Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/M-185 (Michigan highway)/archive1

Coordinates discussion

• Oppose' The lack of one or more coordinates templates mean that - unlike most other linear features on Wikipedia - this road and its major junctions cannot easily be located on mapping services and does not appear on the Wikipedia layers of services such as Google Maps and OpenStreetMap. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Not actionable; coordinates are not part of the featured article criteria, and one of the FAC delegates has stated that coordinates will not prevent an article from reaching FA. Wikipedia talk:Featured article criteria#Coordinates --Rschen7754 11:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
    • If you refer to Karanacs, they said " This is an issue that could be brought up in a review" and "You are welcome to put forth your argument in individual FAC nominations where you think coordinates ought to be applied". And who said, on 21 August 2011: "Yeah, I agree that coordinates aren't a priority - they should be among the "finishing touches" of an A-class or a FA"? Rschen7754 did. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
      • If you're going to use quotes, at least put them in context. Here's the full quote from Karanacs: "The FAC instructions are not going to micromanage which content is and is not included (and if that ever changes I'm targeting infoboxen, not coordinates, first). You are welcome to put forth your argument in individual FAC nominations where you think coordinates ought to be applied, and the nominator can then respond. As a delegate, I am not going to fail any article that does not include it. And yes, this strikes me very much as forumshopping." Uchua has also weighed in: "In issues like this, FAs should follow the Manual of Style. If there is consensus at MOS that these coordinates must be included, then FAs must have them; I don't think it's a good idea to have the FA criteria talk about this quite specific issue." And as far as my comment, I repeat what I said earlier: "Yes, if you take that out of context, I did." --Rschen7754 12:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
        • Also note from the Geo project (Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates/Linear): "As yet, there is no single method which has achieved consensus." ... "A "main" coordinate may not be appropriate for very long features; the definition of "very long" in this context is yet to be determined" ... "This guideline is not intended to cover:"..."Forked, branched or other irregular features"

A road is an irregular feature, especially one like this where there is no endpoint or midpoint. No consensus in either direction has been achieved as to their use in articles, per WT:RJL (and regardless of whether one particular user feels its "not a vote", there clearly is no consensus). Please take your WP:POINT back to the geo project where you can advance the cause, rather than trying to set or change a precedent at FAC, where several dozen existing Featured Articles concerning roads/highways lack coordinates. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 22:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Andy is free to comment on the nominated article as he pleases, including opposing, but there isn't a requirement anywhere to include coordinate data in linear features, and there is no accepted method in including it yet for roadways. (We've reached a stalemate on discussions about the issue at WT:RJL on including guidance in MOS:RJL, which this article otherwise complies with.) The current guidance on linear features from the coordinates project is still a draft that has not achieved consensus. Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) stated in the previous discussion at WT:WIAFA that this issue "definitely needs more discussion as a general rule somewhere prominent so it can be seen by a large number of people who can then comment." Until that happens, and there is a guideline that isn't a proposal from 2008 that hasn't yet left the draft stage, I don't feel that adding such content is beneficial since the string of numbers displayed in the article adds very little to the end reader. The important details on where M-185 is in located are already included in the article through a map in the infobox, the prose discusses its location in relation to the physical landform (Mackinac Island), the municipality (City of Mackinac Island) and the county (Mackinac County), and there is a link to the OpenStreetMap page in the External links section. That's plenty, and I stand by my refusal to add coordinate data to this article in the absence of a guideline that requires it. Imzadi 1979 → 23:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I've replied at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/U.S. Route 2 in Michigan/archive1; the points make there apply equally here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:04, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Which single point would you recommend for a road that is a circle? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 21:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

If two ongoing FACs are going to misquote Karanacs, it would be more efficient just to link to the other FAC which includes the same discussion: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/U.S. Route 2 in Michigan/archive1. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:55, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. Respectfully, I disagree with Imzadi1979. WP:FACR starts "A featured article exemplifies our very best work' and 1(c) continues "Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate". Emphasis sources plural. Because we obviously can easy do much more and IMO better than the infobox map, the openmaps link, and the textual description, by the use of {{coord}} and {{GeoGroupTemplate}} which link to multiple RS maps, we should. It is incomprehensible to me that we would deliberately not take the opportunity to link to this diversity of rich sources, and promote this as an article that exemplifies our very best work. Under what part of "best" in a web environment is "deliberately not linking to some of the best sources around" found? Where will we find a user base thankful or happy that they can't view this structure on GoogleMaps or Bing or their preferred map provider? Only if an aim of this FAC is to deliberately and needlessly frustrate or dismay segments of our readership should this be promoted. At the risk of boring you, I will oppose each road article FAC having the same issue as this one. I appreciate your view may differ from mine; there we go. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

  Thank you for your comments, but this article does use multiple map sources. To wit:

  • Footnote 1: the right-of-way map from the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT)
  • Footnote 2: the Physical Reference Finder Application from MDOT with cartography by the Michigan Center for Geographic Information
  • Footnote 4: an online edition of the map from the Mackinac Island Tourism Bureau
  • Footnote 6: the official paper MDOT map from 2010, copies are free upon request from the department if others wish to get their own.
  • Foonote 7: the online edition of National Highway System, Michigan, a map prepared by MDOT.

