User talk:SPUI/Archive3

I-75

Warning from an admin... blah blah blah... no violation of three reverts per day but... blah blah blah... don't be a dick... blah blah blah... quasi-abusive edit summaries... blah blah blah...

Would it kill you to have a bit more patience with people that you think are idiots? Everyone gives you so much fucking latitude it is mad, but I'm afraid that one day you actually will exhaust everyone's patience.

Sometimes it is not enough to be correct you have to be concilliatory as well. Not that I know anything about that personally, but I'm told on good authority that's the case.

brenneman^{L} 07:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Don't be a duck

What's it's purpose? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

How do you know it's silly being a duck? Have you tried it? Don't attack those of us who like to try the duck lifestyle once in a while. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll have the roast duck with mango salsa. --Interiot 01:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

And i don't have much of an appetite. CambridgeBayWeather

Thank you

Sometimes (but not always, or even frequently) I suspect you have more commonsense than all of us put together. - Ta bu shi da yu 16:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice try

But until you can show a solid 2/3 consensus bugger off. JohnnyBGood t c 20:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Suffixed Oklahoma shield

Here's a suffixed shield photo like you were wanting. This was just posted on Friday according to the back of the sign. Leave me a note on my talk page when you've got the new shields done (if that was your intentions)...Scott⁵¹¹⁴ 21:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks great except at 25px (I've done some tests in my sandbox). The Red River really bunches up at the smaller size, and would probably do the same thing on a real sign at a distance, which is probably why ODOT decided to simplify the border a bit when they started actually cranking out the signs. Then again, ODOT isn't real big on following standards - they've posted Interstate shields in Helvetica font before....Scott⁵¹¹⁴ 22:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

If you're still wanting to do these, I think what you might want to do is follow specs as close as possible, except on the southern border, and simplify that based on photos (Image:Ok66.jpg and Image:Ok9shield.jpg may help for two-digit signs). I only ask because I'm starting to need more new shields on articles, but I'm hesitant to create more of my wacko shields that always seem to end up off-center...Scott⁵¹¹⁴ 08:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Move warring

Stop the move warring. Sasquatch t|c 23:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I will once the pages stay at their correct names. --SPUI (T - C - RFC - Curpsbot problems) 23:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked -- Tawker 23:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

As a term of both your and JohnnyBGood's unblocks I am requesting that you do not revert each others edits - if you do so, blocks will go in effect again -- Tawker 00:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

As an outside party to all of this highway move warring (I've done occasional edits to highway-related articles, but haven't played any role in the battles over what to name them), I'm finding it pretty silly that people would keep warring back and forth over whether a set of highways should be known as "[State Name] State Route X" or "State Route X ([State Name])" or "[State Name] State Road X" or "[State Name] State Highway X" or "Highway X ([State Name])" or whatever. I think consistency across all such articles would be a good thing, and consistency with what the appropriate state highway department actually calls it would also be a good thing, and consistency with what typical motorists know it as would also be good... though these things might clash with one another sometimes. But whatever they should be called, this ought to be hashed out by a process of consensus instead of by unilateral moves and reversions, repeated over and over, as you're doing. *Dan T.* 02:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

As per the anti move war actions, I have blocked you for 24 hours for move reverting JohnnyBGood, despite being asked not to do so. I really don't care how the final naming syntax goes, I am just a little annoyed at the disruptive actions the move warring has brought up and would much prefer a non conflicting solution. If you are willing, I am offering to take a look at both arguments and from a neuteral perspective and (if you both agree to take a step from normal procedures) come down with a binding decision. In either case, I am more than happy to unblock, and I'm sure you're more than willing to discuss this. -- Tawker 18:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The only disruption was the double redirects caused by Johnny's moves. I always take the time to fix double redirects. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 19:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've made a proposal at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California_State_Highways, I'm hoping we can come to some sort of consensus as its obvious that you're both head screwed on good stuff editors and I'm sure a compromise can be reached easily -- Tawker 19:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, seeing as you have some problems with making it binding, would you be able to post your arugument on the page anyways, perhaps of its possible for everone to see where everone is coming from it might help reach a compromise. Cheers -- Tawker 20:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Because from the comments on the non binding arbitration page it looks like a reasonable compromise cannot be reached (this dispute has passed through mediation once without a resolution being reached) I'm afraid the only major course of action is to request that ArbCom, the people who do have the power to issue a binding resolution, take a look at this case. If you feel that this case cannot go any further through non binding means, I encourage you to take it there. Although you "know you are right" it still doesn't mean that other viewpoints cannot be considered and sadly insistance that one is right can cause some problems. I'm not saying you're right or wrong but its obvious there is a dispute here that needs to be solved and it looks like the only way to solve it is to make it binding -- Tawker 22:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

It might be the only option- we've got a failed RFC too. As for your note on my talk page SPUI, noone was blocking you then. I saw no reason why I should have to abide by the ANI rule if you were breaking it and not getting punished for it. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd say the RFC succeeded. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 23:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 93

Why do you keep removing the I-93/95 junction from the infobox. Per the Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Interstate Highways 2di interchanges (especially the X0 and X5) interchanges are considered MAJOR and are supposed to be in the infobox. JohnnyBGood t c 20:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes however one is in Canton 15 miles south of Boston city center and the other is in Woburn 15 miles north of Boston city center. They are over 30 miles apart. This is another great argument as to why saying "near Boston" is very inaccurate and does nothing to give a general idea of the route. JohnnyBGood t c 20:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Besides the fact that the guidelines of the wikiproject support my position in this case. JohnnyBGood t c 20:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Route 66

I have a 1981 road atlas which shows US 66 from east of Joplin, MO to Kingman, AZ. The eastern terminus was at I-44 east of Duenweg and headed straight west down modern MO 66 to the Kansas state line. At Kansas, it is Kansas 66 to Riverton, and Alternate US 69 to Oklahoma. Alt 69 to US 69 northeast of Miami, through Afton and Vinita. West of Vinta, it is US 60 to the beginning of OK 66 near White Oak. OK 66 to Tulsa, follows I-44 through Tulsa, OK 66 to I-35 at Edmond. Through Oklahoma City, its I-35 and I-44 to where OK 66 takes off through Warr Acres. Continues on OK 66 to west of El Reno (OK 66s west end). I-40 all the way to Texas. I-40 all the way across Texas except 11 miles west of Conway where it turns off to US 60 and follows Amarillo Boulevard through Amarillo. I-40 all the way across New Mexico, except through Albuquerque (Central Avenue). In Arizona, I-40 all the way to Seligman, then AZ 66 to Kingman.

There's a handful of breaks in I-40 at this point, but it's probably a safe bet at the end it was on I-40.

Until 1979, it still started in Chicago, though I don't know specifically where, but I do know I've seen a map still showing it ending at Lake Shore Drive and Jackson/Adams. It was down I-55 through the rest of Illinois. In Missouri, it still went down Gravois Road and Watson Road in the St. Louis area and was on I-44 to Halltown. At Halltown, it went west down MO 96 to Carthage, and modern Business 71 to Joplin. It turned west on MO 66 at Rangeline and 7th.

A 1972 AAA map shows US 66 still taking the National Trails Road through Amboy, but that's all I can make out about California at that time. Rt66lt 23:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked for three hours for incivility. We cannot tolerate these types of edits: [1]--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 00:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, the edits you should not tolerate are the other side preaching their incorrect disambiguation. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 00:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I have unblocked you to allow you to reply to your RFAr.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 01:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom Request

Due to the stalemare in this case, I have filed for Arbitration here - this is the required notice to make a statement in the dispute -- Tawker 00:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any RFAr there. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 00:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, there it is. I can't really comment, as I'm blocked, but whatever. --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 00:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Christ

If you want to drive through fucking RURAL America, drive US 59 end to end. Jesus. I think the biggest city you'll hit along the way is Houston. Otherwise, talk about a rural fucking drive. Jesus. --Analogdemon (talk) 15:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Holy Shit

[2] There used to be a bridge over the river on Blackstone Avenue in Pawtucket. You can see the support still in the water. It existed in 1894 [3] but was gone by 1944 [4].

