Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Khayyam Expressway

The article Khayyam Expressway has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Poorly sourced article about a one mile highway. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. Fails the relevant notability rules.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

change in junction list formatting

would it make more sense to do {{UK road|A6}}{{UK road|A582}} [[Preston, Lancashire|Preston]], [[Bamber Bridge]] instead of {{jct|country=GBR|A|6|A|582|location1=[[Preston, Lancashire|Preston]]|location2=[[Bamber Bridge]]}} since the second of the two make the road number signs different sizes and doesnt support B roads so surely the{ {UK road}} template makes more sense? a I have already done this on the M65 motorway Jabba550  ✉ Talk to me :D 13:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jabba550: I would disagree with that change. If there is a graphic missing for a specific B road, then if it's actually signed, that graphic should be created and uploaded. {{jct}} is the preferred template for many accessibility and other reasons, and {{UK road}}'s use should be deprecated. Imzadi 1979 → 23:18, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

The {{jct}} provides the same functionality BUT the signs end up different sizes the {{UK road}} is far more consistent with the sign sizes and supports all roads including those without specific graphics Jabba550  ✉ Talk to me :D 08:10, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

plus it compresses the page, m65 motorway had a 451 byte decrease Jabba550  ✉ Talk to me :D 09:02, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

The signs should have a consistent height, which for UK roads means different widths. That's not a bug, it's a feature. The other template relies on stylized text instead of graphics, and that's not ideal. First, the graphics use the correct typography and actually look like the signs do in reality, and second, jct produces an unstylized link, which readers know is actually a link. UK road applies formatting to the links it generates and hides the fact that the text is a link. That's not a good idea. As for any size decrease, that's not significant because it just means fewer characters were typed into the code for the page and nothing more, and it's not even a big decrease.

Now, is the B6434 actually signed with that number, or is that designation hidden? If it's the latter, then the article was correct before and we don't need a graphic created. If it is signed, then someone can create the missing graphic in just a few moments. Either way, the article should be reverted back. Imzadi 1979 → 00:32, 12 June 2026 (UTC)