Talk:California State Route 55/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about California State Route 55. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Double Nickels?
WTH? I've never heard this name for the 55 before. It is not what it is generally referred to. I will edit this to change the Double Nickels mention to more rarely, because I don't know where this was even said before. Theunknown42 22:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I actually hear the "double nickel" reference often by a few local traffic reporters.
I suppose they think it's clever but not particularly smart IMO.
Busiest
What are the busiest part of the freeway68.123.237.240 (talk) 21:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
GA Review
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:California State Route 55/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 23:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Will review. I know this road! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- review
- "below-grade freeway " - what does this mean?
- Linked. --Rschen7754 23:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- there are sone bare urls used as citations. e.g. [1], [2] and [3] These need to be formated.
- I have made a few edits which you are free to change: [4]
- That's all. Good work, and on hold.
MathewTownsend (talk) 23:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Should be good now. --Rschen7754 00:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- reply - just a little more
- lede
- Due to congestion, several alternatives are being discussed to expand the freeway portion past its current end in Newport Beach.
- what is the time frame for "everal alternatives are being discussed to expand the freeway portion "
- See below. --Rschen7754 20:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- History
- "In April 2007, the Orange County Transportation Authority approved funds to study the feasibility of extending the Costa Mesa Freeway south to 17th Street via tunnels or flyover ramps."
- Is this the "alternatives ... being discussed" in the lede?
- what is the outcome of this study, since this is over five years later?
- Yes, they're the same. Do you think I should be more specific in the lead? I didn't want to verbatim copy it... --Rschen7754 20:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- citations
- This citation still needed fixing:[5]
- I attempted to fix it but it's not quite the format you've been using. Might want to check it.
- Fixed, but generally citation formatting is left to FAC. --Rschen7754 20:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- I also linked flyover. ok?
- Should be fine. --Rschen7754 20:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
MathewTownsend (talk) 13:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing. Article passes all GA criteria. GA pass. Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 01:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)