Arlington County, Virginia

Hey SPUI, I wanted to let you know that I have nominated Arlington County, Virginia as a candidate for US Collaboration of the Week. The article is in need of much help and with a little group effort, it could be brought to Featured Article status! I brought this to your attention as I have seen you have contributed to the article in the recent past. Please cast your vote with your signature at the US Collaboration of the Week page under Arlington County, Virginia. --Caponer 04:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Over a year ago is the recent past, eh? --SPUI (T - C - RFC) 09:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

NYSDOT, statutory usage

It seems that DOT doesn't care too much about this distinction: here are several of its own press releases with the "New York State Route X" usage: [5], [6], [7].

Yes, I'm sure if you want you can find a howling little error like this one [8] to suggest they're unreliable sources on the matter ... and I don't deny that. You can easily find some press releases which use "State Route X". But that proves my point: if NYSDOT cares so little about some sort of proper terminology that its public statements are (ahem) all over the map, why should we?

Now as for the state Highway Law, which you seem to be relying on, I find no distinction drawn between "state highway" and "state route" in the "Classification of highways" section (Art. 1, §3) (I would link to these but unfortunately I can't figure out how to do it within the Assembly's framing system). Indeed, the most relevant section to your position (Art. 12, §341), is headed "State Routes," but uses the term "state highways" throughout. So, if we follow your principle, we're going to have to rename every article "New York State Highway X." I believe if that was your intent you would have done it by now. (I also seem to recall that recently, when someone cited Washington law to you as trumping whatever WashDOT actually did since the two seemed to differ, you said that it was what WashDOT did that mattered.

I would also point out that the aforementioned section of the NYS Highway Law, while it makes reference to highway numbers, makes abolutely no reference to any numbers actually in use either as reference or touring routes. So, IMO, it cannot be considered a reliable guide for purposes of Wikipedia naming conventions.

I also find more Google hits on "New York State Route ..." than on "New York State Highway ..." [9].

So, given all this, I believe we cannot find any reliable and consistent official use from either statute or public usage by the appropriate state agency and therefore must develop a consensus here that works for us. And that consensus has been, for a variety of reasons, to use "New York State Route X." I'm not sure I totally agree with it, but I would rather create articles than engage in edit wars with anyone over this.

And I really don't want to be one of those many people who constantly get into it with you. Everybody says, and they're all right, that you've done a lot for Wikipedia. I have benefited from your work, and some of your edits have improved articles I've worked on. So please, when you respond to this, try to keep it this way. Daniel Case 17:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Massachusetts State Highway distances

Where are you getting the distances for Mass. State Highways (such as Route 111 (Massachusetts))? Also, how do I join the US Roads Project? Tckma 03:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that's complex, but your directions are clear. I'll try it when I next have time to work on some articles. Thanks for the info! Tckma 11:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

One more speed limit sign request

Could you make a MUTCD-compliant night speed limit sign and slap it up at Speed_limits_in_the_United_States#Night_speed_limits? Thanks! 65 mph may make the most sense there.

Nova SS 02:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

WTF

We actually agree on something. I think I may have shit my pants just now! JohnnyBGood t c 18:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Dothan map

Oooh, thanks much for that...and as it turns out that State Route 210 is one of the relatively few Alabama highways I'm fairly familiar with, I went ahead and created the article too. —Pedriana 04:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Broad interstate categories

Is the Category:Interstate 55 thing for all Interstates, or just 0/5 ones? I like the idea.

Also I'd be giving you specs for the U.S. Bike Route signs (still can't believe the routes actually exist) but the MUTCD was recently updated to have the bike in the bigger white space, and the number in the lower one (to emphasize on on-road routes that it's a BIKE route). Don't know if I agree with that, but the updated specs aren't anywhere out there yet. —Rob (talk) 00:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, actually... there's a pair of signs on Moeur's presentation. Page 29 has a side-by-side comparison. —Rob (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

April 9 comment

Don't know if I ever responded to your comment of Apr 9 to me. But I now support your disambig method for the highway articles where state official names leds support to that position, such as Maine. I wanted to apologize for any unpleasantness between us. Gateman1997 16:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Image to be replaced == LibertyParkTunnel.png

The image to which you objected is heavily hand edited, substantially changing its information, detail and coloration. However, in a day or two I will replace it with an equivalent built on U.S. Census maps.

Craig Bolon 13:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

RE: plans for road tunnel

There are several mentions of potential road tunnels under the harbor, some inspired by recent findings that ventilation will be practical over the large center span of the proposed rail tunnel. The Port Authority is said to have looked at the issue, but there does not yet seem to be any sign of that in the documents it makes available on the Web.

Mention of road tunnel

Mentions of a "cross harbor" or "express" tunnel can be found on several newsgroups and other pages. There was a somewhat heated interchange at one point during discussion of a tunnel under West St.

Craig Bolon 14:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Reliable sources

There are items from newspapers.

Craig Bolon 14:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Cross-Harbor Rail Tunnel, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Good find, thanks for the nom. ++Lar: t/c 02:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Page moves

Please do not move pages on road-names without consensus, thanks. --Sunfazer | Talk 19:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I only moved it back because it seemed the sensible thing to do. I'll leave a message on the US Roads WikiProject. --Sunfazer | Talk 19:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

How do we avoid edit warring?? --Sunfazer | Talk 19:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to help out on the State Highways Wikiproject if anyone wants. --Sunfazer | Talk 19:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Moo!

You get a cowstar for being SUPERGREAT!

--217.134.237.125 20:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Roger Morris

Honestly? Perhaps he is a notable person, but the article made it sound like he was most notable for being an outstanding teacher. As someone unfamiliar with him, I didn't get the impression he was noteworthy outside his community (which may not be the case). I also don't know what his community was, since the article doesn't mention what country he called home (there's a well known Cambridge in both the US and the UK). This is just my opinion. I won't re tag it. Czolgolz 20:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't Frown

Please don't frown [10]

behappy--E-Bod 21:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

SMILE!

For nominating Template:Smile for deletion, and creating the ridiculously parodic Template:Frown,

Ral315 (talk) has frowned at you! Frowns promote soft cock and hopefully this one has made you detumescant. Spread the droops by frowning at someone else, whether it be someone you have had an unsatisfying cyber with in the past or a rouge admin. Frown to others by adding {{subst:frown}} to their talk pages. Get bent.

Ral315 (talk) 08:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Really, as "bad things" go that was still way too happy. Better Worse now, but it's a shame there isn't some way to make it stink as well.
brenneman^{L} 12:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:POINT

Although LeT's UsE pRoPeR cApItAlIzAtIoN on WT:CJ is humourous, it breaches WP:POINT. Computerjoe's talk 15:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to say that I and others find your user page deeply offensive and would appreciate i if you could tone it down a bit. Thanks Cicero Dog 18:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I find your user page deeply amusing. I would appreciate if you didn't tone it down in any way. --elias.hc 18:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I second that emotion! Don't let the WikiPinheads grind ya down! ==ILike2BeAnonymous 19:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Computerjoe's talk 06:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Indiana shield standards...

Seeing as the GIFs are gone, I emailed InDOT, and they were quick, but they gave me this:

We use the Standard Highway Signs booklet that is put out by the FHWA. The web address for such is here

This site provides the normal info for a sign. It also gives guidance for the preparation of any word message signs that each state may decide upon using. The general sign design is followed when we make up a special word message sign.

I can't imagine that's enough information to go on creating signs... is it? —Rob (talk) 19:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Lakes-to-Sea Highway

When you stub sort, please leave the stub template after the categories, so the stub category is last. Thanks. --SPUI (T - C) 22:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I quote Wikipedia:Stub: "Because the stub identification is rendered on an article page prior to hardcoded items like categories and inter-Wiki language links, the template is usually placed at the end of the article proper, after the External links section if it exists, but before categories or inter-Wiki links." It makes a lot more sense to me to place the stub template before the categories, because it is a visible part of the article; plus, I rarely have ever seen a stub notice done your way. ~ Booyabazooka 23:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Route 666

Hi SPUI. Wondering why you moved Pennsylvania State Route 666 to Pennsylvania Route 666. I looked when I was renaming Pennsylvania state route 666 and most of the other Pennsylvania state highway articles use the "State Route" convention. I'm also wondering why you changed the links to U.S. Route 62 and U.S. Route 6 to point to redirects to those articles. Seems odd to introduce an intentional redirect. Powers 12:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks for the information. I'm beginning to see why there are so many contentious edits in the highways project. =) Powers 12:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Very devilish, isn't this? :) — Rickyrab | Talk 19:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Deck Arch Bridges

Is this US terminology? I can't say I've ever heard the term "deck arch bridge" in my working career here in the UK. A google UK search reveals 5 hits, 3 of which are for a bridge in Nevada. Leithp 17:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

We normally just refer to them as arch bridges or we classify them by material and construction. It piqued my interest when you re-categorised Craigellachie Bridge, an article I wrote, as an deck arch bridge. I'd just refer to Craigellachie, for example, as a cast-iron arch bridge. Leithp 22:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Well it does indirectly, a masonry arch bridge is always going to be of the "deck arch" type due to the properties of masonry. A tied arch bridge is likewise always going to be of the "through deck" type. The form of the bridge dictates the location of the deck. Leithp 22:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

No, Compression arch suspended-deck bridge isn't a term I've come across either. All the google hits seem to be for Wikipedia or mirrors, which isn't a good sign either. The method of horizontal restraint, the deck or the piers, is different in the two cases but the bridges cited seem to mostly be tied-arches. It was a good idea to transfer the discussion to Wikiproject: Bridges as well, another educated opinion never does any harm. Leithp 13:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

IRC

Heya, can you pop up on irc for a bit? Kim Bruning 23:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Thanks Very Much for trolling Deletion Review with the phil sandifer article. (not) :-( Kim Bruning 11:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Reminder

Can you do those Oklahoma shields now? ...Scott⁵¹¹⁴ 06:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The Iron Bridge

Why are you trying to move this article away from its correct name? Trying to do something like this is something that should be discussed first. Noisy | Talk 19:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Please, please, discuss this first. This is not a standard case, because you would never use the term without the 'The' in front of it. I strongly support your view on the State Routes of Washington, but this is a totally different case. Noisy | Talk 20:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Yep, you can have 'White House staff'.  :-) Noisy | Talk 20:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't move the highways

I think it would be sensible – and appreciated – if you didn't rename any of the state route articles while the matter is being considered for Arbitration.

While there's not a wide consensus on the appropriate article naming scheme (for what it's worth, I'm actually inclined to agree with you on the Washington routes) I believe there is wide agreement that continued move warring is disruptive.

Could you hold off on the moves until the matter is settled conclusively? There are a lot of admins who are getting itchy blocking fingers over the sterile move warring...and I'm afraid I'm turning into one of them. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

State route naming conventions

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll. --Cyde↔Weys 20:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Please respond to my recent comments at Talk:List of Washington State Routes. -- Northenglish 23:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Grow up. -- Northenglish 18:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[11]

80 mph speed limit sign

In celebration of Texas's recently approved 80 mph speed limit, can you replace the 75 mph speed limit sign on Speed limits in the United States with an 80 mph sign? Nova SS 02:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Pseudowallerian degeneration

Hi, did you have a specific reason to recreate Pseudowallerian degeneration? That article was deleted before, and I don't think a redirect is a good idea, since the technical term "pseudowallerian degeneration" does not exist in the scientific literature. Wikipedia shouldn't create terminology; pretty much all Google hits for that term go ultimately back to us. AxelBoldt 15:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Where in WP:RFD would I find an answer to the question I asked you? AxelBoldt 15:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I asked for your specific reason to recreate this page, not for a pointer to some policy. Thanks, AxelBoldt 16:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Route 103

I created a poor stub of Pennsylvania Route 103 to stop the revert war you and another user was having in that TWA article. I hope you don't mind and expand this. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 16:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I love you man

yea yea ya I love you! 72.145.155.253 20:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

 

Hi, SPUI. May I ask you not to create redirect which contain HTML-entities per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HTML codes, Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/February 2006#February_9 and bugzilla:5731? Cheers, —Ruud 00:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

#5463...

Thanks, and "bloody fuck annoying" would seem to be a fairly apt characterisation. Who was it that said, if you think some of the articles are bad, you should see the code... Alai 00:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 17:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

More OK shield images

• Image:US266eend.jpg (OK-2)
• Image:I-240okshield.jpg (OK-3)

Let me know if these help...Scott⁵¹¹⁴ 17:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• Image:Ok15.jpg
• Image:Ok24ok39.jpg
• Image:Ok74.jpg

That 24/39 one should get you what you need. —Scott5114↗ 18:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Your reversion of List_of_highways_bypassed_by_Interstate_Highways

Please don't revert this. While my characterization of two letter abbreviations as ugly is subjective, these are also all redirects, and thus are to be fixed under standard Wikipedia conventinos. Catbar (Brian Rock) 18:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Hmm, I went to rebut you, and found that you're apparently correct, at least by today's standards. Wikipedia:Redirects#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. I think it used to be different, but now, you're right. Sorry. Catbar (Brian Rock) 20:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Boston University Bridge

Hello - I just wanted to let you know that I restored the trivia section in the Boston University Bridge article. I know it seems implausable, however it is truthful to the best of my knowledge. I have never been to the bridge myself, but as a native of Massachusetts I have heard of this before I edited the article. I also provided a citation in the article itself, and included some additional references, including a link that has a good picture of the bridge, on the article's talk page.

The automobile portion of the bridge is built over a railway bridge, and both are built over the Charles River; thus the hypothetical scenario of an airplane flying over a car driving over a train travelling over a boat.

I agree that perhaps the wording could be a bit more verbose to explain this. Feel free to edit it if you'd like. I may do so myself sometime in the future. Cheers! --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 12:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

My mistake - I misread your edit summary to mean "it's not possible that a plane could fly over a car (etc)". Now that I understand your reason for its removal, I see that you're correct in that it's not the only bridge that can make that claim. Sorry for the trouble --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 19:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

RFA Deliberations

Hi,

Is there a page where i can read the ArbCom's deliberations over the naming dispute? Or are those secret? atanamir 20:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Tennessee State Route naming convention

I can't see why you took it on yourself, without any discussion with other contributors/editors, at least that I can detect, to change the format of the titles from "Tennessee State Route XX", which is both intuitive and the accepted Wikistyle, I believe, to ""State Route XX (Tennessee)". I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and will not just move everything back unless I don't hear from you for a few days, but that is my intent as it stands now. Rlquall 14:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm fully aware of the "pipe trick"; you can check my edit history for proof. I still see the policy on this as "proposed", there isn't any consensus that I see, and until then you're potentially changing pieces of lots of (mostly) other people's work (although that is hardly without precedent or unconscionable, and I'm not trying to imply that it is). Unlike perhaps other states, the expression "Tennessee State Route X" is seemingly a fairly commom one here, and I think it makes the best possible convention. Rlquall 14:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

redirect

My apologies, I wasn't aware of that particular policy – thanks for bringing it to my attention. —Pedriana 00:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

radio station

Hi SPUI, I don't know if it's policy or whatever, but the article was just a header "External links" and the infobox. I agree you can argue that the content was in the infobox, and I probably should have just added the line you just added ("KBTR-CA is a television station in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, United States."). That gives it some context (and content). Thanks for fixing it. --Fang Aili ^talk 20:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Will do. Sorry about this; I was deleting a lot of speedies at the time. --Fang Aili ^talk 20:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I will be away from Wikipedia for a few months. My access to the site has been limited and I can only get on during a few hours a week. However, during summer my schedule changes, and thus I am unable to get back on Wikipedia.

You may contact me however, at Wikisource or by email (keep me updated on the arbcom case, I will be able to respond)...

I'm not really sure when I'll be returning. Possibly in August or September... although I signed up to take AP Chemistry, AP Language, AP U.S. History, Pre-Calculus, Spanish 4, Physics, and Eschatology and Hermaneutics. Don't know how the homework load will be. But rest assured... I'll be back.

--Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

For participating in my insane project and surviving, here is a present! Enjoy! Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 01:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

aWP-deadThis user survived AntiWikipedia but subsequently killed himself.

Actually I killed myself. So you lose. Hah. --SPUI (T - C) 01:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case, I'll modify the userbox. Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 01:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

600-series original research

As part of your edit in the new intro, you wrote "The selection of this range was coordinated within the state, gradually replacing older systems of mainly one- and two-digit routes." Where are you getting this?  ;)! lensovet 05:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway (Road?)

That stock certificate is damning evidence that I'm wrong, and it should be Railway instead of Railroad. I thought Railway was a british term and Railroad was always used in the USA. In Rowlee Steiner's manuscript he calls it a Railroad, but he could be wrong too.george 14:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration pages

Do not edit the proposed decision page again. Other than the obvious typo fixes, only arbitrators and clerks may edit that page. I've seen your WP:POINTs, I don't find them particularly cute, and they certainly don't help your case. You will be blocked next time. Dmcdevit·t 21:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Capital Beltway

First, thanks for creating a new exit list, it's needed to be done and it looks great. Second, signage on the beltway is odd, but if you'd like, I can probably head over there next week and get some pictures around the springfield interchange. Or if you want any pictures in general, let me know and I'll see what I can do. Thanks, --MPD01605 (T / C) 04:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

MD 187 is signed North-South throughout its route. I talked with my dad and some people who have lived here for a long time, and this is what I've found out. The Beltway was signed North-South from I-270 to just south of Rte 620 in Virginia. At that turn, it was signed East-West from the southwest curve to near Andrews AFB. From Andrews AFB to the Montgomery-Prince Georges County line, it was signed North-South, and from the county line to where the I-270 spur joins was signed East-West. Not too different from now. I'm going to go check out the new Wilson Bridge later this week, so I'll check out the latest improvements to the springfield interchange, too. --MPD01605 (T / C) 05:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, gotcha. Well, you can see by the pictures you posted that 495 is east-west east of 270, and north-south south of 270. So...good question. I would assume that it's south-east. I'll go check it out next week and snap a few pictures. Sorry for the confusion, I just got my wisdom teeth out today and I'm a little out of it. --MPD01605 (T / C) 05:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

CR seal fonts

Hi! I made this image Image:NJCountyRoad.svg and was looking for some input. Mostly, I'd love to know what font NJDOT uses for their signs. In addition I see that the colors are totally off and was wondering if you had any insight into what the colors are actually supposed to be. Thanks for your help! lensovet 04:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Farm to Market Road 603 Infobox Cleanup?

Help me out here; what about this needs cleanup? I saw you had changed the I-20 shield, and the size of the routebox shields, which is fine with me. What else needs doing? Has there been a standard for these promulgated? I had just copied the sizes and such from another Texas FM--If it's useful to put something useful in the comments on the infobox page or on the project page, to prevent other style errors, I'd be happy to. DavidBavousett 16:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The Esplanade Mall

I have listed this for undeletion, as it was a completely different article when you deleted it. Please be more careful when deleting articles as re-creations of deleted content. --SPUI (T - C) 18:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have commented on the listing here. TigerShark 19:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Yari road

I don't mean to split hairs, but what was wrong with my prod reason on the Yari road article? --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 23:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok I see what you mean, thanks --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 00:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding reversions[12] made on June 12 2006 (UTC) to Waterways forming and crossings of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Voice-of-All 08:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

unblock|This was removal of an unsourced assertion that the Causeway is SR 913. According to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia]], "Wikipedia is not for Uncited Material".

To clarify, see below. --SPUI (T - C) 08:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

If revert warring is inevitable, then go to WP:RFPP and get the page tagged (accuracy) and locked. Then build a decent consensus on the talk page. Just reverting for days will not solve anything.Voice-of-All 08:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

State Roads in Florida is always being edited and added to - protecting it would be stupid. --SPUI (T - C) 09:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm right in the opinion of policy. --SPUI (T - C) 11:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Not in the opinion of the 3RR policy. The intent is to stop the disruption of edit warring, there a few exemptions and removal of uncited material is not one of them. --pgk^(talk) 13:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Your AWB seems to be misconfigured

You removed the sortkeys from the categories in this article. --SPUI (T - C) 06:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hm, thanks for the catch. I'm not sure what happened, and I'll comb through a few of my other AWB contributions to see if the same thing's happened elsewhere. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 23:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to User talk:74.137.216.240, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Steve-o 11:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi I edited my talk page with a message for what seems to be an expert wikipedia police force. Please stop this revert/warn drama. It makes everyone sad.  :/

Redirects

Could you stop making redirects to non-existant pages please. You made one redirect to Townville, South Carolina and another to Fair Play, South Carolina. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 19:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I-85 SB at I-285 topside

Yeah, you're exactly right about exit 95 on Interstate 85 in Georgia. Southbound into the ring road played havoc with my brain. The sign is right: the B exit is encountered first for westbound, and the A is eastbound. Thank you for finding the picture. (Though I'm sure I would've gone shopping at Fry's up I-85 this weekend...just to look at the sign, of course. :) ) Again, nice catch. Thank you! —C.Fred (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Good grief, I understand something the Georgia government did. Book me a room with the rubber walls. :) When they went to mile-log exits, they went with the escalating pattern, so 95B is "above" 95A, to keep the sequence. Under sequential numbering, since only the southbound exit was split, they gave 35A to the first exit encountered southbound...which was 285 west. So, when they renumbered, 35A became 95B, according to the site you mentioned. —C.Fred (talk) 01:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Whew. I reread the site, and I got that entirely wrong. I think the DOT just has the current designation backward. I don't have a reference for the original signage handy, though. But the signs you found a picture of look current. —C.Fred (talk) 01:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Anything I can do?

Hey, I noticed the reaming you took on multiple fronts today and wanted to offer my support (I've been watching with interest ever since I was named as a potential party). They seem to be gangin up on you pretty hard, and while you can be a pain in the ass on occasion, you're both a productive editor and not the only party who may have fouled in the page name dispute. Freak, Johnny, PHenry, Nohat, and Rschen were also equally as culpable and yet they're all skating through scott free on this which isn't kosher. It may bring me back into it, which I'm loathe to have happen at this point, but I can't abide something as one sided as that Arbcom appears to be. Gateman1997 05:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Eh, we'll see what happens. --SPUI (T - C) 05:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Well I left a few notes on the workshop page all the same. Hopefully some good will come of it, God knows my writing tonight has degenerated back to a 4th grade level. But it's better then nothing under the circumstances. Gateman1997 05:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Guess it wasn't any help. They picked me apart. Sorry man I tried but they'll have none of it. I'm afraid to say anything more lest I be dragged in too. Gateman1997 06:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Nevada shields

