There's no need to use the ~~~~ code in articles - it's for signing talk pages. There's no need to record what you wrote on the pages themselves as we can extrapolate this from the page's history. :) M5lenzar 17:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think we should be splitting more pages into multiple route sections. The A1 is barely long enough to justify it and we certainly don't have enough content to do the same with the A38. One route page a road is enough IMHO. M5lenzar 23:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would disagree. I have managed to create 9 pages on the A82, most of which still don't cover the road in as much detail as I have to hand. The A82 is roughly half the length of the A38. As long as the original RD/updated page is left intact for those readers only interested in a quick overview, I suggest that if there are Sabristi with the information to create detail sections, then we should encourage it. I know that I could create a long page for the A38 from Bridgwater to Bristol with no difficulty.
- Shouldn't this be with the rest of the discussion? Rileyrob 07:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I very much support splitting pages for the F99, motorways or other key routes, not as a "must do", but on a "when someone has the time to write some extra content" basis Haydn1971 13:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Currently I'm holding fire with the A38 updates, I've found a few bits to work on that weren't done in the first place and I'm working on them first. I'll let the people decide if it's worth carrying on with it or diverting onto something else...Ravenbluemoon 22:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)