439:. His argument is that highways cannot have their history covered in an article separate from the main article on the highway. He demands that the historical, political and sociological aspects of a policy policy debate that has lasted three decades can only be viewed only through the distorted prism of the "highway buffs" that staff WikiProject U.S. Roads. His remarks on the talk page show a two-step plan: first to merge the the MD 200 article togther with the two daughter articles, and then to drastically edit the combined article back to minimize coverage of the controversy. His comrade Imzadi1979 proposed for after the merger "My serious suggestion is that if anything additional is added from here out to the articles, something minor is removed. For every new piece of information, a minor detail is removed, and transferred to the talk page. Every quotation, especially all of the block quotes, needs to be examined. Most of them should be paraphrased and summarized." This is exactly the opposite of
630:
interstate highway designation, but because of the financing and timing of this highway, it was recently given only a state route designation. (The freeway segment immediately to the west of the toll portion is
Interstate 370.) So this highway, and its history, is much more complex than the other state highways in Maryland. Given the number of press articles over thirty years, it is clearly notable.
629:
If editors what to spend their time producing articles documenting
Maryland state roads, I applaud them. But other editors want to write about Maryland politics and public policy debates, which should be valued on Knowledge (XXG) as well. In most states, a highway of this nature would have an
451:
all of which support in-depth coverage of this topic as a stand-alone article. Instead of bragging that other controversial highway articles give only brief coverage to such disputes, we all should be asking whether there is a systematic pro-highway bias in
Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of
158:
221:- Although the 2 articles could be merged having a separate article relating to the history of the Road is ok as long as there is sufficient information and sources to do so and there seems to be plenty here. --
257:
528:. That is not the case here. The question here is whether it is better to put the content of the discussion on the history of the route in the article, or whether the article is improved by
304:
152:
119:
48:, as this wasn't really a deletion discussion anyway. I also see no consensus below for a merge, but that's what article talk pages are for, so normal editing begins...NOW.
281:
92:
87:
96:
460:
to generate separate state-specific articles for each state's segment of long-distance U.S. roads, even when they don't need to be split on account of article size.
79:
189:
Do not need separate article on history of route. Like the opposition article, the information can be condensed and covered in a section of the
427:
on July 23, 2009. Recently, I attempted to improve the article by added a proper lead, adding a construction history section and conformed to
173:
140:
381:
The MD 200 article is 77K long and the
History of MD 200 article is 32K long, so the merged article would probably be more than 100K.
83:
648:
There are highways more notable than MD 200 that are not split into several articles describing the history, route description, etc.
17:
558:
508:
403:
268:
247:
668:
661:
639:
611:
604:
586:
562:
545:
512:
491:
469:
407:
390:
370:
347:
319:
296:
272:
251:
230:
213:
206:
134:
61:
130:
75:
67:
683:
496:
To clarify a factual error, it is not the policy of USRD to superfluously split articles, but rather the opposite. See
239:
We don't need a separate history article for a state highway article. No other highway article in the U.S. has this. --
36:
180:
363:
533:
682:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
541:
146:
635:
582:
555:
505:
482:
465:
400:
386:
358:
338:
265:
244:
524:-- The main problem with the Opposition article that I saw that made it worth deleting was that the
452:
transportation controveries. Finally, I wish to note that WikiProject U.S. Roads frequently applies
656:
599:
201:
166:
537:
432:
355:
The MD 200 article is not so large that the content of this article needs to be split out of it.
190:
453:
448:
440:
424:
497:
315:
292:
226:
56:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
525:
395:
Well, if all the fluff was deleted from MD 200, the merged article would be much shorter. --
631:
578:
552:
534:
since no other U.S. roads articles have history subarticles that this one shouldn't either
502:
477:
461:
436:
397:
382:
333:
262:
241:
529:
457:
444:
428:
651:
594:
591:
The article does not need expansion, it needs the trimming of unnecessary information.
196:
311:
288:
222:
50:
113:
550:
You fail to answer the question of why this article should remain separate. --
530:
summarizing and putting more detailed information in a separate article
258:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Opposition to
Maryland Route 200
474:
Can you please discuss the article, and not other editors? Thanks.
676:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
435:. I then nominated the article for GA, which drew the wrath of
109:
105:
101:
165:
577:
I will continue to expand the article if it is kept.
305:
179:
431:by repeating the lead as the "History" section of
532:. I disagree with Rschen7754 when he states that
330:for the same reasons I gave at the previous AfD.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
686:). No further edits should be made to this page.
