Template talk:WikiProject Highways

Tracking category

Is it possible to get a tracing category added that tracks articles not associated with a task force? I know there will be articles that don't need it, but that way we can easily find actual articles that need to be assigned to their appropriate task force? --Admrboltz (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KML tracking

Similar to how {{USRD}} tracks which articles need a KML file, I think this template should do the same, but separated out by task force. Eventually, we could lump all the highway project KML categories into one so we can track how many KMLs are needed. –Fredddie ™ 22:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea to separate it out by task force. But why is this template using a different kind of coding then the USRD template, they seem to serve the same purpose. Thewombatguru (talk) 23:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This template is using {{WPBannerMeta}}, and {{USRD}} is one of the few banners to not use the meta template. –Fredddie ™ 23:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but do you know why they chose to do this? Thewombatguru (talk) 23:29, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, the meta template had difficulty with how {{USRD}} lists states and road types. So it's simply a technical problem. –Fredddie ™ 00:15, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should this template also have the reassess, needs-map, needs-jctint, needs-shield and attention-mtf parameters like USRD has, that would create clear lists of stuff that has to be done. Thewombatguru (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The |reassess= |needs-map= and |needs-shield= parameters could be added easily enough, but the last one would need to be renamed. There's no consensus yet that HWY articles require KMLs, although that discussion should be had to confirm what is a good idea for an obvious evolution of standards. MOS:RJL doesn't actually require {{jctint}} or any other templates, which would need to be created on a country-by-country basis to handle the different kinds of political subdivisions. The |attention-mtf= parameter can't be added because HWY doesn't have a Maps Department (née Maps Task Force, MTF) like USRD does, so HWY doesn't have defined map standards that a map could fail to meet. Imzadi 1979 → 19:59, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DEFAULT: MID???

Why does the template default to "MID-importance" rating? Assessments made without regard to articles seems meaningless. If the wikiproject doesn't want importance ratings, they can be removed from the banner -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 03:46, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the rationale is that because like 90% of the project's articles are going to fall in the mid-importance assessment, and so many articles weren't given an importance rating, it was felt that we could default them to that assessment rather than need to rate thousands of articles all with |importance=mid. Imzadi 1979 → 05:29, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most projects, the articles are mostly LOW-importance. Is the project assessing things as "MID" for average importance articles. Shouldn't that actually be LOW? -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 06:55, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This project uses mid as the average since it's the middle of the scale. What other projects do or don't do is irrelevant to this project's practices. Imzadi 1979 → 07:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At least make templates and categories default to NA-importance. These types of pages don't have any importance. --Jameboy (talk) 13:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AL-class

This template is set up for classifying AL-class, but no articles are using it and Category:AL-Class Highways articles does not exist — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ thanks for that. Your work with the Road transport articles category this morning caused Category:Unassessed Road transport articles to fill up. It appears they're all either redirects or Future-Class. If I was at home, I would be able to dig more deeply, but I am not at the moment. –Fredddie ™ 17:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering why you had a class which was completely unused. Maybe time to retire it? I think I've fixed the assessments - your task forces were using a different scale to the main banner. Now they are using the custom class mask — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I purged the unassessed category, so it's cleared out now. Thanks for that; I figured it was something simple. –Fredddie ™ 19:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: All AL-Class lists have been subsequently promoted to FL, but our ACR process still has the option to review and promote additional lists in the future. Imzadi 1979 → 21:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]