion

[edit]
  • Go back to U.S. Roads only. I could support two portals, but under no circumstances should the USRD portal be merged into the NA portal. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • My preference: retain the U.S. road one, then create a generic road portal if necessary. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 02:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I saw no problems with the portal the way it was as the USRD portal. I think it should be moved back. -- JA10 Talk • Contribs 22:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should remain as is - if someone wants to start a Portal:Canadian Roads I'm fine with that. But NA roads seems kind of silly. There's not even a NA Roads project. --Son 13:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep P:USRD as-is, since it seems clear that nobody likes the NA Roads idea. I'm all for a world roads (highways) portal, since there are hell lot more roads in the world, especially Canada and China. —O (说 • 喝) 23:18, 24 September 2007 (GMT)
  • This portal never had any problems as it is - by renaming it - it becomes more prone to problems - and the portal's scope was well established already. Why fix something that isn't broken. That said - if CRWP wants a portal - they can create one. This one shall stay as is master sonT - C 03:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've created Portal:Roads yesterday, with a scope set on roads around the world. This would be a child portal under the Roads portal. Comments? —O (说 • 喝) 00:05, 28 September 2007 (GMT)

I think that consensus should be pretty clear now. I'll move the portal over the next few days. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Utility of outlines to wikiprojects

[edit]

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 22:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some ideas for the portal

[edit]
  1. With the exception of the news section and maybe DYK, we select the content for the portal a month ahead of time. The advantage is that if on 2/1 we know what article will appear on 3/1, that gives someone 4 weeks to edit the blurb, find a photo (not the shield graphic, please! that gets old) and put it in the templates so it goes live on 3/1 at midnight. Then while the March content is being readied, we can be deciding on the April content. Wash, rinse, repeat.
  2. Can we rotate out the shield graphics at the top of the portal occasionally? Maybe 2-4 times a year?
  3. I don't want this to be a rule, but maybe a guideline, to try to find seasonally appropriate photos for the portal? I know that snowy scenes aren't the most common way we roadgeeks photograph the highways, and many areas don't receive snow in the winter, but maybe some fall color in the fall would be nice? I know there are some winter photos out there, those of us in the northern states should seek some out, and add them to the articles.
  4. Maybe we could even create a gallery space on Commons or here where anyone can add promising photos at any time, and we'd have a gallery to look through to simplify nominations. If I'm working through a random article, and I see a good photo or two in there, I can add it to the gallery so non-Michigan editors can see some things I like from Michigan. Then when it comes time to make some nominations, there might be a Florida photo in there that catches my eye that I could nominate?

Just my $0.08 for today. Imzadi1979 (talk) 18:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:United States

[edit]

Know that WPUS is up and running and the US Wikipedian's collaboration is rebuilt, I wanted to focus on cleaning up and revamping Portal:United States. Per a comment on the talk page I have added this portal to the list of US related portals.

I was also wondering if anyone would be interested in adding a Selected article related to the US roads to the list of featured articles. If not perhaps you could suggest one and I will add it? --Kumioko (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are some suggestions at WT:USRD. --PCB 04:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April Fools Day 2011

[edit]

All right, who did the Portland joke? That's the best material I've ever seen on here. :) —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 13:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the joke you saw, but the assist goes to Daniel Case (talk · contribs). –Fredddie™ 23:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Portal talk:Molecular and Cellular Biology which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:30, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice from the Portals WikiProject

[edit]

WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Portal talk:Canada Roads which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 May 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per consensus, and per MOS:CAPS. Consistency with other wikiproject/portal titles, by following MOS:CAPS. The sole opposer did not provide any logical rationale, nor any policy. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


