Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/400-series highways/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2016 (UTC) [1].[reply]

400-series highways

edit

400-series highways (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Floydian τ ¢ 05:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is the final hurdle in making a good/featured topic on the 400-series highways of Ontario, the result of over 7 years of research, photography and writing by myself and a few helpful peers. Floydian τ ¢ 05:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some quick comments:

  • Shouldn't there be a note for 407 that says it's a toll highway (under notes)?
  • 417 has a broken format box.

Mattximus (talk) 12:44, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ah. Firefox is good with tables, so it automatically resolves that error, which resulted from not having |notes=none. I've made the adjustment that should fix it for you on Chrome/IE (lol... IE). - Floydian τ ¢ 02:07, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Dough4872 (Talk) 02:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:
  1. I would suggest the list gets moved to List of 400-series highways in Ontario as to give more context that its a list and that the 400-series highways are in Ontario, something many readers cannot assume.
    I think the current title adequately and concisely covers the scope of the content. Aside from the minor former highway system in B.C., no other highway system in the world uses 400 numbering to some context. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Can a section listing the format for the highway names be added to the infobox?
    I'm not sure how to do this. If you're familiar, could you add it? It's simply "Ontario Highway X" (or "King's Highway X" officially). - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Added. Dough4872 02:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Do you think you can add a description section covering the maintenance, numbering scheme, total length, and longest and shortest highways of the 400-series highways? See List of Interstate Highways in Michigan for an example. I would also order the three sections preceding the table as Description, Design standards, and History.
    Design standards and description cover essentially the same thing. I added a paragraph covering the maintenance, length, and min/max length routes. Not sure what to say that isn't obvious or covered regarding the numbering scheme. - Floydian τ ¢ 18:16, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. I notice you link to Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which concerns the United States. Doesn't Canada have a similar manual? If so, you should link to that or indicate that title instead of the US MUTCD.
    Nope, in Ontario at least we conform to the MUTCD. We have the OTS which deals with it legally, but that follows the MUTCD. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Why are some of the lengths to 0 decimal places and some of the lengths to 1 decimal place? You should be consistent here.
    Only ON 412 has that issue, and the length is based on the only reliably available length. Heck, the MTO hasn't updated the length tables since 2010! - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI, I've contacted the 407 construction group to locate a centreline profile that can give me precision to 1/10th of a km. Until then, it is what it is. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Is there a way the size of the shield for Highway 407 can be reduced? It looks disproportionately large compared to the other shields.
    I agree, will have to contact one of our Lua learned peers on this. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Right now, all shields are displayed by {{routelist row}} with a size of "x25px". Unfortunately, Highway 407's unique shield dimensions yield ugly results with that code. I think there should be a discussion somewhere (not here) to fix the issues that have come up regarding shield sizes in that template and in {{jct}}. As for right now, the module design does not allow for a clean and easy fix. -happy5214 05:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there no way to add a parameter to manually override that size value? - Floydian τ ¢ 17:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Can a color be added to indicate Highways 412 and 418 are under construction?
  1. Done. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Why is the length for Highway 412 coming up as 10 kilometers and 10 miles? something seems wrong here.
    This issue is far beyond my technical expertise. @Happy5214:, do you have any insight on this issue and the two above? - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Module:Routelist row/sandbox has a fix for this issue. Test it so I can deploy it. It adds a digit of precision if the input is a whole number divisible by 10. In other words, the output should be 6 miles. -happy5214 05:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Testing it on the row for ON 412 does indeed return 6 miles. Ping me or adjust the entry for 412 from 10.0 to 10 when you've applied your modification. - Floydian τ ¢ 05:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Floydian: I'll do both. ;) -happy5214 20:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Is the length for Highway 418 known?
    The current TPR (technically preferred route) drawings for 407E phase two provide stationing measurements for the 407 alignment, but not for the EDL/418 alignment. At this time, as with ON 412, 10 km seems to be the rough and only estimate. I've contacted the construction firms for each phase to see if they can provide more accurate data. - Floydian τ ¢ 05:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Isn't Queen Elizabeth Way unsigned Highway 451? You should make a note of this in the table.
    Only for maintenance purposes. I figure this is minor enough to barely warrant mention on the article itself. I'd sooner mention it being the first intercity divided highway in North America when it opened between Toronto and Hamilton in June 1937. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. You have a table for future HOV lanes. Is it possible to add a table for current HOV lanes?
