User talk:Fredddie/Archives/2016

Draft:List of Farm to Market Roads in Texas (3500–3599) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:List of Farm to Market Roads in Texas (3500–3599), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

How to create Highway Shields

How do I create highway shields? Chestertheraccoon (talk) 00:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Shields task force/Tutorial or you can request them at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Shields task force/Requests. –Fredddie™ 00:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Highway Shields Bot

Out of curiosity, I'm wondering, what bot do you use to make all of those highway shields? Vcap36 (talk) 18:54, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't. I make templates and then make each file one-by-one. –Fredddie™ 20:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Iowa state highways, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page I-129. 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) 09:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Dispensed with. -happy5214 11:31, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

US 33

Would you be willing to help me complete User:TenPoundHammer/sandbox into an article on US 33 in Ohio? I started it a while back and forgot about it. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I have had terrible writer's block for the better part of a couple years, so I don't think that's likely. Sorry. –Fredddie™ 16:38, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Map for Minnesota State Highway 7

On March 5, 2016, you created and uploaded a map for the Wikipedia page for Minnesota State Highway 7, MN 7. A correction needs to be made to this map in regards to the incorrect spelling of a city in west-central Minnesota. The city is Willmar, Minnesota, not Willard. -Siberinter (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Oops. I'm away for the week so I can't really do that now, but you should be able to download the file, open it in a text editor, and change it appropriately. –Fredddie™ 05:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I just fixed it. Vcap36 (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:2003 Iowa highway jurisdictional transfer

Draft:2003 Iowa highway jurisdictional transfer, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:2003 Iowa highway jurisdictional transfer and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:2003 Iowa highway jurisdictional transfer during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 02:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

U.S. Route 366 (1927–1932)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of U.S. Route 366 (1927–1932), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://dictionary.sensagent.com/U%20S%20ROUTE%20366/en-en/.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chris Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Power forward. 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) 09:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Module:Road data/strings/USA/IA

I see that you were trying to convert the module to use inheritance and add data used in Template:Infobox road. I can paste what I have, but the only backward incompatibility is that the "width" fields will not be there, so banner placements will be off until my placement mechanism is deployed. (We can add them back afterwards if you like.) Just wanted to check with you first. Chinissai (talk) 11:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what went wrong when I tried it, so go ahead. –Fredddie™ 14:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Module:Road data/strings/USA/OH

How do I add new parameters to (type) in (Module:Road data/strings/USA/OH)? I was wondering because I wanted to add The Inter-county Highways (ICH) and Main Market Roads (MMR) in Ohio from before 1923, and I don't know how to type that in. Cards84664 (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Can you show me some examples of how they'd be used? This will give me a better idea of how to do it. –Fredddie™ 22:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Cards84664/sandbox4

Possible addition of Route lists by county; most likely giving expanded notes on if a route was rerouted out of a county (Shown with SR 2); the space needed to display all ICHs before 1922 (putting them in the main route list would be too massive); and smaller footnotes to show what routes replaced old highways.

On a side note, would the route number parameter be able to support roman numerals used for the old MMRs? My idea (If they did) is to use free use images of roman numerals in the jct lists.

The source of the jct list shown in my sandbox shows how I think it would look.

Cards84664 (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Any opinions? Cards84664 (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I should have clarified that by examples I meant pictures of signs that show the ICH/MMR numbers. If we're not going to have shields (my gut says this is the best option), you can simply copy the IA.Primary type from Module:Road data/strings/USA/IA and change the pertinent information. Roman numerals are an interesting idea (ping Chinssai). I can think of some roads in Spain that would benefit from Roman numerals. In that case, we would still use Arabic numbers for the templates (they look for 5s, not Vs) and something could convert them to Roman numerals. –Fredddie™ 17:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Looks like a parser hook to me. Chinissai (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Yep, I was thinking of using arabic in the source, and using free images of roman numerals in the jct lists Cards84664 (talk) 18:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Minnesota State Highway Map Data

What data do you use to make Minnesota state highway maps? I've been browsing for a while, and I can't find data that I could use to make maps for a Minnesota state highway. Vcap36 (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Did you read WP:USRD/MTF? The tutorial? Whenever I'm looking for GIS data for a specific state, I search for "<state> DOT GIS". I searched for it just now and the first hit was what I was looking for. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/maps/gdma/gis-data.html –Fredddie™ 18:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Vcap36 (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Problem

Do we have any ideas as to when these white signs were used in ohio? Cards84664 (talk) 00:28, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

SR 1 (OH 1920) Wait a second. That looks like faded yellow to me. –Fredddie™ 00:39, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Eh. White with yellow rust? Cards84664 (talk) 16:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

References

SmartTrack

I'd invite your comment on this, since you edited {{Metrolinx}}. Thanks. --Natural R_X 13:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Missing set of Ohio markers

