Getting rather sick of seeing the one and only red link on this navbox and with sources becoming easier to locate, I have finally decided to create an article for the Sorell Bypass. The dilemma I find myself facing is with the infobox. The Sorell Bypass has always been referred to as such and yet this proposal comprises of two different allighnments.
The first involves the Arthur Highway bypassing Sorell to the east. starting at the Tasman Highway south of the town here (-42.790967, 147.561308) and proceeding around the town connecting with the Arthur highway here (-42.781519, 147.574633)
The second involves the Tasman Highway bypassing Sorell to the west. Starting at the Tasman Highway south of the town here (-42.792302, 147.553524) and proceeding around the town connecting back up with the Tasman Highway here (-42.776192, 147.551099)
These 2 corridors have been proclaimed since 1963 and are expressed on several street atlases. While this is not something I can cite, With how much the eastern bypass to the Arthur Hwy is talked about, I get the impression that alignment is the priority.
The above info has been noted so hopefully fellow editors will understand why I have one proposed road article comprising of two traffic corridors.
What I require assistance with is the infobox. Can someone please have a look at my sandbox (or simply to the right) and tell me if I have expressed the infobox to an acceptable standard? To represent two roads on the one project I made use of the ring road part of the template. I think it looks ok. But feel a second opinion will give me the confidence to (or not to) take it out of my sandbox and place in its own article namespace.
Wikiian16:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@Wiki ian: Looks basically okay, but I made a few changes for accessibility (not everyone can see images, so we have to provide text), described the sections as "Western" and "Eastern" and added "near XYZ" to junctions (more intuitive for someone not familiar with Sorell/Tasmanian road routes), and put Sorell into the |ring= parameter (which you described as using but hadn't actually used? Unless you just meant the split road functionality...). I also reversed the direction of the eastern section so it describes a continuous bypass around Sorell (from Tasman Hwy in the north to Tasman Hwy in the south to Arthur Hwy in the east). - Evad37[talk]02:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
I like it
@Evad37: I should have expected a reply from you my friend. You're quickly building a reputation with me as one of my preferred "go to" editors.... While at the proposal stage, I feel that the same article will suffice for both roads given the lack of detailed information on each corridor. But I have taken on board your advice and shall endeavor to be more descriptive with locations. Do you know of any editors with map making skills? I just don't have the know how to trace the map here. Thankyou for your swift reply and fixes you made. Wikiian04:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
The maps found here are even better. I've been told using photoshop you can trace the maps effectively making your own legal copies. Is this true or false? and If true could this process be achieved on photoshop elements 9? Wikiian04:50, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Wiki ian, happy to help! With regards to the maps, as far as I understand, copying via tracing is still copying, and any resulting work would be a derivative work, and violate copyright (unless the original map had been released under a free license). The only way to get around copyright is to already have a map with most of the roads/elements released under a free license (eg from OpenStreetMap), and then add in the proposed roads by drawing your own lines/curves based on, but not copying/tracing exactly, what is shown in the copyrighted map. I have done some of these types of maps before (File:Perth Darwin National Highway, Swan Valley bypass (NorthLinkWA).png, File:Orange Route (Perth-Adelaide National Highway).png), so I can have a look at making a map later today or tomorrow. - Evad37[talk]05:54, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure glad I clarified that with you first. I dare say that uploading a copyrighted image on Commons (whether accidental or not) would not do my reputation any favors. Your maps are sensational - Easy to read and straight to the point. I would be very appreciative if you could spare the time to make a map for this topic. Browsing the infobox testcases I have made some alterations which can be seen here. Following your advise, I tried to emphasise as much location info as possible. Thanks again, Wikiian10:07, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
With the recent changes, the pushpin map always displays when coordinates are defined; this previously wasn't the case (such behaviour causes duplicate maps to be displayed for articles such as Stuart Highway). I think that if a map is defined in |location=, then the pushpin map should not display (since a map with the whole route marked on it is superior to a map with only the end points). - Evad37[talk]02:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC) The code for this is in the sandbox. - Evad37[talk]02:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Infobox Australian place has a |map_type=none to deliberately suppress the pushpin map. |map_type= also supports a few other parameters that could be helpful for short roads where the endpoint dots end up almost on top of each other on state maps. I don't know how easy that would be to add here.
