Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:57, 12 March 2006

Archive pages:

• /Archive
• /Archive2
• /Archive3 (use next time)

NY route stub

Added {{NewYork-State-Highway-stub}} to Misplaced Pages:Stub_types_for_deletion#February_14th for renaming --Censorwolf 16:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I think you should be User:CapitalEnforcer instead since this seems to be the most important thing to you here! In this case however {{New-York-State-route-stub}} you are correct, my bad. Some friendly advice (and I do intend this without malice), you should learn to use proper capitalization rules outside of WP however. --Censorwolf 02:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Taking this outside of Misplaced Pages:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BNewYork-State-Highway-stub.7D.7D for discussion, you state that the WP capitalization guidelines are "not technically correct". Please explain, with references. --Censorwolf 15:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but refering to http://dot.ca.gov is a fallacy of logic: an irrelevant appeal to authority. While CA's DOT is certainly an authority on roads in CA, they are not an authority on capitalization, so it does not matter what format they use. I looked at a few of their pages and their webmaster seems to insist on capitalizing every title, which is incorrect.

Re Talk:List_of_California_State_Routes, the argument positions presented by User:Squib and User:BlankVerse are indeed compelling; your counter arguments for the most part are again appeals to authority, appeals to popularity, appeals to local convention (e.g. it's been that way for a long time, that's the way we've always done it...), and insistence that only people who have contributed to road pages have any say or voting authority. All of these are fallacies of logic.

Only two authorities can be validly applied:

1. A style manual such as the Chicago Manual of Style and
2. The WP guidelines.

On WP, the WP guidelines hold more authority for this case because the guidelines have already been debated and decided on for this media. Just like the CA DOT site has already decided to capitalize all page titles, it wouldn't be a good idea for someone there to start changing the style for some pages; it is better that they all agree with each other. So here, on WP, if the guidelines are to capitalize lists and categories one way, then that is the way it should be done. Unfortunately, not all pages have followed the guidelines, but even if more don't follow them than do, this again would be appeal to popularity and an invalid argument for doing the same.

I asked for an explanation of why you stated the WP guidelines are "not technically correct", but you didn't provide any. --Censorwolf 14:32, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Appeals to authority are valid ONLY when the authority has expertise in the matter being referenced. For example, you would refer to the CA DOT for authority on highway systems in CA, but not on rules of grammar and likewise capitalization style. You would refer to CMOS for capitalization style but not on how highway systems are set up. It's a matter of domain. I have found one of the most educational things I did was to learn the fallacies of logic when I was about 19. WP's pages on them and some of the external refs there are very well done and worth your time. Valid references to authority are useful, invalid references to authority, on subjects outside their domain, are misleading and just plain wrong.

"New York State Route 17" is capitalized because it is a proper noun, NOT because it is "part of a specific system"; just like you should capitalize "The Eiffel Tower" not because it is part of a system of towers but because it the name of an object. If you want to refer to the collection of towers of France, whether they are part of a "system" or not, the correct reference would be "The towers of France" not "The Towers of France" (you would title a song using the latter method, but we are not writing songs).

Hence you have "List of state routes of New York" or "List of New York state routes" or "List of routes of New York State" (first letter always being capitalized for a title). I could go along with "List of New York State routes" since "New York State" could be considered the full place name, just like you could instead say "List of towers of the Republic of France" or "List of towers of the French Republic", but debate on whether to capitalize "state" is splitting hairs more than the rest of this discussion already is!

If you want the road system titles to use improper capitalization and you can get enough people to agree with you, then those who know better will just think "Oh well, I see those road geeks don't know enough about proper capitalization, grammar, spelling, etc. just like we thought". It will make this part of WP look "unprofessional" and/or done by "style-ignorant" editors, and since you are one of the main contributors of this section, it will be a reflection on you.

