Discussion of the old poll (which is now at Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll/Old) is here: Wikipedia talk:State route naming conventions poll/Old. This page is for discussion of the current poll, as per the project page. Powers 21:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Archives

Preliminary discussion Part I Discussion Part II Discussion

The final phase of the poll is coming... so what do we want to call the final page? Wikipedia:Guide to writing about U.S. state highways? Wikipedia:Naming conventions (roads)? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's it supposed to be? Policy, guideline, or convention? I hope we don't have an endless debate over the title, or that will surely qualify for WP:LAME. --physicq210 02:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well since we have to write the (insert term here) next. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a submanual page of the Manual of Style is more appropriate since it is more than just a naming convention. Something like Wikipedia:Manual of Style (U.S. state highways)? --Polaron | Talk 04:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support that. We probably should have a few redirects in place just in case too. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support as well. First two redirects should be the two links Rschen made at the top of this section. -- NORTH ^talk 04:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. It works for me. --TinMan 15:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a style guide draft started by SPUI already, it has some good info in it (and some info that needs to be made more neutral. I can't recall the link offhand but it's around here somewhere... That seems a good place to put some of this. The name could be changed as needed but why start over? ++Lar: t/c 14:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean this one? Wikipedia:Guide to writing about U.S. state highways --Holderca1 14:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It seems like most of the work has already been done. But I do still agree with Polaron that the page should be moved to a "Manual of Style" name. -- NORTH ^talk 16:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't move pages until we have completed the final vote. If you already have, don't revert them, but please hold off on moving pages for now. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I let things go over my trip to Catalina... I'll adjust the timeline. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know. Please throw your input in. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the timeline 'voting' should now officially be over. I'll put in some sort of simple 'endorse' field like we used last time - though I think the outcome is fairly clear despite not everyone being happy with it. --CBD 16:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't we just take out the states that don't need their highway articles moved to the prescribed article title? It's creating unnecessary clutter on the sign-up page. --physicq210 04:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there a bot that can do all of this work? It would seem easier to write a bot rather then try and do it all by hand. It a bot does the heavy work, then any cleanup can be done with a lot less effort by hand. Vegaswikian 05:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I'm aware of for page moves, remember that page move blocks come from Curps... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does pywikipedia serve our purposes? I have User:Rschen7754bot that runs on it, but I am not sure if it can help us here. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can AWB do page moves? It is run by a human so... you check what it is about to do before it does it. ++Lar: t/c 17:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know page moves can't start until Friday, but what about fixing pages so that the newly-adopted convention is used in article text (including the bolded titles)? Can we start performing these cleanups now?-Jeff ^(talk) 19:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure not a prob. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or rather, WP:USSH is, and needs to be tagged as such. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once the Minnesota situation is straightened out, I'll add the guideline tag onto both WP:USSH and WP:SRNC. --TMF ^{T - C} 01:16, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN, WP:ANI, User:Curps, and WP:RFAr need to be informed of the decision here with a list of users involved in the moves at least 12 hours before moves begin. Is anyone willing to do this? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I'll do it myself then. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry. If someone had notified the people above on time we could have started. But then... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. Thank you for your participation in this poll.
2. I apologize on my part for any actions that have not been 100% civil on my part, and for the mistakes that happened in the process.
3. Don't forget to thank the admins who judged this poll. We've appreciated your willingness to adjudicate in a tense situation.
4. Be sure to create the redirects soon.
5. We need to get a new browse system implemented.
6. California editors: Within a week or two we need to restart discussion on infoboxes to get those going again.
7. Possibly the most important of all: The debate is over. We are one team again, working together. Let's work to resolve our differences and work together, being productive again. I believe that this is going to be a new era of highway contributions (the first being before WP:USRD and the second ending now.) We have much local expertise that makes all highway editors valuable. We do need more from a few states, though. We have an assessment program going. We have maps and shields coming. New states are getting new WikiProjects. Let's take the U.S. roads articles to a new level. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hear hear! Question though: for point 5, does this mean a browse system for Interstates/U.S. routes? --TMF ^{T - C} 00:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well ... the system that is currently supposed to be in place should be effective, but it's not fully implemented. For state highways though, it's all over the map. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was a pleasure arguing with you all! =) --TinMan 06:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, trust me, the pleasure was all mine! ;) -- Tckma 13:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder. You don't particularly need to create new redirects right away, but please fix all double redirects once you move a page. -- NORTH ^talk 16:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got fed up moving Wisconsin and tried to automate the process. Not sure how well all of these work but here are some bookmarklets... you need to run these in the following order: (3rd needs to be run for each redirect on the edit page for each redirect)

javascript:ans=prompt(%22Which route?%22,%22%22);window.location=%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Movepage/Highway %22+ans+%22 (Wisconsin)%22

javascript:ans=prompt(%22Which route?%22,%22%22);document.getElementById('wpNewTitle').value='Wisconsin Highway '+ans;document.getElementById('wpReason').value='[[WP:SRNC]] through [[JavaScript]] assistance';document.getElementById(%22movepage%22).submit();var t=setTimeout(%22window.location='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Wisconsin Highway '+ans%22,1000);

javascript:ans=prompt(%22Which route?%22,%22%22);document.getElementById('wpTextbox1').value='#REDIRECT [[Wisconsin Highway '+ans+']]';document.getElementById('wpWatchthis').checked=false;document.getElementById(%22editform%22).submit();var t=setTimeout(%22window.close%22,2000)

--Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 18:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where are we with the converstions? If we're done with the conversions we need to do some striking out on the tasks on the main page. --TinMan 22:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Almost all of the pages have been moved. Every now and then we find a few that didn't (were put in the wrong category, etc.) --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• The dab pages need work. Entries were missing the last time I checked, but this was getting better. There are still a lot of entries to redirects. An editor was confused by this today on the route 225 dab page. Vegaswikian 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely, we're done with this, right? Or no? --Triadian (talk) 07:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all done - pretty much most of the redirects have been created. But you missed the second arbitration case... --Rschen7754 (T C) 08:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]