So I hadn't been at List of State Routes in Ohio for a while so when I saw it just recently I made note of the series of markers through the years. (I assume that while many editors have had a hand in them that one can trace all in some aspect back to you, hence why these comments are landing on your talk page.) I also noticed that one type wasn't represented. It has a black background like the modern one but the marker itself looks like the previous one, including the 3-digit version in a 2-digit space (see example [edit]). No idea of the timeline except that through OR I know that they were prominent in the late 1970s. Mapsax (talk) 13:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Lots of them are still in use in rural areas today so idk Cards84664 (talk) 15:02, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

So when did the current style (Ohio shape on a black square) come around, 1961? We could create an 'OH 1961' (or whatever year) type that would just be squares. –Fredddie™ 16:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Black squares were 1971, modern sometime after that? 80s or 90s idk Cards84664 (talk) 16:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

If you follow the chronology of the U.S. Highway shield, the black square was introduced in 1961 and was redesigned in 1971, which was also when the wide shield was introduced. –Fredddie™ 16:27, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

But with the sr signs, the cutouts were 1961, squares were 1971 Cards84664 (talk) 16:47, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I didn't post these earlier because they were U.S. markers (plus with the website down temporarily I had to dig for alternate locations), but this and this [edited] are contemporary to the state route markers in question. These sure look like 1961 markers to me. That of course would skew the timeline with respect to the last cutouts used. Mapsax (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2016 (UTC) Edit: A couple more: US 2-digit SR 3-digit I think that between these 1- and 2-digit SRs can be created, since I haven't found any examples online, even at AARoads. Aside: I was going to make these comments at WP:USRD/STF but somehow they seemed more appropriate here. Should this discussion be moved there? Mapsax (talk) 22:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mapsax: this is fine. I started a request at commons:User:Highway Route Marker Bot/Requests. –Fredddie™ 22:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

I think for the 3 digit signs the change was around 1990, per this ref Cards84664 (talk) 15:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

My idea of a time line:

1961: US drops cutouts; SR drops "ohio" from cutouts

1971: US changes font; SR drops cutouts

1990? 3 digits are widened

Cards84664 (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

1989 is just when the photo was taken. There were definitely wide shields in the state before that. Mapsax (talk) 15:25, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

According to AARoads, 1967 is when the black squares came into use. I'd be OK with an "OH 1967" type. We can get {{Jct}} and {{Infobox road}} to use the current set of markers below 100 easily enough. –Fredddie™ 21:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

If its 1967, where did we get 1971 as a year before? Because i was not going off of the us years Cards84664 (talk) 23:25, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

1971 is when wide USH and state highway shields were introduced in the MUTCD. –Fredddie™ 23:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

By the way, does aaroads mention the white variant of SR 1920 signage? Cards84664 (talk) 01:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Seems to be inconclusive. –Fredddie™ 22:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

State Route 250
Location	Foo

@Cards84664 and Mapsax: SR 1 / SR 250 The OH 1967 shields are being created as I type this. –Fredddie™ 20:14, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Note many routes were deleted in 1967, so I say we only use routes that were deleted from 1968 to 1971 (69, 194, 351, 375, 627, 230)

Also, didn't the single and double use a smaller font? Cards84664 (talk) 15:02, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the 1- and 2-digit shields, not that I can tell, which is why I set it up to use through . Regardless of how and where they're used, there is an entire set 100-999. –Fredddie™ 15:49, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Enforcing momentarily. Cards84664 (talk) 16:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Tharrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You idiot Georgia State Route 39 Spur (Jakin) is an appropriate page. Ejohn319 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me? Could you elaborate outside of your ad hominem attack? –Fredddie™ 22:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Ohio Turnpike

New shield you put in the text is a few pixels off to the left; margin size; colors a bit lighter
http://www.ohioturnpike.org/images/default-source/For-Templates/home.png?sfvrsn=10
I would do something, but I don't have any experience with inkscape
Cards84664 (talk) 23:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The spec from ODOT shows the text that way and I used the same shield blank as the Ohio route markers. The color code comes from commons:MUTCD colors. –Fredddie™ 23:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Just to note, the OT sign was not designed by ODOT, OTIC shows the shape of ohio differently. If anything, it should stay as the 2007 version, and the background color should be changed to OTICs' choice of #06A160 Cards84664 (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I disagree entirely. –Fredddie™ 23:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

So why should we take odots' design over the commission that actually runs the turnpike? Cards84664 (talk) 23:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Show me a measured drawing from the commission and I'll use it in a heartbeat. Until then, an MUTCD from ODOT is a pretty damn good substitute. –Fredddie™ 00:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

@Cards84664: many of the various graphics created over the years used a different shade of green than what we're using now, usually brighter. This brighter shade is meant to approximate what the color looks like when light reflects off the retroreflective sheeting used to make modern signs. However, there's been no consensus on how to approximate that, so we've stuck with FHWA's defined shade, which for the green is Pantone 342 or #006B54. Yes, it looks a little bit darker, but let's stay consistent with the official definition. Plus, it matches the color in the infobox.

