Jump to content

Talk:Interstate 90 in Ohio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

exit 142

[edit]

This article is about I-90 (Ohio), not about the Ohio Turnpike, although they are the same road for 142 miles coming east from the Indian border. I find this in the table for exit 142:

"I-80 west / Ohio Tpk. – Toledo"

"Eastbound exit, westbound entrance; eastern end of the I-80/Ohio Tpk. concurrency"

Come to think of it, I will change the "concurrency" note to read "eastern end of concurrency with I-80/Ohio Tpk." to cut down on possible confusion, because I-80 and Ohio Tpk. are the same road on both sides of this interchange. If you are actually exiting I-90 here, you can only do so eastbound, staying on I-80/Ohio Tpk. as I-90 jogs over to merge with Ohio 2. Other than the "concurrency" note, I will make no change at this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.52.3 (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Lake and Ashtabula County Exits

[edit]

Added notes for exits in these counties. If anyone has any questions or comments, feel free. I am also entirely open to any suggestions. Sandhillman (talk) 22:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one's replied, I'll say that they seem rather verbose and redundant, especially since these routes are generally not mentioned at the respective exits in the field, so in a BOLD move I'm removing them as a whole from where they have been. However, I will note the parallel 6/20/84/307 in the route description section so the general information will remain. Mapsax (talk) 13:40, 23 February 2013 (UTC) Edited I should mention the basis of my edit with respect to what one should do (MOS:RJL) and shouldn't do (WP:NOTTRAVEL, though I'm reinterpreting that somewhat) in this context. Mapsax (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After reading the links above and the route description, I concur with your changes. I guess I got just a little carried away on the notes. ;-) The last paragraph in the route description seems adequate to alert others to parallel routes accessible from some interchanges. Thanks. Sandhillman (talk) 20:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. You'll also see that I semi-re-reverted in the exit list notes column. Mapsax (talk) 20:47, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your quick response. I wonder if Harpersfield Covered Bridge should be included under notes for exit 218? Just a thought. Sandhillman (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The link for Harpersfield Covered Bridge was added in the note to exit 218. Let me know if this would be a problem since it is a nearby point of interest. Sandhillman (talk) 01:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think it should be there, not that it's not notable, but because of the precedent. It has the advantage of having a WP article; however, it is not listed on signs on I-90; moreover, nothing else is listed along the route with regard to attractions. Note that this is treading on WP:NOTTRAVEL a bit again; you could imagine how full the notes column would get if we mentioned every feature within five miles of I-90 with a WP article plus everything mentioned on signs (I'm guessing that Progressive Field would beat the Harpersfield bridge in terms of notability) plus whatever else editors would deem as worthy of adding. As I'm sure that you know, even just adding the rest of Ashtabula County's covered bridges near 90 would fill the notes column substantially. It's not that this is totally prohibited: From MOS:RJL: Destinations: Locations and roads as presented on guide signs for the junction. Other locations should not be listed unless that location is extremely notable and well known; an entry in the notes column such as "Serves Missouri State University" can be used. Note "extremely," though, and also note that in all four examples on the MOS page, in addition to the rest of the I-90 Ohio list, all comments in the "Notes" columns so far refer to the highway itself or crossing highways, not points of interest; that seems to be our template.
I don't own this article, of course, so if you want to shoot a note off to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads notifying them of this discussion, feel free. Mapsax (talk) 16:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are correct about the revert. I will leave it be as I feel I still have a bit more to learn about Wikipedia. Sandhillman (talk) 01:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So do I, so don't worry.... Mapsax (talk) 12:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

collapesed infobox

[edit]

71.10.247.40 (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC) There is a partily collapsed infobox at the top of the article.71.10.247.40 (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed –Fredddie™ 02:02, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Interstate 90 in Ohio. 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:

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) 01:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I-90 vs. Ohio State Route 2

[edit]

I have found two instances where I-90 might have run with SR 2 either temporarily or unofficially or both.

First, this webpage (full disclosure: on the website which I maintain) has fair-use snippets of two maps, one official, one commercial, which show I-90 following the Cleveland Memorial Shoreway westward past downtown Cleveland then south on the never-built Parma Freeway to the current alignment. However, the location maps on the Northwest-Clark Freeway Study, #6, dated 1963, and the Clark Freeway Study, #8, dated 1966, specifically show this routing as non-Interstate. Even with the brief period in question, I-90 might have been posted along the West Shoreway which already existed.

Second, a Lorain newspaper article from 1966, transcribed here, states that "C. F. Crissinger, assistant division engineer for the Ohio Department of Highways at Ashland, told The Journal that the designation of the [freeway] route [from Cleveland to Sandusky] as I-90 is a predictable eventuality, and that after the road is completed, a public hearing will be held to formally designate it", which means that the extant open parts, however few, may have been posted as I-90 even if that hadn't been formally designated, and even if they weren't, this quote might be worth noting. Related to this, where I-90 went from the Ohio Turnpike/I-80 to the portion of the SR 2 freeway where it actually was officially designated before the connector at current Turnpike Exit 142 was built, c.1976, is ambiguous. For instance the USGS topos for Lorain from 1960 and 1969 show 90 following 80/Turnpike (80N on the 1960 one) to the east edge of the map, just west of SR 57 (current Exit 145). This implies that 90 followed 57 north to the 2 freeway, a supposition supported by the fact that 57 was upgraded to eliminate crossroads between the Turnpike and 2 freeway, a condition which has been downgraded in recent years. However, the topo to the east, Avon, has a different set of editions, and the closest to the other two maps, 1963, shows 90 already on the proposed 2 freeway at the west edge of that map. (2 itself is shown still following US 6 along the Lake Erie shoreline.) Unfortunately, the maps in the ODOT archive don't show enough detail.

Any suggestions on reliable sources to prove or disprove these?

Mapsax (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is in no way a smoking gun, but older signs on the west shoreway don't say to 90. Cards84664 (talk) 17:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would just stick with what we know for sure based on the maps (i.e. what can be adequately sourced), rather than any speculation or suppositions. Obviously if we find another map or a photo that clearly shows parts signed as I-90, then we can change it as needed. As for the entrance ramps to the Shoreway at W. 3rd, that's fairly typical to not include "to" when it's close to the merge. It's similar to signs at the interchange with I-271, I-480, and US 422, which also omit "to". For instance, the sign on 480 eastbound just says "East 480" and "South 271" even though it's still a few miles before 480 actually merges with 271. Same for the adjacent sign to North 271 and 422 (both seen here) and the entrance ramps on that section (seen here). --JonRidinger (talk) 20:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Interstate 90 in Ohio. 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:

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) 18:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Interstate_90_in_Ohio&oldid=1207729908"