Since I see you are currently in school, why don't refer this matter to your language instructor and get his/her opinion? If you are really sure the WP style guidelines are incorrect, then you should take your arguments over to the dicussion page(s) there. That will remove any perceived bias in the argument from the "road crew". --Censorwolf 14:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

NY Routes project

Why I removed the US roads news: I just didn't think the US roads project news belongs on the NY project page. It is already on the US project page, no? Since the link as parent to WP:USRD is already on WP:NYSR, what purpose does it serve to repeat the box here? --Censorwolf 02:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enuf, if it everywhere else. Don't want NY to be left out. --Censorwolf 14:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the {{Template:routeboxny}}. I didn't have time to figure it out yesterday. --Censorwolf 16:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Maine State Routes cat

I suggest one of us renom it for transition to "Maine State Route System". The move was done in blatant violation of consensus.Gateman1997 08:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

US Route

I can understand why US 422 does not belong on the US Routes template; however, it is a unique case that the highway violates the AASHTO numbering. US 422 starts at King of Prussia, PA, ends in Hershey, PA, then starts again in Evansburg, PA (at least 150 miles apart) and ends in Cleveland, Ohio. I think this deserves the significance the other highways (101, 400, etc.) have.

--myselfalso 01:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. The template should say that it is primary routes, though. Is there a template for spurred highways? --myselfalso 02:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

SPUI at it again...

Please visit the talk page of California State Route 15. SPUI has been moving the article and has now proposed the current CA routebox used to great effect and maintained by dozens for deletion claiming it's too long... He wants to replace it with a short uninformative POS box.JohnnyBGood 19:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• Your voice might be helpful in this debate man. They're getting crazy.Gateman1997 02:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• We are fast approaching RFC time for SPUI don't you think? He's been given ample warning and continues to act unilaterally. Gateman1997 05:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• Then we should bring him there again. I've witness multiple violations of WP:CIV, WP:3RR, and edit warring on his part today. I think it's time he was thrown to them and hopefully gets a nice long vacation. He's doing nothing to improve the project lately.Gateman1997 05:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• I agree you're probably too close to this to impartially rule, even though I do trust your judgement. However if you could bring this to the ArbCom's attention it may do some good here. He's moved well beyond "disruptive" and into purposely destructive. Not to mention rude and uncouth.Gateman1997 05:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• Probably, but be sure to make note of his current probational status.Gateman1997 05:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• He also seems to be following the same MO in his actions on I-95 exit list. The article survived AfD this week, yet he's unilaterally turned the article into a redirect to I-95, because he doesn't think it can be salvaged without a full rewrite. Every time it gets restored, he reverts to his redirect. He's missed 3RR by the barest of time margins, with four reverts over the last thirty-some hours. —C.Fred (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, I'm looking at WP:AN/I right now. That looks to be the more valid venue for pursuing this. —C.Fred (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

It's obvious admin help is out of the question, and SPUI won't budge on using his userbox (I think he takes affront that we don't like his box rather then editing the project box). I think our only recourse at this time is to continue to revert him if he makes unilateral changes until enough time or incivility has passed for an RFC.Gateman1997 03:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• We should make a few edits to the project box and see if that placates the guy. Maybe remove the legend section and merge the "state law" section into the route number in the box?Gateman1997 03:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:US-blank.png listed for deletion

SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Thank you for mentioning the {{test1}} and {{test2}} tags. I hadn't been using them on IP addresses, for fear of biting the newbies with respect to them being shared addresses, but now that I see that {{sharedwelcome}} exists, I'll do that more. —C.Fred (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

California State Route 15 and Interstate 605 (California)

Can you set these two up for protection from SPUI? He's reverting both to his userbox which has been rejected thus far by consensus.JohnnyBGood 01:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Route bot?

I was working on the I-95 exit list, and I saw that suddenly there were many changes. This included links of "VA Route 895.svg" and even "Philadelphia, Pennsylvania" to "Philadelphia, PennsylVirginia State Highway". Just a Heads Up that it does this and caused quite some work to fix it. Also, I prefer abbreviations- PA 450, VA 895, I-66, US 30- as opposed to the longer versions, because it keeps everything short and rid of unnecessary words. But that part's fine maybe I'm missing a guideline somewhere. Anyway, just a heads up. Also, I'd like to take this time to complain about SPUI, in Interstate 95 in Virginia, his facts are wrong regarding VA 895, which I've corrected and he's reverted, and also he had a tendency to do whatever he wants regardless of what's been decided, and what looks good to him (i.e. Exit table in I-95 in VA). This isn't my first run-in with him, the last was on the routeboxes and...that was a mess. Anyway, just my complaint. I don't mean to be a bother. But thanks for the Exit List help. --MPD01605 05:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

HELP!!!!

