- Infobox
- Is it customary to include destination cities in the Major junctions rather than the city in which the junction is located?
- Normally it's the city the junction is located in, or an adjacent destination when the junction is located just outside the boundary of the place it is meant to serve. The Highway 16 junction is an example of this - it's immediately outside Johnstown and the route leads directly to Johnstown and the border crossing. As for Highway 401 (which is next to the Highway 16 junction), the alternative would be "near Prescott", a relatively minor community today. The sign at the southern end of Highway 416 reads "{401} West/Ouest Kingston".
- The closest community to the southern terminus is Johnstown, which is closer than Prescott. I do not think it is too much of a stretch to say the southern terminus of Highway 416 is "near Johnstown." I prefer that to saying "toward Kingston, Toronto" because Kingston is 100 km away. Also, I do not like the "to Canada-U.S. border" attached to Highway 16 because the border crossing that is a big deal is not there, but at I-81. VC 00:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- To be honest that sounds kind of counter-intuitive. The Highway 401 exit provides no access to Johnstown and the signs for it at the southern end of the highways say 401 Kingston. The Highway 16 exit provides access to the relatively minor community of Johnstown as well as to the minor border crossing, which I think still warrants mention here (and based on what you mentioned below in the RD section, you feel it is important to this highway in some manner). Both exits are just outside Johnstown though. Would a compromise of removing Toronto and possibly the border crossing be satisfactory? - Floydian τ ¢ 04:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The minor border crossing at Johnstown is important, but I do not think it is important enough to include in the infobox. Trucks traveling between Ottawa and Syracuse are not going to use that border crossing without a good reason. For the "to Kingston" issue, you have "in Ottawa" for the northern terminus. I think you should be consistent in your use of cities, and go by the standard of "where is this interchange located?" versus "where does this road lead?" VC 12:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Normally that works fine, but with the two major intersections at the bottom both in the minor community of Johnstown, its sort of redundant (particularily so since the 401 exit provides no access to Johnstown)... However, the signs at the 417 ends basically say "417 east to Ottawa", since you're in the suburbs of Ottawa Region at that point... Nepean I believe it's called. So would a compromise of consistency work; changing "in Ottawa" to "to Ottawa"? - Floydian τ ¢ 15:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That compromise works for me if you take out Kanata. VC 16:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. - Floydian τ ¢ 16:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 Done[reply]
- Lead
- "The freeway bypasses several communities..." This is technically correct, but it could be interpreted as the freeway does not provide access to the communities.
- Switched bypass to served, and mentioned the bypassing in the summary of the history under the bit on the new alignment built in the 60s and 70s. Done
- I would make clear at the start of the second paragraph that Highway 416 was built as a bypass of the original highway along the corridor, Highway 16.
- I think this should be more clear alongside the change mentioned above this. Done
- I would move the commemoration information prior to the opening of the last link to make the events chronological.
- Done Done
- Route description
- Much of the first paragraph is redundant with the first paragraph of the Lead. I would carve up the paragraph, consolidating details like some of the towns and the Stony Swamp with the other paragraphs of the RD and moving general themes and more important details to the Lead. The progressive (as in sequential, not Pink Floyd ;-) part of the RD is only four paragraphs, so I do not think you need an RD mini-lead.
- Done Done
- I think it is important to mention the international border crossing that is accessible via Highway 16. The Exit list mentions it, so the RD should as well.
- Agreed and done Done
- "are separated by an unconventional 68-metre (223 ft)-wide forested median" The word "unconventional" is subjective and not backed up by the source so it should be removed.
- Done Done
- I would include interchange types when you mention each exit. For example, "provided by a partial cloverleaf interchange with County Road 21" instead of "provided by an exit at County Road 21."
- I don't have any source for the interchange types. I find the naming of them to be much more subjective than declaring a median more than three times the standard 20 metres. To be honest, both are bad without a source, but the interchange types seems almost borderline fancruft to me.
- The aerial source is sufficient for the interchange types. They are not controversial statements, and they are not anything approaching cruft. Was not Ontario the birthplace of the parclo? That being said, everything except at the endpoints is nothing special, so you do not need to include the specific interchange types. However, interchanges include both exits and entrances, so you should use the term "interchange" instead of "exit." VC 00:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Rumour has it... though I've never been able to find any source on that nor even a date for the first one opening in Ontario. I've changed the instances of exit to interchange where applicable. - Floydian τ ¢ 04:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Done[reply]
- Is the stream the highway crosses just north of County Road 21 notable?
- Will check (I'm writing these responses from the comfy confines of my internet-free cottage on Saturday and am very likely forget to check when I get home Sunday evening. Just point this out to me if I do).
-
- "an exit with former Highway 43" First, the current designation of the road, County Road 43, should be used. Second, if you are going to state the route was formerly Highway 43, you need to provide a reference for that.
-
-
- "It passes over the old Bytown and Prescott Railway" The term "passes over" is incorrect because there is no overpass. The railroad has been pulled up, so you should say something like "the line of the former [B&P RW]."
- Good eye on ye. Fixed. Done
- There is no explicit reference to Highway 416 in the middle three paragraphs of the RD. I suggest replacing some of the "It"s with Highway 416, and include Highway 416 in the first sentence of each paragraph.
- Done Done
- "It crosses the Rideau River and enters the Ottawa region. At the southeast corner of the River Road interchange is the Veterans Commemorative Park, dedicated in 2000 by the Royal Canadian Legion." Swap these two sentences to restore the northward progression.
- Done Done
- "The median also narrows to a modest width for the remainder of the distance into Ottawa." The word "modest" is subjective and not backed by the source so it should be removed or replaced with a sourced, objective measure. Done
- "then 2 km (1.2 mi) later" I would remove this because it is an unnecessary detail and because the distance is wrong.
- Done Done
- "the freeway is crossed by the Prescott Highway" "an interchange with the latter provides access to the Prescott Highway" Is the highway called that at the crossing or where it intersects Bankfield Road? If not, the sentences should be reworded.
- Err... It passes beneath the highway, and can be accessed via the Bankfield interchange IIRC (I'm writing these responses from the comfy confines of my internet-free cottage on Saturday and am very likely forget to check when I get home Sunday evening. Just point this out to me if I do).
- Actually, it looks like the old road crosses over Highway 416, so "is crossed by" is not an issue. My issue is your use of the term Prescott Highway when it appears the road is named Prince of Wales Drive in the region of Ottawa. You should check whether the name of the road you are referring to is accurate at the point in the RD progression you use it. Also, in the phrase "an interchange with the latter," the term "latter" seems to refer to Bankfield Road. However, the interchange is with one road that changes names at the interchange. If you are referring to how following Bankfield Road (instead of Brophy Drive) leads to Prescott Highway/Prince of Wales Drive, then say that. VC 00:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The Prescott Highway is just the historic name for the road that was the original Highway 16. The portion within Ottawa was renamed Prince of Wales Drive sometime in the recent past, but its still the historic Prescott Highway that the article makes numerous references to throughout. I'll see what I can do to make this blurb more succinct. - Floydian τ ¢ 04:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
-
- "then abruptly jogs to the west" Abrupt sounds like a dangerous curve. I would replace abrupt with S-curve and try to keep the mention of the westward jog.
- Done, although I've always been bothered by using "S-curve" in an encyclopedic way. Done
- "The route curves to the east" I would mention an eastward jog via an S-curve here.
- As above Done
- "alongside the Stony Swamp, which acts" It is not clear whether "which" refers to the swamp or the bridge.
- Fixed Done
- The Richmond Road wikilink is broken.
- Fixed Done
- The Design features section seems a bit out of place. I suggest carving it up and moving bits and pieces elsewhere. The first and fourth paragraphs, which are general, can be moved to the History. The second and third paragraphs, which talk about specific locations, can be merged into the appropriate spots in the RD.
- Have to disagree here. Compared to other freeways in Ontario, Highway 416 has its share of unique features that were integral in the funding and construction of the highway. Even the MTO highlights this with numerous conferences and webpages. I believe it would be a disservice to the reader/article to fragment this section.
- I am going to address the Design features section, treating the comments here and in the History together, at the bottom of the review once all the other points are taken care of. VC 16:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will move onto the History a little later. VC 01:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I have a housekeeping request. Can you respond to each point immediately after each point? It is much more helpful to see the point and counterpoint (or "done") together than to have to piece them together from two different lists. Please do this for the comments below, but I would really appreciate it if you also went back and did it for the comments above as well. VC 03:58, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- No problemo. I've had editors complain about the lack of chronology when it's done the opposite way, so I never know who wants what :)
- History
- Because most of Highway 416 is an upgrade or bypass of Highway 16, I think we need more context from Highway 16 for the History to be comprehensive.
- What do you think would be good to throw in here? Right now the article starts with the coverage of the Super 2 bypass of the original Highway 16 alignment built in the 60s and 70s. The original alignment doesn't have too much to do with the freeway. However I can see adding a little bit about Highway 16 being the original route from Toronto to Ottawa. - Floydian τ ¢
- Most freeways are not placed along totally new corridors; rather, they supersede existing highways, which themselves superseded lesser roads. How far back does the Highway 16 corridor go? Was it a First Nations trail? When was Highway 16 put in its first modern form as part of the route from Toronto to Ottawa? Basically, I am looking for a paragraph describing the history of the corridor. VC 00:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, after trying to do this a few different ways (including a blurb before the Highway 16 New section), I think I've settled on a good way to accomplish this in a succinct way. Good to go. - Floydian τ ¢ 03:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I like it except for this sentence: "The important corridor between the Trans-provincial Highway (Highway 2) and Ottawa was known as the Prescott Highway until it was numbered in 1925." The sentence implies the Prescott Highway name was replaced instead of supplemented with a number designation. VC 16:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Sort of related, I just noticed the county road number designation of Prescott Highway is not mentioned in the Route description. Please mention the designations for L&G and, if relevant, Ottawa. VC 16:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Adjusted. How's it look now? Ottawa numbers it roads, but that seems to have stopped ever since the Region of Ottawa-Carleton became City of Ottawa c. 2001. It's just Prince of Wales Drive now it seems (Of course, I say this having never been to Ottawa). - Floydian τ ¢ 16:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Done[reply]
- Instances where "two lane" and other lane description adjectives are being used need a hyphen.
- Done. Done
- In Super two, the S is not capitalized.
- Fixed Done
- The last few sentences of the Change of plans section is redundant with the first paragraph of the Design features section. I suggest merging the contents under Change of plans.
- I summarized it a little better. Again I still feel this is a topic best covered separately from the history, as the changes are apparent in the design of the route and not just the savings on paper. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not think twinning necessarily involves the construction of interchanges, just adding a second carriageway, so the second clause of the second sentence of the first paragraph of Twinning and completion should be revised to not imply it does.
- Done. Done
- "Highway 43" Was the road part of Highway 43 in 1996? If not, you could clarify "former Hwy 43" or "what was then Hwy 43" or "what is now X"? Also, the redirect from the link does not seem useful to the user.
- "two flyover ramps" Clarify that these are the flyover ramps between 401 and 416.
- Done. Done
- The construction companies should not be linked because it is unlikely they will ever have articles.
- Done. Done
- I count opening dates for three sections of the highway, but there were five contracts. If multiple contracts opened the same day, can you explain that?
- There are four dates (June 12, 1997; June 26, 1998; August 24, 1998; and September 23, 1999). I'm not sure if the final date includes the section between Oxford Station Road and Shanby Road. I have combed long and hard to find something on the opening of that section, to no avail. - Floydian τ ¢ 05:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Done[reply]
- The third paragraph of Twinning and completion looks odd by itself. I would combine it with the next paragraph.
