Talk:Massachusetts Route 28A

Merge with Route 28

The Route 28A article in its pre-merge version is very stubby and works better as a pre-expressway alignment of a short section of Route 28. The only independent information is the route description, which is already in the Route 28 article. The history is intertwined with the main Route 28 history. User:Ktr101 is opposed to the merge so I'm opening a discussion to see what the broader U.S. Roads community thinks about the appropriateness of merging. --Polaron | Talk 05:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I believe that the Route 28A information appropriately belongs as a section of the Route 28 article, since it acts as an auxiliary route. ---Dough4872 15:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I would format it more like the NY 30A section on New York State Route 30, though. – TMF 23:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge. Not notable - WP:USRD/NT. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Polaron started this without telling me about it. I posted a notice on his talk page, and this is what it said:

Before we go into a full out edit war and break 3RR, would you be willing to discuss the existence of this article? I support the existence of this article because every road with that level of notability. There are multiple articles out there on the Route #A version of the road. It doens't hurt to have the page as it helps to expand knowledge of the area. To those on the Cape, it helps to show the history of the road as well as explain knowledge about it. I disagree with your claim that the Route 28 article covers it as the 28 blurb is a lot less than is in the article. Because of the fact that every road on that level should have an article, it seems meaningless to have this one as a redirect. I'm going to leave things as is until we reach a consensus, but I think a merge template would be the way to go with this so that we can get the input of others in the community as they will help to keep this from being a dispute between two people. I look forward for your input, and I would like to keep this from becomming a full-out war. Thanks for your time.

I believe that this article is notable, but it needs a lot of work. I'll get on it now and I'll come back with a few things about it. I think it should be kept, as it is actually as about as notable as other roads in the area that are state routes. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Here we go, this can be added in to the 28A article: "Beginning in Falmouth, the route meanders north on a series of rural roads. The roadbed itself dates back to before the highway was created, and thus it is not as straight as other parts of Route 28 on the Cape. Before the creation of the nearby expressway, the route was the only complete north-south route in town. In North Falmouth, the road merges with the end of Route 151, and the highway continues north. The road finally ends at the Otis Rotary, as it merges back into Route 28. The Rotary, which is elliptical, was created when the expressway was built." Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Why couldn't that go in the 28 article? --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:15, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

It could. I just looked at other state Route XA articles and this one is in the top 5 or 6 for length. It is the longest one under 10 miles though. I just thought that might warrant some notability of its own in a way. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I was just wondering why this article is proposed to be merged when a few others, which aren't as long are being allowed to stay. I'm not accusing anyone of trying to tick me off or anything, but it just seems odd. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

They should probably be merged too. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

The history of the 28A roadbed is a history of 28 since that was its prior designation. And I agree that most of the other "-A" routes should be merged as well. --Polaron | Talk 05:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)