Misplaced Pages

User talk:Station Attendant: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:15, 21 July 2006 editElkman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers32,321 edits →Re: Minnesota state highways: Think SPUI is unhappy with the decision, but being passive-aggressive about it← Previous edit Revision as of 03:57, 22 July 2006 edit undoElkman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers32,321 edits I'm not sure.Next edit →
Line 49: Line 49:
''I haven't really been paying attention very closely to the naming convention stuff for highways, but did it get decided that all of the state highways should be moved to State Highway XX (State)? I am asking this because I have seen ] going around and changing links and marking articles with a tag which indicates that they need to have their name changed to "meet Misplaced Pages's quality standards". If you have heard anything, could you let me know? --] 22:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)'' ''I haven't really been paying attention very closely to the naming convention stuff for highways, but did it get decided that all of the state highways should be moved to State Highway XX (State)? I am asking this because I have seen ] going around and changing links and marking articles with a tag which indicates that they need to have their name changed to "meet Misplaced Pages's quality standards". If you have heard anything, could you let me know? --] 22:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)''
: I don't think any real decision has been made (still). There was a request for arbitration at ] (which followed an RFC and lots of other discussion). The net result was that ] and all the other participants were enjoined not to move or rename any other highway articles from one controversial name to another until an official policy is sorted out. I think the "incorrect name" tag is SPUI's way of indicating that he isn't happy with that answer, without actually violating the RFAR. Since this has been ongoing with no sign of resolution, I've been putting my energies into other things, like doing articles about historic sites in Minnesota and helping to bring ] to Featured Article status. It's more fun to work on stuff that isn't artificially made controversial. --] - ] 23:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC) : I don't think any real decision has been made (still). There was a request for arbitration at ] (which followed an RFC and lots of other discussion). The net result was that ] and all the other participants were enjoined not to move or rename any other highway articles from one controversial name to another until an official policy is sorted out. I think the "incorrect name" tag is SPUI's way of indicating that he isn't happy with that answer, without actually violating the RFAR. Since this has been ongoing with no sign of resolution, I've been putting my energies into other things, like doing articles about historic sites in Minnesota and helping to bring ] to Featured Article status. It's more fun to work on stuff that isn't artificially made controversial. --] - ] 23:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

'':::Another point, why did ] change some articles (]) and not others (])? --] 03:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)''
: I'm not sure -- I think he's only doing this to articles that he's encountered when "working" on other states, like Wisconsin. I'd rather not get his attention and say, "Hey, you forgot to yell at us for giving Snelling Avenue the wrong name." As far as I care, if the sign by the side of the road says "Minnesota" at the top and "16" in a blue box underneath it, it's valid to call it "Minnesota State Highway 16". If the standard has changed, then nothing at ] reflects this. (Not that SPUI would care; he has yet to actually ''talk'' with the people who run individual state highway projects.) --] - ] 03:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:57, 22 July 2006

MN State Highways

Well here's some general wikipedia links to get you started:

Welcome!

Hello Station Attendant, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 

And Misplaced Pages:WikiProject U.S. Roads has the basics of highway pages. We'd love to have someone for Minnesota since we have a lot of highways with no article across the country. Eventually a separate WikiProject for Minnesota State Highways may come into play. Feel free to ask me any questions... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


Hi, Station_Attendant, I'm from central Minnesota, and will be willing to help out with the Minnesota State Highways project. I've already updated MN-371, and created MN-301. Rschen7754 had noticed what I was doing and has started helping me out. If it's okay with both of you, I'll continue to work on the project.

SpaceJunkie 03:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

It would be great to have more help. If you haven't done so already, just go the the WikiProject Minnesota State Highways project page and add your name to the participants. As of now, things are just getting started so you can work on whatever needs to be done. (Which is just about everything.) Station Attendant 17:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome

I would like to thank you for welcoming me, and I hope to contribute as much information as I can. Station Attendant 04:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit to your userpage

Yes, I subst'ed a template that was to be deleted, specifically {{user allow fairuse}}. Everything should still look the exact same except that the code for the template is now inline. JYolkowski // talk 23:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

The one for Missouri highways is similar to the one you want (I think). It's at: Template:MORoutebox. It doesn't include Missouri anywhere on it, and you could copy and paste it to a new template to keep it seperate from Missouri. You can change colors if you want it to appear different. I modified it from the interstate template. Rt66lt 23:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Cliff Clavin

Given your usage of Template:User SaintCliff on your user page, I thought you might be interested in knowing that I added him to a Wikimedia vote on the Misplaced Pages mascot! Staxringold 19:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Minnesota state highways

The reason I'm not thrilled with my work on Minnesota state highways is because of this: Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions/Numbered highways. Basically, there's a huge, unproductive debate about what to name highways in all of the other states that have highway projects. (For example: Should we say Minnesota State Highway 210, State Highway 210 (Minnesota), Minnesota Trunk Highway 210, Trunk Highway 210 (Minnesota), or That road that goes from Carlton to Brainerd to Breckenridge and keeps the number 210?) Even if we come up with a consensus ourselves, someone with an agenda will most likely come along and override everything we've done. I'm not happy with the situation. Elkman - 21:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I am also not happy about this. From my opinion, it should be exactly the way that we have it now, Minnesota State Highway 210. --Station Attendant 21:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't really been paying attention very closely to the naming convention stuff for highways, but did it get decided that all of the state highways should be moved to State Highway XX (State)? I am asking this because I have seen SPUI going around and changing links and marking articles with a tag which indicates that they need to have their name changed to "meet Misplaced Pages's quality standards". If you have heard anything, could you let me know? --Station Attendant 22:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think any real decision has been made (still). There was a request for arbitration at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Highways (which followed an RFC and lots of other discussion). The net result was that SPUI and all the other participants were enjoined not to move or rename any other highway articles from one controversial name to another until an official policy is sorted out. I think the "incorrect name" tag is SPUI's way of indicating that he isn't happy with that answer, without actually violating the RFAR. Since this has been ongoing with no sign of resolution, I've been putting my energies into other things, like doing articles about historic sites in Minnesota and helping to bring Minnesota to Featured Article status. It's more fun to work on stuff that isn't artificially made controversial. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 23:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

:::Another point, why did SPUI change some articles (Minnesota State Highway 16) and not others (Minnesota State Highway 51)? --Station Attendant 03:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure -- I think he's only doing this to articles that he's encountered when "working" on other states, like Wisconsin. I'd rather not get his attention and say, "Hey, you forgot to yell at us for giving Snelling Avenue the wrong name." As far as I care, if the sign by the side of the road says "Minnesota" at the top and "16" in a blue box underneath it, it's valid to call it "Minnesota State Highway 16". If the standard has changed, then nothing at WP:MNSH reflects this. (Not that SPUI would care; he has yet to actually talk with the people who run individual state highway projects.) --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 03:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)