User talk:Floydian/Archive/2010b

This is an archive of my talk page from May through August 2010

Highway images on 401

Did you see the response posted by Peter? Apparently, there is a special tag that can be used, because there isn't full consensus at Commons where or not to fully enforce the rule about U.S. copyright for non-U.S. images. If you tag the images, they should be okay. Sorry for the confusion. --Skeezix1000

Prince Edward Island Route X

We can go ahead with this I think. There's not that many, do you want to just manually move them? –xeno^talk 21:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll go take a look. If it's not too many I'll do them now. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 18:21, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I realized after I left you the message that some or all might be help up by redirects so I might need to lend a hand. –xeno^talk 18:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: I checked all of them. There are only 6 articles, and only 1 isn't redirected from Prince Edward Island Route X (#5, which I've moved). The other 5 need to be moved by an admin. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Will do. (There's closer to 20 though) –xeno^talk 19:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I think List of Prince Edward Island provincial highways needs an updatin' then (but then again so does every province in Canada). - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll leave that to you ;> Moves are  Done. Cheers, –xeno^talk 19:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

My Editing History

Oh, i've not lost interest... it's life getting in the way of things... had three funerals to attend to in March, then had to spend April getting rid of the backlog of work caused by those funerals... then i've had to work on my website... I'm still intersted in Wikipedia... i just have not had any time to work on it recently. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 19:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

401 ideas

Hey, I recently did some work with the 401 article and put an image in the infobox. It keeps the article a little tidier, but the infobox is kind of long now.

What do you think about adding a subsection entitled "World's Busiest Highway"? There we can dismiss that claim putting in sources that state it as NA's busiest and the one of the world's busiest. We can also state that there is no official source that states it as the world's busiest but it does have volumes higher than any road in the world based on all publicly gathered documents.

The 18 lane pic doesn't really show all 18 lanes well. I think we might need to source this. Does THIS or THIS qualify as sources? I'm sure we can find a text document stating it is 18 lanes too.

Also, has there been any progress upgrading the article to A class? Haljackey (talk) 17:52, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and I'm heading to Toronto on Friday. I'll try to get a shot of the hilly section in the Dorchester Swamp during the trip. (just got a new camera so I hope it comes out ok). Problem is it's forcasted to rain so the shot may not be better than the one that's currently up there. I'll also try to get a shot of the construction between Woodstock and K-W (although we may take the 403 to get to downtown Toronto as we're going there first). Any other photos you want between London and Toronto? Haljackey (talk) 18:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh, no. It's sitting, and waiting. From what I've heard it can take some time. I may just throw it at WP:FAC and see how badly it gets shot down. I think the information regarding the world busiest is from the old article at wikipedia. All sources claiming that are mirrors of wikipedia, or self published blogs from someone who read the wikipedia article. I've got the MTO and FHWA sources that claim the busiest in North America. What we can say is that it has the highest AADT of any road, since I don't believe they measure that in Asia (the only place that could have a busier road is Japan or southeast Asia / China / Taiwan). I don't think a separate section is necessary, just put it in the lead of the Route description, and summarize it in the lead of the article (basically extending the way it is set up now). I think a picture or (preferably, as far as I've heard) a satellite shot of that section is enough validation for the number of lanes (I've used sat. shots in List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes, which is on it's way to being a featured list). Adding the pic to the infobox works really good btw, at both 1024x768 and at 1600x1024.

As for pics, if you can get stop at all and get one of the 401/403 interchange, as well as any photos of the 403 (esp. coming down the escarpment in Hamilton, see if you can get it with the massive waterfall on the south side). The more pics the better. :)

Other than that, don't worry about rain - If the white balance is set right, the picture should look good regardless of the weather. Take a sheet of blank white paper. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 18:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not really sure how to state that worlds busiest highway thing in the route description. You made that section, right? Perhaps you can fit that in somewhere?

It's there now:

"The 401 is one of the world's busiest highways,[4] with an estimated annual average daily traffic (AADT) count of 431,900 in Toronto between Weston Road and Highway 400, as of 2006,[1] as well as daily traffic in excess of 500,000 on some days.[3] This makes it the busiest roadway in North America, surpassing the Santa Monica Freeway in Los Angeles, Interstate 10 (I-10) in Houston, and I-75 in Atlanta."

I suggest changing "is one of the world's busiest highways,[4]" to "is one of the world's busiest freeways[4] and has the highest recorded annual average daily traffic (AADT) in the world at 431,900, as of 2006.[6] The section in Toronto between Weston Road and Highway 400 carries in excess of 500,000 vehicles on some days.[3]"

As for the photos, like I said, I'm not really sure if we're taking the 401 or 403 to Toronto. Either way I'll try to get shots for the 403/QEW articles and whatnot. I'm traveling in a car packed with friends, so we won't be stopping to take pics. The ones I do manage to take will probably be through the windshield or a side window if we're traveling on a overpass. I'll try to roll down the window but if its cold and rainy I don't think it will happen.

Anyways I'll try to get some shots, but don't count on anything amazing. Haljackey (talk) 18:31, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll be out for photos in August. I find it's the best month to capture the colours (beside green and brown) of the scenery, and that the sunlight is at the best angles. Probably won't get further than Cambridge, but I want to get a shot of the reconstruction of the 8/401 interchange. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow, the weather looks absolutely horrible tomorrow. Don't count on any images from me :( Haljackey (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh, I actually got some decent results. The here are the links to the pics that turned out ok. Most are for the 401, but they are in no order. Let me know if you want any uploaded to the commons.

• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard01.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard011.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard01kln.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard01lm.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard01yufyu.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/clipboard02.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/dsv.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/ml.jpg
• http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Haljackey/GTR/sdfds.jpg

Haljackey (talk) 17:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

The Dorchester swamp image is definitely better than the current image, so it would be good, but it's the one of the CN Tower that truly stands out to me. It would be great to use as the first image for the Gardiner Expressway. :::::The other images I don't recognize for the most part.

Found this photo yesterday, you might find it interesting: The widening of the highway from 4 to 12 lanes and the construction of the DVP/404 interchange.[1][2] - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 05:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok cool, I'll get those ones uploaded. Which one did you want of the CN tower, the one up close right (not from the 427 flyover). I guess I should have described the pics some more... The second one shows the widening between Woodstock and Kitchener, 3rd one is a ped overpass and Grand River bridge, 4th is C/E widening between Hurontario Street and 403/410, and the last is near the 427/Gardiner/QEW junction. Haljackey (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The pictures are up. Oh, and those images are cool too. Perhaps the first one you linked can replace the old 400/401 junction as it is much more interesting. Haljackey (talk) 17:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been doing some work with the images on the 401 article, mostly cropping them to make them smaller in the article. This mainly consists of cutting out the sky which is, for the most part, wasted space. After completing this, I noticed that the highway traffic camera pic doesn't fit in well with the article. Now that there is a picture of a changable message sign, do we still really need the camera pic? Haljackey (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Not sure I agree with all of the changes. Some of the pictures look very odd being so short in height (Dorchester Swamp), but a number are also much better (HoH billboard). I also plan on replacing the 18 lane / CMS picture as soon as a replacement is available - The camera picture has very little clutter and focuses solely on the subject at hand, instead of showing a dozen items of interest at once. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 00:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, Ok. Feel free to recrop the pictures (look in file history on the image page) if you think some of them look odd. Thoughts on getting rid of the traffic cam pic? Also found some pics of the 401 in London from a hot air balloon [3] [4]. The photographer has given me permission to use his images on Wikipedia in the past, so getting them in the article shouldn't be too much trouble. Haljackey (talk) 00:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, I intend to keep the traffic camera and remove the CMS one when a replacement for the 18 lane shot is found (or if one doesn't show up soon), since there is no clutter in the traffic camera shot. The second hot air balloon photo is great for showing a Parclo, methinks. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 01:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. I'll upload that one to the commons under the Highway 401 category. I'm not sure where it's going to fit in the article because it has more length than width. Feel free to add it anywhere you see fit. Haljackey (talk) 01:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It's up. I cropped it a bit to cut out the sky. Link: [5] Haljackey (talk) 01:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I see you got the 401/404/DVP pic up. I think having that in the article along with the 400/401 pic is overkill. The one you just added is much better, so keep that one. I would also suggest it be cropped to reduce the length of the image, showing just the 401 and the interchange. Something like this: [6], or one that I have sharpened and enhanced: [7]

