This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Add ((WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)|class=|importance=|atlanta=|atlanta-importance=)) project banner to Atlanta-related articles to talk pages and assess.
Maintain and further improve articles already of high-quality.
This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Not exactly sure why this was merged, but I see NE2 has proposed a split of the Athens loop material into its own article. I also think it should be split into its own article. What do other people think? TCN7JM22:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had asked in either the IRC channel or the WikiProject and was told that it should be merged into this page. If it should not be so, then can someone explain their reasoning? Thanks. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 23:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I support splitting out the Athens loop as it has enough of a description and history independent of the SR 10 article to have its own article. Dough487200:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am unsure if it should be re-split out, but, if it gets done or not, it needs a major rewrite. Also, the exit list needs to be revamped correctly. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 00:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What about it needs a major rewrite? I just wrote the bulk of that route description last December. It has the citations and everything. All it needs is to be touched up, and a couple of missing citations added, if you ask me. TCN7JM16:31, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought it needed a rewrite. It definitely needs some touching up, but I defer to one of you more experienced editors. If you read the "Bannered routes" section, you will see that there used to be another loop in Washington. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support splitting. It's a beltway, more important than SR 10 (which is mostly a carrier route for US 78). Also: are there other SR 10 Loops? If not, the disambiguation is unnecessary. --NE211:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This page is getting long, what I think is that:
Each county segment shall become separate articles except for Columbia and Richmond counties
There shall be a separate article for the concurrency of U.S. Routes 78 and 278 for both segments
Oppose—this highway is only 172 miles in length, so the content just needs to be trimmed down. We don't need a turn-by-turn-by-turn description of the route of a highway at this level of unending detail. There's no precedent for county-level sub articles, nor should there be. Imzadi 1979→22:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to put this in perspective, the following Featured Articles are on highways that are similar in length or longer than this one:
So if we can write articles judged to be "Wikipedia's finest work" on these highways without the need to further split them, then we can do the same for this highway. Additionally, this is far from the only article on a highway in Georgia that has suffered from needless verbosity. They all need to be fixed because no one will bother to read these endless walls of text. Imzadi 1979→22:56, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.