Talk:Interstate 278

Interstate 278 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 19, 2017	Good article nominee	Listed
August 9, 2019	Good topic candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Good article

New York City High‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Roads: Interstates / New York / New Jersey Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Topics

Interstate Highways

Locations

New York

New Jersey

This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.

This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Article recognition:

	A fact from this article was featured on the Did you know? section of the U.S. Roads Portal in March 2010.

One List

I'm trying to make it all into one list. It's much easier. Whoever keeps changing it back, stop it. -Amlnet49 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlnet49 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New York Route 440

Was a New York Route 440 info, ok to put in the 278 info box?

--Nextbarker 01:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC) nextbarker[reply]

As NY 440 is a limited-access highway, I see no problems with mentioning it. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 01:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed Jgcarter 03:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map?

The article is missing the map of the highway, which logically is more important than all the other information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.5.42 (talk) 18:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then bring it up at WP:USRD/MTF/R. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BQE E and W

At the northern end of the BQE, there is a place where the road splits into two sections: one section goes east, the other goes west. Both merge with the Grand Central Parkway. Growing up in New York, I always considered both of these sections to be part of the BQE mainline, and in fact they are called the BQE East and the BQE West. The west branch carries I-278 and the east branch does not, but I have never heard a single New Yorker referring to the BQE as I-278, which is why I don't think it makes sense to call the east branch of the BQE an exit onto or entrance from the Grand Central Parkway to/from I-278, as this article implies it is. Actually, the BQE proper ends when I-278 merges with the Grand Central Parkway. I'm not really sure what the name of the section between the Triboro and that junction is. I just asked my dad and he thinks it's called the "BQE Extension," but I've never heard that before. Google maps calls that section Triboro plaza. Would anyone care if I changed article to reflect? I could probably dredge up some info from the NYC DOT.

Quodfui (talk) 18:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Find sources and come back to this. Google Maps is not top of the line cartography. Mitch32^{(Wikipedia's worst Reform Luddite.)} 19:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at page 199 (205 by acrobat's count) of this document^[1] you'll see that not only does the NYDOT call the E spur of the BQE the "BQE East Leg," the BQE E leg receives interstate highway funding as part of I-278. On page 200 it says the highway bridge carrying 44th street crosses the Grand Central Parkway but again on 199 says the bridge carrying 31st street crosses the BQE. Thus, it stands to reason that this section can be called either the BQE or the GCP, but given how ambiguously this section is referred to I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't have any official designation at all. Quodfui (talk) 19:41, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would err on the side of caution and leave it that way if we can't prove it. Mitch32^{(Wikipedia's worst Reform Luddite.)} 17:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well, as for the BQE E and W legs, I live here, I've lived here for a long time, and I've never heard of the BQE E being referred to as an on-ramp to the GCP. I have a source here that agrees with me. If you can find a source specifically repudiating my source, then you might make an argument for this being an ambiguous thing, but since this is a NYC DOT document, you really can't. Suppose I arbitrarily decided what color I thought the Libyan flag should be (say, solid green, as it was under Qaddafi) and then proceeded to ignore a document by the Libyan government specifying its current design. You just can't do that when there is such a compelling document arguing the opposite case as you'd like to make. Quodfui (talk) 04:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bridgereport10.pdf

NYCDOT Maintenance

While doing some research today, I discovered that, according to the NYSDOT Highway Inventory Listing (updated no earlier than 2011) [[1]], no part of the BQE is maintained by the city. Region 11's less-than-mediocre website shows an image implying that the section is city-maintained, but there's nothing that indicates the age of the image. As it is known that NYSDOT documents frequently contradict each other (i.e. Interstate 787, where everything but the Official Description states that the route is concurrent with NY 7 for a short distance), is there anything else that could give a hint about who maintains that section of highway as of now? Coasterlover1994 04:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Interstate 278. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120927164825/https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/technical-services/hds-respository/Traffic%20Volume%20Report%202010.pdf to https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/technical-services/hds-respository/Traffic%20Volume%20Report%202010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Interstate 278. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 03:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Interstate 278/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PointsofNoReturn (talk · contribs) 20:43, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article over the next few days. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments for criteria:

