Talk:New Jersey Route 139

New Jersey Route 139 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 1, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

U.S. Roads: State highways / U.S. Highways / New Jersey Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Topics

U.S. state highways

U.S. Highways

Locations

New Jersey

This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.

This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Article recognition:

	This article was the selected article of the New Jersey task force in August 2015.

New Jersey: Hudson County Mid‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hudson County Task Force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Note

If anyone's wondering about the whole 1&9 -> 139 thing, here's an email I got from NJDOT some time ago (in or before 1998):

Route 139 was a new number assigned to the upper and lower levels of what
was once Route U.S. 1&9 Business.  It is a short route, which did not comply
with the criteria for a U.S.-numbered business route.  We sought to assign a
three-digit number. Under the U.S. numbering system, odd first digits denote
spurs (even are loops).  There was no other greater rationale than that we
essentially replaced the ampersand in 1&9 with a similar-looking digit *3".
For your information, we continue to carry suffixes of *U* and *L* to
distinguish the upper and lower roadways of the alignment.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by SPUI (talk • contribs)

GA Review

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:New Jersey Route 139/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
"The reason for this project is that the current viaducts are structurally obsolete" <-- To the normal reader, what does "structurally obsolete" mean? I know what it means, but if there is no link, it should be clarified. Also the sentence sounds weird.

B. MoS compliance:
You have the NJDOT linked in every citation. It should only be linked in the first use.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

Again I see summary style. The construction to retrofit Route 139 lacks the details of when the 12th and 14th Street Viaducts were constructed in the first place.
Where is any mention of the New Jersey Route 139U designation?

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
I think pics of the viaducts should be included, they are important.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Compared to Maryland Route 12, which i just reviewed, I see the major problem with both is its written in summary style, which is a no-no. We need full details. On hold, 7 days, the usual.Mitch32^{(The Password is... See here!)} 13:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have replied to the above comments. As for both this article and MD 12, I am confused with the summary style issues and would also like to note there are not too many sources on the early history of the road. Do you think you can explicitly explain what needs to be done? As for the picture of the viaduct, I cannot find a suitable image on Flickr and I do not plan on traveling to Jersey City any time soon to get a picture. Dough4872 (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Uh, 139 is a highly important route in Jersey City and such, I don't know how it lacks info on the viaduct, and I will tell you that adding the dates is not really sufficient. People are going to want to know when, why and how. MD 12 needs more details on proposed projects.Mitch32^{(The Password is... See here!)} 18:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have added a little more information about the viaducts from what I can find. Dough4872 (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I will AGF on this and pass it. But I think this should be expanded even further before A and FA.Mitch32^{(The Password is... See here!)} 01:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on New Jersey Route 139. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (February 2018)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New Jersey Route 139. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927220227/http://www.njroads.org/ends/139/nj139.htm to http://www.njroads.org/ends/139/nj139.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic