Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review/Interstate 68

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Result of the discussion was promote to A-class.

Interstate 68[edit]

Suggestion: No suggestion given regarding A-Class

Nominator's comments: This has been an interesting article to work on, and it'll be useful to try to get some other opinions on the article, so here it is.

Nominated by: Algorerhythms (talk) 16:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First comment occurred: 00:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Support - Article has no problems I am aware of. Very clean, neat and setence flow is nice. – CG 00:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - I have a few concerns with the article before I will support it for A-Class:

In lead, is it nessecary to have a link to an unrelated U.S. Route 48
- Changed.
Move the route description to before the history section
- When I originally wrote the article in userspace, the route description was before the history, which seems to be the far more common pattern among road articles. I took a look at some A-class and FA articles like Interstate 37 and Interstate 355, which place the history first and liked that pattern, especially considering in the most recent article I took to FAC, the reviewers had issue with emphasizing the route description over the history. The U.S. Roads standards do not state that the route description must come before the history section, so I prefer it the way it currently is.
  - My $.02, there is nothing in stone that says the Route description must come before the history. I do think this article reads better with the history first. I've debated on doing this on a few of my FA nominations. It was brought up for the nomination of Interstate 70 in Utah at FAC, but was only a couple of people who suggested it, with no firm consensus, so I didn't do it.Dave (talk) 02:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence "In Cumberland, the situation was particularly bad, as traffic exceeded the capacity of Cumberland's narrow streets." as you use the word "Cumberland" twice
- Changed.
"the Narrows" sounds colliqual, use "Cumberland Narrows"
- Changed.
Refrerences should not be in the middle of a sentence, move to the end
- I'm fairly certain that it's considered acceptable to place references after commas, but I've moved the references to the ends of the sentences.
Combine the following sentences "MDSHA, however, later concluded that adding additional route shields to the U.S. Route 50 freeway would not be helpful to drivers. Since about half the freeway already had two route designations and drivers on the freeway were already familiar with the U.S. Route 50 designation, MDSHA decided against adding Interstate shields."
- Changed.
Provide a wikilink to the article about the current U.S. Route 48
- Changed.
The last two paragraphs of the Effect on surrounding region section sound more like route description than history. Consider moving?
- Changed.
In the route description, try to describe more of the physical environment of the route, such as whether it passes through urban or mountainous areas.
- I've added some more description of the physical environment of the route.
The information in the route description sounds a little dry. Try adding a greater variety of wording

The sentence "I-68 then ascends Haystack Mountain, entering the city of Cumberland, the most congested section of the highway in Maryland." sounds awkward
- Changed.
In the route description, is it nessecary to quote information that is also mentioned in the History section
The phrase "U.S. Route 220 leaves Interstate 68 toward Bedford, Pennsylvania." sounds awkward
- Changed.
In last paragraph of rotue descripion, indicate eastern terminus is in Hancock
- Changed.
Use the {{future road}} template at the beginning of the Future section
- I'm not particularly a fan of that template, but I've added it.
Is it nessecary to mention information about the Mon-Fayette Expressway, an unrelated road, in the article?
- I've tried to keep the discussion of the Mon-Fayette Expressway in the article to a minimum, since it isn't directly related, but since the construction of the portion of the road in West Virginia will involve the construction of a new interchange on I-68, I do think that it does have to be mentioned at some point.
Is it nessecary for there to be separate exit lists for the West Virginia and Maryland segments? Is there a way to combine them?
- It was actually NE2, not me, that made the exit list for the article, but I suppose I can combine them by adding a "State" column.

Dough4872 (talk) 04:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Actually, I think is cleaner with them separated — master son^{T - C} 14:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm sort of conflicted on this part... both ways of presenting the information have their advantages. Splitting the tables definitely looks cleaner. I did the ~~splitting~~ merging of the tables as a separate edit, so it can be reversed just by clicking Undo. - Algorerhythms (talk) 17:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. There are still a couple more of your points I need to address, and I'll probably get to them later today. - Algorerhythms (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also have a concern with the exit list I must have overlooked. There are a few intersections missing mileposts. Are these mileposts known? Also, use section parameter for future road template Dough4872 (talk) 15:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the missing mileposts. They're available from the MDSHA Highway Location Reference. - Algorerhythms (talk) 17:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - All of my major concerns have been addressed. Just remember to use the section parameter for the future road template. Dough4872 (talk) 15:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues from — master son^{T - C} 01:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from User:Master son
- Lead Section
- History
  - In Cumberland, the situation was particularly bad, as traffic exceeded the capacity of Cumberland's narrow streets. - No need to mention Cumberland twice here. It seems clear to me that if you put "as traffic exceeded the capacity of the city's narrow streets" that would be clear enough
    - I've changed the second "Cumberland" to "the city."
  - The first corridor for the construction to be approved by MDSHA ran south of U.S. Route 40. - Define what MDSHA means on the first occurrence of the acronym (I noticed you spelt it out in the route description - leading me to think the RD was prior to the history before)
    - Done. When I originally wrote the article in userspace, the route description was before the history, which seems to be the far more common pattern among road articles. I took a look at some A-class and FA articles like Interstate 37 and Interstate 355, which place the history first and liked that pattern, especially considering in the most recent article I took to FAC, the reviewers had issue with emphasizing the route description over the history.
- Route Description
  - Interstate 68 runs 112.6 miles (181.2 km) – 81.1 miles (130.5 km) in Maryland and 31.5 miles (50.7 km) in West Virginia – connecting Interstate 79 in Morgantown, West Virginia to Interstate 70 in Hancock, Maryland, across the Appalachian Mountains. - I suggest "spans" instead of "runs"
    - Changed.
  - Do we need to spell out official route names (i.e. "Interstate 68") every time? Short-hand should work here.
    - Changed to "I-68."
- Future Work**
  - Add {{future road}} to the beginning of this section
    - I'm not particularly a fan of this template (I think it's ugly and not particularly necessary), but I've added it.