SPUI is unilaterally moving CA 283, CA 99, and also placing his info box on those pages and BUS 80 in Sacramento and I-605. Can't we RFC this guy?JohnnyBGood 19:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

It appears he's moved into other articles as well. I too would support an RFC or Arbcom at this stage. We've got several ongoing discussions he's been invited to join but refuses to. Time to get higher powers involved.Gateman1997 20:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. These moves, and his insistence now on making redirects and links for "CityName (ST)" contrary to Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions_(city_names)#North_America is unacceptable.

I don't have the time to put this evidence together, but I've certainly seen enough violations of (WP:NPA), (WP:CON), and (WP:CIVIL) to warrant it. --Censorwolf 19:59, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sorry = I've noticed. Again via the same culprit. I will see if I can add my voice to the unblocking chorus. --Censorwolf 13:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I did a lot of work on those articles and felt a little violated. Daniel Case 22:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Continuing. I see no solution without presenting a full case history and intervention from higher powers. This editor appears to think that he alone can decide how parts of WP will be built. --Censorwolf 03:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

OK Good. I see this will take a while. Meanwhile we plod on. --Censorwolf 03:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Seems like there is a like mind. ] --Censorwolf 04:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

CA 85

Hi, just letting you know I modified CA 85 with the jerk's infobox but w/ all junctions. Let me know what you think. If he objects to THAT then we should just keep resisting him because if he's not taking that he's just being unreasonable to the extreme. We may even be able to put the postmiles in there.JohnnyBGood 23:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I reverted it with a few changes real fast, let me know what you think. I'm just running this through in anticipation of the worst. However for now I'm in favor of not backing down for sure.JohnnyBGood 23:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Shield image formats

Should any new shield images created be in svg? I have noticed that most other highway systems have been converting to svg. Station Attendant 23:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

California State Routes

Do you know why they're currently at "California State Route X"? I mass-moved them about a year ago from "California State Highway X". There were some complaints, but, except for SR 17, it settled down. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 04:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, there wasn't any consensus. I just came in and decided to move them. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 04:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I-95 exit list

Why did you revert this to its forked version? --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 06:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Moves

Only if you stop making controversial moves without consensus. Pot kettle black. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:MNSH

I just saw your message updated to my User Talk. I'm relatively new at updating pages on Misplaced Pages.

Did you see my updates for MN-371, is that how you got my name? I'm a big road geek who lives in Central Minnesota, and would be willing to help out on the Minnesota State Highways WikiProject if you can give me more details on what I can do (since I haven't done anything involving a WikiProject before).

SpaceJunkie 05:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I see you noticed my updates to MN-371 and MN-301. Thanks for fixing them up for me. If you, or anyone else, wants me to keep working on trying to update other Minnesota highways in my area, let me know on my talk page. Thanks!

SpaceJunkie 02:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I added the banners back to the talk pages.

SpaceJunkie 02:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Connecticut state routes

Sorry, I didn't know that there was this highway naming issue. Since I created 95% of the existing pages, I thought I would go ahead and move them to the name ConnDOT and the news media use. I have already finished moving all the existing pages but if you want to revert them, then go ahead. So which name should I use for newly created articles? Polaron 04:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Med Cabal

Thank you for doing the legwork (fingerwork? :) ) to get the case started. I hate that it came to it, but his edits were getting tedious to deal with and standing in the way of progress.

Call me old school, I guess. :) I came of age on Usenet, where there was a defined process for creating or renaming newsgroups: a Request For Discussion, where the idea was presented, and if it looked like it was getting favourable reception, then a Call For Votes, which was a straight up/down vote, and only then acting on the proposal, if it passed the vote. So I'm used to the idea of discussing first and then acting along the lines of what the prescribed majority favor doing. It looks like the AfD process is more of a CFV with a RFD interwoven (see my AfD nom of polylogue), and I can adapt to that. But when SPUI's idea loses the vote, but he sends the control message anyway...well, that's where we are now. —C.Fred (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)