Talk:Alberta Highway 4

Image copyright problem with Image:Redcoat-hwy.png

The image Image:Redcoat-hwy.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:AB-Veteran HWY.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Sunshine Trail

I have added note that the highway was once called "Sunshine Trail" so if anyone could maybe go more in depth on the naming of Sunshine trail. http://www.galtmuseum.com/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.184.25.48 (talk) 04:26, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for making this contribution, but the link that you provided within the reference does not verify this. When I click that link, all I get is a white page with the text "DB/Text WebPublisher cannot be accessed in this way." and an OK button. As such, I will revert the contribution until the proper link that confirms this is provided. Hwy43 (talk) 05:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alberta Highway 4/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rschen7754 (talk · contribs) 21:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for having a look, I am taking photos in the Lethbridge area today and there will be a few photos up of this highway by the end of the day. -- Acefitt 21:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I may make a few additional comments that will benefit the article with ACR and FAC in mind, if you are working towards that.

For this review at GAN

• I'm not sure why Google Streetview is used as a source. It can be used if you need to cite a sign or in a few other circumstances, but I don't see why the standard Google Maps can't be used here. (Perhaps it might be better used for the speed limits, though that is usually not considered notable enough for an article).
• Infobox looks fine, except Towns has an extra comma after it.
• Citations generally aren't in the lead. I would also add it to the route description and cite there.
• constructed in the immediate vicinity of a Canadian Pacific Railway branch - could be a bit more clear. A branch of the line?
• Not counting links in the lead, generally cities and highways (and anything else) are linked the first time they are mentioned in the body of the article, only.
• the original alignment of the highway was directly through the community - would need a proper citation for that.
• The grammar/writing style seems fine, not seeing many issues there.
• Like many main highways in Alberta, the alignment of Highway 4 is based on an existing railway. - I'm not sure that you can use a 2010 map to cite this. "parallels an existing railway", maybe, but I think you would have to get an older map to do this, maybe even a book.
• "Twinning" needs a link - it's not a term that's widely used in, say, the US.
• reiterated by annual reports - in annual reports? Also might want to say who wrote the reports.
• Who designated the highway the First Special Service Force Memorial Highway? Both governments?
• Last sentence of history needs a citation.
• to render the CANAMEX Corridor free-flowing - could be more clear.
• this would be detrimental to adjacent properties - be more specific
• likely rejected by city council - a bit POV here, I would say who thinks it would be rejected
• RJL notes - generally there are no periods at the end since they are not complete sentences.
• RJL distances - generally the most precise you can be is one tenth of a km/mile when using Google Maps to cite lengths. It would be preferable to find official GIS data/ministry of transportation sources to get the lengths. Some provinces may not have that data, in which case you are stuck using Google Maps. In that case, I would be more consistent with the number of digits after the decimal.

Other suggestions

• The article is short on details explaining why the roads was built (look in newspaper archives). I think this is okay for the GA level, but more will be needed for ACR/FAC.
• Creating a map might look nicer than just a screenshot of OSM, but again not required for GA. Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maps task force/Tutorial has a good tutorial, if you want to give it a try (there is a bit of a learning curve, though).
• FAC will be stricter on citation formatting - for example, ref 13 would need a page number if you can find it.
• A KML of the route would be nice (but not required for GA) - see Help:Attached KML for details.
• Construction costs will need to be inflated if possible. I would use caution though, as construction costs are inflated differently than, say, consumer purchases. If it's not possible to calculate this for the Canadian dollar, better to leave it out. See Template:Inflation for more details.

I'm putting this on hold for the standard 7 days for the fixes to be made. --Rschen7754 21:45, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

My intention was not to use StreetView as a source, but rather as supplemental information to the existing map sources. I've added a couple of map references in addition now, and I suppose the Street Map links could be entirely removed. Still looking for a source stating which of the two governments designated the highway as the FSSF Memorial but haven't haven't found anything yet. Presumably it was a collaboration but I'll continue searching. I'll swap the map to a graphic created by another user until I can create a better one, and continue searching for more info to supplement the history. -- Acefitt 23:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: Changes have been made. -- Acefitt 20:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

The wikilink is still missing but I won't hold up the nomination over that. Passing. --Rschen7754 03:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: Thanks, I removed the instance of that word in the infobox and forgot to grab the others which I'll do now. It's a very common phrase in Canada and I actually didn't realize it's not used elsewhere. -- Acefitt 03:45, 12 December 2016 (UTC)