User talk:Viridiscalculus/Archives/2013

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maryland Route 260, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Right-of-way (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Viridiscalculus. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/California State Route 52.
Message added 21:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rschen7754 21:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2013

Volume 6, Issue 1 • Winter 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Wikidata Q&A USRD Cup returns Project looks ahead to new year	State and national updates Project news Task force reports for CA, FL, and PA
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—EdwardsBot (talk) 19:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposed closing of Morriswa RFC

Hi, Viridiscalculus. As a person who has commented in the above RFC, your input on a possible closure of the RFC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Morriswa#Proposal to close would be appreciated. Thank you. --Rschen7754 05:09, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Viridiscalculus. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/Michigan State Trunkline Highway System‎.
Message added 01:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Imzadi 1979 → 01:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Can you please respond to this soon, as Imzadi1979 wants this to be TFA very shortly? Thanks! --Rschen7754 08:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Interchange locations on I-70 and elsewhere

Hi,

In this edit to Interstate 70 in Maryland you noted that the center of the interchange is in Carroll County. What is the defining characteristic that allows an interchange in a table like that to be placed in two counties or on a county line as I had it? For that interchange some ramps are in Frederick County, and some are in Carroll County. I made the change originally when I saw something similar on an interstate article in Missouri or somewhere out there (I forget the state and interstate number in question), noting to myself that I should specifically check I-70 exit 68 on the I-70 Maryland article.

Note also that a similar situation occurs with Interstate 81 in Maryland / Interstate 81 in Pennsylvania where the PA exit 1 ramps straddle the Mason-Dixon line and therefore the interchange would seem to be in two states.

Just curious what the precedent is, and if it varies by state.

Thanks. --Tckma (talk) 23:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure if there is a hard-and-fast rule on what to do in the county line situations. It may be worth bringing the issue up at WT:USRD to see what the consensus (or lack thereof) is. There are two main differences between the Mount Airy situation and the PA 163 situation:

1. The PA 163 bridge is on or pretty darn close to following the state line. I-70's bridges across MD 27 are not on the county line.
2. The state line serves as a natural separation for state-detail articles, so extra care needs to be taken for a situation that affects two articles. The state line is also a major political division; county lines are not so major.

My reasoning for only using Carroll County:

1. I use the official centerpoint of the interchange as deemed by MDSHA, which is 0.03 mile east of the county line in Carroll County according to the HLR. Some exit lists use a range of milepoints for interchanges. If that was the case, then including both counties would be prudent.
2. Having just one county in the County column is simpler.
3. Someone may interpret a pair of counties in the County column as MD 27 being on the county line, which is not the case.

I prefer to keep the exit list as it is now, but I could be persuaded to show both counties if there is consensus to do so.  VC  16:12, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2013

Volume 6, Issue 2 • Spring 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Project creates route list standard Driving down under Meta and Wikidata update ACR becoming active, changing USRD Cup wraps up	State and national updates Project news Task force reports for CA, GA, MI, OK and WA
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—EdwardsBot (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members). So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maryland Route 198

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Maryland Route 198 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Nbound -- Nbound (talk) 22:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Article

The article Article you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Article for comments about the article. Well done! Nbound (talk) 00:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maryland Route 198

The article Maryland Route 198 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Maryland Route 198 for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Nbound -- Nbound (talk) 00:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

DC 295 connection with MD 295?

I notice that you've reverted my edit to Baltimore-Washington Parkway. (Technically, this is a separate road from MD 295, however, Maryland Route 295 redirects here, and that makes sense.)

If I drive south on MD 295 and I do not get off the highway at US 50, I end up on DC 295 south. What agency is responsible for maintaining that short segment of connecting road? If MDSHA is responsible for maintaining the US 50 interchange, it's certainly not National Park Service. DDoT's more than likely not responsible for maintenance north of the DC/MD border. My guess would be its maintained by MDSHA, in which case it's either MD 295 or has some secret designation.

The MDSHA route log may stop at the US 50 interchange (I'm going to check on this, because I'm curious). However, to someone who is not a roadgeek, that is, most users of Wikipedia, MD 295 connects to DC 295. The entire route in both MD and DC was once slated to be designated as I-295, so there's a historical precedent for this as well. --Tckma (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

The Prince George's County 2010 SHA route log (one of the article references) sets milepost 0.00 at US 50, which corroborates the version you reverted to. I'm a little curious as to why MDSHA chooses to start the route log here and not at the DC line. I'm guessing the US 50 interchange is maintained by MDSHA as a part of US 50 (this is what confused me, maybe it should be taken out of the article), but the MD295 mainline and connector to DC 295 are NPS maintained. The B/W Parkway portion of MD 295 is unsigned, and so if it's NPS maintained rather than SHA maintained, why bother to give it a secret designation at all? --Tckma (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Now that you have done some digging, you realize why your edit had to be reverted. The secret designation is necessary for MDSHA to inventory the NPS portion of the parkway, particularly because there is a seamless transition between the NPS and MDSHA portions of the parkway. There is also a seamless transition between the MDSHA segment and Russell Street, which is maintained by Baltimore DOT. Keeping inventories of roads maintained by other agencies is not strictly necessary, but it is very helpful. Contrast with the Kansas Department of Transportation, which pretends the Kansas Turnpike does not exist.