- Done. Done
- Why was Palladini reluctant to name the highway for veterans?
- I made some changes. The legislative hansard source doesn't quote his reasoning (if he gave any at all), but the paper source makes the connection to the other Veterans Memorial Highway in London and the general watering down of the honours given to veterans. I agree myself... they've lost their significance at this point. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC) Done[reply]
- What is significant about the mass vehicle pileup? Did it cause changes in procedures or anything permanent? It looks odd in its own paragraph like that.
- There doesn't seem to be anything that happened as a result of this. It was just a major incident. Pileups only happen once every five years or so in Ontario so they are generally big news stories. - Floydian τ ¢ 05:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Aside from the pileup, have there been any changes to the highway since 1999?
-
- Junction list
- Is the Highway 401 west exit marked as or officially Exit 0? If not, the Exit entry should be blank or dashed.
- Looks like the gore sign for Highway 16 is the last one (Exit 1). I think the 406 and 410 are the only freeways with an Exit 0 sign. Fixed. Done
- The second data row does not include Highway 401 toward Cornwall or Montreal or whatever the control cities are.
- Fixed... I think. Let me know if this setup works for you. Done
- Rideau River spans two Notes rows. This implies the bridge over the river is 2 km long, or the user might be confused for some other reason. I suggest either removing the river information—preferred, because the river and bridge do not look like a big deal—or create a dedicated row for the bridge/river.
- Fixed. Done
- The Queensway redirects to Highway 417, so The Queensway should not be wikilinked.
-
- There is still one instance of The Queensway linked. This is a major junction, so you should add control cities. I checked Google Streetview and several destinations are included on the signs. VC 00:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The links to the county or regional roads do not redirect to the proper places in the lists, but that seems to be a template issue, so I will not hold it against you.
- I can fix it relatively easy... should it redirect to the section of the article with the table of roads?
- Each link should redirect to a particular spot in the table of roads. For instance, L&G County Road 20 should redirect to the row in the table for that county road. VC 00:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a larger issue that I think I would have to address with a AWB run through every article. The list articles do not have anchors in the individual rows at the moment and that is quite a large amount of work. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:31, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- References
- Ref 7: Link directly to the map. The webpage looks like a self-published source.
- Fixed Done
- Ref 18: Using the current satellite imagery to support your assertion that the super two ended at that spot could be construed as WP:OR. I would try to find another way to support that.
- Added a second ref from the early 90s that shows the two alignments merging at that point Done
- External links
- The Google Maps reference is also the same as Ref 6.
- Removed Done
- Images
- The phrase "lest we forget" is not mentioned at all in this article. I think the sign should be described in the caption of the image that shows the sign. You can also mention the sign in the background is the French language version. (I was viewing the video of the person driving Highway 416 and I was surprised to see two blue signs in a row until I remembered the bilingualism.). The caption as you have it now, talking about the other memorial highways, can be modified and linked with Palladini's reluctance to name another memorial highway in the Twinning and completion section of the history.
- Done... let me know if this works. Done
- The other images and their captions seem fine, but it would be good if someone else did a formal image review before this goes to FAC.
- Wikilinking
- I have not put together anything empirical, but the wikilinking in the prose seems to be inconsistent in its frequency. My preference is to only wikilink each topic once; however, you can do whatever you want, as long as you are consistent, such as wikilinking each term once in the article, once per major section, once per subsection, etc.
- Generally I avoid multiple linking unless its an obscure topic that is mentioned in the lead and then not again until the bottom of the history.
