Talk:Missouri Route M (Jefferson County)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jeffco Scenic Byway[edit]

I can understand that this article covers a rather minor route, but it could be merged with the Missouri Route 21 article. Both are a part of the Jefferson County Scenic Byway, and this could be a nice addition to that article. Or, the byway could have its own article, with this article merged with it. Writing such an article could take some time though. Dy 162.5 (talk) 20:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As they say, this highway is the exception that proves the rule, the notable route from a non-notable set. --NE2 04:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So do you support the inclusion of MO SSRs in Wikipedia? --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of question is that? --NE2 05:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm just wondering what your position is on that. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On what? Obviously I support the inclusion of this one. --NE2 06:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But what about MO SSRs in general? --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What does that have to do with this article? --NE2 15:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is an article about a MO SSR. Including one article about a MO SSR implies that having articles about other MO SSRs is okay. After all, there's a precedent for it! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lay off the crack... --NE2 22:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If MO SSRs are not supposed to be a part of Wikipedia, then that should be listed on the Missouri State Highways WikiProject page. I didn't know that before writing this article. The reasons why I think that this article should exist is because it is a major arterial road, linking two freeways, plus it is a part of the Jeffco Scenic Byway. M is one of the very few MO SSRs that should deserve its own article. Dy 162.5 (talk) 22:32, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly! You did well; Rschen7754 and Scott5114 seem to see things as binary choices. --NE2 23:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was listed there at one point; it seems to have been removed recently or perhaps I'm thinking of another page. I'll see if I can track it down in the history or figure out where I got the idea that it was there. But are we all agreed here—because I don't want to find out this and think it's all resolved only to find that there's still people unhappy about it—that the vast majority of SSRs are indeed unworthy of an article?—Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 17:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Removed by User:O on March 18, 2007 (diff). I don't know why he did that; it seems like a guideline we should have. I reincorporated it into the Missouri project page, with a little addition. So now the guideline there now states that for a lettered route to have an article it should be in Kansas City, Springfield, or St. Louis (and after a year of living in Springfield, I doubt that any of the routes there really merit an article) and can justify having an article on their own merits. Route M falls into the St. Louis area, barely, and you could say that being part of a scenic byway and being a multilane route (wow, that looks weird on the MoDOT map) could justify having an article. Dy 162.5, does this seem like a fair guideline to you? —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That seems reasonable. I don't know of any other multilane SSRs, though MM, west of M, is being upgraded to four lanes from route 21 to route 30. I think that the city limitation is too... limiting, though. Jefferson City, Columbia, Cape Girardeau, as well as several other metro/micropolitan areas in the state could have some notable SSRs. Dy 162.5 (talk) 04:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan article?[edit]

I just noticed that this article is tagged as an orphan. It is not, though. The Route 21 page links here, as well as a couple others. I really do not know why this was tagged so. If there is no valid reason for this tag, I will remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dy 162.5 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Missouri Route M (Jefferson County). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Missouri_Route_M_(Jefferson_County)&oldid=1203502775"