  If these aren't enough high-quality reliable sources to verify the information from the "Route description" section, please let me know. In addition, that entire section's directions, landmarks and locations can be verified using the text of two books, Michigan's West Coast: Explore the Shore Guide and Michigan's Traverse Bays and Mackinac Island. Moon Spotlight (2nd ed.). Otherwise, your reasoning has been addressed. Additionally, what would be a high-quality, RS for the exact coordinates used for the roadway? OSM is user-generated and can't be used as a source. MDOT does not publish coordinate data for its roadways and for me to measure it from Google Maps runs into issues with original research and their reliability. I must respectfully state that that your opposition has already been addressed and no further action is required. Imzadi 1979 → 02:06, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

  Once upon a time, we used to get criticized for using too many map sources at FAC. :| --Rschen7754 17:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

  I've replied at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/U.S. Route 2 in Michigan/archive1; the points make there apply equally here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:04, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Resolved issues from Floydian

Copied from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/M-185 (Michigan highway)/archive1 - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 03:50, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

---

1. Lead
   1. The 'also' in "It also has no connection to any other Michigan state trunkline highways" has jumped out at me every single time I read this article. I am not a grammatical genius, so I'm not positive if it is ok or not, but its reads as "A narrow paved road of [distance], it offers scenic views of [stuff]. It also has no connection to any other Michigan state trunkline highways". The scenery and the connection to other US highways aren't connected thoughts, so "also" seems inappropriate.
   2. "The City of Mackinac Island, which shares jurisdiction over Mackinac Island with the Mackinac Island State Park Commission (MISPC), calls M-185 Main Street within the built-up area on the island's southeast quadrant, and Lake Shore Road elsewhere." - I think the second 'Mackinac Island' could be phrased as "the island" to kill of the repetitiveness here. Also, I believe Main Street and Lake Shore Road should be bold in this case (but I stand to be corrected on this as well).
   3. "Lake Shore Road carries the highway next to the Lake Huron shoreline, running between the water's edge and woods outside of the downtown area." I've always personally felt that 'woodlands' is a better word. I'm not positive that 'woods' is common outside of North America, and it also seems very informal. This is just my personal preference so you can feel free to disagree here.
   4. "The highway was built during the first decade..." - Starting with a fresh concept, this should be a new paragraph. "According to the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), M-185 is "the only state highway in the nation where motor vehicles are banned".[3] These restrictions on automobiles date back to the 1890s, and since the ban, only a few vehicles have been permitted on the island other than the city's emergency vehicles." can be added to this new paragraph to make all three approximately equal in length.
2. Route description
   1. "...the generally accepted starting point is at the wooden mile 0 marker placed in..." - mile 0 should be emphasized in some form as the content of the wooden marker methinks.
   2. "MDOT does not install the standard state highway reassurance markers on this roadway" - niether does MISPC, unless they paint them on the pavement or stick them in the middle of the road, they install the markers along this roadway.
   3. "As the road around the island, M-185 is recognized in the press for its unique role as the only state highway without car traffic in the United States by such papers as The Kansas City Star, [10] the Chicago Tribune,[11] and the Toronto Star.[12]" - I believe that As the road around the island is superfluous and adds nothing to the statement that follows. As a state highway would give more emphasis/reason to the unique aspect that these papers are noting.
   4. "In 2008, USA Today named the island one of the "10 great places to get your feet back on the ground" as a carfree destination.[14]" - I know this is correlated with the car ban on M-185, but does this article significantly cover M-185 per se, but does this boast the road, or the island?
   5. "The magazine Paraplegia News in an article encouraging its readers to visit Mackinac Island called the trek around the island on M-185 a "high priority" for visitors." - this sentence needs some commas.
   6. "That building is operated by the MISPC, but it was originally a US Coast Guard station." - this historical fact should have a ref at the end rather than leaving it to the three at the end of the paragraph.
   7. "The beginning and ending of M-185 is marked at the intersection of Main and Fort streets next to the visitor center." [...one sentence...] "At the mile 0 marker in front of the state park visitor center,.." - some redundancy here
