For the record, all the tagged pages I listed on 4 Oct 2011 appear now to have been dealt with.

Thanks to whoever took care of that.

And for further record, the template in question is called Template:Delete Me.

Delete Me tag added to A1016 (Shoeburyness)!

We've usually kept confirmed mapping errors, but tagged them appropriately, so that no-one goes back in a few months time and re-adds them.

Steven

Still tagged as "dispute" rather than an error. Another "A108 in Ilford" situation!

BTW I have been this way on foot.

Think Occam's Razor:

from among competing hypotheses, selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions usually provides the correct one, and that the simplest explanation will be the most plausible until evidence is presented to prove it false.

Yes, "disputed numbers" means ones that we don't believe are correct. Unless we get official confirmation, we cannot say more that the A1018 is probably a mapping error, with a 99% certainty..

I think many in Sunderland may disagree with you...

A1018?



Seriously, how about getting rid of the entries for known mapping errors and redirecting them all to a single Wiki article on the lines of "List of known mapping errors"? I can do this - have had years of editing stuff on the 'real' Wikipedia.

Think of it this way - can you say, with 100% utter certainty, that the number was NEVER allocated (even in error) to that stretch of road in Shoeburyness? Can you say with 100% utter certainty that the B4454 never, ever existed?

You could redirect all of them, but you'd need the page to exist anyway, so you might as well add the details there and just stick it in the right category - a separate list seems to me like double the work to keep up-to-date, as all the information captured on the road page needs to be captured anyway.

I'm glad you've never edited stuff on the 'fake' Wikipedia by the way - that would be awful! There is only one Wikipedia, but lots of Wikis.

Ha, of course there is only Wikipedia!

OK, maybe keep some of the details, eg. route, coords, but I see no reason for adding such things as the A1000-A1999 box at the bottom.

Think of it this way, if you were following the route of the M25 on Google Maps and you found a spur numbered M21, would you really need an article on the Wiki for that? Remember the only source for "A1016" in the Southend area is Google, just like the only source for "A108" in Ilford was A-Z (IIRC).

So you can access similarly numbered routes really easily? There's exactly the same reason as for any other road article.



Yes. It would say something like "M21. The M21 is a mapping error shown on Google Maps around 2012 for the spur from the M25 to the A21 at junction 4." Just like, say, the A36(M) article.

The point is that if we want to be the UK's key reference on road numbering, we have to expect that someone might ask a question about any road number, including incorrect ones. If Google were to mislabel a road as M21, we should have a page about it, so that anybody who thinks to themselves "M21 sounds a bit weird, I wonder whether it's correct?" can look at the SABRE wiki and read our page that would say no, it's not.

Completely agree with this

You'd also have a {{Member Site}} Template directing you to a certain website that apparently nobody reads... </wishful thinking>

Complete tangent, but still of relevance. Should the page not also mention that M21 was used in an episode of the proper Captain Scarlet in the 1960s?

On the subject of Shoeburyness, is Campfield Road actually A13? I was always under the impression this is a former route, and the A13 now ends at an end-on junction with the B1016. That's how I wrote what became the current SABRE Wiki article.

I believe you are quite right, Yoxley. Although the A13 extended as far as Shoeburyness railway station pre-WWII, it is AFAIK at least 50 years since it last ran any further east than its junction with the B1016 (at TQ931849).

Hmm,, that would mean the map shown in the A1016 Shoeburyness article is wrong!

Blame OpenStreetMap - it's their current mapping.

Is it possible to use another map? For instance, I notice the OS maps on FlickR seem to be labelled accurately.

It's possible to use a whole pile of different mapping - but not current OS maps. The instructions on how to change, and the different layer names are in the Wiki help.

Alternatively, you could just change it on OSM - that way its right not just for us, but for all the other OSM users.