What do you think? Haljackey (talk) 04:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Good job on the caption btw. Another issue with the old one was two links next to each other without a word that is not linked separating them.

I don't think having both pictures is overkill, but I definitely agree on using your cropped /enhanced version (upload it to a new name though - I intend to use the full height image on Don Valley Parkway). I'm more for the historical images that actually show something being done over the pictures of the highway today though, so I'd rather take out another image that adds little to the users knowledge than two informative historical images. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 06:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure as long as the pictures are organized the two won't be overkill, at least until the article gets chopped up for A-class or featured article status. Can you upload the cropped image you liked? I don't know the licensing for that photo. I'm sure it will be very similar to the full pic you just uploaded. Haljackey (talk) 06:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

just dropping by to say hi

How are the Canadian roads faring? and any problems with the visual reorganization of the Jcon template that I did? And what is a good page to look at the new format of infobox road that you were working on for the Canadian roads? stmrlbs|talk 18:13, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't speak for the rest of Canada, but Ontario is beginning to shape up just slightly. Hopefully Highway 401 (which is probably the best example of the infobox) will be ready for FAC soon. No problems with the organization you did, it has made it much much easier to follow things around and figure out where errors are stemming from. Some other examples are at Don Valley Parkway, Ontario Highway 35 and Kipling Avenue. You might find this pretty interesting. Check out April 2010 too.

How are your projects coming along? - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 04:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow, on the stats! Good Job! Sorry I didn't get back. Just working a lot lately. I was looking at your examples and they look nice - I like the color. But, is there a key that explains what the colors mean? Aren't you using a color system? It is probably under my nose, but I couldn't find it. But, I like the way it looks. stmrlbs|talk 05:11, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, just checked out that link for the stats. It skyrocketed not long after you changed the article, and it looks like it has further increased dramatically since we got those featured picture contenders. Haljackey (talk) 19:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

It's not only that it skyrocketed, but that it's continued to hold that pattern after the first couple weeks when we were editing it heavily. I barely load the page once a day now on some days, yet it has consistently gone from about a dozen views a day to three to five hundred. I wish I could see where it has come from. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Well I think it's only one per IP address per day. If I loaded the page 300 times in one day it would still only count as one. I've been adding links to it from other articles (such as pictures and road-related articles) so maybe that's one reason? Like I said the last two days are way up and I think that may be due to the featured picture contenders... Haljackey (talk) 19:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

401 Ideas take 2

I have a few more ideas for the article.

• First of all, all the red links should be eliminated (exception might be made for the exit list).
• Maybe make a subsection discussing the problems with the road / congestion? Highway 401's Toronto segment was named one of the worst roads in Ontario in 2009 by the CAA. Link and source: [8] general information: [9]
• Expand the section about the service stations and maybe get a pic of one under reconstruction. I tried to get a shot of the one that's been demolished in Ingersoll, but the image came out blurry. Also, the one in Woodstock (estbound) is open, yet it's stated closed in the article. In addition, it has all the services described in the Newcastle (westbound) service centre. Perhaps the two were switched up? (Not sure if Newcastle one is open or closed, but I would assume its closed.)
• In your completion map, you have a ??? on the most eastern stretch. I think a date needs to be found and changed in the image.
• Maybe include a video showing some important milestones the highway achieved over the years? I recall seeing a couple on Youtube. Good example: [10]

Speaking of Youtube, remember I linked you a high-speed video of the C/E system? I recently talked to the uploader, and he's in the process of fixing the annotations and tweaking the video so it's more accurate. He'll contact me when its done so it can either be linked in the external links or possibly added as a video file.

Thoughts on these 401 ideas? Haljackey (talk) 18:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• Per WP:REDLINK, redlinks should only be removed if the page they link to has no chance of ever being created. Most of the redlinks in the prose are to county roads (esp in Durham) that don't have articles just yet. I strongly dislike removing redlinks simply because they are not blue.
• It t'was, and then the MTO repaved its entire surface through Toronto. That may be worth mentioning. Unfortunately it's hard to source things such as traffic congestion locations and times, even with all the books on the highway, almost none mention congestion beyond the number of vehicles using the highway. However, if you can find a source that rants at the highway, we could very well integrate some into the GTA part of the route description.
• Funny, I hadn't got to that part of your message yet, and as I typed the previous point, the exact same thought came to me. The Tilbury SC is supposed to reopen beginning in July if I'm not mistaken - I'd like to get a picture of the new centres... Preferably something vertical so it can be slipped in beside the Service Centre table.
• Haven't been able to find a source more reliable than this posting by Cameron Bevers on Yahoo groups. It appears as though the part from 10 miles east of Prescott (@Iroquois) all the way to Lancaster began in several separate segments at the same time, and they all joined and completed the full ~75km at the same time as well. Construction started in mid 1960 and finished by 1964. The last section from Lancaster to Montreal was started in '63 or '64, and was done in time for Expo '67 (but I can only find dates for the highway out of Montreal which "connects with Ottawa, and Ontario's 401 to Kingston"). It's better to indicate a lack of knowledge than to promote potentially false information.
• That youtube video is interesting. We have to be wary of what we link to though. Both under consideration of WP:ELNO and WP:EL, as well as the fact that we can't verify the accuracy of the videos in many cases (and they can be changed without notice).