As you have created some very accurate shields for other states, may I request that you create shields for the state routes in Nevada? I'm currently working on the articles themselves, but I'm not quite the graphic artist. Thanks. --Geopgeop 15:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing else out there we can use apart from modifying the existing PNGs: Image:NV-28.png (2-digit) and Image:NV-604.png (3-digit). Whatever signs I could find online, they are on copyrighted pages such as [13]. However, the 1979 edition of Standard Highway Signs includes many state highway signs (even Nevada), but it is not available electronically, I'm afraid. I have contacted NevadaDOT for the actual design, and I'm awaiting a response. --Geopgeop 11:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I just received a response from NDOT. Unfortunately, I wasn't too clear, and they asked me to say again what I needed. I'll update you on the progress. --Geopgeop 17:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I just received the PDF of the shield design from NevadaDOT. However, they want me to call them about the licensing issues over the phone. (The shields we may draw from this are after all under derivative use.) As I will be busy today (I'm graduating from my trade school today with an MCDST certification) I will call sometime tomorrow instead. (Forgot to sign) --Geopgeop 22:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I just called, in effect NevadaDOT said we could do anything we want with the shield design (except make actual shields for use on the freeway, but that's already law) so we're go. I'll send an email to you with the PDF attached. --Geopgeop 19:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I thought that the SVGs that I made were okay, until ChrisRuvolo brought it up on my talk page. Can you review the SVGs that I've done at Commons:Category:Nevada State Route shields? Try modifying from the Nevada blank.svg and see that it looks like Image:Nevada_State_Highway_Signposts_Carson_Range.jpg, please? --Geopgeop 08:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I made a new version of Commons:Image:Nevada blank.svg. Compare the two versions and the Carson Range JPEG link above and see if that was an improvement. Either way I'm done and I'm leaving it up to you again. (Will I ever make up my mind?) --Geopgeop 08:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh and of course compare it with Image:NV-blank.gif. --Geopgeop 08:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm obsessed. Check my talk page out because I uploaded Nevada 207.svg, and you can compare with Nevada 206.svg and the Carson Range JPEG. Now that's it. --Geopgeop 09:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It's been a few days, any progress so far? --Geopgeop 20:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

my sad svg

hey, just curious why the SVG CR seal on 500-series got nixed during your cleanup? thanks. lensovet 23:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burlington Center Mall copmpromise

A compromise might have developed at the above discusiion that you earlier participated in. Come by and chip in your ideas, if you wish. youngamerican (talk) 13:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Your comments on the CU request against Kurt Leyman

The complaint that the IP in question is a company proxy and that blocking it is blocking other users should be taken up at WP:ANI. I'm not sure how CU can help at this point. Thatcher131 11:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• I pointed out your comment to the blocking admin and we'll see where it goes from there. Thatcher131 11:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • As I said, my only concern is that this person is claiming to be someone else but is actually Kurt or a meat of Kurt. I'd think we'd need to get verification somehow that this is a proxy. But hey, if it's decided to reverse my block, I have no problem with that. --Woohookitty^(meow) 12:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

NY villages and towns

You placed a merge tag on several villages and towns in New York state that shared the same name. You should probably be aware that villages are separate corporate entities within a town. Towns are minor civil divisions and the villages are typically the incorporated places within them. There is more information at Administrative divisions of New York. Polaron | Talk 02:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The town is probably a safer choice for linking to since a village with the same name as a town is usually wholly within that town. Another option is to treat towns and villages as separate municipalities and just check where exactly the roads you refer to pass through. Polaron | Talk 02:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, these should definitely not be merged as they're quite separate governmental entities.--Pharos 06:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest sorting them out carefully, and one at a time. Just because we're not sure what a transportation (or other) article is talking about doesn't mean we should cover up our ignorance by pretending the towns and villages are the same thing. Actually, the meaning is pretty clear from many of the articles (they're usually referring to the towns).--Pharos 07:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Nah, the villages are in some cases I think only a small proportion of the population of the towns. If anything it should be the towns that would get the undisambiguated title. In any case, this should probably be discussed at Talk:New York (for want of a better forum) before there's any wholesale change.--Pharos 07:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, that just means that the town (of course by definition) is always bigger and sort-of more notable than the village. Don't think of it as a "town"; it's really what's called a "township" or a "sub-county" (to make something up). For relevant Wikiprojects, there's only WikiProject New York City, which I started a while back, and which is extremely inactive (and not terribly relevant to these towns and villages).--Pharos 08:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

NH Route images

Please confirm that all NH route images now have SVG images to replace the PNG images which {{routeboxnh}} uses so that the PNG images can be deleted as obsolete. TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 21:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Your Presence Is Requested...

...at Talk:Inner Loop (Rochester) and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York State routes#Routebox Discussion, Part 3. --TMF ^{T - C} 14:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Diamond signs

When you run out of things to do (not likely), Warning sign could use some SVG images to replace the GIFs that are used there currently. —Scott5114↗ 18:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Project tags...

...until someone agrees that WikiProject categories belong in articlespace, or I get a Meta: or Project: namespace, those tags are pretty much the only way to tie a project to its articles. If there any other structural solutions, I'd be interested in hearing them. —Rob (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Counties in the NYS Routebox

I'm beginning to warm up to the new routebox, I'll admit. However, there is one more thing I'd (as well as a few other users on the WP:NYSR talk page) like to see: a list of counties that the route passes through.

As you said before, the point of a routebox is to give a basic overview of the route and to help a reader quickly visualize where the route travels. I think that listing the counties that the route traverses, not in the junctions, but just as one row above the major junction row, as is present in the current routebox would be great. --TMF ^{T - C} 17:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

PR-52 article

For the PR-52 article you made, could you please create SVG images of the PR-52, PR-18, and PR-1 shields? The shield looks like this: File:Puerto Rico 1 Highway.PNG. This shield though is PNG. Andros 1337 20:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Userpage

You certaintly have an umm... "interesting" userpage. :) --TBCTaLk?!? 02:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Your Autobahnbox mass edits.

Would you please mind stopping screwing with the bloody template? There was a discussion about it, on numerous occasions even, you were the only one who wanted NOT to keep the exit lists in the infobox, and yet you do a bloody edit on every goddamn article that is out there.

I have reverted all your edits. Accept consensus or just shut up. --doco (☏) 06:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 86 (east)

In Interstate 86 (east), why did you change the link to U.S. Route 219 to US 219 (NY), which just redirects to the former? Powers 13:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

User:SPUI/jajaja

User:SPUI/jajaja has been nominated for deletion at miscellany for deletion. Please see the deletion page to vote and comment.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91^{(review me!)} 08:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

MfD Result Notice

Hi,

The MfD discussion on your "jajaja" subpage was closed with a "delete" consensus. I have deleted the subpage and its associated talk page. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

tfd Template:Trans-Canada

the {{tfd}} tag should definitely not be visible on the main space, all editing details and internal workings should certainly not be seen by the annonymous user that just looks up things on wikipedia. By including tfd between <noinclude></noinclude> tags, that particular proposal will be seen by editors, but will not show up on the main space. Qyd^(talk)04:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

If the tag is not included, it is only visible to those who happen to look at the template itself or have the time to pay attention to TFD. On the other hand, when it is included, it is seen by all who use the articles it is in. This is why the tfd template is in small text.

I see your point (although I don't entirely agree); however, the fact that you are removing the template from every page somehow contradicts this rationale. Peace. - Qyd^(talk)15:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Truce, olive branch, smile, what have you...

Northenglish has smiled at you! I know you're the one who nominated {{smile}} for tfd, but here's a personal message instead. We haven't always agreed in the past, but I'd like to put that behind us, as I think there's definitely some common ground. Thank you so much for your help completing the County routes in New Jersey merge; I knew I had let some minor things fall through the cracks. SPUI, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship! -- Northenglish (talk) -- 17:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Cardiff Bus Route 53

Hi, I notice that you removed a {{prod}} tag from the article Cardiff Bus Route 53 last week; this article has now been AfD'ed, and since you deprodded it I thought you might want to comment on the AfD debate. -- AJR | Talk 23:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Learn to clean up better!

