Talk:Interstate 85/Archive 1

Archive 1

SC abandonned bicentennial structure on I-85 between Spartanburg and Greenville

In the early 70's SC designed and started a bicentennial glass structure on the west side of I-85 (southbound exit); this structure was based on a geometric shape (maybe dome?) made of specifically shaped pieces (maybe triangles) that resulted in accumulating each piece's (triangle) error as the structure was built until the summed errors were too many to allow further construction and the thing was left to rust for several years. Can someone provide a picture and or corroboration? Philfossil 15:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Possible add to Notes

Maybe of something of interest, but near Gaffney, South Carolina, there is a graveyard in the medium of the Interstate highway. The graveyard has been there since the 1800's and cannot be accessed unless you park along the medium of the freeway. Unless you are looking for it, you will miss it since it is an oddity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Washuotaku (talk • contribs) 20:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Undid redirect

I undid the "I-85 in Virginia" redirect and created a page on the highway's route through this state. --Bdj95 19:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Shortening list

WP:IH guidelines say that major interstates (ones that end in "0" or "5") should only have "major intersections" (i.e., intersections with interstates also ending in "0" or "5") listed there. The remaining intersections should be listed within the body of the article itself. I-85 qualifies in that regard. --Mhking 23:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Not in the current rewrite. It specifically says: "For any interstate that is long enough to have 8 or more 2di junctions, such as I-80, I-90, I-40, I-10, I-75, and I-95, only list 2di junctions where the number ends in 5 or 0." I-85 does not qualify in that regard, with seven junctions in the infobox. —C.Fred (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

False combine in infobox?

An editor today combined I-20 and I-75 onto a single line in the infobox. The problem is, that makes it looks like the roads are multiplexed at the interchange, when they are not. Other routes--like Interstate 20--use separate lines for multiple intersections within a single city. Is there any reason to group the two roads onto one line, or should they be broken back out to two? —C.Fred (talk) 21:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason to have both junctions in the infobox? --NE2 05:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Both are major interstates. To omit them would to imply that the roads do not intersect. —C.Fred (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It implies nothing of the sort. --NE2 06:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge I-85 Corridor in?

I don't believe that the I-85 corridor necessarily needs an article. The article as it stands is more about the corridor itself rather than the developing megalopolis barely mentioned in the article, and I think that it should thus be merged. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 05:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The Interstate 85 page is about the road itself, construction, structures, etc.; the I-85 corridor page is about the land surrounding the freeway I-85, and the culture and economic development within that land. Njbob (talk) 12:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Njbob, the Interstate 85 article is about the road, I don't think that merging the corridor article would be a good thing. Altairisfar_talk 19:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Criss-Cross

I've been driving back and forth on I-85 between LaGrange, GA and Petersburg, VA for the last couple weekends and have noticed that there is a section in NC (roughly between Thomasville and Lexington, and in the vicinity of a rest area) where the northbound and southbound lanes cross over, so that the sb lanes are to the east of the nb lanes. (assuming for the sake of discussion that the road is actually running geographically north and south at this point). Is this a unique feature for an interstate highway? Does anybody know if there was a particular reason for this design? LarryMac 14:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes. North Carolina built a Vietnam Veterans Memorial at the rest area that is located in the crossover section. By crossing the interstate travel lanes, access to the rest area is by simple right-hand exits with no bridges necessary at the rest area and minimizing the number of bridges necessary for the project. C.Fred 02:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

what is the name of the the town/city heading toward north Carolina right as you take interstate 85 and exit 185? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.68.221 (talk) 22:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

I moved information from the I-385 and I-585 pages to this page, as those two are spur routes of I-85. I-385 and I-585 now redirect here. WhisperToMe 04:26, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Why? Those pages need to now be separated from Interstate 85. --Rschen7754 22:32, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Recent edits

Those are not "unneeded citation requests". The WP policy WP:OR prohibits original research such as stating that the "east-west span is longer than the north-south span". If a Reliable Source actually stated that, then there should be a citation for it. Similarly, it is OR for editors to use their own designation of regions of the US (there is no official designation of a "Southeastern" region for the US). If a Reliable Source has stated that this is a Southeastern region highway then there should be a citation for it. 17:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️ See also WP:DOCITEBLUE. There is no exemption that allows "obvious" statements to remain uncited. 17:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

Were the region capitalized, my pedantic side might agree, but no cite should be necessary to say something is in the "southeastern United States", i.e. the fact should be readily apparent if anyone looks at a map of the country to see that something is in fact in the southeastern area of the country and not the northeastern, northwestern nor southwestern areas. See: Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue.

In the future, The owner of all, please don't open multiple discussions, like you did at WT:USRD. It's fine to neutrally point people to another location, but it's not good to open a whole second discussion. Imzadi 1979 → 18:44, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Well at least that makes logical sense. I disagree, considering (1) unfortunately a lot of readers will not realize that there is a difference between "southeastern" and "Southeastern", and (2) the inclusion of that point seems to be to indicate someone's opinion that the route should not have been given an "x5" number (because it is only "regional" and not national). However if there is no consensus then I will not attempt to change it again. The more problematic statement, though, is [It] covers a larger east-west span than north-south. That one definitely needs a citation or it needs to be removed if it's OR. 20:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

Auxiliary routes

Should there be a section on the auxiliary routes of I-85 somewhere on this page? NintendoTTTEfan2005 (talk) 23:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)