The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Result of discussion was promote to A-class with 4 net support votes and no oppose votes. -- Kéiryn (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Utah State Route 68 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class

Nominator's comments: SR 68 has recently passed its good article, and I would like to see this as the projects next FA

Nominated by: Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments As a fellow Utahn who has driven this road from end to end a couple of times, my apologies for being tougher on you than I would on most. =-)

• IMO at least a couple of sentences should mention Point of the Mountain, which is currently not mentioned in either the SR-68 or I-15 articles. This road runs on the more gentler western slope of the Jordan River than used by the more well known I-15 through PotM. I have wondered if there is historical significance to the route of redwood road through the area, but I doubt it. The right-of-way directly paralleling the Jordan River (i.e. most likely used by travelers in the horse and wagon era) is the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad tracks. But it is notable that all the "good" ROW is in use by the railroad and Redwood road, and I-15 uses land higher up the cliff as a result, while crossing Point of the Mountain.

Also the article mentions Becks, Utah. Other than "beck street" I'm not familiar with this. Perhaps an explanation or removing it? According to my Benchmark atlas it's the name of the railroad siding at the north end of the Union Pacific Freight terminal in North Salt Lake, right at the Beck Street/I-15 interchange. If you want to just go with that the citation text would be Utah Road and Recreation Atlas (Map). 1:250000. Benchmark Maps. 2002. p. 43. § F8. ISBN 0-929591-74-7.</ref> Dave (talk) 04:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your right, there does need to be something on the Point of the Mountain, how ever, I am not familiar with the area. Regarding Becks, it appears we got that from [1] which lists it as a "city" near Beck road, in south North Salt Lake / north Salt Lake City. I'd say just remove it, but I am open to suggestions. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 15:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just remove. In all likelihood, it only exists as some designation on some USGS map that was drawn up years ago. The vast majority of locals have no idea that any such designation exists. DeFaultRyan (talk) 18:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changed Becks > North Salt Lake. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 18:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Becks was named after Beck's Hot Springs, the northern terminus of the Great Salt Lake and Hot Springs Railway. --NE2 21:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But does that make it a notable location? It may have been notable in past days, but it is almost completely unheard of today. There isn't even a WP entry for the location, and I haven't found any other web sites that reference it, apart from sites like hometownreport.com, onlineutah.com, and other places that appear to have parsed some list of USGS or census designated locations to produce a catalog of pages. Just because it's written down on some piece of paper in some filing cabinet, does that mean the location, for all intents and purposes, exists? DeFaultRyan (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability does not expire; once something is notable, it always is. --NE2 22:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was Becks, Utah ever notable to begin with? Or was it just a record-keeping oddity? The designation has only ever existed as a rail siding - not a town, nor a village, nor a community. It doesn't show up on addresses, zip codes, phone books, precincts, etc. Are all the USGS quadrangle names notable in any context outside of USGS maps? Would we ever refer to "Agate, Utah" as a location? How about "Ant Knoll, Utah"? DeFaultRyan (talk) 23:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The hot springs seems to have been notable. --NE2 09:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - "Becks" is technically in Salt Lake City and I've never heard that area being referred to as North Salt Lake, just to get that cleared up. Anyway, I would change Becks to "northern Salt Lake City" or something similar because I have never, ever, ever heard that area being called Becks. The area around 21st South and Redwood Road used to be called "Redwood" but that fell from popularity. There are a lot of obsolete neighborhood names in Salt Lake City, so why are we calling it Becks? CL — 23:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ... uh, what Ryan said above :) CL — 23:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I add my vote to the ones of "how is a rail siding notable". However, I'm ok with the current wording of the article too. My personal preference would be if the name "Becks" is going to stay, why not incorporate NE2's statement for context, rather than the location. How about something like "The road extended to Becks, a railroad siding and junction named for Beck's Hot Springs, the northern terminus of the Great Salt Lake and Hot Springs Railway." IMO that is more interesting than clarifying which side of the county line it's on.

On to the other point, I can try to work Point of the Mountain in if you'd like. Problem is I'm unaware of a formal definition for it. Most everybody who has spent any time in Utah has heard of Point of the Mountain, but I've never seen a formal definition. I'll try to dig up something. If It's ok with you I'll add it in. Dave (talk) 05:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point of the Mountain is the "point" of the Traverse Mountains formed by the water gap of the Jordan River. There's a similar one at Lake Point west of SLC. --NE2 09:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that's about all I can find from reliable sources on the net. I'm going to give this a shot. Admrboltz, just revert if you don't like it. For the record, according to the book "Utah Ghost Rails" (which hasn't let me down yet =-) ) the situation with the terminus at Becks was very temporary. It has two single line mentions.

First mention: Page 33, Chapter titled "Bamberger Railroad", "He (Simon Bamberger) organized the Great Salt Lake & Hot Springs Railway in 1890, and a year later had steam-drawn trains operating to Beck's Hot Springs, four miles north of the city limits. .... This initial venture was rather heady to Mr. Bamburger and he then proceed with the next phase of his plan..."

