Wikipedia

Portal:U.S. roads/Selected article/Recommend/2009

< Portal:U.S. roads | Selected article | Recommend
(Redirected from Portal:U.S. Roads/Selected article/Recommend/2009)


The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support M-28 --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:12, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

January 2009

  • New Jersey Route 37 - I don't believe we've had New Jersey at all. - Mitch32(Go Syracuse) 16:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Well in reality we have had both MI and NJ (if you count Pulaski Skyway)... I'm supporting M-28 as it is a FA. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support CA-78. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support NY 28N. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support I-68. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:32, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

  • Interstate 66 - It's a decently-written article, and is appropriately sourced, with good information. It's been a few months since we had an Interstate. --MPD T / C 00:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Interstate 68 - recent promotion to A-class. --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Support - great article. Dough4872 (talk) 00:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Support – looks good all around. – TMF 08:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

May 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was support US 41 (MI). – TMF 00:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

  • U.S. Route 41 in Michigan - An A-class article and current FA candidate. - Algorerhythms (talk) 23:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Support - We have not had a U.S. Highway article for a few months, and this is a very well-written one that has yet to be featured. Dough4872 (talk) 19:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Support - A well-written article that deserves a spot on our portal. –CG 21:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

June 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the poll was support PA 652 by default. – TMF 05:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Pennsylvania Route 652 - A-class article, have not had Pennsylvania in a long time. Dough4872 (talk) 01:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Nice article. –CG 15:47, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Support, A-Class, looks good. We need more monthly noms though... – TMF 09:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

July 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the poll was support WA SR 531. The alternative proposal is supported by the nominator of the original and no objections were presented to the alternative proposal. Thus, in the interest of keeping business in line, I'm going to close this and make WA SR 531 the selected article for July. – TMF 03:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Washington State Route 339 - We haven't been back in the Northwest for a while; this article is about a road with no road at all. (A-Class) –CG 12:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Support as nominator. –CG 12:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Interesting article about an interesting "road". Dough4872 (talk) 15:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: the article subject looks interesting and the article itself looks good, but I'd like at least one picture to be added to the article before I can support it. – TMF 21:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - I fully agree with TMF that a picture would REALLY help, and I strongly encourage CG to scour Flickr or wherever for a free image that could be used. Even without the image, the article is an interesting change of pace from the usual. Dave (talk) 23:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I'd like to point out that it took me 10 seconds to find an image on flickr already with a CC licensee (i.e free to upload to commons) [1]. The images are out there. There are lots of really good ones (as in could be a Quality image) but they are licensed CC-NC-SA. [2] But that's not the end of the world. I have talked to some flickr users and some have agreed to remove the NC clause so wikipedia can use it. I would think in 10 days time we could get some images on here. Dave (talk) 23:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Some pictures are of the three other Vashon Island ferries, look for the passenger-only ferry. That's SR 339. –CG 23:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support — only if a photo is added. I did a little copy editing and cleanup on the article, so I'm willing to give this article some attention, but only if a photo is added. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I will support only if a photo is added; otherwise, I will have to oppose this nomination. The article does pass the GA criteria, since images are optional for whatever reason that I can't comprehend, but without a photo it doesn't meet the standard that we have established here for selected article. – TMF 11:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

So...it's July 1 and there's still no picture, which means there's one explicit oppose and one inferred oppose against two non-nominator supports; hardly a consensus. The question is, what to do? IMO if we shoehorn this article through, it greatly lowers our standard for PUSRD SAs. – TMF 16:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

After briefly thinking about it, I'd be game for moving the ACE Connector up a month. – TMF 16:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what to do here. Per my post above, there are plenty of pics on flickr, already CC licensed, I found dozens on the first try. However, as CG points out there are 4 ferries in this location and I'm not qualified to tell which is which. However, for somebody who IS familiar with the area, there's no reason why we can't get a picture up in 30 minutes. CG, can you please take the lead?Dave (talk) 16:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm going to propose this - if no picture is added to the article by 0:00 UTC July 2 (so basically six hours from now), then the ACE Connector, which has passed A-Class and is undergoing a FAC, will be the July PUSRD SA. I normally wouldn't propose something like this, but it looks unprofessional to have a blank spot on the portal. – TMF 17:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I've spent my online time looking for good, relevant pictures, but all are not freely licenced. ACE Connector might as well have to be PUSRD SA this month. –CG 18:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
What about this one [3] Not of the ferry itself, but of the dock, and it's CC-SA licensed, which Commons will take. If this is the right dock, why not?Dave (talk) 18:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Another idea, staying with Washington: how about Washington State Route 531? It's also an A-Class article and is much more illustrated than SR 339. – TMF 19:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer this idea. –CG 19:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