[14] --Analogdemon (talk) 18:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

aribtration

Has there been any conclusion / decision by arbcom yet? I've noticed the /worskship and /proposed decision pages are more or less inactive now. atanamir 03:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Block

I have blocked you indefinitely over your little experiment at User:SPUI/jajaja: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and, while you have made a large number of useful contributions, you have also spent much of your time in deliberately wasting the time which other contributors to the project. The page in question cannot be described as promoting the encyclopedia, and seems deliberately designed to disable the access for certain users who do not have sufficient free memory on their computer. I shall inform the Arbitration Committee of this block, as you are on probation. Physchim62 (talk) 13:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked .. though if SPUI has been acting badly, please assign him a reasonable block. There's simply no community consensus for an indefinite block. --Cyde↔Weys 13:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Shortened to a one week block for violation of probation, with a request to ArbCom to extend this to one year. Physchim62 (talk) 14:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'd intended to post a reminder that SPUI is not supposed to be naughty, by order of the Committee in the last case he was involved in. I don't agree with psychim62's recommendation of an extension, though (I can say that because I've recused myself as a clerk from that case). That whole nasty page should be flushed, because it's an ad for the kind of prankery that has no place here. But SPUI does excellent work elsewhere. --Tony Sidaway 17:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock|uh... what the fuck? In addition to the ridiculousness of this, note [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#User:SPUI/jajaja]]: Mackensen [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war/Proposed decision#... is banned for two months and placed on Probation|was an arbitrator at the time of my probation]] and "voted" to undelete.}}

Attempted discussion on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Today's SPUI blocking --SPUI (T - C) 21:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

More on the probation

(to go on Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Highways/Proposed decision if I'm unblocked)

The proposed decision will place most of the parties on probation. As has been confirmed by Tony Sidaway in a conversation on IRC, this means that admins can block for anything and claim it was done under the probation, as the blocking admin can define disruption. As it is being done with implied ArbCom approval, whether such approval exists or not, other admins are less likely to unblock (and such unblocks may not be proper - see below). He also said that "if you screw up enough to deserve mandated probation, we figure that you're probably a disruptive person and any subsequent blocks are probably right". An earlier probation has recently resulted in a week-long block on me for a page I made over a year ago, and recent actions I took to save the code (mostly in comment tags, to avoid screwing up my user page) before deletion. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Today's SPUI blocking and [15] for details.

An earlier incident resulted in Tony Sidaway banning me from any page I had recently used the word "fuck" on. As above, disruption is in the eye of the blocking admin only. Tony also made it clear in that case that any unblock would not override the ban, and would be misleading in that I could still not "legally" edit according to Wikipedia:Banning policy. See User talk:SPUI#Edit summaries.

Thus, I dispute the appropriateness of the probation. It basically tells admins "look, here's someone you can block and get away with it". --SPUI (T - C) 00:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. It would be interesting if the "fuck" rule were applied more liberally, though. - brenneman ^{L} 01:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You have made several errors, in the first instance attributing to me words ("admins can block for anything and claim it was done under the probation") made by you yourself, which I did not confirm but in fact disputed on at least two occasions, and in the second instance attributing to me words ("Basically, if you screw up enough to deserve mandated probation, we figure that you're probably a disruptive person and any subsequent blocks are probably right.") written on IRC by another user. Simetrical. You have also conflated blocks and bans. You were banned in an earlier instance (and I lifted the bans after long discussions and undertakings from you). In the current instance someone has blocked you. Please correct your errors.

On the probation, I have already advised you to go to the Arbitration Committee and seek to be relieved from it, should you find it too onerous. Administrators do not set the terms, they only enforce the probation. One of the terms of your probation is that you can be blocked for provocative edits. --Tony Sidaway 03:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You "disputed" my statement, but nothing you said actually contradicted it. As for the misattribution, sorry. I have not conflated blocks and bans; Pnyschim62 banned me. --SPUI (T - C) 03:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If you admit that I disputed your statement, you can hardly claim that I confirmed it. even if you think that nothing I said contradicted it.

I'll pin the difference down here. You say that "admins can block for anything and claim it was done under the probation". That would mean that someone could block you for disagreeing with them, or editing after midnight UTC, or any old thing. I say a different standard applies, and I stated it in the IRC conversation: "administrators can only block you under probation if you act provocatively or disruptively" and "the idea is that the admin decides what is disruptive." Administrators make decisions on disruption all the time, it's what we're for.

Physchim62 also has conflated blocks and bans. --Tony Sidaway 04:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

"The admin decides what is disruptive" - thus, an admin can call "editing after midnight UTC" disruptive and block for it.

As for conflation of blocks and bans, why do you think that? He has banned me for a week under the terms of the ArbCom probation:

"After he finishes serving out his ban, administrators may ban him from any page he disrupts, and/or ban him from Wikipedia for up to a week for each provocative edit he makes. If, after two months, SPUI can demonstrate good behavior, he may appeal the probation."

I see nothing about blocks, only bans. --SPUI (T - C) 04:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

An administrator cannot call "editing after midnight UTC" disruption. The administrator decides what is disruptive, but he does not determine what is disruptive. --Tony Sidaway 04:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If an admin can decide that using "fuck" in edit summaries is disruption, why not? --SPUI (T - C) 04:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Wrong again. Under your probation you're enjoined from provocative edits. Your use of those words was provocative and, in the edit summaries of articles, particularly sensitive. Other editors make the occasional expletive, but you had made quite a habit of it [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] and reacted in a characteristically combative manner to polite suggestions that your behavior was a problem. Moreover you cannot complain that other editors get away with it. Those editors are not on probation for provocative editing. --Tony Sidaway 04:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Right again. You decided that those edits were provocative and banned me for them. In other words, you decided what was provocative. --SPUI (T - C) 05:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. There was no doubt in my mind that your actions in the circumstances were provocative, and your response to polite requests that you stop was doubly so. Now be honest: were you surprised when administrators said that your repeated, copious use of expletives in edit summaries was provocative? ? --Tony Sidaway 05:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I bloody well was surprised, actually. --SPUI (T - C) 05:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Then the block was necessary to bring you to your senses. --Tony Sidaway 05:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

As I said, you decided what was provocative. --SPUI (T - C) 05:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Stipulated. That is normal for a probation. --Tony Sidaway 05:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming my argument again. Please stalk me no more. --SPUI (T - C) 05:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You're still making a leap of logic in your argument. You assume that, because a single administrator decides when you're breaking your probation, an administrator can make up just any old excuse to block you and say that it's under your probation. The one example that you gave was a ban from articles for provocative editing, use of many expletives in editing. Your response to the news that some editors found it provocative at the time was characteristically pugnacious and (of course provocative). You still maintain that it took you as a complete surprise that use of the word "fuck" in a large number of article edit summaries in a single day could be seen as at all provocative or inappropriate. I in turn think that you are forced into that difficult position by your apparent wish to discredit the principle of probation itself. --Tony Sidaway 07:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose asking you two two quit it is pointless? SPUI, I feel your pain in the arbitrary nature of "provocative," but you do stir the pot you must admit. I'd prefer that people tried talking to you rather than blocking you (or nominating things for deletion) rather than blocking you, but I can't make them. For example, did anyone try asking you about what the hell you're "yesyesYES" page was about?
brenneman ^{L} 07:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I've decided not to respond to Tony unless he says something new.

Actually jajaja is Spanish laughter (J is pronounced like English H) - I believe jajaja is a redirect. I made the page as an experiment in steadily-increasing font sizes, and found the product rather amusing.

Oh, and I assume you're not going to do anything about this ridiculous block? --SPUI (T - C) 08:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Suppose you recognised that your problem is your provocative behavior, and promised not to do it again? I guess the direct approach counts as "something new" by my standards. --Tony Sidaway 10:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you understand - I don't intend to be provocative. Thus, as I can't predict what others will find proocative, I can't avoid "provocative behavior". --SPUI (T - C) 11:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I am doing something about your block, wise-guy. Talking things over will (hopefully) lead to a more stable solution than a straight unblock would. I agree totally that the "provocative" tag is too-easily applied, and note that in this case at least no effort was made to avoid SPUI-bashing. I think the application to ArbCom is a good idea, but you should put in some diffs to back up your statement. - brenneman ^{L} 11:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen Click yet?

Go pirate (by which, of course, I mean to don a pirate hat and pay to enter a movie theater) it and watch. You'll appreciate the new userpage material. --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 04:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

New York subway stations

I have come across several NY subway station articles that do not start by saying they are about a subway station and assume one already knows what all the acronyms mean. Does anyone take care of these articles especially? It looks like a big job to bring them up to standard. I noticed your commen on the list of NY subway stations and thought you might know about it.Billlion 15:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

A simple request

Sometimes, you do good work. At times, you are a useful wikipedian. Unfortunately, you have a strong tendency to juvenile stunts and boundary pushing and generally immature and disrespectful behavior towards others.

