User talk:CBessert

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

I'm gonna guess that you might be Chris Bessert of Michigan Highways. I'm very happy if that's the case. Michigan Highways is a great site and has been a valuable resource for several articles I've edited. Happy editting. older≠wiser 22:11, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Old BL I-96 (Farmington, MI)

Hi, I had a few questions about what might simply be a typo at the Michigan Highways site. While I would never put anything past "official" sources, I find it difficult to understand how the former BL route through Farmington could be internally designated as "Old I-96". I could easily understand "Old BL I-96" though. older≠wiser 02:51, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

I've made a couple modifications to the I-96 listing on the Michigan Highways site (thanks for the heads-up!) and added my thoughts to the "OLD BL I-96 (Farmington, MI)" discussion page. CBessert 04:45, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Christopher Bessert? is that you? I have been visiting your Michiganhighways website quite frequently. You can help contribute to Wikipedia by dumping info from your site. --SuperDude 06:06, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I am the same Chris Bessert from the Michigan Highways site. I have actually been contributing here for over a year, mostly to Michigan highway-related pages, however I don't feel "dumping info from my site" is appropriate for many reasons. First, it has taken me a LONG time, a LOT of research and even a great deal of my own MONEY to assemble the website you visit frequently. Yes, it's a labor of love and I don't mind sharing the information with everyone, but to simply "dump" info from there would be a disservice to all involved. Second, I have, unfortunately, found quite a bit of data directly copied from my site and pasted here without anyone asking first or even being cited as a source. I provide my site as a public service, free of charge, and find it very frustrating when people simply copy-and-paste my hard work over here without even asking or citing. I *will* keep contributing, but only as I have the time, as I am still working hard on my own sites. I also try to check back here every so often to correct the most egregious errors I find. CBessert 23:09, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Next time, when you reply to somebody's message, don't write it in your own talk page. Lots of people have performed this mistake.

Instructions on how to contact other Wikipedians:

1. Click a username
2. Press Discussion
3. Press the + button, type your message then save it like you save edited articles.

--SuperDude 01:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Please contribute to Wikibooks

Since you know alot about Michigan's highway system, you should describe the features of Michigan's road signs in Wikibooks. --SuperDude 04:18, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Michigan State Highway Shields

I notice that there are no shields on Wikipedia for Michigan State Highways. Like we have for the Interstates, perhaps larger images (PNG images, similar to this File:Interstate15.png and others, provided by Kamlung) of these signs could be made, which can be scaled down as needed. The 120x120 markers on your page here are also quite good. -- Fogger 02:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Clarification

Hi, Chris. Just wanted to clarify the reason I put the webmaster's name by the webpage I bookmarked was so I wouldn't be accused of copyright infringement. Have a good day. (unsigned comment from Igo4U)

Interstate 375

As a GIS major deeply enthused in urban geography and cartography, I have visited your highway site many times before to learn details about Michigan’s highway system. When I went to revamp the article for I-375, I was quickly scolded for borrowing information from your site and using that information to expand the article. Although your website was cited, the information was not reproduced verbatim as someone else had so blatantly mentioned, and they reverted my edit to a previous miniscule version. There was information incorporated from several websites, and some pieces of the information came from your site. So, with your permission, I would like to expand only the I-375 article using pieces of your hard-earned information. If you don’t approve, I’ll just redo the article promptly without crediting or using any of your work. (Notorious4life 04:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC))

Correction: the majority of the article in question was in fact taken word-for-word from Michigan Highways. That is what I was objecting to. Here is the diff of what Notorious added [1]. Here are links to the relevent pages at Michigan Highways: [2] [3] I think it is pretty clear that most of the added information came word-for-word from Michigan Highways. And for reference, since Notorious archives his talk page with remarkable speed (without responding to me directly, I might note), here is a link to what I wrote there. older≠wiser 13:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I've read both entries above and I have to agree with 'Bkonrad' in that there were several long strings of text lifted directly from my website verbatim, including phrases and syntax that are rather unique to my writing style. I also agree with his decision to revert the changes and, further, he is 100 percent correct in his characterization of the work I've put into my website over the past eight years. Mind you, I am also a contributor here on Wikipedia and have spent many hours adding to and correcting articles, many of them Michigan highway-related and I plan to continue to do so as much as I possibly can. I believe in this project and want to help if I can. However, as was pointed out, I have not only spent countless thousands of hours of my own free time, but also many thousands of dollars (in webhosting fees, in the purchasing of books and maps and in the travel required) in documenting the highways of Michigan for the website. I have made this material available freely to anyone on the Internet, so please do excuse me if I find it rather disturbing when people directly copy information from my site. I would encourage anyone, including 'Notorious', to write all the original articles you'd like, but please don't copy word-for-word. Thanks. CBessert 18:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Fan club on MySpace

I have a fanclub on MySpace called the "Interstate road fan club", you should start a MySpace account and join the club. The Interstate road fan club is a place where roadfans share information about highways and stuff like that.