– Case fix per MOS:CAPS since these titles show up in article space. Per precedents at Portal:Canada Roads and Portal:Civil rights movement, and the vast majority of portal titles that already conform to MOS:CAPS. Support as nom, obviously. Dicklyon (talk) 04:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose all—for the fourth time, no. Imzadi 1979 → 05:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Your position that "they're named for their corresponding WikiProjects and follow the proper names of those" has been explicitly rejected wherever tested; why not go with that consensus? Dicklyon (talk) 20:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I can still register my continued opposition even if I accept that my position may not carry the day. Discussions like these do not have to be unanimous in the end, and my objections can still be noted for the record. Obstructionism would be to launch a filibuster or some other action not possible in these forums where one person can't prevent a consensus. Imzadi 1979 → 21:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, your opinion is welcome, though I can't resist trying to sway it. Dicklyon (talk) 21:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Side comment, but there is a proper name for the highway system in Michigan, the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System, so a possible slight tweak of the scope would allow us to name the portal after that name. Furthermore, I do have an objection now to the inconsistency that's being created in portal names now that we have Portal:Roads of Canada but Portal:Australian roads. Also, no comments regarding whether or not to drop the periods in "US" in line with modern style guides, or to expand the abbreviation to "United States"? Lots of discussion to be had before enacting any of the proposed moves. Imzadi 1979 → 21:22, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't think that changing the scope in order to fit a proper name would be a great approach in general. Maybe Portal:Michigan roads would be good? I'm open to other consistency changes, though I think finding a universal happy format might not be so easy. Dicklyon (talk) 21:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    As for changing U.S. to US or United States, I don't have an opinion except that such side issues should not derail the progress of case fixing that we're trying to get done here. That can be discussed and implemented as a next step. Dicklyon (talk) 23:02, 24 May 2018 (UTC
    The last two editions of Chicago Manual of Style have removed their previous insistence on U dot S dot. But it's not a big deal for me if people object to the modern version in specific cases. @Imzadi1979:: it would be helpful to hear your substantive reasoning, briefly—as frustrating as it must be to have to repeat it. The reasons for downcasing are still hanging around, even if you disagree with them. Tony (talk) 15:35, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Tony1: I have two reasons. One to which Dicklyon alluded above is that this portal is named consistent with its parent project, WP:WikiProject U.S. Roads, and it would look wrong after 13 years to capitalize that name differently, and I regard both as proper names after this length of time.
    The second reason is much more substantive. I regard portals as akin to a publication as a collection of content. Until the MOS says that we have to call it the New York times, then I don't see a problem with these portals remaining titled as they are.
    As for "U.S." vs. "US", I do have a preference for dropping the periods in the context of highways going forward, because the abbreviated version of highway names already omits them. See the mixed up mess that is "U.S. Route 41"/"U.S. Highway 41", which is abbreviated "US 41" and compare that to the text within U.S. Route 41 in Michigan. (WP:USSH says we consistently title those highways as "U.S. Route X" but notes for prose that in some states the correct name would be "U.S. Highway X".) The Michigan articles dropped the periods to comply with CMOS 16 and MOS:US and to be consistent between the full name and abbreviation. Imzadi 1979 → 21:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    We agree on U dot S dot. But your reasoning for retaining the cap is very weak. Tony (talk) 02:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—since when did we allow portals to defy our capping guidelines for general text and article titles??? Tony (talk) 05:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, for the fourth time yes, because that's where the consensus is. Continuing to oppose just to oppose out of stubbornness after repeatedly not getting one's way is anti-consensus obstructionism. WP is a sentence-case site for all public-facing material, from articles to categories. Portals are not a magical exception.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:16, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

@Usernamekiran and Dicklyon: there's still outstanding questions left to be resolved, "U.S." vs. "US" vs. "United States", so it's a bit premature to start moving anything just yet since it would be highly disruptive to move things multiple times. Imzadi 1979 → 20:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's really no harder to address that question now rather than later. Probably easier, actually. But we can go ahead and do the case fix moves in any case; moves are easy, even with sub-pages. Dicklyon (talk) 03:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Usernamekiran and Imzadi1979:—I wonder whether there would be any more than the odd traditionalist objection to removing the clunky dots. They remain in officil titles (U.S. Department of ... etc), but Chicago Manual of Style has been saying it's fine to drop them—for years now—having insisted on them until the start of this decade. I think many Americans don't use them; and hardly anyone in handwriting. Who would bother? Tony (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's uncontroversial by me. Dicklyon (talk) 04:45, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:North American Roads listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:North American Roads. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Legacypac (talk) 19:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Every road?

[edit]

Does every road in America deserve an article? People go crazy over notability for people. Does it apply to what roads are important and those that are not? Eschoryii (talk) 08:50, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I read the portal page. No one needs to respond to my inquiry. Eschoryii (talk) 09:07, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Historic list of "roads made, or in progress"--where should this go?

[edit]

On January 23, 1818, President James Monroe issued a list of information on "roads made, or in progress, under the authority of the Executive of the United States"[1] that describes--perhaps loosely--the precursors to the American highway system, or at least, Federally-built roads. I can't seem to find a good place for this data, any thoughts on where it could be useful? Wrecksdart (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"P:USRD/AFD" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect P:USRD/AFD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 20 § P:USRD/AFD until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "H. Doc. 15-61 - Message from the President of the United States, transmitting pursuant to a resolution of the House of Representatives of ninth Dec. last, information of the roads made, or in progress, under the authority of the Executive of the United States ; the states and territories through which they pass, or are intended to pass ; the periods when they were ordered to be made, and how far they have extended. January 23, 1818. Read, and ordered to lie upon the table". GovInfo.gov. E. De Krafft. 23 January 1818. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:U.S._roads&oldid=1237974724"