1:

Route description:

~~In the first sentence of the subsection on the BQE, "At this interchange" should be replaced in order to specify the specific interchange. This is too vague otherwise.~~
- The Belt Parkway interchange. epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I thought that the dividing line between the BQE and the Gowanus is the interchange for the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - Oops, I was looking at the wrong section. Done. epicgenius (talk) 03:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - That change looks good. The last thing to note is to make sure readers know that the official name (Hugh Carey) refers to the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, not a separate tunnel. Perhaps that point could be noted when the tunnel is first mentioned in the previous subsection. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        I fixed the previous section instead. epicgenius (talk) 23:54, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In the second paragraph of the section on the tribourough bridge, the tidbit on the highway crossing the Hell Gate should specify that the Hell Gate is part of the East River, or the article should simply say that the bridge crosses the East River.
- Done.

History section:

In the second paragraph of the Staten Island Express way section, the sentence "But local opposition to this spur was tremendous, and unlike previous projects by Moses, it was defeated when Mayor John V. Lindsay took office in 1966; the southern half of this proposed spur did get built, however, and was opened for traffic as the Richmond Parkway, which was to have been the name of the entire roadway." Consider splitting the sentence into two at the semicolon and moving the "however" to the beginning of the second sentence. Also, consider then rephrasing the last phrase of the second sentence to "the proposed name of the entire roadway." The two sentences should be reworked.
- Done.
~~"A ramp stub of an interchange on the expressway still exists cut into the hills of Todt Hill." Rephrase, perhaps to "A ramp stub of an interchange, cut into the hills of Todt Hill, still exists"~~
- Done.
~~Third paragraph of SIE section: "Construction streted in". Typo, presumably meant to be the word "started".~~
- Done.
~~Also in the third paragraph: "...which involved two new ramps, exit 13B for Richmond Road...". The comma should be replaced with a colon.~~
- Done.
~~Last paragraph of the BQE section: "By 2020, another upgrade is set ot renovate the section...". Typo at "ot", presumably to be replaced with "to".~~
- Done.
~~For the images at the end of the prose section of the article, a large whitespace gap exists between the text and the exit list. Consider moving and/or shrinking image to reduce that gap.~~
- I split the paragraph, removed the pixel size, and moved the image from the previous section to make more space for the paragraph in this section. epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Unfortunately, now a stray line of text now exists under the image at the end of the section. I don't think this is too important for the review, so I'll the ultimate aesthetics to your judgement.
    - Is it fixed now? I simply replaced the image with File:I678bruckner.jpg. epicgenius (talk) 03:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - The text looks good now. There is no whitespace between sections. ~~One thing to note, about the image caption, is that the Bruckner Interchange is the end of I-278, but not the Bruckner Expressway. I-95 continues north as the Bruckner for a few more miles.~~ PointsofNoReturn (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks for pointing that out. I've fixed it. epicgenius (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2:

3:

4:

5:

~~The last image, of the Bruckner Expressway, has uncertain source information. It's probably an ok image based on the other uploads of the author, but I would look into the copyright info just in case.~~
- I replaced the image (see above). epicgenius (talk) 03:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

6:

Overall: Very good job with the article. Just a few more items and I will be ready to pass this article. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That wraps up the review. Thank you for being so responsive to my comments. I hereby pass this article. Congratulations! PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:41, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BQE Reconstruction and removal proposals

@Epicgenius: I added a section discussing plans to rehabilitated or remove the BQE. Can you look over it and see if anything should be changed or added? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 13:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kew Gardens 613, Sure, I'll look it over. epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bridgereport10.pdf

[1]