Jump to content

Talk:M-28 (Michigan highway)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

A-Class

Promoted to A-Class following this debate. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 21:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyeditor's thoughts

In addition to the small changes that I made directly, I have three suggestions for further improvement.

  • The quoted phrase in the "Historic bridges" section, "with corbeled bulkheads and six panels recessed in the concrete spandrel walls" includes two words that many readers will not understand. The Manual of Style advises against linking words like "corbel" or "spandrel" within the quote itself, but I'd suggest including a brief explanation of these terms in a separate sentence or perhaps paraphrasing instead of quoting so that direct links would be acceptable.
  • The licensing for Image:Seney Stretch1.jpg looks odd to me. The original on Flickr may be protected from being used by Wikipedia.
  • The lead might include a brief mention (three or four words added to an existing sentence) of the historic bridges.

Finetooth (talk) 18:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

The image was specifically relicensed to be added to this article. The Flickr tool at Commons confirmed that it was available to use and uploaded it. I've added the bridges reference to the lead and a sentence following the quote. Any suggestions or does that wording pass muster? Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
The wording looks fine, and you've taken care of the image question. The article reads well. Finetooth (talk) 02:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to remove date-autoformatting

[From User_talk:Imzadi1979#dates

Dear contributors

MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes From rules for raw date-formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.

There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:

Disadvantages of date-autoformatting


  • (1) In-house only
  • (a) It works only for the WP "elite".
  • (b) To our readers out there, it displays all-too-common inconsistencies in raw formatting in bright-blue underlined text, yet conceals them from WPians who are logged in and have chosen preferences.
  • (c) It causes visitors to query why dates are bright-blue and underlined.
  • (2) Avoids what are merely trivial differences
  • (a) It is trivial whether the order is day–month or month–day. It is more trivial than color/colour and realise/realize, yet our consistency-within-article policy on spelling (WP:ENGVAR) has worked very well. English-speakers readily recognise both date formats; all dates after our signatures are international, and no one objects.
  • (3) Colour-clutter: the bright-blue underlining of all dates
  • (a) It dilutes the impact of high-value links.
  • (b) It makes the text slightly harder to read.
  • (c) It doesn't improve the appearance of the page.
  • (4) Typos and misunderstood coding
  • (a) There's a disappointing error-rate in keying in the auto-function; not bracketing the year, and enclosing the whole date in one set of brackets, are examples.
  • (b) Once autoformatting is removed, mixtures of US and international formats are revealed in display mode, where they are much easier for WPians to pick up than in edit mode; so is the use of the wrong format in country-related articles.
  • (c) Many WPians don't understand date-autoformatting—in particular, how if differs from ordinary linking; often it's applied simply because it's part of the furniture.
  • (5) Edit-mode clutter
  • (a) It's more work to enter an autoformatted date, and it doesn't make the edit-mode text any easier to read for subsequent editors.
  • (6) Limited application
  • (a) It's incompatible with date ranges ("January 3–9, 1998", or "3–9 January 1998", and "February–April 2006") and slashed dates ("the night of May 21/22", or "... 21/22 May").
  • (b) By policy, we avoid date autoformatting in such places as quotations; the removal of autoformatting avoids this inconsistency.

Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. If anyone objects to my proposal to free the dates of autoformatting in the main text in a day or two on a trial basis (using a script), please say so below. The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links.

Critically, since I’m an FAC reviewer, I want to state in unequivocal terms that whether or not contributors object to this proposal will have absolutely no bearing on my review or declaration at FAC. I’m proposing the action because FAC is an influential process, not because nominators might feel under obligation—they shouldn’t. Tony (talk) 02:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

My preference is to leave alone. There are exactly four dates that would be changed, one of which is in the infobox. The rest are in citations that would not be changed which would require a lot of manual editing. I don't think the four links removed would impact the appearance of under or over linking. Imzadi1979 (talk) 06:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Unique passing sign?

In the section M-28 (Michigan highway)#Seney to eastern terminus, the caption reads "A unique passing sign on M-28 westbound near McMillan". What makes the sign unique? Is it the one with two down arrows and one up arrow? This kind of sign exists elsewhere and so is not particularly unique. It might do to reword like "Westbound on M-28 near McMillan". Chris857 (talk) 02:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

At the time the photo was taken and added to this article, that style sign was not in common usage, and I think it's still not common. We can change the caption though. Where else is MDOT using this sign, btw? Imzadi 1979 → 22:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't remember where I've seen them, but I took a raodtrip this summer from Michigan to Flordia, so it could be almost anywhere. It may be that the sign is rare or uncommon, but I like the wording you changed it to. Chris857 (talk) 00:45, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on M-28 (Michigan highway). 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 17:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M-28 (Michigan highway). 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 09:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M-28 (Michigan highway). 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 03:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:M-28_(Michigan_highway)/Archive_1&oldid=1083523589"