Open main menu
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8


Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Highways/Archive 8 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, SteviethemanDelivered: 18:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Using Mapframe and maplink

Hi all, any thoughts on using mapframe(not released) and maplink in highway projects ? I have updated couple of maps for Indian National Highways in list. -- naveenpf (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

A recently arrived template {{Graph:Street map with marks}} gives access to Open Street Map base maps and annotations etc. I made a derived template {{OSM Location map}} which is a bit more standard to use, puts the map in a frame, etc, and provides a link to a full screen 'maplink'. It may not be ideal for highways maps, but may be useful for particular locations, where editors want show a map with locator marks and labels. There are some example uses in the documentation. RobinLeicester (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion regarding Ontario navboxes and categories

Please see this discussion regarding changes to the navbox template and the categorization system of all roads in Ontario. Commenting is appreciated before April 30, 2017. - Floydian τ ¢ 03:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Need help in creating 200 articles for Indian National Highways .

National highways list has to be updated and new articles has to be created. Current National highway list in is here, about 200 NHs doesnt have article in en wiki. OSM has all new the NHs the list is here. Can anyone help in updating the list and creating the articles ? -- naveenpf (talk) 12:44, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2017

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Archive 8/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Highways.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Highways, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Unused subpages of Template:Infobox road

there are currently about 812 unused subtemplates of Template:infobox road. which of these should be kept? which should we have deleted? I would imagine we want to keep the testcases subtemplates? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 21:52, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Correct about the testcases. The ones in the format /shield, /link, and /abbr templates can be deleted. –Fredddie 00:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I have a sandbox here: User:Rschen7754/IBRdelete. Could someone double-check this before I mass delete them? --Rschen7754 01:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Rschen7754 that list looks good to me. I checked and all the items in that list (except for the browselinks one at the end) match the pattern '/shield_', '/link_', and '/abbr_'. once all of those are deleted we can re-examine to see if there are more that can be deleted. Frietjes (talk) 17:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I looked at the rest of them and it looked like those ones are actually used or might be used in the future. @Fredddie: --Rschen7754 18:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Seems to have been done already. --Rschen7754 01:31, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Forth Road Bridge

Forth Road Bridge, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Canadian Provinces for Template:Infobox road


I was wondering if it would be possible for Canadian provinces to be listed on Template:infobox road for inter-provincial highways? There is currently the ability to list states for American inter-state highway articles. Thank you.
MuzikMachine (talk) 04:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

@MuzikMachine: that should be   Done. Imzadi 1979  04:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Batu Tiga–Sungai Buloh Highway

Can someone here validate my feeling that the above article's table is a mess/not in best practices? I came across this wanting to clean the linting errors, but this one is to the point of crazy-making. --Izno (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Seems to be a problem with much of Category:Highways in Malaysia. Maybe this is the general state of roads articles outside the West? --Izno (talk) 18:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
WP:RJL is how they are supposed to look. (And yes, I've wanted to change their awful color scheme for years...) --Rschen7754 18:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion pages for task forces

I propose that we redirect the talk pages of task forces here, because there are currently several queries going unanswered for months at pages like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways/Asia. Thoughts? --Rschen7754 20:52, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Good idea, this page is not active enough to warrant having other talk pages.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 23:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
This has been used with the subpages of WP:USRD with great success, so I support doing the same here. One talk page is much easier to manage. –Fredddie 00:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
A few notes: this would include pages like WT:HWY/ACR (which are departments I think?) but of course not pages like WT:USRD where the project is independent. --Rschen7754 04:17, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 15:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed A-Class Review rule changes

It has been almost 3 years since the last discussion about ACR, and there are several stale reviews (on the order of months and a few over a year), and we've hit a record low number of FAs this year, so I think we should reevaluate how we are handling ACR, to be more realistic with both the decreased number of reviewers, and the road projects' other priorities. I've made a few proposals below. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Closing with support for this change since there were no objections. --Rschen7754 17:48, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove source reviews as a requirement

It was a good idea, but pragmatically, there's only a few editors who can do these, and 1 editor who can do these well. I can't think of a time when FAC has accepted one of these instead of doing their own. I see no need to do these in house. Of course, we should always be eyeballing the reference list to make sure self-published sources aren't used. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Getting rid of the requirement sounds good, but we should leave the option of doing one if requested. –Fredddie 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
I think we can get rid of this requirement. If needed this can be done at FAC. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Agree with removal, but allowance of one if requested. Duplicating the FAC process just slows down ACR. SounderBruce 03:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Unless there are further objections I plan to remove this requirement from the ACR page in about a week. --Rschen7754 03:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Closing with support for this change since there were no objections. --Rschen7754 17:48, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove the once a year spotcheck as a requirement

