Is AARoads notable enough for a Wikipedia article?

Started by hotdogPi, December 26, 2022, 08:26:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

hotdogPi

I don't think it is, especially since the more popular Minecraft Forum doesn't have one, but there's a shot. Keep in mind that the forum is not the only part of AARoads. AARoads is currently mentioned in a single sentence of the roadgeek article on Wikipedia, although that article is not US-specific.

We have at least 4 Wikipedia admins here and several experienced non-admin members. This helps with creating an article, although not with notability.

I can think of two or possibly three events where our forum affected the outside world, excluding the recent anti-kernals12 video which isn't notable enough:
1. Ken Jennings' 7 posts while researching things for writing the book Maphead.
2. That time we found out where a photo of a specific album cover was taken (East Hartford).
3 (questionable): US 20's quoted length being wrong for decades due to "3365" including alternate routes.
4. Rothman personally deciding that I-81 Business is going to be a thing in Syracuse.

I also believe 1995hoo has appeared in news articles, but that's just "same person as a forum member", not part of the forum itself.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.


Alps


jeffandnicole

Why is this a question? Yes, anything can be a Wikipedia article. It just depends on the time one puts into it. I'm sure Alps will be honored if you atarted to create the article for him.

Max Rockatansky

Certainly it could, the page and forum have been online long enough to justify it.

Hunty2022

Me and my many other wikipedia accounts will help on the article!  :-D
100th Post: 11/10/22
250th Post: 12/3/22
500th Post: 3/12/23
1000th Post: 11/12/23

Hunty Roads (under construction):
https://huntyroadsva.blogspot.com

Mapmikey

Quote from: 1 on December 26, 2022, 08:26:08 AM
I don't think it is, especially since the more popular Minecraft Forum doesn't have one, but there's a shot. Keep in mind that the forum is not the only part of AARoads. AARoads is currently mentioned in a single sentence of the roadgeek article on Wikipedia, although that article is not US-specific.

We have at least 4 Wikipedia admins here and several experienced non-admin members. This helps with creating an article, although not with notability.

I can think of two or possibly three events where our forum affected the outside world, excluding the recent anti-kernals12 video which isn't notable enough:
1. Ken Jennings' 7 posts while researching things for writing the book Maphead.
2. That time we found out where a photo of a specific album cover was taken (East Hartford).
3 (questionable): US 20's quoted length being wrong for decades due to "3365" including alternate routes.
4. Rothman personally deciding that I-81 Business is going to be a thing in Syracuse.

I also believe 1995hoo has appeared in news articles, but that's just "same person as a forum member", not part of the forum itself.

4. Deciphering US 66's early endpoints in the Los Angeles area

Maybe it's the stroke recovery talking, but since I am responsible for #2, #3 and a major contributor to #4, maybe I should get a Wikipedia article.  :):):)

NE2

pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

Max Rockatansky

#7
Quote from: Mapmikey on December 26, 2022, 12:41:05 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 26, 2022, 08:26:08 AM
I don't think it is, especially since the more popular Minecraft Forum doesn't have one, but there's a shot. Keep in mind that the forum is not the only part of AARoads. AARoads is currently mentioned in a single sentence of the roadgeek article on Wikipedia, although that article is not US-specific.

We have at least 4 Wikipedia admins here and several experienced non-admin members. This helps with creating an article, although not with notability.

I can think of two or possibly three events where our forum affected the outside world, excluding the recent anti-kernals12 video which isn't notable enough:
1. Ken Jennings' 7 posts while researching things for writing the book Maphead.
2. That time we found out where a photo of a specific album cover was taken (East Hartford).
3 (questionable): US 20's quoted length being wrong for decades due to "3365" including alternate routes.
4. Rothman personally deciding that I-81 Business is going to be a thing in Syracuse.

I also believe 1995hoo has appeared in news articles, but that's just "same person as a forum member", not part of the forum itself.