The other youtube video definitely will be going up. If the author can, use information from the article so we don't run into problems with FAC saying the video contains unsourced "facts" - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 22:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The 2009 Worst roads was released earlier this year, so that would have happened after or during the resurfacing projects. I'm sure it wasn't just road surface that was the problem, congestion, weaving, volume, design, average speed/time, etc are all factors. Can you change the service centre chart then? Move the services from Newcastle to Woodstock and open it and close the one in Newcastle. I would but I don't know how to edit charts very well. I sent the video uploader a message regarding sources from the article and he said a lot of the stuff he got was from Wikipedia, but back in August 2009. The article was rewritten since then, right? Or was it before? Haljackey (talk) 00:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Nope, I copied my rewrite article over on March... 25th I believe. What do you mean by move the ones from Woodstock to Newcastle? I'll change the Newcastle one to closed. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 00:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The Woodstock one is open and has the services that's described in the Newcastle one (Esso, Tim Hortons, Wendy's, Mr. Sub, Nicholby's Express), that's what I mean. Sorry if I confused you. Was the article rewritten that recently? Guess I didn't come along long after :P. It was April 18 when I contacted you for the first time. [11] Haljackey (talk) 01:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Found an old mid-1950's photo of Highway 401 at Warden Ave that might be of interest to you. It's on the commons: [12] Haljackey (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I haven't been by it myself, but there are articles saying it closed on Marc 31st[13] (and the source used in the article). Where did you find out the Newcastle one is closed? I'm trying to find a source but I can't (it was open when I went by on April 2nd, but Port Hope had closed two days earlier). I like that photo... I like it a lot. It's indescribable how much has changed. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 14:25, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

All I know for sure is that the Woodstock one is open, and it has every single service that's described in the Newcastle one. I'm not sure if the Newcastle one is open or closed. Glad you like the pic! Haljackey (talk) 15:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's an link from the MTO. It doesn't say anything about the Woodstock or Newcastle service centres being closed. After seeing this list, I'd be willing to bet that the Newcastle one is open. [14] Haljackey (talk) 16:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

It only covers Phase one, which was July 2009. At least a couple were closed on March 31st, but they only seem to be advertised in local papers around their locations. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Just purchased a bunch of Official Ontario Roadmaps off ebay. 1961, 1964, 1965, and 1968. Hopefully this will help fill in some details on the Eastern section and the Tilbury–London stretch (which I know was only 2 lanes at first, but I can't find more than thekingshighway.ca or that youtube video that verify that.

I've also gone over the article with a fine tooth comb. It looks like it's just down the Route description, especially in the GTA and somewhat in Eastern Ontario. I'm afraid if we can't find sources on the collector-express system that FAC will pick it out for sure. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like fun. I'll try to look for some more sources. We can always use google maps right? How about Google Streetview? We could use a sign that shows where the C/E system stars by the 409 denoting which lanes go where. Haljackey (talk) 18:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Sparingly, yes. Streetview is usually discouraged, but it's no problem to show a satellite shot to indicate the width (in lanes) and the start / end of the system. Anything beyond that would require another source. One of the sources I've come across is actually a scientific study of the system as a traffic management system... I'll try and find it to see if it describes anything (sign colours, transfers, the basketweave, etc.) - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 18:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok here is some info I found.

• This is basic and not really academic, so it might not count as a source: [15]
• This is a powerpoint from the MTO that states Highway 401 uses a collector / express system. Could be used to source the first statement in the subsection. I'ts on page 11. [16]
• This MTO page talks about COMPASS and it's main goal on the 401 is to provide info about the system: [17]
• This article talks about the disadvantages of frontage roads. We might be able to incorporate it into the text. It's also a very interesting read.[18]
• This one is good I think. It talks about problems with Toronto's freeway system and talks about the C/E system on page 17 [19]
• From Google Maps/Streetview. Sign indicating the start of the C/E system on the eastbound 401 at the 409. [20]

Anyways hope that helps.Haljackey (talk) 19:16, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, haven't heard from ya about these. Are they any good?

• Also, I submitted this image as a candidate for a featured picture. I reverted it to it's original version so that anyone can enhance it if they so wish. I could use your support on this and from others on road wiki pages. Link: [21]. Full list of candidates here: [22].

Perhaps if it is made a featured picture it will help increase the chances of Highway 401 becoming a featured article. Haljackey (talk) 06:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The first one is actually a mirror of the former wikipedia article, the second I can't view (can you post a screenshot of that page perhaps). The third is good, but doesn't really say much on the system (was a good source on the cameras though). The fourth is a great read, but doesn't really compare frontage roads to collector-express systems (but since we too have frontage roads, I wonder if an Ontario report compares them?), so it could possibly cause some WP:SYNTH issues. The fifth one is the former gettorontomoving essay, you'll want to post that at the reliable sources noticeboard to see if it's an ok source to use.

I posted at the FPC, but I'll echo here: Its a sharp photo, but we've got photos that are so much more interesting to go for that candidacy. File:401_Overview.jpgFile:Highway_401_Night_Lapse_Busy.jpg and File:Evacuated_Highway_401.jpg would be far more likely to succeed - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I replied to your comment there. I was also considering the night shot but I really like this picture as it puts the viewer right in the driver's seat. Haljackey (talk) 15:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the pic isn't going to make it. If you want to nominate the night pic, I'll support it. The reason why I didn't choose it in the first place was because I thought Flickr images couldn't be featured pics. Haljackey (talk) 05:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Not sure how this is done, but we could add something to the "did you know?" section on the wikipedia homepage. Such as saying "did you know that Highway 401 is the busiest highway in North America?" or "Did you know that Highway 401's widest point is 18 lanes near Pearson Airport?" or "Did you know that Highway 401 has the longest collector / express system in the world?" etc. Might further increase the chances of this becoming a featured article along with the featured picture attempts. Haljackey (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

They're all separate independent processes. DYK is for new articles or articles that have been expanded five-fold in the past 5 days, so the article wouldn't be eligible for it. I'm waiting on a peer review, and then I'm going to make the nomination. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 01:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah I see, good luck with that! Also in order for the night pic to be a featured picture, it has to be a major component in at least two articles. You might want to add those links back. Haljackey (talk) 02:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

He's done it again: [23] Haljackey (talk) 16:52, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Adding this one now. Hopefully the other half is done soon to accompany it. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

He said he's starting on it. I'll let you know when the annotations are complete. Haljackey (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah ha! How's this for a source for collector/express? Widening of 401 from 427 to Kipling Ave! [24] Haljackey (talk) 03:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't even mention it though. It just says its a class EA for the widening between Kipling and the 427. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 14:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah after looking at it again, I think this was conducted to add an extra lane in the past, not a C/E system in the future. Haljackey (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Floydian. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page.
Message added 03:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dabomb87 (talk) 03:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Note on KL Roads list

I removed some parentheses from a note on the Kawartha Lakes list. I thought they were distracting. As a plus, it reads as a complete sentence now! —Fredddie™ 01:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Cool, looks a lot better like that (and a lot less repetitive when read aloud). Cheers, ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 02:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Your edit at Reincarnation

Please explain how the source you cited supports the sentence you added here. It doesn't seem to. The version you altered was the result of a consensus hammered out over time. Please engage on the talk page and respect consensus. Mitsube (talk) 23:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Sources override consensus, that's WP:V. Obviously you are only reading the abstract. The Washington Post article is an opinion piece, an essay. It means nothing in terms of scientific statistics. "Scientists don't believe reincarnation", not "scientists choose to ignore the substantial evidence in favour of reincarnation" - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 01:51, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It is not true that there is a scientific consensus, namely, that reincarnation is false. Reincarnation is not a topic that science considers, generally, so how can there be a consensus on it. Now please explain your reverting in the word "notoriety", which is not sourced. Mitsube (talk) 00:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Notoriety? Huh? Please explain how you use the opinion piece of a newspaper to indicate the consensus on a topic that stretches across science, religion, philosophy and medicine? Please explain how the research of one doctor can be used to indicate the overall trend in the topic? The article is a sea of POV research, and really spends no time looking at the topic from the point of view that it is a fringe theory or pseudoscience (aside from a remark about the doctor being a victim of the critics calling his work pseudoscience). - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes

Hey, just wanted to congratulate you on the above list's promotion to FL. You spent months on it, and despite the many obstacles you didn't give up, so it's great to see your persistence finally pay off. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, and thanks! Hopefully the other ~25 lists will be able to follow in due time without so many trials. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 23:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

List of numbered roads in Durham Region

Hello, Floydian. I saw the subject article listed as a G7 CSD and wanted to come by and ask why. I'm kinda new at this so forgive me if my inquiry is at all improper. You don't owe me any explanation, but it appears a good bit of work went into the article. I realize another admin may execute the delete before you answer, but I'm loath to zap the article without your thoughts on the matter. Thanks Tiderolls 04:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

It was indeed a mistake on my part, and I ended up having to ask for deletion when I realized this afterwards. Thought it was a copy of the article in my userspace I was deleting but it had redirected me instead. All in all a good fail. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Floydian, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User talk:Floydian. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Provincial Highway vs King's Highway

Um, you are away that - from a legal standpoint - Ontario hasn't had "Provincial Highways" since the 1920s, and all highways (even secondaries and tertiaries) are not only legally designated as King's Highway, but all references to them by the MTO in one form or another (be it traffic counts, construction reports, etc) state "King's Highway" and not Provincial Highway. If you're using the name, and then stating "... also known as..." it's a misnomer to refer to them as provincial highways. For more information, please see Highway Traffic Act, Section 1(1). A link is available at http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90h08_e.htm.

I'm not looking for an edit war, but unless you can come up with a better reason for referring to the highways incorrectly - and I don't think you can, since no one anywhere, including law and government, refers to them as provincial highways, I'm going to keep changing references to Provincial Highway XXX to King's Highway XXX, and I have the references to back up my edits.

Otherwise, I like what you've done with the articles. They look a heck of a lot nicer than they used to.

All the best, Snickerdo (talk) 04:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Snickerdo. I'm the one who originally reverted your edit. You make a good point however. I will decide to stay out of this one and take the neutral ground.

If an agreement can't be reached, why not simply call it "Highway 401" instead of "Kings Highway 401", "Ontario Highway 401" or "Provincial Highway 401"? I've also heard it referred to as "the 401 Freeway". Haljackey (talk) 04:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not trying to pick a fight here or anything :-) It's just that the correct legal and official government name is King's Highway. Why would anyone have any issue to changing Provincial Highway to read King's Highway in the various Ontario highway articles and, and leave any references to Highway alone without the word Provincial as is?

We should probably update the infoboxes. Any highway from 2-199 should be changed from Provincial Highway to King's Highway. Highways from 500-699 should be changed to Secondary Highway, and highways in the 800s should be changed to Tertiary Roads. Those are all the official names for the various class of highway. All references to the 407 should also be removed from the infoboxes, including the King's Highway shield, etc. I'd do this myself, but I'm still trying to get my head wrapped around the inner workings of how that stuff works in the infobox.

Sound fair to everyone? Snickerdo (talk) 05:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I can do that. Give me a few days, however, as I'm certain I read somewhere that all the highways (2-406, 408-800+) are Provincial Highways legally (and this was a rather recent document, 1999 or 2001). I want to see if I can find this. Change away for now if you wish, I have no issue. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 06:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the infobox change. In addition, the 407 kings highway shield (in the infobox for the 401 article) should removed and replaced with these two images: File:407_ETR_logo.svg Haljackey (talk) 06:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. When I had first driven the highway, it had a normal Highway shield with the number 407 in it. This is what I see now checking Streetview,[25] so we should try to replicate that in the infobox presentation. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 06:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The 407 never had a normal King's Highway shield, it always used the round corporate-looking logo. There are some green trailblazer assemblies in Peel Region that use a King's Highway cutout, but those are put up by the municipality and incorrect.

Once the Eastern extension is constructed, we'll probably want to split the article into two - one for the 407 ETR, and the other for what will end up being King's Highway 407. Snickerdo (talk) 04:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm assuming that would be fairly easy. Just put the ETR image below the 407 image, right? If you want it exact, make "express" in the text it's own line and increase the font a bit. I forgot these are signposts (reassurance markers or whatever they are called), not junction signs. Haljackey (talk) 14:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't even need the text part, just the logos really. No need to change the infobox either, it already classes highways into "Freeways", "King's Highway", "Secondary Highway" and "Tertiary highway". - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 16:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey Floydian, you made the shield images, right? I don't know if you're planning on doing this already, but it might be worthwhile to make a 407 shield for the 407 page similar to http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&ll=43.348526,-79.831209&spn=0,0.033603&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=43.348367,-79.831194&panoid=or_dlFkJdRfxQvz-IbKGZg&cbp=12,21.56,,2,1.67 while keeping just the oval for lists. Just a thought. Snickerdo (talk) 04:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep. I'll probably make both since the oval is a png instead of an svg. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Featured Picture

Floydian, please see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Highway 401 Night Lapse. I have a suggestion. Greg L (talk) 01:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Why not try the evacuated 401 pic now? 3rd time's a charm. :P Haljackey (talk) 23:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Replied at the FPC page. I'm not sure the evacuated pic adds any information to the article, it would probably get opposed. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I dunno, we can at least try it. That pic doesn't suffer from the long exposure problem people are noticing, so I would put it's chances at "decent". If you're not going to do it, I can give it a shot at some point and see what happens. I don't think there are any additional pictures beyond that image that are featured picture worthy unless you prove me wrong. Haljackey (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Trying this instead, maybe it'll fare better. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 01:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh? Isn't that the same picture? If it isn't I don't see it anywhere on the featured picture candidates list. [26] Haljackey Haljackey (talk) 01:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah I see it hasn't been added to the list yet. Are you going to add it? If you don't know how I can do it. Haljackey (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Guess the picture isn't going to make it as a renominated version. Who knows, maybe the opposers will support the black and white photograph. It's also very useful for two articles (the other being the Toronto Propane Explosion). Let me know if you want to do it. If not I can make the nomination... it's no big deal. Haljackey (talk) 00:59, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and did it. Third time's a charm! Let's just hope this saying is true! Link All featured picture candiates] Haljackey (talk) 03:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I could really use your support for the colour alternative [27]. Just a bit more support and this one could actually make it! :) Haljackey (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Po' buster/PhiltyBear?

Floydian - I've finally been provoked enough by an anon IP user who I suspect is Po' buster/PhiltyBear to file another checkuser into whether or not that individual is using an IP to evade his ban. It's at the same location as the previous two CUs: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PhilthyBear. Please offer whatever opinion you have. Cheers. --H MIESIANIACAL 17:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

401 Ideas take 3

Trying to make a three-shielded sign for the main image in the 401 article. I didn't have much success with the PNG, and the SVG file didn't display at all.

Links:

• PNG
• SVG

Original links to shields:

• 401
• M/C-Freeway
• Highway of Heroes

I think the one shield is ok but there's room in the template to increase the width of the image, allowing us to put the other two major shield signs in there.

I see you were the one who made the shield that's in the article right now so perhaps you could help?

Thanks in advance. Haljackey (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

This seems really unnecessary... And besides, the MC shield is no longer posted (the picture in the article isn't the best) and the HoH shield is only posted between Toronto and Trenton... not to mention there is no instance of them appearing like that. All three shields are already represented in the article. Besides, any wide image is going to have to go further down the page and cannot be the main image. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 07:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

---

Oh, and in addition, I got a new camera this week. It's much better than the one I used for the shots I uploaded earlier (I took the other one back because it sucked, this is the one I have now in case you care: [28]), so I'll be sure to take some shots when I'm on the road. I don't think I can get many shots from overpasses except when I'm in a car driving over it. I might be heading to Windsor a few times this summer as well.