What I am going to ask you to do is quite simple: grow up, come in from the cold, join the community in a serious mature adult responsible way. Knock off the cheap tricks, and be helpful and friendly to others. It is really that simple.

Unlike some other disruptive users for whom I have no respect and little hope that they can ever grow up and not act like fools, I think otherwise about you. You've had your fun (though it cannot have been that much fun, right?) but now it is perhaps time to discover a more mature and adult fun, the fun of doing something helpful and charitable and usefully productive for the world while having fun with friends who care about the same thing. If you can't do that, it is probably time to find a new hobby.

But if you can... and I think you can, then this would be a good time.

You could start by cleaning all the idiotic stuff off your userpage and getting serious as a contributor.

--Jimbo Wales 22:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Blah. I was thinking of redirecting my user page to my talk page, but now I'm not so sure, as it will look like I was pressured to do so. --SPUI (T - C) 23:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

You could do the mature thing and do what's right, regardless of what motives you think it will look like you may have had for it. I agree with Jimbo; you've done lots of useful things, but you also have done a lot of silly things. If you'll find some other outlet for your silly things where it's more acceptable, you can be a very good contributor here. *Dan T.* 00:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I am a good contributor here. I'd prefer if people would help me with stuff like Wikipedia:Peer review/United States Numbered Highways rather than harrassing me. --SPUI (T - C) 00:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that you are a good contributor here, but I'd also recommend cleaning up or redirecting your user page, regardless of whether it's because of pressure or your own voliton. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 00:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I hereby command SPUI to not redirect his user-page to his talk. - brenneman ^{L} 13:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no pressure my man. Do it because you want to do it. The fact that other people may be happy about it is just a bonus, not a reason not to do it. You talk about people harassing you, well, the easy way to make that happen is to stop doing things that appear to be designed to harass others.--Jimbo Wales 16:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The boss gives good advice. Construct evidence supporting your viewpoints on the talk pages of articles that you spy a problem with, thereby avoiding edit wars and the like. Take the advice on the highway arbcom case, and take it to heart that sufficient edvidence can sustain your stance on the matter. Avoid silly actions that don't hold any relevance to the encyclopedia. Give contirbutions and productive statements, not jokes and playtime.

If you want to play the silly, misunderstood editor, it would behoove you to leave this out of wikipedia resources and direct such energy to mainspace conributions. Such actions do not convince your fellow editors of your good intent and such blocks will probably continue based upon your ongoing behavior. It would therfore be in your best intrests to clean up your act and stop mucking about akin to a playground. Its your choice to continue these games and I don't personally endorse these positions but I think the new road to being a proper wikipedian is your best chance. -Zero^Talk 08:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

*sigh* Is there not anyone else in this whole encyclopedia that people can give advice to? But hey, SPUI, while we're handing it out, here's a useful tip: If you apply some pressure to your perineum instead of shaking it, you can avoid that last drop falling into your knickers. - brenneman ^{L} 08:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Help with SVG bug

I know you don't like talk page templates, but I went ahead and created one for the NJ WP anyway at {{NJSCR}}. Unfortunately, despite the claim that the SVG bug has been fixed, I can't get Image:County_blank.svg to appear on the right side. I've tried ?action=purge and what not, but no luck.

Help, please? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 23:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that was the problem! -- Northenglish (talk) -- 23:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

SVG question

Hi SPUI, just a quick SVG question ... is it possible to have a path whose stroke is directionally striped? I.e. if the path is a semicircle, the entire length, half the stroke's thickness is red, and the other half is blue? Is such a thing even possible? I'm using inkscape and can't figure out how to do it. If I do a pattern stroke, then the pattern is just "overlaid" - so if the pattern is horizontal, and the path is curved, then the pattern won't curve with the curve - quite annoying and not what I want.
Anyway any insight you might have would be much appreciated. Thanks! lensovet 19:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop what?

That page is crap. If you don't want it deleted, I'll bring it to AFD. It's five names! What use does it serve? 69.145.123.171 ^Hello! Tuesday, July 4, 2006, 07:07 (UTC)

Kindly explain what the heck this page is for? It's pointless. --69.145.123.171 07:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

List of railroads with a nickname ending in "Road"

I didn't - I simply restored the tag that was removed. removal of those tags, whether they should be there or not, tends to be a sure-fire way of getting the deletion approved. better off fighting it at the appropriate talk page or with the person who put it there.Bridesmill 07:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC) Then replace it with an AFD at least; seems it's been prodded before with the tag removed; whihc just doesn't look healthy.Bridesmill 07:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi, we are grateful you take time to add edit summaries but you might want to take care of your language Special:Contributions/SPUI; relisting - got jack shit, it got jack shit on PR and adding a more descriptive reason for your edits; rv, revert, blah. Thanks 82.38.100.8 10:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Florida Road Shields

I stareted making some of my own, than I noticed they were different from yours. The reason is I used the sign designated as "Independent Freeway Use". Any idea what that designation means? TimL 16:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ohio Turnpike "original research" dispute

Submitted to the Mediation Cabal for outside opinions. I disagree with your contention, as the alternate routes can be found on any map of Ohio, but I will respect the MedCab's decision. --Larrysphatpage 01:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

My signature

Whoa! How did you get the dots over the r? —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 04:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding my signature

Thank you very, very much for arranging a way to use the Umlaut R without using images! —this is messedr͏̈ocker (talk) 04:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways

The case has been closed and the final decisions published on above's link. -- Drini 16:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Interstate 405 (Washington)

Out of curiosity, why did you tag the infobox on the I-405 page for cleanup? As far as I could tell, it was fine.

I did however add the missing yrcom data, as well as corrected the browse links at the bottom, and removed the tag. Was there something else I was missing? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Georgia (country)

Could you make it clear if you're vote was Support or Oppose on this requested move. Rmhermen 23:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Template talk:Exit sign

Hello SPUI, you used the {{helpme}} on Template talk:Exit sign. Please note that the tag is for use by newcomers for help with basic editing, and it should only be used on your talk page. Please consider asking at the Village Pump (technical) for an answer to your query. Cheers, Tangotango 14:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from (1) using the {{helpme}} template on a page other than your user talk page and (2) using the template to get help with non-newcomer editing. Thanks, Tangotango 14:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Use of Helpme

Please use the {{helpme}} only on a user talk page. It is not for any other pages.

In reference to the helpme you placed, I made a minor change to the page, go and see if it is what you want. --No1lakersfan 14:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that I was unable to help you wth the image. However, I need to tell you that there is something wrong with the map of New Jersey Railroads. When I try to put it on a bage, it only displays as a thin horizontal line. But, if I click on it (when I use it as a thumbnail) I can see the full image. Could you try to modify it to where it would work on a normal page? --No1lakersfan 14:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible that you could make it smaller, to where it would work on Wikipedia? If not, no problem. --No1lakersfan 14:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well, thanks for telling me about that. I have not been able to get your template to work without drastically changing the way it looks. You may want to try asking somewhere else to see if they are able to do anything for you. --No1lakersfan 15:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Signatures

How do you get your signature to have the links to the talk page and contributions page at the end of your usernatme? I would like to try to put that on mine. --No1lakersfan 15:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

What all do I put into that box so that it works like yours? I tried some stuff and it didn't work so I removed it. --No1lakersfan 15:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I have tried that but I get a lot of crap. Is there something I am doing wrong? I remove it so I do not display the crap I get. --No1lakersfan, 15:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that got it to work right. I appreciate your help. I knew there was something I wasn't doing right. --Willy No1lakersfan (T - C) 15:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

highway question

What is the difference between a primary and a secondary highway? I was going to expand some articles WV state routes, but I was not sure what was what. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 16:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. i did not know if there was a Wikipedia consensus. I will check out some sources and see if WV DOT has a designation. If not, I will stick to using descritions like "two lane" or "four lane". youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 16:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Stubs

I do sympathise with your comments, but I'm stub sorting anyway.--Runcorn 19:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

NJT rail line

...can you explain what you did and why?... lensovet 20:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, regardless of the other issues (I do like the fact that lines are entered more nicely now, though code readability is nil right now), can you put back the Category inclusion that we had on the old template? Thanks. lensovet 22:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

We can add flexibility by just adding a cat boolean to the template. if it's not specified (or = yes), then we do the automatic cat insertion. if it's =no, then we don't. way easier than going through each article one by one and inserting cats into them. as for morristown line, well you could easily insert another #switch case to test for the line variable - simple as that. if anything, the template makes it easier to change categories, because you change it in the template once and the changes take place everywhere at the same time. lensovet 17:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wayne-Route 23

You might want to follow this external link to an NJ Transit system-expansion project notice specifically describing this proposed park-and-ride station.

