Comments:
- Since the entire length of Tonkin Highway is State Route 4, I would make sure that it redirects here and I would bold "State Route 4" in the lead.
Actually theres quite a few good reasons why this should not be done, but the main ones are:
- All Australian states at one time or another used the same State Route shield
- There was/is other State Route 4s
--
Nbound (
talk)
06:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Is this the only State Route 4 that existed in Western Australia? If so, it should be bolded. It should also be helpful to note that designations are bolded even if they have been used multiple times. For example, "Delaware Route 4" is bolded in both the article about current
Delaware Route 4 and the article about
Delaware Route 299, which was formerly called Delaware Route 4.
Dough
48
72
00:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Current AURD practice is to only bold names that were commonly used for the road (See also:
WP:AURDNAME). Its unlikely that this road has ever been referred to as "State Route 4" (Evad, correct me if Im wrong), even by local residents - At best it may have gotten something like "Highway 4". Ask almost any Australian where "<route>" is, and they'll probably give you you a "dunno mate". Similarly the fact that these two are entirely concurrent is more coincidence than anything else, equating the route number with the name isnt correct within the Australian context. The routes are not the roads themselves, and barring few exceptions are never treated as such, they are applied to roads to ease navigation. Im not overly familiar with Perth, so if it is actually commonly called SR4 there outside of roadgeek circles then by all means he should bold it. --
Nbound (
talk)
03:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
-
State Route 4 redirects to
List of highways numbered 4, with "*
State Route 4 (Western Australia) –
Tonkin Highway" listed under the heading == Australia ==. In the article lead, I have bolded State Route 4, because, it this case, both the name and route describe exactly the same bit of road – that is, all of Tonkin Highway is State Route 4, and all of State Route 4 is Tonkin Highway, without exception. Normally this isn't the case, hence Nbound is correct that standard AURD practise is not to bold the route designation. As for almost no-one knowing or caring about the route designation,
WP:COMMONNAME applies to the title of an article, not the bolding of alternate (and not necessarily common) terms for the subject of an article, which is covered by
MOS:BOLDSYN.
- I think this is at risk of setting a poor precedent (and somewhat ignores AURDNAME). The reference to AURDNAME was also to the specific lead section (Im actually not referencing COMMONNAME at all). In other words that we equate the title with common names used to refer to the road itself (which can occasionally include route designations [eg. F3 Freeway for the Pacific Motorway (Sydney-Newcastle)]), rather than other names such as route numbers or internal designations. Similarly the secondary name section of the infobox has the same prerequisites, so names in bold should actually be listed in both, but again there its not really appropriate to equate the two. Route numbers and internal designations have their places within articles and leads where appropriate, but equating one with the other isn't correct. Unlike many areas around the world, routes and roads are not synonyms by virtue of alignment alone, the fact that these two happen to be entirely concurrent is a coincidence. I suspect this might be less of an issue if in our imaginations we equated a road with a concurrent Tourist Drive, Overdimensional Route, Detour Route, etc. You would never say that one is the other, bolding implies the words are true synonyms, which they arent, neither are SR4 and Tonkin Highway - In most cases internal road numbers would be more true as synonyms, but even then we dont bold those, because they are unused in the general public (even if the article later introduces them). Im not going to further interrupt Dough's review, but please take these considerations into account :) --
Nbound (
talk)
04:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Okay we do not have to bold State Route 4. I understand that Australians favor names over numbers and that numbers are rarely used and hardly known to the general public.
Dough
48
72
00:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
- The sentence "A further 400 metres (0.25 mi) takes the highway to a traffic light controlled intersection with Benara Road." sounds awkward.
- The sentence "After 500 metres (0.31 mi) the S curve ends, along with the residential area, leaving the highway travelling between industrial and commercial properties." needs to be reworded.
- "traffic light controlled intersection" seems like an unnecessarily long phrase and is repeated several times in the route description. You could use "signalized intersection" instead or simply "traffic light".
- The sentence "A 1.1 kilometres (0.68 mi) section takes Tonkin Highway to Leach Highway, as it curves back to the south-east." sounds awkward.
- The sentence "Over the next 1.5 kilometres (0.93 mi), it curves back to the south, and meets Welshpool Road East, now entirely within Wattle Grove.", the last couple of clauses need to be reworded as it sounds confusing.
Dough
48
72
03:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
- I've made changes for all of the above, if you could take another look (
diff). -
Evad37 (
talk)
16:52, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
reply
|