282:list of Maryland-related deletion discussions
8:
303:Note: This debate has been included in the
280:Note: This debate has been included in the
423:- This article was created when applying
302:
279:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
526:subject of the article was biased
498:Talk:Interstate 8#Merge proposal
1:
328:Summarize, merge and redirect
76:History of Maryland Route 200
68:History of Maryland Route 200
703:
669:23:33, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
640:17:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
612:03:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
587:01:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
563:20:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
546:20:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
513:06:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
492:06:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
470:06:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
408:09:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
391:09:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
371:16:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
348:02:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
320:02:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
297:02:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
273:01:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
252:01:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
231:00:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
214:23:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
62:00:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
679:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
433:Maryland Route 200
191:Maryland Route 200
322:
308:
299:
285:
694:
681:
667:
664:
659:
654:
610:
607:
602:
597:
490:
487:
480:
369:
366:
361:
346:
343:
336:
309:
286:
212:
209:
204:
199:
184:
183:
169:
117:
99:
44:The result was
34:
702:
701:
697:
696:
695:
693:
692:
691:
690:
684:deletion review
677:
662:
657:
652:
649:
605:
600:
595:
592:
486:
483:
478:
475:
437:User:Rschen7754
364:
359:
356:
342:
339:
334:
331:
207:
202:
197:
194:
126:
90:
74:
71:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
700:
698:
689:
688:
673:
672:
671:
643:
642:
623:
622:
621:
620:
619:
618:
617:
616:
615:
614:
568:
567:
566:
565:
518:
517:
516:
515:
494:
484:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
412:
411:
410:
374:
373:
350:
340:
324:
323:
300:
276:
275:
254:
187:
186:
123:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
699:
687:
685:
680:
674:
670:
666:
665:
660:
655:
647:
646:
645:
644:
641:
637:
633:
628:
625:
624:
613:
609:
608:
603:
598:
590:
589:
588:
584:
580:
576:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
570:
569:
564:
561:
560:
557:
554:
549:
548:
547:
543:
539:
538:Algorerhythms
535:
531:
527:
523:
520:
519:
514:
511:
510:
507:
504:
499:
495:
493:
489:
488:
481:
473:
472:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
450:
446:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
419:
418:
409:
406:
405:
402:
399:
394:
393:
392:
388:
384:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
372:
368:
367:
362:
354:
351:
349:
345:
344:
337:
329:
326:
325:
321:
317:
313:
306:
301:
298:
294:
290:
283:
278:
277:
274:
271:
270:
267:
264:
259:
255:
253:
250:
249:
246:
243:
238:
235:
234:
233:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
215:
211:
210:
205:
200:
192:
182:
178:
175:
172:
168:
164:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
132:
129:
128:Find sources:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
58:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
678:
675:
650:
626:
593:
551:
521:
501:
476:
420:
396:
357:
352:
332:
327:
261:
240:
236:
218:
217:
195:
188:
176:
170:
162:
155:
149:
143:
137:
127:
55:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
479:Imzadi 1979
335:Imzadi 1979
153:free images
632:Racepacket
579:Racepacket
462:Racepacket
383:Racepacket
312:• Gene93k
289:• Gene93k
256:Also see
193:article.
627:Comment.
454:WP:SPLIT
449:WP:EVENT
441:WP:SPLIT
425:WP:SPLIT
120:View log
223:Kumioko
159:WP refs
147:scholar
93:protect
88:history
51:postdlf
131:Google
97:delete
653:Dough
596:Dough
536:. --
458:WP:SS
445:WP:SS
429:WP:SS
353:Merge
237:Merge
198:Dough
174:JSTOR
135:books
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
636:talk
583:talk
559:7754
556:chen
542:talk
522:Keep
509:7754
506:chen
500:. --
466:talk
456:and
447:and
421:Keep
404:7754
401:chen
387:talk
316:talk
293:talk
269:7754
266:chen
260:. --
248:7754
245:chen
227:talk
219:Keep
167:FENS
141:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
57:talk
46:KEEP
310:--
287:--
181:TWL
118:– (
663:72
658:48
638:)
606:72
601:48
585:)
553:Rs
544:)
503:Rs
468:)
443:,
398:Rs
389:)
365:C
318:)
307:.
295:)
284:.
263:Rs
242:Rs
229:)
208:72
203:48
161:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
634:(
581:(
540:(
485:→
464:(
385:(
360:V
341:→
314:(
291:(
225:(
185:)
177:·
171:·
163:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
138:·
133:(
125:(
122:)
116:)
78:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.