Talk:Trail of the Ancients

Assessment

Removed the "stub" assessment since this article has much more content than would normally be classified as a "stub" article. And any stub classification would be removed by WP:AWB. Perhaps, though, the format of the article is better suited to a "list" classification.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:33, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd agree with that. –Fredddie™ 20:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. It's an article on a single roadway designation, so List-Class is inappropriate. It's missing a History or junction list, so it can't be upgraded to Start-Class for USRD. (Other projects are free to assess differently.) Imzadi 1979 → 03:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I made this posting before I read your point in another conversation about how stub, start, etc. are assigned.

It doesn't seem to me that it's a single roadway. It's a compilation of multiple roads of various designations across multiple states.

I question the applicability of a junction list - since that should be covered by the individual highway / route / etc. articles. This article will be harder to create a history section than the Enchanted Circle Scenic Byway article where the common thread was transport in and out of Taos from 1250, 19th century and 20th+ century where it's really clear cut.

For the Trail of the Ancients, the history varies considerably based upon the peoples (Ute, Navajo, various Puebloan peoples) and timeframes (pithouse period, pueblos for pueblo period, post CO pueblo period to NM Rio Grande pueblo period), etc. It's not a cohesive discussion and would need to pull information from multiple articles to what I thing would be a VERY long history section. Further, there was not Spanish colonization so it would be hard to find road history before the 19th century. So, I'm guessing, then, most of what would be done would be pulling history information from each of the highways which goes against the guidelines for WP:Wikilinks (i.e. roughly, don't replicate information across articles where possible). For example, see: Enchanted Circle Scenic Byway#Highways from the 20th century

I would be willing to rewrite this article to a different format, but I question those two points.

In the "roads" standards that you provided it seemed to be written for single roads with start and terminus points. Is there something for the project, or another project that specifically deals with writing articles about byways?--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads#Roads vs. Byways--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Lake Superior Circle Tour (LSCT) follows multiple different state and provincial highways in Michigan, Minnesota, Ontario, and Wisconsin. The article is about the routing and history of the tourist route designation, which is a single specific entity. Yes, it overlaps other highways, but we have many cases where highway designations overlap. One 7-mile (11 km) section of highway here in Michigan has three separate highway numbers, each with a Featured Article, and it carries part of the Lake Michigan Circle Tour and the UP Hidden Coast Recreational Heritage Trail. Because of the concurrencies, we have to duplicate information to make each highway's article comprehensive.

As for a junction list, the LSCT article has junction list, which is a bit of a work in progress to refine its presentation. Remember too, not all highway designations follow a single linear path: M-185 (Michigan highway) is a loop, and M-114 (Michigan highway) had three termini at the time it was decommissioned.

As for the Trail of the Ancients, I can see no reason why this article can't have a history section that deals with the history of the byway designation and summarizes the pertinent history of the roads it uses. I can also see no reason why some sort of junction list can't be supplied in this article. In short, the difference, in my mind, is that a "highway" gets a number, and a "byway" gets a name, yet they each have a route to describe, a history to detail, and junctions to list. Imzadi 1979 → 03:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

History section - Yes, the sections for the history of byway creation - without getting into the history of each of the highways - makes TONS of sense! I will add that to the history section of the Enchanted Circle Scenic Byway article within the next day or so, too.

Junctions - I guess I'm confused by this list. It's not clear what highways are junctions - just where the junctions come in on the byways. I see that you have provided me tons of examples for Michigan (yeah, Michigan!) - but is this the way it's done for byways across the country? Is this a standard for the project for "byways" as a whole?

Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

What I did as a junction list for LSCT is new, and subject to refinement. It will probably be converted to something more table-oriented later.

Australia (and Alaska) have the situation where named highways and numerical designations don't have a 1:1 correspondence. The article, as titled, may be about a named highway (like Seward Highway) that has segments with different numbers (both AK-1 and AK-9), which is very analogous to our scenic byways. The table lists the junctions from one end to the other, just like most highway articles, but notes where the numerical designation transitions from one to the other. That is something that is in MOS:RJL sets up based on the Australia situation, but Alaska follows the same pattern. Such a thing would work on loops, since we'd arbitrarily pick a point along the loop to serve as the terminus, and it would even work with byway designations that fork by taking a page from how M-114's junction list is set up. Imzadi 1979 → 04:53, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Unless I'm missing something:

• There's nothing in MOS Road junction list about byways, scenic highways, etc. Particularly, no examples of how junction lists should appears for byways or scenic highways.
• There's no consensus about the treatment of byways or scenic highways regarding use of junction lists - and how to set them up.

That said, again unless I'm missing something, the only addition I see is addition of the history of the byway designation.--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Removed the "Manual Maintenance Template" (July 2019) after re-writing to remove advice/instruction (including reference to DOT driving directions). Mtgerard84 (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Hovenweep.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)