- Then I will use that standard when I do my final sweep. In the meantime, I recommend you go through and check the wikilinking scheme and wikilink things that should be wikilinked but are not, like the Rideau River. VC 00:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I may have some more comments later. I plan to do a final sweep for grammar and other micro-level stuff once all the content stuff is addressed. VC 03:58, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added a few replies, but I'm still going. Just wanted to save this since my computer has had a bad history. - Floydian τ ¢ 01:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Alrighty, I've responded to everything. A few need your response, but we're getting close! - Floydian τ ¢ 06:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess that infobox issue is all that's left. I've tried a compromise to avoid listing the 401 interchange as being in a place that it doesn't provide access to. - Floydian τ ¢ 15:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I have responded to all remaining comments. There are two or three things left to resolve that are not Design features. I will start a Design features discussion a bit later. VC 16:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Responded to those and made fixes. - Floydian τ ¢ 16:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Design features
I thought about this some more and here are my thoughts on what to do with this section:
- I think the first paragraph belongs in the History. The paragraph is not well linked with the following three paragraphs and does not do a good job introducing them. The paragraph talks about cost-saving measures, but at least two and possibly all three of features described seem to be more expensive upgrades rather than cutting costs. Specifically, this paragraph can be inserted at the end of the second paragraph of the Change in plans section, with an additional statement that the review led to the construction of some of Highway 416's unique features.
- The other three paragraphs can remain where they are in the Design features subsection. Because the paragraphs are short, you may want to make them bullet points preceded by an introductory sentence or two about design features.
- The last two sentences of the third paragraph of the Route description proper should be integrated into the paragraph about the bridge at the Stony Swamp. Right now, the portland cement award is mentioned twice. If you are going to single out the bridge, you should concentrate the details in one spot in the article.
- The leda clay paragraph is fine, but the acronym CNR should be expanded and Blast made lowercase.
- The sloped cuts paragraph looks fine.
You may also want to add more design features or unique things about the highway (the Veterans Commemorative Park comes to mind) if you can get the information and can write two or three sentences on a topic. VC 01:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think the commemorative park would really qualify as a design feature. It's just a park with a cenotaph off to the side of an offramp. I've been searching for more, but so far nothing. - Floydian τ ¢ 04:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If you find anything else, you can add it later. For now, I will declare this issue closed. Next I will do a final sweep. VC 00:00, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Final sweep
- The search term King's Highway 416 does not redirect to this article, but it should because it is the first phrase in the article. You should also include the phrase Ontario Highway 416 bolded in the first sentence.
- Fixed redirect issue. "Ontario" is not part of the official highway name and is merely the CRWP naming standard to disambiguate this Highway 416 from other Highway 416s. - Floydian τ ¢ 07:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The phrase "Despite this" in the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Lead does not seem like the proper transition phrase. Can you either remove it or replace it with a transition phrase that does not imply "these are villages along the route despite best efforts to do or not do something"?
-
- In the first sentence of the RD, should "Leeds and Grenville" be prepended or appended with "United Counties" or something similar? It seems awkward not using a generic here.
-
- In the History, is there a reason "environmental assessment" is capitalized? It is not being used as a proper noun.
- Does the History mention when Highway 416 North was completed? Maybe I am having a blond moment, but I see construction ground to a standstill due to budget issues after overpasses were built, there was a review, then the remainder of construction info in the article is about Highway 416 South.
- I'm glad you caught that. I'm not sure if I added it at one point and it got deleted by some wonky edit... or if I never had it there in the first place. Regardless, the two opening dates for the northern section are now there. - Floydian τ ¢ 07:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not a fan of the order of information toward the end of the Change in plans section after you inserted the missing information; it is needlessly non-chronological. I suggest you rearrange the information by ending the second paragraph after "construction activity on Highway 416 came to a standstill for two years" as it was before. I would move the three sentences with the completion dates and cost to the end of the third paragraph and merge the sentence that starts "it was in this period" with the third sentence of the third paragraph. This will make the information more chronological and the third paragraph will be meatier. VC 19:47, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I did most of what you recommended, except the three sentences mentioning completion dates/cost have been moved to the very beginning of the "Twinning and completion" section. I think this makes a lot more sense in the overall structure of the article. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- MTO should be spelled out the first time it is used, then acronym thereafter. The first instance of MTO is in the Design features section.
Those issues should be it. I made some copy edits that you should look at and make sure I did not do anything adverse. VC 02:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
|