BTW: I've navigated the West Belt Road Interchange myself. They're doing something to that interchange, and that's the very interchange for which they advertised for an off-site road-improvement contract back in March. --Temlakos 21:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Interstate 405 infobox

Thanks for your response, I figured that's what the cleanup tag was about. However, there's nothing on Wikipedia policy/guideline/etc. that I can find saying that infoboxes must be less than a screen long. I think it's detrimental to populate Category:Wikipedia infobox cleanup with almost exclusively state routes simply because you feel the infobox is too long. (In fact, many of the infoboxes on California state routes in that category are less than a screen long, at least on my screen.)

This all being said, I do prefer your infoboxes on User:SPUI/onthecaca and User:SPUI/SR 599, as well as the one we use in the New Jersey project. Perhaps rather than simply tagging all the articles, it's time to re-open civil discussion? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 22:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

KS TPK, exit 127

I assumed they would leave off the direction (as the northbound signs do), but they did get it right. Here's some other pages from that site you can get pictures of signs from: I-35, 335 and 470, I-70. Hope that helps. Do you think FAC will let us get by with the sign templates? —Scott5114↗ 07:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The Cattle Pens are, well, cattle pens. It's pretty much an exit to a bridge with a fence at both ends for cows. —Scott5114↗ 15:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Ontario highways

The existence of a redirect really isn't the point; the point is that the numbers aren't in the title that actually appears on the category page. (You do know, I assume, that pipetext only affects where a title sorts, and doesn't change how the title displays, right?) Bearcat 18:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not about whether the stretch of road has highway number signs or not; it's about whether that highway number is physically in the title of the Wikipedia article or not. And kindly post responses on the appropriate talk page, not on the Canadian noticeboard itself. Bearcat 18:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It most certainly is not a pointless distinction. And anyway, that's precisely why I'm soliciting outside comment in the first place. Bearcat 18:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

How is it pointless to insist that Wikipedia categories be sorted on data points that are actually present in the title of the article? Put yourself in the shoes of a non-roadgeek for a minute: they're going to take one look at the category page, and be completely confused by the way it's sorted. Wikipedia is not here to do what you think is logical even if it's counter-intuitive to almost everybody else on the planet; we need to do what's clearest and least confusing to an average reader, the one who isn't a roadgeek with extensive knowledge of Ontario's hidden 7000 highway numbers and what the Thousand Island Parkway's signed highway number was thirty years ago. Bearcat 18:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

When you're looking at the category page, and the title is the only thing you can see, the title means everything. The content doesn't mean anything until you actually get to it. Bearcat 18:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I-95 exit list II

I'm sorry. I looked at Talk:I-95 exit list and saw an actual consensus (meaning no vocal objections) to transcluding the exit list, at least until all states on I-95 have their own articles.

I took your comment, "I had always been told that content should not be transcluded in this way, but personally I see no problem with this. I might play around with the placement of the edit link," (emphasis added) as reluctant support for transclusion.

What would you support we do with the exit list instead, as it's pointless to randomly have four states have the exit list in one place and the rest in another? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 18:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That's a fine idea eventually, but then what happens to the exit lists for SC, NC, DE, and PA? I support the redirect idea on principle, but not at the cost of those four exit lists. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 19:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Go for it! The transclusion was just a temporary solution until the other states had articles. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 19:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC) Or I'll just do it myself. *wink* -- Northenglish (talk) -- 02:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Just as an update, the switchover is complete, and all of my slashed page names, including Interstate 95/Florida exit list have been speedily deleted at my request. I still say you should have went to AfD instead of TfD though. :-P -- Northenglish (talk) -- 03:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Citations in US Route Infoboxes

Heya, why were the citations removed from the infoboxes for routes 1 thru 6 (i think) regarding the length and date formed. As far as I know the site that they linked to led to the site where that information was obtained. Although I'm pretty sure it wasn't directly listed on the page the reference linked to...is that the reason you removed them? Stratosphere 02:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, nevermind, I now realize you added a citation needed because those articles never had that reference! My apologies. Stratosphere 02:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Disruption

Your conduct on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 July 8 has become disruptive. The next time you act disruptively on that page you will be banned from it per your probation in the Pedophile Userbox Arbitration case. --Essjay 16:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I also put some pretty stiff warnings on WP:AN/I and WP:DRV over this. Then I noticed that SPUI had been edit warring over this and was tempted to block. But I'll hold off. The warnings remain. Any continuation or resumption of this disruptive behavior will result in action under the first of SPUI's two probations. --Tony Sidaway 17:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

As I'm not aware that I'm doing anything disruptive, it's rather hard for me to comply. --SPUI (T - C) 17:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

SPUI, I agree with you to an extent that words like "provocative" and "disruptive" are too vague and being used too liberally against you. (I still for the life of me can't understand how your jajaja page fell under either.) However, I don't think there can be any debate that re-opening a closed TfD debate is disruptive.

I hope you've accepted my smiley olive branch above. I just really think you ought to cool your jets. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 20:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Ontario et allii

Yeah, more complaints about you, big bloody suprise. On Category talk:Ontario provincial highways and the lot, any chance you could pretend to be someone who talks nicely to people he disagrees with? "Common sense - something you all lack," is uncivil, even if it is true.
brenneman ^{L} 02:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

US 41 end

When I edited:

• The article was saying it ends at US 1 at half the places and SR A1A at the other half. (See next bullet.)
• It mentioned the extension to SR A1A but didn't clearly mention the truncation in 2000. (I thought what the article said was that between 1953 and 2000 the route was gradually extended to A1A -- I didn't know I had to interpret that as being extended in 1953 and truncated in 2000.)
• Google maps said it ends at SR A1A -- [25].

So I changed the rest of the places to read SR A1A instead of US 1. Thanks for correcting my edit.

BTW can we be sure [26] is more reliable than Google maps? -- Paddu 22:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

For some reason the photos weren't loading so I could only see the text. Thanks for the clarification. -- Paddu 22:14, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Your message

Ok.Now i understand.I didn't understand the GDFL perfectly anyway-it said "Free Documentataion Liscense" which made me think it fit everything.HurricaneCraze32 21:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sortkey

No reason really. Little bits of whitespace like that sometimes inexplicably bother me. Did that mess up sorting? —Scott5114↗ 05:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Opt-out list

Dunno why, but somehow I got the idea you were already on my opt-out list. Which is why I left one copy of your full signature in the section, removing only redundant clutter in the section. --Tony Sidaway 20:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

U.S. Route 1/9

Great idea to create an article for the U.S. Route 1/9 concurrency. Might it make more sense to name the article separating the 1 and the 9 with either a dash or an ampersand, rather than a slash? I always sound out the name of the concurrency as "1 and 9" (or more accurately "1 'n 9"), which may correspond better to the ampersand. From my informal review of signs, it seems that 1-9 appears much more often than 1&9, but I don't recall seeing 1/9 anywhere. Any thoughts???? Alansohn 21:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation re state usage of 1/9. I saw that you had created redirects for just about every possible combination and permutation of US/U.S., Route/Highway and the numbers 1 and 9. You'd be hard pressed to guess a link that won't work, but the 1/9 may be the least likely to be guessed. Alansohn 21:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The Ted

[27] --Analogdemon (talk) 13:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sucks ass. --SPUI (T - C) 14:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)