Thanks, but I'll have to pass. Not only do I have a full-time career and a family which is on the way to getting larger soon, I maintain three huge websites, I contribute to Wikipedia, I have a social life, and I communicate with other "roadgeeks" via other, much more established forums, such as misc.transport.road on USENET (posting there for nine years) and GreatLakesRoads and OntRoads on Yahoo! Groups. If you want to discuss all things highway, I'd encourage you to visit any one of the many existing forums instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. Check 'em out! CBessert 07:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Michigan highway naming

If you are still active and get a chance, can you comment at Talk:List of highways in Michigan#Naming?, especially in regards to whether MDOT uses any format other than "M-X"? Thanks. --SPUI (T - C - RFC - Curpsbot problems) 15:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I did before I saw your request here. I hope my comment there suffices. MDOT (and its predecessor agencies) have not used anything but the "M-X" convention for more than 80 years. CBessert 01:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Ontario now

According to the Highway Traffic Act, "King’s Highway" includes the secondary highways and tertiary roads designated under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act. Is this a special definition used only for that act, or is it still used in general? Additionally, is the term King's Highway still used officially? Please respond on Talk:List of Ontario provincial highways if you et a chance. --SPUI (T - C) 12:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Michigan Left diagram

Thanks Chris. Your reconstruction of the alternate highway sign (which I don't recall seeing before) explains the Michigan Left concept nicely. On a more important note, congratulations on fatherhood. -- KelleyCook 13:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Wis 103?

Has Wis 103 existed at some point in the past? It doesn't show in your site [4] and since you are still in the works with your all-time, I won't know if it exists otherwise. Thanks in advance --master_son^{Lets talk} 00:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, in Fond du Lac County. It is now CTH-TC. I hope to have the "Master List" done soon... CBessert 03:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your wonderful resourch on Wisconsin Highways! It is excellent! You can use the image that I took of the east terminus of former WIS 103 (which is now FdL County TC as you correctly pointed out) if you want. (Image:Wis103EastTerminus.jpg) I bet you don't want to use it since U.S. Highway 151 was redesigned and re-routed slightly since 103 was decommissioned. Cheers! Royalbroil ^{Talk  Contrib} 05:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the rewrites

I was trying to keep as much of what you put on your site diffrent from the article. I think I was going overboard with some of these edits and not proofreading them before hand. But then agian who knows what I am thinking after working 10 straight hours hehe. In anycase thanks for the help I love it. BTW I am sorry about the Business exits on US 31 in michigan. I didnt mean to leave them that way for that long. I been attempting way too much on here and in my real life. BTW I did use MDOT as a source on a lot of those edits along with Earth Google and Yahoo Maps. So I did not use your awesome site exclusively :)--Mihsfbstadium 11:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Possibility on 93

Hey Chris,

In the notes here, you write:

The southern end of STH-93 is one of those odd occurrences in Wisconsin where the first 15 miles of a highway are signed concurrently with two other routes, first with US-53, then for three miles as US-53/STH-54/STH-93, then for another six miles with STH-54. It is clear this situation exists due to the route-swap between STH-93 and STH-35 in c.1990 (as detailed in the note below), but as to why WisDOT did not simply truncate this route at jct STH-35 & STH-54 in Centerville is not readily apparent.

If you look at the map and then drive south on 53 in Eau Claire, it rationale actually does become readily apparent.  :-) For whatever reason, WisDOT decided that 93 was going to be the primary connector between EC and LC. Why they made that decision, however, is not readily apparent. Cheers, Tomer^talk 03:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

US-131 in Mackinaw City

Thanks for making that correction. I don't know who put it there, either -- it was there when I started working on the listing of routes. As I said when I checked it out, the claim seems to be completely unfounded that it went all the way to St. Ignace.

BTW, FWIW, I did not claim that your website gave support to the notion. In fact, when I went to your articles, I came to the conclusion that the material that was in the Mackinaw City, Michigan article was wrong, and posted the query in the discussion.

I've enjoyed your articles. Happy holidays. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Stan

US-31 in Mackinaw City, Michigan and other road listings in Northern Michigan and Traverse City, Michigan

Chris: Since you are the road guru (I bow to your expertise), I made lots of changes and additions, and I'm sure your editing would imporve them. If you would kindly take a look, I would appreciate your help. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Stan

US-23 in (and north of) Harrisville, Michigan

Chris: You got rid of the word "parallels" and substituted something like 'runs on the shoreline.' I had avoided that construction purposely, as 23 only sort of runs along the shoreline (intermittently at best), and often moves far away from the shore. Just north of Harrisville it vears northwesterly, and is substantially west of the shore line all the way through Ossineike at least. Likewise, in Alpena it does go past Squaw Bay and follows the shoreline until it turns west into downdown, then jogs around through town and the river, and then shoots due north through Rogers City and Cheboygan. Its only north of Rogers City (briefly) and north of Cheboygan that one actually can see the lake. I was trying to avoid misleading our readers into erroneously thinking that they would be along the lake shore. Believe me, I have talked to out of state bicyclists who were doing that route, and who were gravely disappointed. Just a thought. best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC) Stan

