Talk:U.S. Route 66 in Arizona
{{GA|23:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)|topic=Transport|page=1|oldid=930653945}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|listas=U.S. Route 66|
{{WikiProject U.S. Roads|state=AZ |type=US66 |type1=trail |class=GA |importance=Mid |needs-jctint=no |needs-map=no}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low|AZ=Yes|AZ-importance=high}}
{{WikiProject National Register of Historic Places |importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Ghost towns|importance=Low}}
}}
2006 comments by SPUI
According to arizonaroads.com:
- [http://www.arizonaroads.com/us/us66.html US 66] decommissioned 1985
- but [http://www.arizonaroads.com/arizona/az66.html SR 66] formed 1984?
Can't find anything else :( --SPUI (T - C - RFC - Curpsbot problems) 08:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
:{{ping|SPUI}}: I'm sorry a reply came 13 years after your originally inquiry, but I believe I have the answer you're looking for. US 66 was decommissioned by ADOT in 1984, but was recognized by AASHTO until 1985. Often times, states and AASHTO don't always see eye to eye with designations. Another example was the fact AASHTO recognized the eastern terminus of US 66 being at I-40 and US 666 in Sanders from 1979 to 1985, while ADOT recognized the western terminus as being at I-40 and US 93 in Kingman from 1979 to 1984. Since ADOT no longer recognized US 66 as an active US Highway starting in 1984, it made sense for SR 66 to be designated in its place from the moment ADOT recognition of US 66 ended. -MatthewAnderson707 (talk|sandbox) 22:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Major additions and partial reorganization of the history section
I used some resources I've gathered for writing on other U.S. Highways in Arizona to spruce up the history a section a bit. However, I only reorganized and updated the origins of Route 66 in Arizona and the origins plus details of Historic Route 66. Because I'm currently trying to re-write the entire history section of U.S. Route 70 in Arizona to meet Featured Article status, this is as far as I'm going to take it for now. If anyone else would like to take over the improvement of this Route 66 article, by all means, please do so. I'll be busy with US 70 for the foreseeable future. I'd like to add as a final note, I also provided a new map of Route 66 as well as a KML file. Hope this helped a little. -MatthewAnderson707 (talk|sandbox) 01:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
:Update: I re-wrote the entire history section to GA Article standards. When I get the chance, I plan on doing the same with the Route Description. I'm not doing this for my own personal benefit, I'm doing it because I feel like it's time US 66 got a good article. The mother road deserves her respect. -MatthewAnderson707 (talk|sandbox) 21:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
{{Talk:U.S. Route 66 in Arizona/GA1}}
Anachronisms
Do we care about anachronisms in the infobox? Or should the infobox only list junctions that existed when US66 was an active route? I ask, as on the national U.S. Route 66 we do care about anachronisms. The infobox in that article has an (in 1947) next to the major junctions, and the infobox represents junctions as they were in 1947. However, in this article there are at least three highway junctions in this infobox that did not exist until the 1990s, years after US 66 was decommissioned, those are SR 89 at Ash Fork (would have been US 89 at the time), SR89A at Flagstaff (again would have been US89A at the time) and US 191 at Sanders (would have been US 666 at the time). I can see valid arguments either way. Listing the modern designations would aid someone attempting to trace the route on Google Maps, etc. However, there's value in how the national US66 article handles it too. Which way should this article go? Thoughts? Dave (talk) 21:02, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
:Personally, I ponder it this way. If Wikipedia existed decades earlier, we'd have updated the articles as each truncation was made, and then certain details would have been fixed in place when the designation was decommissioned, including the designations at the junctions. As time passed, new facets would have emerged to be added, like the tourism/historic route/popular culture/etc. I don't think that we'd have gone back post-decommissioning to revert content to an earlier year.
:So applying this to US 66, I figure that the infobox would reflect the final pre-decommissioning status of the highway for each state as would the junction list tables, although the map might reflect former alignment/greatest extent. (See U.S. Route 33 in Michigan for a map showing the greatest extent or County Road 492 (Marquette County, Michigan) for former alignments.) The notes in the junction list may say something like "Now SR 89" to give context for the junction in Ash Fork. Imzadi 1979 → 02:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
::Yeah. These days, I generally try to follow Imzadi's rule when it comes to US 66 and the sections of old US 80 marked as a historic route officially by states in the same fashion as US 66, (which with US 80 is currently just California and Arizona). At some point, People, when they see a historic route, generally like to think of the highway as it was in its prime, before the interstate came around. Far as I'm concerned, any route up to the first section of Interstate opening up with these designated historic routes should be fine. I know in the past, I tried to do this with several highways, and wrote US 80 in New Mexico that way (which I intend to eventually re-work into reflecting US 80 in 1989 when NMDOT stopped recognizing it as an active highway), but I've changed my approach to try and stay more in line with the standard.— MatthewAnderson707 (talk|sandbox) 17:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)