Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/U.S. Route 45 in Michigan

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways‎ | Assessment‎ | A-Class Review

U.S. Route 45 in Michigan

edit

Promoting. --Rschen7754 20:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Toolbox

U.S. Route 45 in Michigan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: This is the last of the interstate (lowercase "i") highways in the UP of Michigan to come to ACR. There isn't a lot to say, so the article should be an easy review.
Nominated by: Imzadi 1979 → 07:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 00:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Review by Dough4872

edit
Review by Dough4872
  1. In the lead, you should mention what road it ends at.
    • Added. —Imzadi1979
  2. "US 45 crosses the river near a roadside park south of Rockland.", what is the name of the park?
    • The park is not named. —Imzadi1979
  3. Maybe you can mention where US 45 was extended from in 1935.
    • Added. —Imzadi1979
  4. Maybe you can provide a little context about the Paulding Light.
    • Added. —Imzadi1979

Overall, a decent article. Dough4872 00:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All items above addressed. Imzadi 1979 → 02:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Article looks good now. Dough4872 02:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by TCN7JM

edit
Review by TCN7JM

I will review this after Dough's review is completed. TCN7JM 02:20, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. "...and the junction with M-28. The trunkline runs northward..." – It is hard for one to tell if "the trunkline" is US 45 or M-28. I originally thought it was supposed to be M-28 given their juxtaposition.
  2. In the second sentence of the History section, I believe using both "previously" and "before" is redundant. I'd try to reword the sentence to get rid of one of them.
  3. I think the part about the Paulding Light could be explained in a bit more detail, if not reworded. If possible, try to explain a bit more what significance this has/had to the route before it was debunked in 2010.

All in all, this is a great article. Doesn't need much for promotion. TCN7JM 04:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaks and additions applied. Imzadi 1979 → 05:11, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-review comment

edit

I see we have a photo of downtown Ontonogan, but is there any chance we can get a photo of the actual terminus, preferably one with the END 45 marker if there is one? —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have a couple of inquiries out there for relicensing requests on Flickr. One was for a photo of the wooden sign at the terminus (much like US 41's Copper Harbor terminus). Maybe a little drive is order though to get the US 45 ENDS marker assembly photographed if I can't get a photo relicensed. Imzadi 1979 → 07:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Floydian + image/source check

Review, image and source check by Floydian

edit

Consider this review to be a source check

Lede
  1. The article title is U.S. Route 45 in Michigan, but the article doesn't use the periods. I know the current discussion will hopefully clarify this, but is there some explanation behind this
    • According to The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed., 2010, p. 489), periods are no longer preferred in the abbreviation "US" unless being used in a publication using traditional state abbreviations, but even then, CMOS recommends using two-letter postal codes instead of the older traditional abbreviations. Because of that, MOS:ABBR recommends the undotted form saying the other is an option. WP:USSH hasn't been updated, nor has USRD had a discussion yet about renaming the affected articles. (In fact, the project name itself should actually be changed to eliminate the periods.) In any case, the Michigan articles have already switched in the prose and templates, but not yet for titles. Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "In between, the roadway crosses the UP running through the Ottawa National Forest and running along the Ontonagon River." - Any way to avoid the double use of running?
  3. "The highway dates back to the 1930s in Michigan. At the time it was extended into Michigan,.." - Again, this feel like a double use. The first use almost seems redundant with the article title and lead sentence.
  4. "...and some realignment changes in the 1970s moved the path of US 45 around before it was returned to the previous alignment." - This is awkward. I understand what it is saying, but the wording is certain to raise eyebrows at FAC.
    • Tried something with that wording. Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • These all look good, and I can accept your reasoning regarding point 1. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Route description
  1. Do refs [4] or [5] show the time zone line?
  2. "North of here is Bruce Crossing and the junction with M-28. US 45 runs northward parallel to the Middle Branch of the Ontonagon River. The highway crosses the river near a roadside park south of Rockland. East of Rockland, US 45 meets the southern terminus of M-26 and turns northwesterly parallel to the Ontonagon River[4][5] and a branch of the Escanaba and Lake Superior Railroad (ELS).[6]" - This reads as a series of points with no continuity.
    • I made some copy edits there. Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • These points look good, though I believe refs [4] and [5] are better placed at the end of the sentence, even if they don't mention info indicated after the point where they are placed. The sum of the sources verify a sentence IMO. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • The only thing is that FN 4 and 5 are for everything in the paragraph before them, and shifting them backwards would imply FN 6 also cites the whole paragraph. (It doesn't since it's only about the railroad...) Imzadi 1979 → 07:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
History
  1. "As part of the project, tons of waste copper rock..." - I suggest working in some link to tailings here, as this is what I assume you are referring to as waste copper.
    • The source doesn't specify that it was what we'd call tailings though. I know in this part of the UP, tailings from the iron mine is a sandy material left over after the rock is ground finer than makeup powder and separated, but not anything rocky enough for that type of road construction. In the Copper Country, their tailings is usually in the form of stamp sand. They could have been using the overburden, but again, the source isn't specific enough to specify what it was beyond "waste copper rock". Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Source check: 11 - All good.
  3. "In late 1973, MDOT reversed the rerouting. US 45 was restored to its previous routing on Rockland Road between Rockland and Ontonagon. M-26 was re-extended south from Greenland to Rockland. M-38 was extended west along Ontonagon–Greenland Road." - I made an adjustment to this to make it read as a list as opposed to independent thoughts without flow between them.
  4. "The local folklore says that the light is from the ghost of a railroad brakeman according to signs in the viewing area." - May read better as "According to local folklore and indicated on signs in the viewing area, the light is from the ghost of a railroad brakeman." However, there is no context as to what or where this viewing area. In addition, the previous sentence includes "local phenomenon". This double use of "local" feel redundant.
    • I editing the prose a little and inserted a mention of where this viewing site is, which on part of Old US 45 (Robbins Pond Road) in the area. Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Source check: 16 - All good.
Major intersections, External links
  • All look good
KML
  • I don't suppose you could show former routings on the KML as I've done on ON 71?
Source check
  • The previous review includes a spot check for refs 4/5, 11 and 16. Pending a response, all of these check out swell.
Image check
Overall
  • Only other issue I can spot is that there is no mention of the length in the Lede or Route description, which I believe you normally provide with utmost precision (eg. Brockway Mountain Drive)

-- Floydian τ ¢ 06:49, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    • Added the length, but not to the full precision... Imzadi 1979 → 10:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm curious as to why you don't in this instance after the comments at Brockway Mountain Drive when it was TFA?
        • My criticism there, in retrospect, is more that the one editor was trying to excise all mentions, going so far as to change one of the three mileposts in the junction list to use a rounded figure but leaving the other two. The prose can get clunky with the extra precision, and if a rounded figure is to be used, we need to indicate it as rounded. Imzadi 1979 → 07:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Indeed. Whenever we as editors make a decision on how to present data, we should indicate what we did in the prose. All the issues are taken care of, so I am now supporting! - Floydian τ ¢ 15:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Highways/Assessment/A-Class_Review/U.S._Route_45_in_Michigan&oldid=1140183865"