Second mention, page 58, chapter titled "Utah Light and Traction Company" "The year 1890 brought new troubles for the fledgling electrical operation in the form of competition. The Salt Lake Rapid Transit Company was ... offered a franchise for .... Beck's Hot Springs..." I've actually cut a lot out from these quotes, just enough for necessary context. Dave (talk) 02:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's more than just the rail terminus; [2] and [3] should have enough. --NE2 04:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm arguing details, not problems with the article. As such, this discussion can probably be moved to article talk page. The article itself is good. Dave (talk) 02:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments — Here are the comments from my review of the article.
  • The first mention of each highway type should be accompanied by the abbreviation used. This is done in the lead sentence with "State Route 68 (ST-68)…" but not for Interstate or US highways.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think we misunderstood each other on this one. You don't need to do the full name (abbreviation) thing every time, just for the first state route, US Highway and Interstate Highway. That way the abbreviation convention is used once with the full name of each type of highway, ideally that's something that would naturally pop up in the lead. (It's kinda like how the AP specifies a person's first and last name are used on first mention and last name only on subsequent mentions.) Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • D'uh! Fixed. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 00:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know the route description is supposed to be written south to north, but the common phrasing is a "north–south highway". Just a suggested change.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph of the lead should be expanded or merged into the first.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The southwestern shore of Utah Lake appears to the right as the road briefly turns northeast." You shouldn't use left/right directions in the RD. Please use compass directions.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a lot of "soons" in the prose of the RD. I would suggest a little bit of a copy edit for some variety in phrasing.
    • I only see two instances of soon... clarify? --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest breaking the history section into more than one paragraph, maybe just two
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is an extra space before a comma in the sentence: "Becks is the name of a rail siding, 4 miles (6.4 km) north of downtown Salt Lake , that briefly served as the terminus of a commuter rail line to Beck's Hot Springs.[6][7]" This sentence also has a mismatch in the decimal precision of the length conversion. Both measurements should have the same number of decimal places, and no more or less than the original measurement.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to see an introductory sentence before the Major intersection table. See what I did with M-28 (Michigan highway) or M-35 (Michigan highway) for what I mean.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a minor quibble, but in the Major intersections table the street names have the directions capitalized, but the few highway directions are in lowercase, i.e. " SR-140 east (14400 South)". It's my personal preference to always capitalize the first letter of a highway direction in these tables.
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Commonscat should be moved out of the infobox and to the External links section where it belongs according to Wikipedia:Wikimedia sister projects. (This has been mentioned at FACs.)
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 23:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article overall is very good, but any article can always be improved. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ready to Support promotion pending that one little note above on route abbreviations. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Wikipedia's preference to not capitalize directions; 14400 South is, on the other hand, like South Main Street - South is part of the name of the road. --NE2 23:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I could argue that the direction is part of the intersection name. It just looks very odd to me to have one but not the other capitalized when the new MUTCD-compliant signs have the initial letter larger/capitalized on the direction plates.Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Part of the intersection name"? As far as I know, the only named intersection here is Parkin Junction. --NE2 00:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Why do we need that note above the jct list? It's a bit redundant and not needed, provided you've read the whole article before it. None of the FAs such as I-70 in Utah, US-491, and all the NYSRs have this note above the jct list. CL — 01:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Sometimes a note is necessary, when there is a confusing or unusual situation with the road. But that's not the case here. If the note must stay IMO it reads better with "other state highways." Dave (talk) 16:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing. Probably jumping the gun here, but it's not any part of the USRD standards. IMO the section header "Major junctions" is sufficient. CL — 19:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments - Pretty good overall, a few things that can be improved:
  • In the lead: "linking U.S. Route 6 (US-6) to all of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area's major freeways and expressways and to US-89." The "and to US-89" part seems to not fit in well with the rest of the sentence. You may want to reword this.
    •  Done per convo on IRC --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 05:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first paragraph of the route description is a bit dry, though this may just be the fact it's describing the road in a very rural area of Utah.
    • Its just dry... --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 05:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may want to add a citation to the third paragraph in the route description. - Algorerhythms (talk) 00:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 05:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Algorerhythms (talk) 13:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Problems I gave over days on IRC have been solved. Good luck!Mitch32^(UP) 01:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• More comments - Alright, don't shoot me for these -
  • No refs in the lead.
  • That said, some of the stuff in there should be moved to their respective sections (the AADT and traffic stuff, and the construction info. Those should be moved to the RD and history, respectively)
  • I don't see how the I-215 image pertains to this article; sure, it's the Redwood Road exit, but that's about it. We don't see any part of that road; all we get is a sign with the SR-68 shield.
  • Refs are always, always past the punctuation mark. I'll fix this last one. CL — 04:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• One more thing; do we need the subheaders in the RD? Two of them only have one paragraph in them. I find em unnecessary, but that's just me - CL — 04:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]