The only decent shot I could get from an overpass is from Wellington Road overlooking the 401/402 interchange. It's pretty close to me so I should be able to take some shots while standing steady. Here are two examples, do you think they would add to the article? [29] [30] Haljackey (talk) 04:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll check these out in the mornin' only had a moment to pop on and I've already extended it. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 07:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

lol, that's fine! Check out my comments whenever you get a chance. I am also thinking of nominating the B&W 401 pic in the propane explosion for featured picture. Who knows, the third time might be a charm! Haljackey (talk) 15:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

27 should replace or accompany (depending on space) the shot in the Dorchester Swamp. Looks like I may possibly be going to Warsaw today, so I'll try and get my passenger to take photos along the way. May stop by Port Hope to get the service station. Cheers, ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoa wait..27 was just an example. That's from Scott Steves (Onthighways.com) who doesnt want his photos here. I said I could get a shot like that. What do you think about the shields image I made? Feel free to touch it up. Hope you have fun on your trip! Haljackey (talk) 23:22, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, alright ya. I grabbed some today; went the opposite direction to Elora Gorge, but I got some good pics of the Hanlon Parkway and a couple of the 401. Saw the work on the c-e extension for the first time as well.

I'm not sure what you are trying to do with the images... The main image can't be wide, it should be narrow. And as I posted above, one of the shields is no longer posted and the other only along a portion of the highway, so they shouldn't just be grouped together. Perhaps adding the MC shield to the infobox (would also allow us to remove that grainy image from further down), and then we have the HoH shield on the billboard already in the article. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 06:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

All right, cool. I'd like to see your pics sometime! I also saw you put the MC-freeway shield in there. Even though the HOH sign is only used for a portion of it's length, I still think it would be useful to add there as long as it doesn't stretch the infobox template. Adding that would allow us to get rid of both the MC-freeway sign picture and the HOH image.

In the spot where the HOH image is, we could eventually replace it with an image of people lining the overpasses paying they're respect to the fallen soldier(s) passing by. I'm in the process of getting one such image available for use on Wikipedia, hopefully the author will agree. Other than that the only other major image we need is a shot of a service centre under (re)construction.

In addition I took the liberty of nominating the B&W propane explosion shot as a featured picture. Could use your support. Third time's a charm! [31] Haljackey (talk) 15:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

The infobox standards at WP:HWY (as far as I remember at least) require things in the infobox apply to the entire length of the highway. Technically we shouldn't even have the Highway of Heroes name in the infobox at all. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yay! The author of [this image has allowed me to use it on Wikipedia! I'll upload it to the commons and add it to the article. Should it replace the HOH billboard image or be an entirely new image? I'll add it separately for now, allowing you to decide weather or not you want it to replace the billboard shot. Haljackey (talk) 19:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I've cropped and colour adjusted the photo a bit so I'm going to add that. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Cool, I like it! Although it would better if just a bit more red was added to make the Canadian flags stand out a bit more. In addition, here is the HOH shield. Can that be added to the infobox alongside the 401 and MC-freeway signs? As long as it doesn't stretch the infobox, I think it would add enough to the article to allow us to remove the HOH billboard image. Haljackey (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I've remade the Highway of Heroes shield as an svg (the png had a white background and shadow so it wouldn't have worked). I think the new infobox looks great, so I'm going to proceed to remove the two images that are no longer necessary. I'll try adding some red to the overpass image as well. Cheers, ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 02:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, looks great! Removing those two images will help reduce clutter while those shields in the infobox will retain their encyclopedic value. The only thing I noticed is that the MC-freeway sign now looks out of place as a PNG image. It just doesn't have the level of detail as the other two and it stands out being in-between them. Glad you liked my idea! Haljackey (talk) 03:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I was going to get to that shield shortly. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 03:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

A break for the hell of it

Nice! With that one remade, every junction will have a nice looking shield. Except for Allen Road. Does that highway have a trailblazer thing like the DVP, Gardiner or black creek drive?

• Also, did you want me to get a shot of the 401/402 interchange from an overpass? Haljackey (talk) 23:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Black Creek Drive has a marker? I made the DVP one, I'll get around to the Allen in time. Forgot to add the DVP one to the exit list too. Yes, get a couple shots from different angles if you can. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 03:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah the DVP trailblazer would really be cool to add to the infobox. This is the sign for Black Creek Drive that I was mentioning: [32]. Anyways it's of no use to the 401 article because it becomes highway 400 before it meets the 401, much unlike the 404/DVP/401 junction. I also think adding the ETR image next to the new 407 marker could be of some use. I would suggest testing it out sometime and see how it fits.

• As for the overpass shots, I'll try to get some next week, but I can't guarantee I will be able to do it. Nearly got a chance to today as I drove over the overpass. I looked for a good vantage point and I think I found one. Haljackey (talk) 05:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

While we're still on the infobox, should the cities in the "cities" section be altered? Right now it lists cities along it's route that have a pop of 100k or more. I'm thinking it should be changed to the "control cities" along it's route. They are Windsor, London, Toronto, Kingston and Cornwall if I recall correctly. Sound like a good idea? Haljackey (talk) 16:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. The cities part is meant to show the cities serviced by the route. Ideally they'd all be there, but since there are so many I like sticking to the census areas over 100k. I wouldn't be opposed to adding Cornwall back in since its a control city, with a hidden note detailing the selection criteria. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, just thought it might be a good idea. Also, I recently found this thread that may be of interest to you. It covers Highway 401, other 400-series highways and Canadian highways. [33] Haljackey (talk) 17:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep, been there, though haven't covered even half of the 50 odd pages of photos. If you haven't been yet, check out CANroads (you'll enjoy this post if you haven't read it before) and ONTroads at Yahoo groups. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

edit: By the way... Where did you get all the Adam Colvin photo's? Is there a gallery on Flickr? Those aerial shots are the best angles. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 17:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

My membership at CANroads has been pending for quite a long time. Guess the group owner (whoever he/she is) doesn't frequent the site too often these days to approve new members. I haven't checked out that ONTroads one, thanks for the link.

As for Adam Colvin, here's a thread containing all his pictures [34]. He also posts some of them on Flickr [35]. He has a job operating hot air balloons in London and thus he takes a lot of pics while up there. He hasn't posted any yet this year, but I did request some more pics of the 401/402 highways and he said he'll try his best to get them. Haljackey (talk) 18:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look through them; might be some more good ones for the 401 and 402 articles. The Allen and Gardiner circles are done.[36][37] - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Nice work! By the way, I found two more documents that may be useful to your articles. This one talks about the new Detroit/Windsor crossing's setbacks and controversy: [38] , and this one talks about Toronto's canceled highway developments: [39].