As for why MD 295 and DC 295 do not connect, it helps to know the history of the area. The Baltimore–Washington Parkway and the portion of New York Avenue west to Bladensburg Road were completed in 1953 or 1954. There was a seamless transition between New York Avenue and the parkway, which explains why the MD 295 inventory begins at US 50 near the Anacostia River. The current course of MD 201 was built between 1953 and 1957; the Kenilworth Avenue expressway that carries the DC 295 designation was completed in 1957. If you look at the Maryland Route 201 article, it is MD 201 that links with DC 295, not MD 295. US 50 east of the southern end of the parkway, John Hanson Highway, was completed in 1962. The three routes were constructed close enough together in time that it is almost certain they were planned to converge in their current form. The inventory is likely a reflection of that order of events.  VC  20:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not native to Maryland, so I don't have the history. --Tckma (talk) 21:11, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maryland Route 112, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seneca Historic District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Summer 2013

Volume 6, Issue 3 • Summer 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Rewriting Infobox road and incorporating Wikidata Driving around the Pearl of the Orient Fixing our shields licensing	State and national updates Project news in brief Task force reports for CA, GA, MI, MN and WI
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—EdwardsBot (talk) 22:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Kansas Turnpike

Hi! Kansas Turnpike has hit the stage where the remaining NBI references should be updated - is this something you're still interested in? --Rschen7754 01:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will work on the NBI references this week. Should I also work on the template documentation and/or teach you and other editors how to use it? I noticed it is not used very often outside of Maryland articles.  VC  18:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

If you have the time that would be great. --Rschen7754 public (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maryland Route 117 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{reflist|30em|refs=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:22, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Randolph Road may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Randolph Road ({{convert|9.0|mi|km|abbr=on}}<br>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused by what you meant in the RfC

Hey mate, you've asked me if I could "reset the table" in the RfC for the Miami Problem. Either I'm dumb or confused as I'm not sure what you mean. Could you please tell me? Thanks. -DyluckTRocket (talk) 12:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I would like you to restart the discussion by starting a new section in the RfC and framing it with the clarifications you posted at 15:09, 17 August 2013. Your clarifications stopped the morass the discussion was becoming, but I think we need to start anew instead of piling on top of the existing discussion. I want to see as clean a slate as we can, and I think it is really important that you initiate it instead of someone else saying "I am starting a new discussion because DyluckTRocket said up above that X and Y..." Does that resolve your confusion?  VC  17:47, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks. -DyluckTRocket (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maryland Route 189, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MacArthur Boulevard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clara Barton Parkway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chain Bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/Baltimore–Washington Parkway

Hi! As a Maryland editor, would you mind commenting on this? --Rschen7754 03:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I am indifferent on whether it gets demoted. If the trend is toward keeping, and you specifically need my help to get it over the hump, give me a shout.  VC  04:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Do you notice anything about the article that needs substantial improvement? --Rschen7754 04:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

My first thought is that the article is broad but not comprehensive with regard to history. As with the other 5-year-old articles we are taking to ACR, it was acceptable then but is questionably acceptable now, depending on each person's taste. But making the history comprehensive is going to be a significant undertaking. I would like to work on it eventually, but I have no desire to tackle it now.  VC  04:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pennsylvania Route 97 (Adams County) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 1941: US 140 is bituminous road (low type) for entire length); solid black line on US 15
• the pike, which on January 23, 2004 were designated [[historic district contributing structure]]s ([[cf.]] Baltimore Pike properties and homes in the [[Gettysburg Battlefield Historic District]]. In

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to U.S. Route 240 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• its bridge across the [[Old Main Line Subdivision|Old Main Line]] of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad]] at Frederick Junction. South of the city limits of Frederick, US 240 had an oblique intersection

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited U.S. Route 411, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2013

Volume 6, Issue 4 • Fall 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Final push for 2013 goals A New York state of merger Templates, Lua, and sister projects	State and national updates Project news in brief Task force reports for CA, IA, MD, MI, and PA
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—EdwardsBot (talk) 03:11, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Indiana 931 discussion

Just a point of clarification: I've supported listing only the year since the discussion started. I only started to suggest looking for sources with an exact date in order to avoid a revert war. Mapsax (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:04, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

MD 925

I'm not seeing any mention of MD 3 there. Do you have the wrong page number? --NE2 03:12, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

It is the page numbered 73 in the actual book, not based on the viewer or PDF or whichever mode you are reading it in. It is in the table within the District 5 section.  VC  04:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Blah. Why did they put two books together? I was looking at this one, which, coincidentally, talks about the Crain Highway. --NE2 05:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it is obnoxious. But the book came that way and was scanned that way.  VC  13:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maryland/All-time list

I'm more or less done with this now. Have you had any success using the state road plats available here? --NE2 06:46, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I have used those once. They were cumbersome. I am also not sure how exactly how they should be used. If the plat is dated 1940, was the road completed in 1940, started in 1940, or was the land acquired in 1940?  VC  15:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)