   8. "M-185 heads east between Marquette Park at the base of Fort Mackinac and the marina at Haldimand Bay." - this infers the park is at the base of the marina, which doesn't make sense. "M-185 heads east between Marquette Park, at the base of Fort Mackinac, and the marina at Haldimand Bay." clarifies the from and the to.
   9. "Main Street then turns northeasterly passing Mission Point Resort (the former Mackinac College) to cross onto state park lands, and the road name changes to Lake Shore Road." - is there a portion of Main Street that is not part of M-185, because from this sentence I picture a street that juts off, named Main Street, and that intersection is the point where M-185 changes from Main Street to Lake Shore Road. I'm not sure how to clarify this in a better way.
   10. "After entering the state park, M-185 continues north-northwesterly along the eastern shore of Mackinac Island,.." would be better, as the first sentence of a new paragraph, as "After entering Mackinac Island State Park, M-185 continues north-northwesterly along the eastern shore of the island,"
   11. "Mile 4 is situated at Point aux Pins at the northernmost point on the island." - 'of' instead of 'on'.
   12. "Here, M-185 and Lake Shore Road turn southerly" - until this point you mention one or the other, and this sudden mention of A and B makes them seem like two distinct things.
   13. "passing the state boat dock and the nature center" - You should elaborate on the nature centre. This is the first mention of it, and I'd think the best place to do so.
   14. "The area is a popular stopping point for tourists biking or walking M-185, and the location where British troops came ashore during the Battle of Mackinac Island during the War of 1812." - these are two distinct ideas that are similar, but not conjunction-similar. I'd reword this as "The area is a popular stopping point for tourists biking or walking M-185; it is the location where British troops came ashore during the Battle of Mackinac Island during the War of 1812."
   15. "Located here are restrooms (at the nature center), a water fountain, picnic tables, a concession stand and a stony beach." this is an awkward sentence... and very detailed.
   16. "...along Maniboajo Bay, M-185 and Lake Shore Road re-enter the park..." - another odd mention of both.
   17. "The building's 660-foot-long (200 m) front porch[19] is billed as the "longest in the world".[20]" - 'billed' is a strange word choice. Claimed is more encyclopedia-appropriate.
   18. "As it passes the island's public library on the water side of the street" - I believe 'coastal side' is the right way of phrasing that, even for lakes.
   19. "to run through the downtown district" - suggest 'pass' here, but I'm pretty indifferent.
   20. "Other than the library, most of the city's public buildings actually sit along Market Street" - this feels informal; might I suggest "Other than the library, most of the city's public buildings are actually situated along Market Street"
   21. "...many of these outlets, nearly a dozen, feature the authentic Mackinac Island fudge made fresh daily during tourist season." - you say "many", then you specify a more specific figure. The former is redundant.
   22. "Three streets and a city park allow for connections between Main and Market streets." - this sentence would be better placed following "...along Market Street, one block behind Main Street."
   23. "...Main Street intersects Fort Street and the point of beginning for M-185 at the state park visitor center." - point of beginning is very awkward wording. Maybe "...Main Street intersects Fort Street at the state park visitor center, the mile 0 point for M-185." - or - "...Main Street intersects Fort Street at the state park visitor center, completing the circuit of the island"
3. History
   1. "Storms in later that year washed away sections of M-185, removing huge chunks of asphalt." - I'm guessing 'in' is the rogue word in this case.
   2. "MDOT closed the stretches of the roadway on July 7, 1986, after the Independence Day weekend to fix the damage." - need a comma after the Independence Day weekend. I also suggest changing the first clause to "MDOT closed those stretches on July 7, 1986" to improve the flow.
   3. "Repairs were budgeted to cost $894,366 to replace the missing sections of roadway, and tourists were detoured inland, and uphill, to access the island's various tourist attractions." - awkward syntax, suggest "Repairs were budgeted to replace the missing sections of roadway at a cost $894,366; tourists were detoured inland, and uphill, to access the island's various tourist attractions."
   4. I also believe you need an inflation adjustment for that figure
   5. "The only known motor vehicle collision on Mackinac Island occurred on M-185 at the head of the Shepler passenger ferry dock when the island's fire truck slightly damaged the door on the island's ambulance on May 13, 2005;" the date is better off earlier in the sentence: "The only known motor vehicle collision on Mackinac Island occurred on M-185 at the head of the Shepler passenger ferry dock on May 13, 2005, when the island's fire truck slightly damaged the door on the island's ambulance;"
4. Major intersections

   • Looks good, though I'd possibly expand the hatnote to "The entire highway is on Mackinac Island, which is located within Mackinac County, Michigan.

5. References

   • Consistency looks good, PDFs indicated. I'm not going to examine them in-depth / fact check.

---