4. Deciphering US 66's early endpoints in the Los Angeles area

Maybe it's the stroke recovery talking, but since I am responsible for #2, #3 and a major contributor to #4, maybe I should get a Wikipedia article.  :):):)

Amusingly I did point out the erroneous US 66 western endpoint history to someone on this forum that does edit Wikipedia pages. Obviously I hold a bias given I was also part sorting that whole mess out.  Does that mean Gribblenation ought to get an article stub?

skluth

I've written a few Wikipedia articles and edited several more, though it's been a while. All it takes is someone willing to put in the work for the page. I don't think there is a problem regarding justification giving that it's been used as a reference or at least those here have enough knowledge and have documented a lot of highway material, both current events and historic. I wouldn't consider the forum itself worth the effort but as part of a more encompassing page for all AA Roads. I'm sure there's more than enough for a decent page.

rschen7754

Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.

Rothman

Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

rschen7754

#11
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.

(Disclosure: I am an English Wikipedia admin)

Rothman

Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.
That seems extreme given it would be a page devoted to an obscure website.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Scott5114

uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Scott5114

#14
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:33:30 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.
That seems extreme given it would be a page devoted to an obscure website.

Speaking as a Wikipedia admin...it is extreme and also accurate.

rschen has a tendency to play it far too safe on this kind of thing, and I don't care as much about my admin rights there as I think he does, so I'll just come out and say it: there is currently a slow-moving campaign on Wikipedia to delete all of the road content. Some people view it as trivial, useless fluff, the same as entries for obscure Pokémon. So they want to purge the site of all of the road content to...I don't really understand why. Make the encyclopedia more pure, I guess? But they're willing to do things like willfully misinterpret or outright change the policies on proper sourcing and things like that to ensure that they get their way.

Even if the content is deleted from Wikipedia proper, it's not likely to disappear entirely, because open licenses and so on. However, the whole ordeal has a lot of the Wikipedia roads editors stressed out and some are ready to walk away from the Wikipedia brand over it.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 26, 2022, 04:37:37 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:33:30 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.
That seems extreme given it would be a page devoted to an obscure website.

Speaking as a Wikipedia admin...it is extreme and also accurate.

rschen has a tendency to play it far too safe on this kind of thing, and I don't care as much about my admin rights there as I think he does, so I'll just come out and say it: there is currently a slow-moving campaign on Wikipedia to delete all of the road content. Some people view it as trivial, useless fluff, the same as entries for obscure Pokémon. So they want to purge the site of all of the road content to...I don't really understand why. Make the encyclopedia more pure, I guess? But they're willing to do things like willfully misinterpret or outright change the policies on proper sourcing and things like that to ensure that they get their way.

Even if the content is deleted from Wikipedia proper, it's not likely to disappear entirely, because open licenses and so on. However, the whole ordeal has a lot of the Wikipedia roads editors stressed out and some are ready to walk away from the Wikipedia brand over it.

It seems kind of ridiculous to make it all-or-nothing. I-90 deserves an article under any circumstances, even if something like MN 286 doesn't.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

Max Rockatansky

#16
^^^

See, I'm of the opinion that every state-maintained highway probably deserves a dedicated page aside from some limited exceptions.  If a highway has a trackable history, to me it has merit.

Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.

(Disclosure: I am an English Wikipedia admin)

"Internal politics"  really is one of those things that screams to me that I was on the right track abandoning editing Wikipedia road articles a long time ago.  I really don't get what a lot of guys get out of doing Wikipedia edits when you could be doing your own thing with way less rules hanging over you. 

Scott5114

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 26, 2022, 04:57:37 PM
"Internal politics"  really is one of those things that screams to me that I was on the right track abandoning editing Wikipedia road articles a long time ago.  I really don't get what a lot of guys get out of doing Wikipedia edits when you could be doing your own thing with way less rules hanging over you. 

It does have its benefits and drawbacks. Benefits include the fact that the Wikipedia brand name will always bring you readers, and if your work is good enough it may well be exhibited on the front page where thousands of people will read it. (I've had two of my articles featured in this way.) And within the little project of roadgeeks, there's opportunity for collaboration, which is fun. (You don't necessarily have to make your own shields, maps, or even photos for an article; there's usually someone who is happy to do that for you.)

But the drawback is indeed All The Rules, and the people from the larger Wikipedia community who Don't Get The Roads Thing and try to make life rough for the roads editors for no real reason.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

ran4sh

#18
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 26, 2022, 04:57:37 PM
^^^

See, I'm of the opinion that every state-maintained highway probably deserves a dedicated page aside from some limited exceptions.  If a highway has a trackable history, to me it has merit.

Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 26, 2022, 04:28:05 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 26, 2022, 03:59:56 PM
Without going into details I would not recommend doing this at this time.
Found the vagueposter.

I am not sure exactly what I can say, but given the current internal politics of the site I think that an article would be deleted and it might encourage others to get more road articles deleted. Thus, I would advise against it.

(Disclosure: I am an English Wikipedia admin)

"Internal politics"  really is one of those things that screams to me that I was on the right track abandoning editing Wikipedia road articles a long time ago.  I really don't get what a lot of guys get out of doing Wikipedia edits when you could be doing your own thing with way less rules hanging over you. 

Same here, but including both road and non-road articles on WP.

Edit

If I do edit WP I aim for "malicious compliance", i.e. tagging articles with "citation needed" or "original research" or similar where necessary. Then when others object because they want the article to be featured or something, I cite the WP policy that you need a consensus to remove those tags. Sometimes the editors choose to remove the content if they can't find a reference, which is an acceptable outcome.
Control cities CAN be off the route! Control cities make NO sense if signs end before the city is reached!

Travel Mapping - Most Traveled: I-40, 20, 10, 5, 95 - Longest Clinched: I-20, 85, 24, 16, NJ Tpk mainline
Champions - UGA FB '21 '22 - Atlanta Braves '95 '21 - Atlanta MLS '18

Fredddie

It's also a handful of people springing up out of nowhere and deciding that road articles don't meet the verification policy. Suddenly they decided that you can't use maps as sources for *anything* without much of a discussion. We've fought back, but it's tiring trying to defend something that has been fine until recently.

skluth

Wikipedia has a huge amount of road articles. I haven't heard anything about removing them. Several of the articles selected for possible deletion include a lot of unsourced articles and others featuring obscure people. Things that look important like the 2014 World Cup Awards duplicate info found in other articles. I seriously doubt they're going to remove all the road articles; that sounds more like some new urbanist wacko plot with a few overloud squeaky transit wheels. Does anyone seriously think Wikipedia is going to remove an article about US 66 or the Trans-Canada Highway?

I could see them removing a lot of the individual highway pages. I doubt a page needs to be devoted to WI 108. I wouldn't be surprised to see several pages combined into a more omnibus highway page where several highways of lesser significance (e.g., WI 101-110) are combined into one page.

But I'm not interested in writing a AA Roads page myself. Like others, I don't want the hassle.


formulanone

Conflict of Interest would mean we really shouldn't create the article. If there's more popular hobby websites and forums that didn't make the cut, then it's a no-go.

J N Winkler

It sounds to me like keeping roads content on Wikipedia should take higher priority than having an entry for the AARoads forum.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

jeffandnicole

Many people still view Wikipedia as a half-accurate info site where the entries should be taken with a grain of salt.  If there's internal political issues, then it's not the issues that will make Wikipedia worse, it's the internal politicians that are fighting amongst themselves and don't give two shits about the general population.

Scott5114

#24
Quote from: skluth on December 26, 2022, 06:29:07 PM
Wikipedia has a huge amount of road articles. I haven't heard anything about removing them. [...] Does anyone seriously think Wikipedia is going to remove an article about US 66 or the Trans-Canada Highway?

I could see them removing a lot of the individual highway pages. I doubt a page needs to be devoted to WI 108. I wouldn't be surprised to see several pages combined into a more omnibus highway page where several highways of lesser significance (e.g., WI 101-110) are combined into one page.

The problem is that for a lot of minor highways, having length and location data on Wikipedia is the most accessible way of finding that data. Suppose I live in Wisconsin and I need a 108 for the lowest-route number game here, so I need to know whether WI 108 is close to me. Looking it up on Wikipedia is going to be way faster than digging around in whatever WisDOT route log system exists (if there is one–Oklahoma doesn't have anything like that because internally roads are categorized by control section number). Google Maps will sometimes reveal at least the location with a search, but it's hit or miss. Some states still have roadgeek-maintained route logs available, but even at the zenith of roadgeek websites not all states had one.

Given this, a system of "important highways are OK, but minor highways get deleted" is apt to lead to the important highways having no maintainers, since many of the people who currently do the maintaining would find that "compromise" unacceptable, and would just walk out.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.