I would also add that this is pretty much true (with the exception of briefly approaching Greenbush from the north, and parts of Oscoda and Tawas and the approaches to the area around the "singing bridge") for 23 south all the way down to Standish. Looking at a map of Michigan, one one see 23 and think that it is a shoreline road. But the appearance on a big map can be deceiving. I've driven this route hundreds of times, and I've bicycled most of it at one time or another, so I really have a 'concept.' Of course, in a macro sense (and in an editorial one, putting aside literalism), you have a point. If you get far enough back, if you could see I-75 it could look 'close to the Atlantic.' I exagerate, but I'm sure you as a consumate annotater of roads understand what I mean.

BTW, I wanted to thank you for cleaning up a lot of road sections in a bunch of communities where I had put them in. It was my hope that somebody would do that, and you've really come through. If I knew how to give you a Wiki thumbs=up, or attaboy, I certainly would. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC) Stan

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Belle Isle Park may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• park, the City's Parks and Recreation Department managed {{convert|6000|acre|sqmi ha}} of parks (now approximately {{convert|5000|acre|sqmi ha}}. The [[Huron-Clinton Metroparks]] authority manages

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CBessert. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, CBessert. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, CBessert. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Michigan communities format

While I know highways are your expertise, especially in the state of Michigan, I would like your opinion on another matter regarded Michigan municipalities and unincorporated communities.

A newer editor recently went through several township articles in the state and began eliminating the standalone "Communities" section and combining that information into the "Geography" section. Additionally, that editor deleted some maps and alleged unreferenced information (including one paragraph where the reference itself was deleted with the text). When I messaged that user and asked why they were changing the structure of the articles, I was given an arrogant non-answer that was apparently meant to explain that they were simplifying the content and layout of the articles. That user has only swept through some of the Upper Peninsula townships—the easiest areas to make broad edits due to the low number of municipalities—and appears to have gone away for now. While that user did make some good edits, such as moving the "History" and "Geography" sections in order and also updating population statistics, I strongly disagree with moving the communities of a township into the geography section. I don't know if or where this discussion ever took place—maybe in another state's discussions—but it appears to contrast with what has been the standard format in Michigan township articles for as long as I remember.

I believe eliminating the individual "Communities" section in an article downgrades the importance of the communities themselves, and adding that information to the "Geography" section overloads that section, especially for townships that might have many communities with lengthy descriptions, such as McMillan Township and Augusta Township—the latter of which retains that standard format of an independent "Communities" section. I don't believe that human settlements (e.g. communities) and geography are similar enough to be combined into the same section in an article. I'm not going to revert that editor's layout changes yet, because I don't know what the consensus format should be for these articles. I don't edit articles or engage in discussions for other states, but I would like some solid consistency within the Michigan municipality articles. My understanding is that the basic chronological format for a township layout has always been: Communities > History > Geography > Demographics > References > External links. I would like your thoughts on this matter, as you are a more experienced editor. I'm trying to make municipality and unincorporated community articles consistent across the state, including content and layout—a task that I believe is approximately 43.2% complete. —Notorious4life (talk) 20:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding sooner, but I've been out-of-town as of late. In my cursory glance of the articles in question, I would likely say I would side with you in terms of the "Communities > History > Geography > Demographics > References > External links" order in these articles. While I believe there could be an argument made in support of "Communities" being related to and potentially subordinate to "Geography," I don't think it would be strong enough to change the format of these articles. In many peoples' minds, "Geography" may imply and infer physical geography, with political geography being addressed in a different section. "Geography" is such a general and wide-ranging term, unfortunately. (I majored in Geography/Cartography and minored in Journalism in college, so I have a somewhat unique perspective on this topic.) I'd prefer if there was a more of a consensus on a change like this, to be honest. Like I said, I generally agree with your points and my personal preference would be to keep the articles as they were, but I always like to hear if there are perspectives and opinions contrary to my own just in case there's something I hadn't thought of. One main issue with discussions such as these, though, is that many don't have a very good grasp on the differences (in Michigan, at least) of townships, incorporated cities and villages, unincorporated communities, hamlets, place names, and even things like Census Designated Places (CDPs) which often serve to confuse things more than they help, IMHO. "Village," for example, in Michigan has a very precise legal definition, while "village" is known by many people as a generic term, which is why I like to use terms like "community" or "hamlet" for unincorporated communities. Anyway, those are my thoughts at the moment. Please let me know if I can be of any help going forward—and I'll try to keep an eye on talk pages and messages as much as I can. CBessert (talk) 03:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)