Talk:California State Route 190/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about California State Route 190. 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 |
History notes
1941 map: proposed road [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] --NE2 22:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
GA Nomination on hold
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
No significant problems in article, but needs to have references corrected.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- There's a lot of redlinks in the article, but this is probably ok. I would make sure you only wikilink each term the first time its used in the article (outside of the lead)
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- References are not in a consistent style; online sources should have "accessed" information. See WP:CITET for citation templates that can be used, given that it doesn't appear this article is using Harvard referencing.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
--MASEM 18:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Links cleaned up. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see which sources need accessed date. You may be referring to the various reports that are published online; these already have an associated publication date. --NE2 01:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- All web links need an access date, the date that you actually went to the link. This will be different to the date the document was published. --Holderca1 talk 15:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not really, since those links are simply "convenience links". Caltrans produces a yearly (?) bridge log; this is the July 2007 edition. The purpose of the accessed date is so if the resource changes, we know when it was accessed, but these aren't going to change. --NE2 16:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- So then just put today's date for them. --Holderca1 talk 00:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- It seems to be a MLA style issue - I'd just go ahead and put a date just to have one in the reference. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Or I could remove the link. --NE2 05:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Honestly, how difficult is it to type "accessdate=2008-03-07" and copy and paste it to each spot, you are talking 15 seconds of work. --Holderca1 talk 16:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Or I could remove the link. --NE2 05:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not really, since those links are simply "convenience links". Caltrans produces a yearly (?) bridge log; this is the July 2007 edition. The purpose of the accessed date is so if the resource changes, we know when it was accessed, but these aren't going to change. --NE2 16:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- All web links need an access date, the date that you actually went to the link. This will be different to the date the document was published. --Holderca1 talk 15:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I added the accessed dates. --NE2 18:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Just an FYI, accessdates should be a standard date format, and they can be "today" as long as the source still exists at that point, it's not when you first looked for it. That way, if the site should disappear, someone may be able to find the article at the Wayback Machine or other source.
- However, regardless, the issues addressed from the GA hold have been cleared up sufficiently that, congratulations, I promote this to GA. --MASEM 23:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on California State Route 190. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist9/planning/docs/tcr_sr190.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080427104154/http://www.nps.gov:80/history/history/online_books/deva/section3a5.htm to http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/deva/section3a5.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721033203/http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/2006all.htm to http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/2006all.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
EBoarding through Death Valley
Is it legal to walk, ride bikes or even all terrain eboards on California state highway 190? 2600:387:8:F:0:0:0:4A (talk) 22:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)