Also, should our further discussions take place on the 401 discussions page? That way we can get feedback from other editors. Your userpage is getting a little crowded too. Haljackey (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit: Also, the evacuated 401 pic has had new life breathed into it. [40] Do you think a new nomination should be made for the colour image? Haljackey (talk) 15:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

We should move to the 401 talk page so that others can chip in if they have something to add. I saw the nomination... I'd recommend copy&pasting a message to all the voters letting them know you changed the picture to a colour version and would really appreciate if they came and took a look at it with a fresh set of eyes. If they come back, go with it. If you wait a couple days and they don't show, it'd probably be worth a renomination. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

edit Also, did Adam Corvin give permission to use all his photos on wiki, or did you only approach him regarding the specific ones you've uploaded? There's a gold mine in thar! - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I sent a quick message to those who have not revoted since the colour image was added. Also Adam said he doesn't care if his pics are used here. Although its probably best to contact him for some photos (they are resized to 1024x768 on that thread and on Flickr, yet he sent me 1600x1200 photos of the London skyline pic and the Guy Lombardo Bridge, both of which are in the London article. Haljackey (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

An edited version of the colour photo has now been added to the featured pic can. Could use your support on the colour one, the edited one or both. [41] Haljackey (talk) 17:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

How's this for a pic of the 401's hilly section? [42] Also shows one of those truck inspection stations in the distance. Feel free to add it to the article! Haljackey (talk) 05:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

CSG Forums

Have you checked out CSG Forums yet? I think you will like the site! It also has the best chatroom I've ever been in! Haljackey (talk) 04:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

FAC Closed

I have archived Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ontario Highway 401/archive1; please see the instructions at FAC, and refrain from further reverts. Further work on the article before re-nominating it, in a few weeks, will help assure a better outcome. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The outcome that you and you alone are deciding 3 days into it? Bullshit, its a work in progress and I'm making productive changes to it. Archive it all you want, I will continue responding to it and pointing editors that have reviewed the article back to it to respond to me. You are not at all helpful. Thank you. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't revert the FAC delegate. Very simple. They have been given authority to remove nominations that are not ready. --Moni3 (talk) 19:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I get that. What niether of you get is that that it is not helpful nor productive. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:50, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand your frustration as I have gone through the nomination process quite a few times. The article you nominated has now a list of items that need to be addressed. They need to be fixed and you can use the opportunity while the article is not nominated to make the necessary changes and bring it back in a few weeks. Few reviewers makes for a backlog of nominations. It is unfortunate that nominations must be archived, but there are limited resources available. Almost anyone who has ever nominated a featured article has had to go through the process more than once for an article. Do not think of it as a failure.

Otherwise, thank you for indicating you understand the FAC delegates should not be reverted. --Moni3 (talk) 19:58, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I never thought of it as failure, just the loss of an official venue that was being used by myself and the reviewers to discuss their comments. I know almost no articles pass the first run through... It took me four at FLC to get List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes up, and I gave up at FAC with Rumination syndrome. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Floydian, Sandy did not decide to close with nomination on her own. There were several reviewers who left you extensive feedback, and several more who suggested that you withdraw the nomination until you've fixed it. Based on those alone, Sandy can close the nomination. The article, although interesting, has such a myriad of problems that it cannot be fixed at the FAC level. I suggest fixing them, doing the GA nomination (and I agree with Brad that the focus of the article is such that it would not pass GA without extensive comment), and then, after an good ACR, try the FA nom again. The article is not ready. auntieruth (talk) 20:39, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if I can add any more to the discussion, but you did say you expected it to get butchered. This is what happened. By learning from it and taking the constructive comments into consideration, the article can be significantly improved. I would suggest trying a GA nomination again once you address the comments from the FAC nomination, should help you on a second FAC nomination. I'll be here to help you every step of the way. Haljackey (talk) 00:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Featured Picture Caption

It's stated in the caption of the featured picture that the first time Highway 401 was fully closed was during the propane explosion. Wasn't it fully closed in 1999 due to carnage alley? Or are you referring to that section? If you are that needs to be changed. From "It was the first time the highway has been fully closed since it opened to traffic in 1952" to "It was the first time the highway has been fully closed since that section opened to traffic in 1956" or something like that. Just looking for clarification before a protected version is made, because then it will be uneditable (too late). Link Haljackey (talk) 05:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Good point. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 06:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I looked at it and adding all that makes the caption too long. That sentence isn't really that relevant so I took it out. Keeps the caption short and simple, yet still informative. Haljackey (talk) 19:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Infobox road updates

Several parameter names were recently deprecated in the next phase of the template revamp. The parameters are listed at User_talk:TwinsMetsFan/Sandbox2. Additionally, I coded subtemplates for |type=KLR to automatically produce the shield and name. That means as you update KLR infoboxes, you can drop the marker_image and the deprecated name parameters. We'll probably get a bot to update all of the infoboxes in all of the articles for the parameter rename/harmonization. Imzadi 1979 ? 03:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

It's looking pretty good. I still need to learn some of the new features so I can put it to use. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 14:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

You have been granted the 'reviewer' userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xeno^talk 13:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Out of process FAR removed

I've removed your FAR of the TFA; please read the instructions at WP:FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

So basically we're stuck with that pile of rubbish on the main page because of red tape? There are some cases where the better interests of the project supercede the beaurocratic process of change. I suppose not on Wikipedia though. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Black Creek Drive. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Oo7565 (talk) 21:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Um... No reverts have occurred and you obviously don't see the sequential improvements. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 21:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I got one of these too. The ed just doesn't know our 'beneficial relationship.' ;-> ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 21:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah but there wasn't even a revert... Each edit built upon the last (unless something was lost by accidental edit conflict somewhere?). Weird. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 21:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Possibly the ed watches edit comments and made a judgment call. Maybe it fits within some parameters. I would rather be editing ... ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 21:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Took some 401 pictures

I took some pictures of the 401 from the Wellington Road overpass today (looking east and west). Have a look at them and see if they're worth including in the article. I really like the zoom in of the 401/402 exchange myself!

All my shots are in their original resolution, unedited format here: [43]

Haljackey (talk) 01:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I also made a video of the 401 eastbound in London. May be of some use. It's a little bumpy and you can see the tripod in the windshield's reflection... it was my first time doing this. Link: [44] Haljackey (talk) 16:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. I never knew London was the largest city in North America without an urban freeway. I bet it's still better to drive than half of those cities with freeways though :p

As for the pics, 00133 is my favourite for representing the highway, but the smog seems to have fallen from the sky for just that shot. 00135 Looks really good. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 16:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll get those two uploaded here. I'm thinking of adding it to the recent history section as it compliments the improvements made in this area quite well. Which one should I use? Also, feel free to link that video as an external if you think it adds to the article. Haljackey (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Floydian. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 19:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WP:PERM/A

Hello, Floydian. You have new messages at WP:PERM/A.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• And again. Courcelles (talk) 20:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Highway 401

I hope you didn't take the revert personally. Just seems like the only real way to fix it quickly. Canterbury Tail talk 15:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

No no, not at all :) I didn't even notice what I'd done actually. I ran it through notepad and a find/replace editor and pasted it back in. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

It happens to us all. No harm done. Canterbury Tail talk 16:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

File:WineRoutelogo.gif

Hi. Two weeks ago, you asked that File:WineRoutelogo.gif be undeleted temporarily. I have undeleted it and reset its countdown timer so that it will be deleted in one week, unless it is added to an article and the template removed. --B (talk) 20:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

My bad, I totally lost track of it. I've plopped it back into the appropriate article and removed the tag you added. Thanks for the heads up :) - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'm half embarrassed to say that I've been here for more than 4 years and had never noticed the existence of that template before today. Obviously, the category isn't being very well monitored if it takes two weeks to get a response. ;) If the occasion arises again, you may want to make a request at WP:REFUND, which is regularly monitored. --B (talk) 20:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Slashes

Just so you know... slashes are perfected acceptable for use in naming concurrent sections of highway or highway junctions/interchanges. Imzadi 1979 ? 07:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Problems with your comments at Template talk:Infobox road#Implementation of colors

Some comments I was going to post there, but brought here instead.