Similar to the above; while FAC has sometimes accepted our spotchecks, I don't see a need to do this in house. Of course, if reviewers are concerned, they can do a spotcheck on their own initiative. Also, the "once a year" means that practically every ACR gets a spotcheck since only one ACR per editor passes a year. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Getting rid of the requirement sounds good, but we should leave the option of doing one if requested. –Fredddie 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
I think we can get rid of this requirement. If needed this can be done at FAC. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Unless there are further objections I plan to remove this requirement from the ACR page in about a week. --Rschen7754 03:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Number of supports

Without prejudice to the third option, closing as go down to 2 net supports since there is some consensus for it. --Rschen7754 05:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Require 4 net supports but allow drive-by votes

This is basically returning ACR back to how it was around 2010. I think that we've had a lot of instruction creep over the years and we need to get back to basics. It allows us to basically set a sliding standard of how much we will review, depending on how experienced the editor is, and to drive-by oppose if we feel a nomination needs more scrutiny. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Go down to two net supports

If we don't want to go that radical, I'd propose getting rid of the two-tier system, which has some arbitrary limits separating the tiers, and where the third review might not be so necessary. --Rschen7754 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

I think we can cut down to two net supports based on the amount of reviewers available right now. Dough4872 14:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
USRD/HWY is a bit too small to require that many votes. I think most editors in the project can be trusted in not supporting an ACR without a thorough look. SounderBruce 03:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hybrid system

Rather than have a hard requirement of supports, I'd like to see a hybrid system based on having quality reviews. By that, I mean that when someone reviews an article, another editor comes along and reviews the review; mostly to judge that the reviewer isn't phoning in a review or isn't being unfair to the nominator. Sometimes one long review will be sufficient, other times three shorter reviews will be needed. I think most of us who have reviewed articles in the past know what to look for in a quality article. –Fredddie 02:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

It sounds good, but I'm not sure I understand how it would work in practice. --Rschen7754 04:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
@Fredddie: Could you clarify your proposal? My concern is that we would either have to elect a delegate like FAC does, or have some objective way of determining when a review is done. I don't think my original proposal is that different from this one - I see the 4 net supports as more of a "move to close" sort of deal rather than a hard count of reviews. --Rschen7754 03:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that electing delegates is the way to go; flexible rules work better than hard and fast rules, in my opinion. My idea of reviewing the review wouldn't be too far from spotting a terrible review at GAN and calling out the reviewer. A review should be a discussion anyway, not simply a checklist of things to fix. I have massive headache right now, so I might chime in more later. Discussions good, drive-by reviews bad. –Fredddie 22:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

General discussion

Route marker specifications

I have started a list of shield/route marker specifications that can be found online at c:COM:HWY/L. If you know of any, feel free to add them to the list. My hope is to keep this as a list to help those making shields, and to assist those keeping everything organized at Commons. --Rschen7754 06:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AH374

FYI. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 14:26, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Move request for a bunch of highway portals

Editors here may wish to be aware that there is a proposal to retitle a number of highway-related portals here. Bermicourt (talk) 19:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Swiss motorway vignette

It appears that User:ZH8000 who appears to be from Switzerland has taken offense to me pointing out on the Vignette (road tax) page that the Swiss motorway vignette for cars is the most expensive transit vignette in Europe, given that everybody else offers one for durations shorter than a year and that at prices less than 40 CHF. Since the claim is doubtlessly true and arguably interesting, can anyone help me find some more references that will satisfy user ZH8000? (talk) 01:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

A search for "swiss vignette most expensive" on Google turned up no useful reliable sources through 3 pages. Barring any such sources, your claim (even if true) constitutes original research and will be removed. In fact, comparing the annual vignette price in Switzerland (currently about €34) to the range in the linked vignette article, you could argue that, despite there not being a shorter-term option, the Swiss vignette is among the cheapest in Europe. Therefore, calling it the most expensive is not "doubtlessly true", and I don't fault ZH8000 for removing it from the page. -happy5214 22:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Strange output by junction templates

I would normally investigate and fix myself, but my keyboard is prone to errors and so that is not a good plan. On Ontario Highway 403, there is a random "t" showing up below the header text. I've checked a few random articles and the problem seems to be unique, and not within the article. Can someone perhaps see if there is a misplaced "t" in the coding for {{jcttop}}? - Floydian τ ¢ 11:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This is weird. I copied ONinttop from ON 403 into Special:ExpandTemplates and it works as intended, no T. If I copy the entire jct list, the T appears. And it only happens on this article. I'm stumped. –Fredddie 15:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
@Floydian and Fredddie: I found and fixed it. Imzadi 1979  16:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks guys! Weird how its in the middle of the table code but appears before it. - Floydian τ ¢ 12:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.


