Talk:California Department of Transportation

Transport High‑importance

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

California High‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

NPOV warning

This article reads like a Caltrans brochure. Caltrans has been extensively criticized, and this article makes it sound like an unequivocal success. The only phrase which even comes close to criticism is "stubbornly idiosyncratic", and this comes paired with praise for being "innovative". -Juansmith 20:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't strike me that way. The second sentence after the one quoted from above has some criticism, and subsequent sentences point out not only "firsts", but "lasts"... not typical of a brochure. Perhaps the author of the preceding comment has a specific criticism in mind. Jim 04:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the only problem is 'stubbornly'. The paragraph goes on to give examples of both innovativeness and idiosyncraticness. What is subjective is whether that idiosyncraticness is in fact 'stubborn'75.8.224.113 09:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless somebody formulates some concrete contradictions to what's in the article page right now, I don't think the POV tag is justified. --Frescard 04:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture issues

Two issues. First of all, the 85-101 interchange, as I understand it, is primarily a VTA project funded mostly with local funds, not a Caltrans project. A real Caltrans project would be the Bay Bridge retrofit or the new Alfred Zampa Bridge. So we need to replace the picture with one of a real Caltrans project.

Second, the picture of the SoCal district office is terrible. We need a better photo that's not shot straight into the sun. I would take it myself but I won't be in downtown L.A. for the foreseeable future unless something comes up. For an example of how to take good photos of a building, see United States Patent and Trademark Office. My first photos were shot from the other side of the building (straight into the sun) and looked terrible. Then later when I had the time I went around to the other side (so that the sun would be at my back) and took the photo that's now in the article.--Coolcaesar 22:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on California Department of Transportation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629070931/http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/Named_Freeways.pdf to http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/Named_Freeways.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]