Maybe a question to ask is - do users of the system see value in seeing stats and maps on "OK Turnpikes" or "New York Thruway System" beyond seeing them as part of usai, usaus, usasf, or various state systems (where they carry state numbers)?
I personally am fine with just leaving usasf as its own grab-baggy system under the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" principle. Turnpike/thruway/tollway systems generally can stand on their own as their signed numbers and any segments without a signed number can go in usasf.
I would, however, be in favor of creating a separate "New York Parkways" system specifically, for several reasons:
1) The number of parkways in New York far exceeds the number of turnpikes or what have you in any other state (except perhaps Florida toll roads, but most of those have signed numbers). It is easily a system in its own right.
2) There are many NY parkways which are not freeway-grade but are still major roads and signed as parkways. To avoid diluting the meaning of "Select
Freeways", the creation of a separate system with no such qualifying restriction makes sense.
3) Many NY parkways are not in usasf and it would be useful to all for these to be added in, even if not as part of their own system. Indeed if we weren't busy trying to rebuild the site I'd be lobbying for this to be prioritized.
Also, a thought: the GSP extension in NY is already clinchable in the usasf system. If we create a "New York Parkways" system it would seemingly logically be shunted over to there... but it's NYSTA maintained, so it also would logically go in "New York State Thruways" if we created such a thing. This conundrum would be avoided by not creating the latter...