Talk:Interstate 215 (Utah)

Untitled

Anyone know what the extra ramp from I-80 west to I-215 north at its east end is for? [1] --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

You mean that one that's way out there in the corner away from all the other ramps? bob rulz 03:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The one down in the south part. If you take the exit from I-80 west to I-215, you can either merge with I-215 south or take that ramp, which leads towards Foothill Drive and Parleys Way. But there is a direct ramp from I-80 west to those roads. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 09:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't see what you're talking about. I'd have to go over there again (I live just a couple miles from there). As far as I know, you can't do that. bob rulz 23:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

What does "CCW" and "CW" mean on the exit list? Michaelcox 05:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyeditor's thoughts

I noticed a couple of things that I thought I should mention.

• The lead talks about I-415, but the main text does not. The History section is probably the place for a more complete explanation of I-415. The explanation in the lead makes it sound as if I-415 only existed on paper, but this needs to be made more clear. The phrase "deleted to maintain continuity" might be misunderstood to mean an actual removal of pavement, but I don't think that is what is meant.
  • This is true - I will take care of this

• State Route 5 is mentioned in the History section but not in the lead. Perhaps it would be good to list it as yet another of the alternate names such as Belt Route in the first sentence. I'm not sure it's a more important name than Belt Route, and I'd be inclined not to put it in italics rather than bold letters.
  • Utah had a weird thing before 1977 where it had inventory numbers of interstates and U.S. routes (SR-1 was I-15, SR-4 was I-80, and so on), but they didn't sign the highways with the "inventory numbers", but with the regular number it was given by the government, if that makes any sense. But after 1977, they got rid of this so it belongs in the history section.

• The last paragraph of the route description includes this sentence: "The freeway loses one lane in each direction and passes the airport to the west." It's not clear from that statement whether the highway is west of the airport or vice versa.
  • I'll try to tackle that

• The cite web templates should have date, accessdate, and, if the file is a pdf, format parameters added to them and filled in when possible. It's not always possible to find a date of publication, but in many cases it appears next to the copyright line at the bottom of a web site's main page or somewhere else on the main page. I added an accessdate and date of publication to citation 7 as an example.
  • I'll attempt to take care of this - thanks for your copyediting help and suggestions, they're definitely helpful :) - CL — 05:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I hope this is helpful. Finetooth (talk) 01:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Interstate 215 (Utah)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Not bad, just a few minor things to fix

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The history section is a bit unclear, especially the second sentence. It may need to be reworded to make it clearer.

   True. I'll attempt to get to that soon.

   Meh, I just fixed that sentence that was the most outstanding. I read over it but found no other clarity problems because I'm familiar with the route; what else would need to be fixed in that section? CL — 21:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

   Better. - Algorerhythms (talk) 00:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   In the route description section, are all the paragraphs referenced from Ref 3? If so, there should probably be a tag at the end of each of the paragraphs to make that clear. Also, Ref 7 might not be considered a reliable source.

   Ref 3 problem is fixed. As for Ref 7, previous GAs have passed with this source. Perhaps this doesn't change anything, but it's for the record

   In that case, I'm willing to pass the GA if you can remove the tag on Ref 7. - Algorerhythms (talk) 00:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

   Done. CL — 00:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold, awaiting changes Algorerhythms (talk) 23:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

   Passed, after changes made. - Algorerhythms (talk) 01:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the review. Not everything has been addressed but I'll try to get to it tomorrow or perhaps Wednesday. Thanks again - CL — 03:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Interstate 215 (Utah). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120503235619/http://nationalbridges.com/nbi_record.php?StateCode=49&struct=++++++++0C+512 to http://nationalbridges.com/nbi_record.php?StateCode=49&struct=++++++++0C+512

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:54, 29 February 2016 (UTC)