On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   10:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on old numbered NHs in India

HI, Need help in consense on having standard naming for NHs which have old numbering system. Government of India changed NH naming in 2010. There are few national highway article which have old numbers. We have to follow a standard pattern for the naming. See the category Category:Indian_National_Highways_(old_numbering). 15 NHs names should be changed. I had changed earlier. It is getting reverted saying precision. Can someone help ? -- naveenpf (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree that the article names should be consistent, but I do not like the double disambiguator that is in use (India, old numbering). I would suggest renaming the old highway articles to "Former National Highway <number>" e.g., National Highway 1 (India, old numbering) → Former National Highway 1 (India), National_Highway_1B → Former National Highway 1B, etc. That way the scope of the article titles is precise and disambiguation can occur by location as needed, which I would say is ideal. –Fredddie 11:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion.It was started National HIghway because it will be helpful in instant search displaying the required item . -- naveenpf (talk) 02:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Seeking advice and help

Hey, new here. I came across an article about one of the main highways in Israel (Highway 2 (Israel)) and was wondering if there is some kind of MoS that I can follow to improve it. The Highway 2 (Israel)#Interchanges section specifically is half nonsense. The "meaning" part is mostly wrong (seems like a bad google translate) and the "type" part to me means nothing. I have no idea what those pictures mean. Would appreciate advice on this. --Gonnym (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gonnym: there is MOS:RJL, the MoS section on "road junction lists" that details how such sections should look. I agree that the icons are meaningless, and the table needs a good cleaning/overhaul. As for the rest of the article, the best practices that have developed for US roads involve the "Big Three": route description, history and junction list. There are other sections that get used from time to time, but almost all good highway articles will have some prose section that describes the route of the roadway along with the landscape (natural and artificial) plus a prose section that details the historical development of the subject. The article then naturally concludes with the junction list table before the standard appendix sections (see also, references, external links). Imzadi 1979  22:16, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Highway 2 (Israel)#RFC: Which table should be used

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Highway 2 (Israel)#RFC: Which table should be used . I've opened an RFC which concerns this Wikiproject and among other things, the implementation of MOS:RJL Gonnym (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

IAM RoadSmart listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for IAM RoadSmart to be moved to IAM RoadSmart. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:33, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of colours

Can I add other country's shield colour here? Thanks! --hueman1 (talk) 07:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@HueMan1: could you provide an example of what you want to add? –Fredddie 01:13, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
@Fredddie: Like the Philippines? --hueman1 (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
I assumed that's what you wanted to add when you messaged me on my talk page. Could you please show us exactly what you want to add? –Fredddie 12:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

"Chris' British Road Dictionary" now known as ""

I wanted to just bring it over to the attention of editors who may have missed the memo, since there was an old link on the WikiProject Highways/United Kingdom project page. Chris' British Road Dictionary changed its name and URL on 11 August 2018. Going forward the site is known as Old URLs using the former address will still work for the foreseeable future.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 02:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Loop ramp

Can somebody here perhaps help us along with this issue?--Neufund (talk) 15:35, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Taiwan highway naming discussion

A discussion is ongoing at User talk:Szqecs#"National Freeway" vs. "National freeway" regarding the naming of Taiwan highway articles. You are invited to comment on the issues being discussed. -happy5214 12:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at talk:A45 about the level of detail to give in the route description

See talk:A45 road#Route description has too much obsessive detail for discussion. Participation welcome. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Trafikkalfabetet (Norway)

If someone needs a copy of Trafikkalfabetet (the Norwegian sign font), perhaps for route markers or such, I've just spent the last week and a half recreating it from standards and SVG files here on Wikipedia. The glyphs are at File:Trafikkalfabetet teksttegn.svg. I hope to make an OTF next. —Scott5114 [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 10:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


I'm working on a junction list for an expressway in Hokkaido right now. Using Template:JPNinttop I'm having a problem when placing Hokkaido the template. The template wants to automatically change Hokkaido to Hokkaido Prefecture, which is a redirect, but it displays as a red link. Here's an example of the top of the list:

The entire route is in Hokkaido Prefecture.

Tomakomai00.06Tomakomai-higashi  Hokkaido ExpresswayMuroran, Sapporo
1.000 mi = 1.609 km; 1.000 km = 0.621 mi

Mccunicano (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mccunicano: I don't see a red link anywhere in this sample. Has the issue been fixed? If not, please point us to where the error is. -happy5214 12:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@Happy5214: The red link was at where the template automatically generates the text "The entire route is in Hokkaido Prefecture." The template specifically wanted the link Hokkaido Prefecture, Japan, so I created a redirect from that name to the page Hokkaido to get rid of the red link; however, the text that the template generates is a bit of a misnomer, as Hokkaido is a special category of prefecture in Japan and by name already has the idea of a prefecture built into its name. That's why the article exists simply as Hokkaido. So if the template could be changed to allow this, I think that would be best. Mccunicano (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
This will be more complicated than I anticipated. I'll try to get to it by the end of the year. -happy5214 18:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Input requested - Split of Warning sign

Input is being requested on a proposed split to take the topic of 'safety signs' out of the warning sign article and form a new article 'Safety sign' using Draft:Safety sign. Refer to the linked talk page for more information.
(Please do not make your input here, go to the linked talk page, at Talk:Warning sign and provide your input there.)--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 21:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

List of the world's longest highways or numbered roads?

Is there somewhere on Wikipedia a list of the longest highways or numbered roads in the world? (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Return to the project page "WikiProject Highways/Archive 8".