Could someone who understands such things please add a tracking category for roads that only have one of |coordinates_a= and |coordinates_b=? Especially since the older |coordinates= has been quickly converted, it is possible that some of these are a point that is not at either end of the road. Ultimately, it would be nice to add KML or GML to the generated map, to show the route, not just the endpoints on the standardised maps.--Scott DavisTalk04:10, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I thought the first category looked short, then realised some of the pages I thought should be in it have no coordinates at all in the infobox. I probably won't have much time to look at coordinates until next week. --Scott DavisTalk23:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
The list of pages that I converted from the old |coordinates= to |coordinates_a= should continue to exist here until July 1. I converted 57 pages, of which a handful had two sets of coordinates. I changed those to use the "a" and "b" parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll try to work through them, but probably not until next weekend. Of the ones I've looked at, some had the 'a' end, one had the 'b' end, some had somewhere in the middle, and one had a point a few km from the route, and not inside a curve, either. --Scott DavisTalk14:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
suppress locator map
What is the "right way" to suppress the locator map when the mapframe map looks better? One solution seems to be to take the coordinates out of the infobox (as the mapframe uses the coordinates in Wikidata not the ones in the infobox). Is there an undocumented parallel to |mapframe=no? Thanks. --Scott DavisTalk03:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Pinging people who might know: @Evad37 and Frietjes: - also, |use_lga_map=yes seems to be broken at the moment, even for the few LGAs I know have maps (and work as |alternative_location_map=Australia South Australia City of Adelaide for example). The error I see in preview is "Lua error in Module:Location_map/multi at line 143: Unable to find the specified location map definition. Neither "Module:Location map/data/Australia South Australia&" nor "Template:Location map Australia South Australia&" exists." --Scott DavisTalk01:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
@Frietjes: Sorry - Sturt Street, Adelaide was one of the pages I have had trouble with. It currently has alternative_location_map set, which overrides the broken use_lga_map. Delete the alternative map line and preview the page to see the error message. --Scott DavisTalk14:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Scott Davis, okay, it looks like the # in the was causing the Location map module to think it was a "multimap". I changed this to a normal space, which seems to fix the problem without breaking anything. Frietjes (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Frietjes, that looks better. I think that has been broken for quite a while. is the only way to suppress that map altogether (such as when the mapframe is better) to remove the coordinates from the infobox? Thanks. --Scott DavisTalk23:11, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Scott Davis, there is no good way to turn off the location map right now (only hacks), but we can fix this issue. we just need to decide on the syntax. it looks like {{infobox road}} doesn't automatically add location maps, so we can't take the syntax from there. we could take syntax from {{infobox Australian place}}, which would mean introducing a |map_type= parameter. but, we already have a |mapframe= parameter for turning off the mapframe map. so, it might be useful to have one parameter for toggling between the four options: (a) no maps, (b) mapframe only, (c) location map only, (d) both? I have added some tracking to see which articles are using the |mapframe= parameter. Frietjes (talk) 12:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Scott Davis, after allowing for the tracking category to fill, it looks like the |mapframe= isn't used anywhere (so no mapframe maps are being suppressed). after looking at Template:Infobox Australian place some more, I decided to use the same logic here, so if you set |map_type=nomap it will turn off the pushpin location map. if we put mapframe maps in Template:Infobox Australian place we may decide to have |map_type= control both? Frietjes (talk) 15:02, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I think that's a good interim solution, and agree that whatever gets decided, it is helpful for Australian roads and Australian places to be treated the same way for consistency. My personal preference is to use one parameter for what to include rather than a bunch of separate on/off toggles. The way that |display= works on {{coord}} is also an option, which is scalable to a range of possibilities. Sometime I'll get to using the new parameter to suppress some of the duplicate maps. --Scott DavisTalk00:08, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Tunnel information
Just wondering if the infobox has capacity to add parameters for tunnel specifications, such as tunnel clearance, lanes etc, as well as tunnel operator and owner. Lane Cove Tunnel and Cross City Tunnel use Infobox tunnel instead of Infobox Australian road. I am hoping to be able to use Infobox Australian road for these articles while retaining tunnel specifications.Marcnut1996 (talk) 23:46, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
& 
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}