  1. At this point there are only 3 sets of HOV lanes, which are detailed in the prose preceding the future HOV lanes table. Seems redundant at this time, but certainly warranted in the near future as several new sets are opened. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  1. You should add some pictures of the 400-series highways to the article. See List of Interstate Highways in Michigan for a possible way the pictures can be showcased. Dough4872 01:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. - Floydian τ ¢ 04:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Some replies added. Will resolve some of the other issues in the next few daysweeks. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Dough4872: Everything should be addressed now. Awaiting your reply. - Floydian τ ¢ 18:16, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This list looks good and meets the FL criteria. Dough4872 20:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 02:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • "it wasn't until 1952 when these routes were given 400-series designations." The contraction here should definitely be reworded, as it isn't the strongest possible writing. Yes, I just used one myself, but us reviewers tend to do that once in a while when we're in a hurry to get back to the article. :-)
  • This may just be me, but I've never been crazy about sentences starting with numbers, like "400-series highway design has set the precedent...". Can the sentence's ordering be changed to avoid this?
  • Where is the last sentence of the lead sourced in the body? I see the claim "among the safest in North America", but nothing involving comparative traffic volume.
  • First paragraph of Design standards: "Highways in Ontario are among the safest in North America, with 0.63 fatalities per 10,000 licensed drivers in 2010.[52]" (per 10,000 being the comparative part). - Floydian τ ¢ 15:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • History: "Until early 2015, Highway 407 and 416...". Given how other sentences in the area are written, shouldn't Highway be plural?
  • Design standards: The first sentence of the section is really long and winding. Can I recommend splitting it before "notably"?
  • While on the subject, I've never been fond of the use of "notably", since I would hope the content would be notable if mentioned in an FLC candidate.
  • Sort of fixed this in splitting the sentence... But "of note" is more-or-less the same. I use it because there are many other design standards that are copied by many other jurisdictions that aren't worth mentioning. - Floydian τ ¢ 15:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Highway: Cells that are colored should have matching symbols, per WP:ACCESS. This helps keep articles accessible and provide confusion. For my sake, it took a few moments before I realized why the color was there (I presume because the network has still only been proposed?). Giants2008 (Talk) 22:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Imzadi made accessibility tweaks, but I still don't see symbols for the colored cells. Is it possible to tuck a symbol into that template that places a colored box at the bottom of the list (the one next to "Proposed or unbuilt")? If not, this will be considerably harder, and I may end up capping the comment if resolving it proves too difficult. You might want to ask Imzadi about the issue. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, you want a symbol to accompany the colour. Though I agree this would improve accessibility, there's no appropriate symbol to use. It would be entirely made up. - Floydian τ ¢ 03:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks like other recent high-level road lists have a similar system. Can't say that I'm in love with not included the symbol, but I don't want to be the stick-in-the-mud who makes a big deal about it, so I'll leave the point out for other reviewers to consider and consider this review completed. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Traditionally, we've required that the notes explicitly explain the condition prompting the color usage in tables like these in highway articles. We've also built the templates to include tool tips (hover text) that appears when a reader hovers his cursor over the colored rows in tables. In this case, the "proposed" text in the "Formed" column conveys the explicit meaning behind the orange color, the tool tip says "Future route" and the color key at the bottom says "Proposed or unbuilt". These last two items (tool tip, color key and color usage) are additional visual clues to reinforce the "proposed" text in that column, and they're sufficiently handled as is. Imzadi 1979 → 05:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – With Imzadi's explanation, I'm satisfied that the accessibility guidelines are met by the measures he highlighted. That was my last remaining concern about the list, so now you can consider my review complete. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Imzadi1979—I made a few minor tweaks to some of the citations to enhance formatting consistency. The sources look good in terms of quality and formatting, Floydian. Also of note: it's usually not necessary to cite the volume and issue numbers for newspapers, especially since they're normally not used to index issues in libraries, unlike the publication date.

As I noted in the GAN review, by converting this over to a tabular list format, I'd support a future nomination here at FLC. I have two last comments before I formally support promotion:

  • AADT Traffic Volumes 1955–1969 and Traffic Collision Data 1967–1969 is listed in the bibliography section and cited in full in two footnotes (63, 64). You should convert those two footnotes to use either {{sfnp}} or {{harvp}} for consistency with the other entries in the bibliography.
  • Second, but the Emery source isn't cited anywhere, so if retained, that should be shifted to a "Further reading" section.
Otherwise, all looks good. Imzadi 1979 → 10:18, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Did a source review, which passes. Promoting. --PresN 15:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/400-series_highways/archive1&oldid=1138478735"