August 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was support ACE Connector. – TMF 07:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Atlantic City-Brigantine Connector - Recent promotion to A-class and current FAC, have not had a New Jersey article in a long time. Dough4872 (talk) 16:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Support. As an aside, the last New Jersey article was Interstate 295 (Delaware-New Jersey) in February 2007, so having a NJ article as the PUSRD SA is long overdue. I can't imagine how many NY or MI articles have appeared on the portal since then. – TMF 19:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support per being a non-NY article. –Juliancolton | Talk 20:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Good quality, great lead, pictures included. –CG 19:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Primary reason, pretty good article. Secondary reason - regional balance.Dave (talk) 05:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support Ridge Route. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

Article needs to be copyedited first. For the record, T-beam.Dave (talk) 21:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Ridge Route – longtime FA, excluding a one-month period where it was demoted, then repromoted. Originally promoted to FA in August 2004. – TMF 19:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support - The highway is historically significant, located on the west coast and on the Register of Historic Places. –CG 20:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support — I agree with what's been said here. It's one of the oldest FAs the project has, and deserves a chance in the spotlight. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support – per above.Dave (talk) 02:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support as nom. Since I nominated several, I felt it was necessary to specify which one I prefer. – TMF 19:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keysers Ridge – Cumberland, Maryland) – FA. – TMF 19:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

October 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the poll was support Interstate 37. – TMF 16:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Interstate 37 - A-class Interstate Highway article, have not had Texas in a long time. Dough4872 (talk) 03:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support per nom. – TMF 19:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support --Admrboltz (talk) 00:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Support --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Brockway Mountain Drive — My reason for nominating this A-Class article is two-fold. We've never had anything but state highways as Selected Articles. (Assuming Ridge Route is accepted in September, it would be the first). Brockway Mountain Drive is a county road in Michigan known for its scenic qualities. In fact, there is a very nice fall color photo of the road in the article that could be used for the photo to accompany the article blurb. Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
That's not 100% true, I do know of a few Interstate and US highways, and IIRC Polenski Skyway that have been selected, but your general point is valid, State routes are certainly over represented in this forum.Dave (talk) 05:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Interstates and US Highways are still state highways. The point still stands that a road outside of state maintenance has never been selected. Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Very interesting little article. –Juliancolton | Talk 05:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - The article is well-written, isn't state-maintained and A-CLass. –CG 18:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Not that this is a bad article, but we have had too many Michigan articles on the portal recently. If this article is selected, it would already be the third MI article this year alone. We need to see other states. Dough4872 (talk) 13:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Dough. This has nothing to do with the quality of the article, but like Dough said there's been an abundance of NY and MI articles. I'd rather see items from several different states than many from one. The same logic is used at TFA, where a variety of topics is preferred over similar topics. – TMF 19:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • 'Oppose 'per Dough. --Admrboltz (talk) 00:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Support US 5 CT --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

  • We have 3 GAs from the state of Connecticut: U.S. Route 5 in Connecticut, Connecticut Route 190 and Connecticut Route 361. I will just toss out the idea that one of these should be selected, and purely for the reason that there's another fall color photo in CT 190, that's my pick over the other two. Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Support US 5 - The article has a long lead, two adequete photos that can be used for the blurb and represents both rural and urban Conneticut. –CG 18:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support US-5 per CG. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose CT 361, fails imagery criteria. Support US 5, solid article from top to bottom. CT 190 is good too; with a longer lead, it would be a good candidate for SA in the future. – TMF 17:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Support US 5 - Out of the three, it is the best article. Dough4872 (talk) 18:05, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

December 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the poll was support RI 99. – TMF 05:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Ohio State Route 716 — We've never had an article from Ohio grace the portal. Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this article long enough to support an adequate blurb? –Juliancolton | Talk 05:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
The joy is that since we have 4 months before the blurb would have to be done.. we'd have time to summarize the article into a longer blurb than the article's lead. Imzadi1979 (talk) 06:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Support if lead is expanded - The lead is a bit short and so is the article, but its suitable. –CG 18:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The lead is too short and there is no picture of the road. Dough4872 (talk) 17:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Just a comment here, but the lead of an article isn't copied verbatim to make the blurb for the FA on the Main Page. If the lead doesn't summarize enough of the article to be long enough for the blurb, we just add to it when crafting the blurb. As for a photo, well... we have time on that as well. Imzadi1979 (talk) 18:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: I think it's far too early to support or oppose this nomination based on the article's current state as December is about four months away. A lot can change over that time. This is why I'm not a fan of setting up nominations for months that are several months out. – TMF 21:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose. No improvements were made, and thus it falls well short of the criteria on many levels. – TMF 05:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Rhode Island Route 4 - GA currently at ACR A-Class article currently at FAC, never had Rhode Island before. Dough4872 (talk) 18:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose, to me it looks like the quality of the article has actually declined since it went to FAC. – TMF 21:12, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
    • It is still better than OH 716, which has a short lead and no picutre of the road. ---Dough4872 04:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
      • That's true, and for said reason I've opposed that article as well. – TMF 05:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Rhode Island Route 99 - Another GA from RI. ---Dough4872 05:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

  • Support, this one looks pretty good. – TMF 05:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the poll. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:U.S._roads/Selected_article/Recommend/2009&oldid=1025007706"