Talk:U.S. Route 522 in Maryland

Merging to U.S. Route 522

I have for a long time thought about sub-article state-details for U.S. Route 522. I've argued time and again over the non-necessity of a U.S. Route 522 in Maryland article. The entire stretch of U.S. Route 522 in MD is 2.53 miles, hardly noteworthy and the info could always be placed in the main article with balance. There is really no need for West Virginia and Maryland articles and WV hardly has significant info for the 22-mile stretch and Maryland doesn't need its own article. I have tagged this for merge to start up the discussion to whether or not this should stay. Inclusionists may say yes to the fact that it deserves its own stretch, but that would mean U.S. Route 60/62 in Illinois deserved its own article and U.S. Route 224 in Pennsylvania should both exist. Hell that would make a significant notice to create U.S. Route 611 in New Jersey, not necessary either. I'd like to hear other opinions however.Mitch32^{(Transportation Historian)} 23:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I merged U.S. Route 8 in Minnesota back into U.S. Route 8 for similar reasons. In that case, the MN segment is 22 miles, and the Michigan segment is 2.322 miles. Unlike the US 8 case, at least US 522 has two states (VA and PA) with significant distances, meaning sub-articles in those cases are somewhat appropriate. I would merge the MD article into the parent. Imzadi 1979 → 23:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose This article is hardly a stub, and has more content than a lot of short highways I've seen in the past. If the article was not up to snuff, then I would be OK with merging, but not in this case. --Admrboltz (talk) 23:44, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I said on IRC that I wouldn't be opposed to a U.S. Route 522 in Maryland and West Virginia article. It's not the most elegant solution, but it would allow us to have a proper junction list for the two states where we wouldn't have one on the national article. –Fredddie™ 23:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The well-written reasoning is worthless, because I don't feel if its a GA or FA that it should be not open to losing its article. The article isn't even a GA or FA.Mitch32^{(Transportation Historian)} 23:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

And whats stopping it from being sent to GAN? It looks pretty ready to me right now as it stands. --Admrboltz (talk) 23:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

If it was a GA I'd still nominate it for merge. GAR exists.Mitch32^{(Transportation Historian)} 00:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose because I believe there is enough information for each state's segment of US 522 to warrant state-detail articles. This U.S. highway passes through four states; is there a precedent for not splitting a four-state U.S. highway into state-detail articles? I do not think length of a particular segment or that length in relation to the lengths of other segments should be the sole determinants of whether there should be a state-detail article for that segment. Keep in mind that US 522 is merely a common designation of four different state highways. Each state's section has a different history that may not be explicated in every state now, but can be added in the future when the proper resources are found. Also, I am not convinced by an "article not being needed" argument because that argument would never be used for a primary state highway article that is 2 or 19 miles long.
  I am interested in how a U.S. Route 522 in West Virginia and Maryland sub-article would work. Is there a precedent for such an article? I personally think the Maryland and West Virginia state-detail articles should remain separate, but if the consensus is for merging them, I would like to learn how that would or should work.  VC  02:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Currently, there is not a precedent, but combining two state-detail articles could create a new one. If I were combining two state-detail articles, I would write it as if it were one route as much as possible. –Fredddie™ 02:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'd think of it like U.S. Route 131. One RD that encompasses both states. The history covers both in the same timeline, and the junction list is one table. Imzadi 1979 → 03:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. –Fredddie™ 04:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose - The state-detail article is B-class. Even though it covers a short section of road, it should stay. Dough4872 04:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
• Merge. It's two paragraphs of info. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)