1. I don't see any compromising on the part of the Ontario contingent there (i.e. you). As it stands right now, there are no other colors except the current blue, and there will be no other colors until consensus is reached on guidelines for their usage.
2. Some of us (i.e. everyone so far except you) have agreed that there needs to be some rational guidelines on color, and the best basis is signage. It's not arbitrary on our part, since we're following established conventions.
3. In the US, signage is not a federal issue. Florida previously used colored versions of the US Highway shields, assigning color based on number. The federal government said they wouldn't contribute funding for sign replacement in the 1980s unless Florida used the standard signs, which they were free to do. Florida switched in 1993. California still uses a cutout US Highway shield design from the 1950s. The default state highway marker is a circle. States use designs of their choosing. Michigan has used a diamond in some format since 1919. Oklahoma recently dropped the circle for a design with the state outline.
4. Ontario doesn't use symbology in the way you're saying they do. If they did, the 400-series highways would have a different sign. Since they don't, they're just another type of King's Highway.
5. You say that you don't understand why other countries are able to differentiate based on color? Well, that's just how the UK does it. They made the decision that A roads that are at motorway standard would switch to blue signage, and if they were at secondary road standards they get white signage. Otherwise A roads get green signage. Ontario does not use colors that way. If they did, 400-series highways would have one color shield, King's Highways would have a second, Secondary Highways would use a third and the rare Tertiary Highways would use a fourth. Instead, Ontario differentiates based on shape and number.
6. Until consensus is reached, there won't be admin changing the template to activate the subtemplate. At over 12,000 transclusions, this template falls squarely under WP:HRT and that standard has to be reached first.

For the rest of my comments, consult the talk page. Imzadi 1979 ? 08:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I just don't think signage is the way to go, since many countries don't use different colours for different types of roads. It would make far more sense to agree to a universal set based on the fact that the four types of roads (freeways, state maintained trunk routes, state minor route or county roads, and local roads) can be easily divided in most countries. It's just ridiculous to force colour to be limited to something that many countries don't have. I am essentially forced to use only the blue infobox if I switch over (or maybe I can put green on three or four to make everything extra pointless). - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 15:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to convince others of your viewpoint, and you haven't done that yet. In fact, the color subtemplate has been added into the infobox and locked down as part of it. It transcludes 12,000+ times with all of the rest of the main template, so it needs protection under WP:HRT. Since there wasn't consensus reached to allow it, the Ontario specific code was removed when the Italian green scheme was added. To paraphrase TMF, there is consensus to use colors in a certain way, so those usages were included. There is not consensus to use colors in other ways, so those usages were not included. Any additions to the color template, at this time, will need to meet the burden of consensus to be added. That means should other countries' infoboxes be merged in, they will get the default color scheme unless their infobox followed signage colors. Imzadi 1979 ? 03:32, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Commas edit conflict

Hey there. I just recently copy-edited Don Valley Parkway and made some comments for you in its peer review. In the process of doing this, I completely erased your edit removing a bunch of commas. However, I wanted to ask you your reason for this, as I put some of them there to break things up, and prevent it from sounding like a run-on sentence. Is there a reason why you did this? --Natural R_X 02:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a grammar wiz, so I could be horribly wrong, but I've always been told not to use commas before the word 'and' and 'or', as it already serves the purpose of a comma. Wikipedia condones both ways, but I've generally gone comma+and free through most of the articles I've rewritten. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 02:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Okie dokie. Well maybe you could solicit some feedback on it from other editors on your peer-review, or FAC if you choose to take it that far. --Natural R_X 03:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

Hi there. A few weeks ago, when Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back was featured on the Main Page, you were among those who believed it was not up to current FA standards. Now that it's been a few weeks, are you still interested in starting an WP:FAR for it? Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The main issue was it getting to the main page. However, I went through it and pointed out the issues I had and they seem to have been corrected pretty well. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 02:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Floydian. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 05:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Buckhorn Lake (Ontario) etc

The naming and disambig structure you've created is more logical, especially since the Buckhorn Lake in the Kawartha lakes is by far the most major of the ones of that name in Ontario; the others, if articles are written, can be named "Buckhorn Lake (County/District XX, Ontario)". Are you able to affect the deletion of the current Buckhorn Lake (Ontario) disambig page so the current Buckhorn Lake (Peterborough County, Ontario) article can be moved there? I cannot, as it needs an admin to do so. --papageno (talk) 16:09, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I always thought you were an admin :p

I am not, not by a long shot. I put up the deletion tag on the Ontario one so that the Kawartha lake (which is the only one of the four I've ever heard of) can be moved there. That tag will show up on many admin's to-do lists, so hopefully it'll be gone and moved in short time. Cheers, ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 20:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Don Valley Parkway 1963.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Don Valley Parkway 1963.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Infobox Ontario road listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Infobox Ontario road. Since you had some involvement with the Infobox Ontario road redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Muhandes (talk) 05:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Trail Building Photo

I know two organizations that do trail building/maintenance. You can try TORBA. They do work in conjunction with the city of Toronto. You could also try IMBA Canada. They have some local chapters in the GTA. One guy I know, Jason Murray heads the Durham Chapter. He's been involved in several builds I've been on. You can find his email through the contacts (I won't post it here). Hope this helps. Atrian (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Expressway browser

Ok, as we discussed on IRC before you had to go to work, I created the start of a template for you: {{on-exp browse}}. To use in in the infobox, just paste the completed template in the |browse= parameter of {{infobox road}}. It takes 5, 6 7! parameters at the moment.

{{on-exp browse |title= |previous_link= |previous_year= |route= |year= |next_link= |next_year= }}

The two links will show whatever full wikilink you add for the previous or next route. The years show up in parentheses in small text below the link and route will show in bold in the middle. The ends are set to 45% of the width and the middle is 10% if used, which is how the default browser in the infobox works now. If you need graphics, you'll need to add parameters for them to the template. I'll add a browser to The Middle Road and Don Valley Parkway as a samples in action. In updating the template for the DVP, I added the 6th parameter, but I also switched the output of the two sides to center in the table cell that's created. You can switch them back to left and right alignment if you wish. Imzadi 1979 ? 22:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The title parameter was added since I forgot that when you use the system parameter of IR, it outputs above the output of the browselinks subtemplate. This title parameter outputs above the browser cells as its own row in bold. You can put a link in there if you want, or leave it unlinked. Imzadi 1979 ? 22:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

That's really awesome Imz! Thank you for going above and beyond to show me :) - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 02:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Now there's one issue that I wanted to run past you. Essentially the header above the browse links will only show if there are browselinks to display. We could extend this template to add the ability to colorize the title like the IR headers. It could be as simple as a |color=brown style template. It would only color the title cell in the little table that's created by the template. For the DVP, it looks fine as is, but on The Middle Road, it would look better colored in brown. Just food for thought. Imzadi 1979 ? 02:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

