CA 78

[Max Rockatansky]

Seems we didn't have anything for CA 78, but I did work up something for its history on Gribblenation:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2022/04/california-state-route-78.html?m=1

The Glamis Road and Ben Hulse Highway east of Brawley are mine or unique development wise.  Essentially Imperial County was build the initial road the state was supposed to convert it to an expressway.  The road got built and the state took it over as it was, the expressway conversion never happened.

[nexus73]

One has to wonder why 78 Westbound does not have Oceanside as a control city.  The interchange with I-5 is a real jammed up mess with the traffic signal and 20 MPH curves.  It needs a complete upgrade to being a full interchange. 

Thanks for posting those videos Max.

Rick

[rschen7754]

While there is a lot of unique and informative information, I am concerned that a number of these articles are using text from Wikipedia with minimal changes - in this particular article, the paragraphs starting with "During February 1956" and "The road connecting Brawley".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_78

While this is technically allowed, attribution and free relicensing are required under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License.

Disclosure: I was the primary author on the CA 78 Wikipedia article, as well as CA 125 and CA 67.

[Max Rockatansky]

While there is a lot of unique and informative information, I am concerned that a number of these articles are using text from Wikipedia with minimal changes - in this particular article, the paragraphs starting with "During February 1956" and "The road connecting Brawley".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_78

While this is technically allowed, attribution and free relicensing are required under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License.

Disclosure: I was the primary author on the CA 78 Wikipedia article, as well as CA 125 and CA 67.

Correct, I did notice your reference tags in the Wikipedia article regarding the pre-state highway history and with with the Glamis Road.  The rewording was at best minimal hence why I listed the actual reference newspaper articles.  I don't recall if I linked the Wikipedia article anywhere in the blog (I think that I did imbed it in a hyperlink) but I'm happy to update to the attribution style you are seeking.  FWIW I did do an interim disclaimer noting you as the source for the Glamis Road and pre-State Highway information along with a overt Wikipedia article link.  I'm not a Wikipedia author so I probably going to guess the citation isn't really in line with the format you would prefer?

Do you have links to said newspaper articles or know where I could find them?  As no you likely noticed I like to pull directly from the actual reference source or at minimum link it directly via imbedded hyperlink.  Our highway articles tend to be very much on the micro level as opposed to a macro one.  I know Daniel with CAhighways would like to have a correct attribution for the pre-state highway era history and Glamis Road as well.

I believe that I might have spoken to you regarding CA 67 to obtain the actual reference links and historic photos?  Given you are the author I would hugely prefer to reference you directly as well and link the actually Wikipedia edits.  Likewise, if there anything you feel that might enhance the Wikipedia article from the CHPWs don't hesitate to grab it.

[The Ghostbuster]

Was the CA 78 freeway ever proposed to go further east than it currently does?

[Max Rockatansky]

Was the CA 78 freeway ever proposed to go further east than it currently does?

No, it was built to planned scale. 

[rschen7754]

While there is a lot of unique and informative information, I am concerned that a number of these articles are using text from Wikipedia with minimal changes - in this particular article, the paragraphs starting with "During February 1956" and "The road connecting Brawley".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_78

While this is technically allowed, attribution and free relicensing are required under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License.

Disclosure: I was the primary author on the CA 78 Wikipedia article, as well as CA 125 and CA 67.

Correct, I did notice your reference tags in the Wikipedia article regarding the pre-state highway history and with with the Glamis Road.  The rewording was at best minimal hence why I listed the actual reference newspaper articles.  I don't recall if I linked the Wikipedia article anywhere in the blog (I think that I did imbed it in a hyperlink) but I'm happy to update to the attribution style you are seeking.  FWIW I did do an interim disclaimer noting you as the source for the Glamis Road and pre-State Highway information along with a overt Wikipedia article link.  I'm not a Wikipedia author so I probably going to guess the citation isn't really in line with the format you would prefer?

Do you have links to said newspaper articles or know where I could find them?  As no you likely noticed I like to pull directly from the actual reference source or at minimum link it directly via imbedded hyperlink.  Our highway articles tend to be very much on the micro level as opposed to a macro one.  I know Daniel with CAhighways would like to have a correct attribution for the pre-state highway era history and Glamis Road as well.

I believe that I might have spoken to you regarding CA 67 to obtain the actual reference links and historic photos?  Given you are the author I would hugely prefer to reference you directly as well and link the actually Wikipedia edits.  Likewise, if there anything you feel that might enhance the Wikipedia article from the CHPWs don't hesitate to grab it.

I think what you have is fine by me. Technically you are supposed to link to the history page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=California_State_Route_78&action=history and also give the entire content the same freely redistributable license and it's always possible some other contributor might object but I don't care about that.

I've definitely used sites like AARoads and cahighways to pinpoint years and statutes to research but then I close the tab when I write and draw my own conclusions from the original sources. I don't think that using roadfan sites as a starting point for further research requires attribution and I certainly wouldn't expect it of my own work - though both sites are also linked at the bottom of the article (anything more would violate Wikipedia sourcing guidelines since they are not considered "reliable"). But then - I am careful to not use any of their text or necessarily the same conclusions. The more people we have researching, the more the hobby/field/whatever you want to call it moves forward - I'm just concerned about borrowing other people's text or ideas without attribution, especially when there is a stigma against Wikipedia road articles in general.

Anyway - the archives of the San Diego Union Tribune and predecessors are hard to find nowadays, I did a big dump way back when I was researching but lost access. Perhaps it is easier nowadays, I haven't looked recently.

[cahwyguy]

I've definitely used sites like AARoads and cahighways to pinpoint years and statutes to research but then I close the tab when I write and draw my own conclusions from the original sources. I don't think that using roadfan sites as a starting point for further research requires attribution and I certainly wouldn't expect it of my own work - though both sites are also linked at the bottom of the article (anything more would violate Wikipedia sourcing guidelines since they are not considered "reliable"). But then - I am careful to not use any of their text or necessarily the same conclusions. The more people we have researching, the more the hobby/field/whatever you want to call it moves forward - I'm just concerned about borrowing other people's text or ideas without attribution, especially when there is a stigma against Wikipedia road articles in general.

Although a bit off topic, I'll just note that although I was sloppy in the early dates of cahighways.org, I've gotten better. In general, stuff that is lifted and reworded always gets a citation of the source, unless it is just a word or three that is integrated into existing text. In many ways, Max and I are a team now: he helps augment the history in detail in his posts, and I summarize and link back to them (which is always good backup, as web sites alas can disappear).

As for archives disappearing: I used to do link validity checks on my site. Not any more. I'm sure half of my newspaper citation links are dead as newspapers constantly break their linkage. So most links to source articles go stale; at best, you'll know the source and a date.