Can't see much else here - very good job. Just the few things and we're good to go.

Thanks for the review. I think I've addressed all your points, but if I missed something, please let me know. - Algorerhythms (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just one - You changed Interstate 68 to I-68, what about the other references to routes (several West Virigina/Maryland state routes and US Routes? Only the first mention should be spelled out in full - Unless it's necessary for FA. Let's be consistent) — master son^{T - C} 01:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: First mentions of any such route should remain spelled out. (US Route 40 is an obvious example here) — master son^{T - C} 14:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For each of the routes, I've abbreviated all but the first mention, where I've placed the abbreviation in parentheses. - Algorerhythms (talk) 17:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Were good here with corrections completed — master son^{T - C} 23:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dave (talk) 23:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC) addressed[reply]

{{{2}}}

Support For the record, I have done the inflation adjusted numbers a little differently in my FA noms. Not sure which is better, see Utah State Route 128, Dewey Bridge section. Dave (talk) 23:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by SriMesh | talk 00:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please wikilink the first mention of United States, New York, Mississippi, Ohio
Done.
Please state US $ on first use of currency in the article.
Done.
Add notes about $113 million being 2003 or 1991 currency as the economy is fluctuating now and use the Template:Inflation...see perhaps...Sideling Hill Tunnel or Atlantic City–Brigantine Connector for two different methods.
Done. (Incidentally, it appears that in modern-day dollars, the road would cost well over $1 billion to build...)
This sentence in this context does not make sense...This marks the third time that the US 48 number has been assigned to a highway, the first use being for a highway in California that existed in the 1920s...The previouse statement talks about removing 48 from 68, then one 1920's instance of using 48 is talked about, then removed 48 from 68 makes two counts..so what is third time??
The first one was the road in California in the 1920s, the second one was Interstate 68, and the third one is the Corridor H highway from Weirton, West Virginia to Strasburg, Virginia, mentioned in the previous sentence.
I don't believe full- and part-time employment full needs a dash in this case.
Suspended hyphens are generally considered to be acceptable in English.
Copyedit / crop superfluous words which are bolded...Economic difficulties remain, however, particularly in Allegany and Garrett counties
Changed.
Copyedit / crop superfluous words crop bolded words... replace with were or are....There have also been concerns over loss of customers to businesses that have been cut off from the main highway due to the construction of the new alignment in the 1980s,....
Changed.
Three miles east of needs the km to mi conversion...In same sentence are northward and eastward more appropriate than just leaving terms at north and east?
Changed (the convert template doesn't seem to want to put it in words, so I simply typed in the conversion...)
In Exit list section a whole column is labelled # why? Could this be expalined in italics above the table, to make the entries more valid.
The "#" column is for the exit numbers for the exits from the freeway (in fact, the article exit number is linked from it. I tried changing it to read "Exit number"
Freeway, an homage to the historic... change to.. Freeway, homage to the historic...
NOW for a few from the automatic peer review thing' Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
I've expanded the lead. - Algorerhythms (talk) 00:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
automatic peer review Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 6 km, use 6 km, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 6 km.^[?]
automatic peer review Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
I've removed an occurrence of this in the heading of one of the sections.
How come some highways designated in the intersection table have no shields, however the majority of them do.
The ones that don't have shields are the ones that the Maryland State Highway Administration do not post signs for (for example, exit 33 is for Maryland Route 736, but the signs at the exit read only "Braddock Road," and on the road itself there are no signs indicating it as MD 736.)
All images are OK as of this date.
In this reference...^ AASHTO (1989-06-07). "Report to the Special Committee on Route Numbering". 4. http://cms.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/1989-USRN_Cmte.PDF. Retrieved on 2009-01-17...which is used to support that the US 48's designation to I-68. Should there also... for the broad coverage also say that there used to be an I-68 living in Maryland that changed its name to I-595, for those more familiar with that I-68 route over this one.
That's already mentioned, though, thanks for pointing that out, as it made me notice I had the wrong page listed in the reference
The online references check out as of this check.

Support - Changed my comment to support, as all of my major concerns have been addressed. Thank you, and good luck with your future endeavours as well. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 00:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.