And just because I was bored: File:Ontario_QEW.svg. The font is Century, when stretched to narrow it down, it was a perfect match for the PNG. Imzadi 1979 ? 07:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Noice! That would explain why I couldn't find it. Don't have that font in Flash. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 12:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

A query at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Permitting metric distances in road tables

I posted a query of all the people pushing to force conversions for the distances in the junction lists on highway articles asking why this "issue" has not come up at your FAC or any of the previous FACs over at least the last year concerning highway articles. It's nothing personal on your article, because I personally believe it's another case of outsiders coming up with a "problem" to fit their preferred solutions without regard to the editors that actually research and create the content of these articles. Imzadi 1979 ? 02:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I have to interject. If your FAC is somehow delayed by this whole debacle, that's BS. You deserve better. –Fredddie™ 03:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

And I totally agree. Imzadi 1979 ? 03:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused. How is it holding my FAC (I see no comment at it), and what does this have to do with Canada. We converted to strictly use the metric system 35 years ago. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 03:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Your articles don't have miles in addition to the kilometres in the junction lists. There's a bunch of editors who are telling us that all junction lists need conversions from the primary unit used into the other system. Imzadi 1979 ? 03:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

AN3, and your signature

Hello Floydian. I had to change the header line of your 3RR report (now at WP:AN3#User:Wtshymanski reported by User:Floydian (Result: Stale) because your signature was too complex to allow me to create a link to the 3RR report from elsewhere. Maybe you could try to simplify the user-visible form of your signature? I also left a warning at User talk:Wtshymanski. It was promptly removed. EdJohnston (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah I noticed that, but I thought changing it after the fact might screw around with things on the noticeboard. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 18:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if this is the problem, but when I try to click on the 'T' of your signature I get no link to a talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

It won't work on my talk page :) I was scratching my head and pulling it apart trying to figure out the problem. Took it down to just the bare link before I realized what was going on. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, here is a link showing that the first part of your signature can be employed in a header line. I think your signature is a Wikimedia stress test and not everything may work. EdJohnston (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

About that 3RR ANI

I have commented on the content issue at Talk:Electric_power_transmission. The following however is not relevant to "discussions about improving the article," so belongs here.

I think that your bringing this little disagreement to ANI when W. had only done three reverts, not "more than three," was inappropriate and disproportionate. Yes, yes, the "spirit of 3RR" can be violated by fewer than four edits, but opening an ANI under such circs is not commonly done; certainly not before starting a talk page discussion.

One very good reason for that is that if you start such a discussion and the other person reverts again without responding, you have a much stronger case for your ANI. (A hint for future incidents)

But, no. Instead of taking it to the article talk page (Talk:Electric_power_transmission shows no edits from you prior to your opening the ANI; none until after it was closed, in fact) you went straight to ANI. By my observation, such is often indicative of an editor (and to be clear, I mean someone in your position, not W.'s) trying to get his or her way without bothering with the "discuss" part of WP:BRD. True, W. did not open a topic on the talk page, but neither did you - which is particularly ironic given your recent statement that "it's much better to discuss and carry out a consensus." (diff) W. did give reasonable, if succinct, explanations for the edits in his summaries - explanations that to me at least were conclusive, and insufficiently countered by you.

In short: Floydian, I think you're in the wrong here, both re. the caption and the ANI. Jeh (talk) 19:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

You missed this and the follow up response from W, which is unacceptable. I went straight to the editor in question. It doesn't take 4 reverts to make it an edit war, it just is an edit war by the fourth edit, no questions asked. W reverted me twice, once with a misleading summary, then continued to revert a second editor. Hiding your edits under false summaries is a low move on W's part, one that makes me toss away any piece of compassion I may have had in order to purge Wikipedia of uncivil editors. The caption I am iffy on. Not all pictures MUST contain caption that reference to the object in that specific capture. The picture shows an example of an electric transmission line. The caption reads that said lines can carry hundreds of thousands of volts. This is undeniably true - Some lines can carry that. This one may not, but you'd only know that if you are an electrical engineer. I am opting to not specifically call out those towers. The caption would be "Here are some 66kV lines". Lame. Instead, I am making a generalization about electrical transmission lines, an example of which is pictured, that they may carry voltages above 100,000 volts. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 19:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I've never thought that going to the editor in question was better than going to the article talk page (except to post a notice that there's a discussion on the article talk page). Re. "4 reverts", it may not take four reverts to make an edit war, but based on for ex. this recent closure one should wait until four or more reverts before bringing the edit war to AN3; they even have a template for it. And the way I read WP:DISPUTE, AN3 is in general rather far down the list in the dispute resolution process.

With that, I think I've said all I have to say here, so I am disengaging. Re. the caption, I said my piece on the article talk page. If subsequent replies thereto are posted there, I will respond there. Jeh (talk) 21:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Ontario Highway 427

Hi Floydian, I was wondering if you could help me out, so for further reference, I will know where I went wrong in the policy I used to remove GoldDragon's edit to this article. I'm sorry for removing the discussion board or forum site from the external links, as I was under the impression they were not allowed to be included. It wasn't just the policy WP:ELNO that through me off, I had seen many editors remove them as well, and thought I was following their lead. What I was hoping you could do, is give me the link to the policy you used to re-add the links to the article. I have scanned through alot of policy and can't seem to find a policy statement that says discussion boards or fourm sites etc., are now allowed to be added to the "External links" section of the article. All I keep coming up with is the same policy I cited above, which says there not allowed. Any help would be appreciated. Cmr08 (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

No, no problem whatsoever. You are right in the policy you are following - Normally we would not link to fan sites, blogs, forums, etc, unless produced by a well respected expert in the field (and recognized by other sources as such). However, WP:ELNO should be taken with a grain of salt (it's a guideline after all). It is written to satisfy general requirements across 3.5 million articles. If the link is to a specific topic on a forum that can be read without registration and which provides an in-depth analysis of a specific facet of a subject, it is generally acceptable. The way I've come to understand things is that the external links should provide further coverage, data, information, or media that would not be appropriate (or verifiable) for the article itself. It really comes down to using judgment on a case-by-case basis. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 01:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, it doesn't really matter to me what is included. I just found it a bit much that the same editor had added the links 12 times, but never made any attempt to explain or justify why they should be included, which under the policy was his responsibility as the editor who added them. He just kept reverting the removals and made no attempt to discuss. I figured he was just trying to sneak them back in, which is why I reverted.

One thing I was wondering, when we're dealing with a discussion or forum thread where everyone has usernames, how do we know 100% that the poster is a reputable person in that field of expertese and not some 10 year old sitting at his computer? Cmr08 (talk) 03:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

In this case it is the data and media that is valuable, but inappropriate for wikipedia. The text itself merely places the photos into context, but alongside the article, the collection of photos ar ll that's necessary to gain a much deeper understanding of this little stub road. I certainly agree about GoldDragon though, and I'm keeping my watch out. - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 05:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Please don't be a dick

Talk:Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity#Diagnosis 173.213.168.203 (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Why are you calling me a dick and pointing me to a discussion I've never even read before, yet alone responded to? - ??o??ia? ^t _¢ 23:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Typo

I believe you have made a typo here (the date format). –xeno^talk 01:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ontario Highway 77

Calmer Waters 18:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ripley worm.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ripley worm.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)