As for OTIC vs. ODOT, when OTIC releases the appropriate source, we can switch. Until then, I agree with Fredddie that the Ohio MUTCD is our best source for now. Imzadi 1979 → 07:03, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

U.S. Route 69

Why did you revert my edit on the U.S. Route 69 page? Charlotte Allison (Morriswa) (talk) 23:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Because, in your edit description, you said you "revamped [the] section". That was a lie; you only put some maintenance tags on it. I know you mean well, but typically, I never tag something I'm not willing to fix myself. –Fredddie™ 10:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I admit that it wasn't exactly revamping, but that wasn't a good reason to revert my edit. I apologize if I lied. I don't usually do that. Charlotte Allison (Morriswa) (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The basic problem is that in the past, we have had random editors wander up to an article, stick a maintenance tag on it, and then disappear, which then sits there for a long time. For example, I recently improved Hatfield train crash, and in doing so managed to improve the article such that a {{refimprove}} tag that had sat there for over 7 years could be removed. Consequently, people have been suspicious of them, hence you may find the odd user page with a satirical message like "An editor thinks something might be wrong with this page. They can't be bothered to fix it, but can rest assured that they've done their encyclopedic duty by sticking on a tag." User:Beyond My Ken/thoughts#Tags has some further insights that are a bit blunt but worth reading (as, indeed, is the whole of that page, an excellent read if I do say so myself). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have two philosophies about tagging articles. I do a lot of new page patrol-esque stuff looking through the bot-generated lists of new articles that might fit with the USRD or HWY projects. Usually I just tag and assess the talk pages of the new articles. I'll go through and spend some time doing basic clean up work in the articles themselves. I will also sometimes tag some obvious deficiencies in the (perhaps delusional) hopes that these new editors creating these new articles will pick up a few better practices and learn that some practices aren't really a good idea. It doesn't always work, but sometimes it does.

When I'm writing or expanding an article, I will sometimes self-tag things with {{cn}} as a reminder to come back and add a citation. I'll do this when it's an obvious-to-me fact from my research, but I don't have the source(s) sitting immediately in front of me and I don't want to interrupt the flow of my writing. Then when I hit a good moment, I pull the sources and insert the ref(s). I try to avoid the drive-by tagging that you've been doing though Morriswa. Imzadi 1979 → 23:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

It really irks me when brand new articles are drive-by tagged, especially when a new(er) editor wrote it. That goes along the lines of WP:BITE. –Fredddie™ 23:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I usually just fix things, but some big things need a citation, so it gets an inline tag, not the big banner. I guess that I should have clarified that I prefer the inline tags in that situation to point out specific and actionable things. Why tag a whole section as needing citations (if there are none, it should be obvious), when you can tag something specific, like a direct quotation, that needs a citation or should be removed soon? Imzadi 1979 → 00:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Converting OSM to KML

Heya, can you help out with something. At Talk:A303 road/GA1 I was trying to get a suitable KML plan working from an OSM trace. Basically for SABRE Maps I created a pull-script from OpenStreetMap that takes a planet.osm dump and spits out a corpus of traces for just about every significant road in Britain and Ireland. Each file is basically a graph, contain a list of nodes followed by a list of vertices. This ought to be fairly straightforward to convert to KML, but when I ran it through Geoconverter and uploaded it to Template:Attached KML/A303 road, the link to Google Maps crashed the browser while the link to Bing only displayed about half of it. I've since deleted the attachment as it was over 266K of text, which seems extrordinary large and hence probably wrong. Would you be able to advise how to proceed with this? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Can you open it in Google Earth? Whenever I make KMLs (using this method), I will use GE to clean up the file. From there you can output to KML. –Fredddie™ 20:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I've opened my version of the KML in Google Earth and it's fine. I re-exported and updated the template file as linked above. Now the dropdown WikiAtlas map works correctly, Bing has large sections missing, and Google Maps doesn't seem to be right at all. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

Wishing Fredddie a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 03:31, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker)Happy birthday, dude! Charlotte Allison (Morriswa) (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Woodstop45 (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of U.S. Route 75 in Iowa

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article U.S. Route 75 in Iowa 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 Legobot, on behalf of Coemgenus -- Coemgenus (talk) 13:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of U.S. Route 75 in Iowa

The article U.S. Route 75 in Iowa you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:U.S. Route 75 in Iowa for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Coemgenus -- Coemgenus (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of U.S. Route 75 in Iowa

The article U.S. Route 75 in Iowa you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:U.S. Route 75 in Iowa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Coemgenus -- Coemgenus (talk) 12:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

ND 91s

I saw in the history of List of North Dakota numbered highways that you added ND 91 in St. Thomas, but I also spotted a ND 91 in the Harvey inset of the same source that you used. Error? Reused designation? Dunno. Mapsax (talk) 15:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. The one in Harvey is signed whereas the one in St. Thomas is not. But multiple NDDOT maps from different years refer to both highways as ND 91. So if St. Thomas is an error, it's one they've been making for a few years. –Fredddie™ 15:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Fredddie. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)