Talk:Minnesota State Highway 371

U.S. Roads: U.S. Highways / Minnesota Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Topics	U.S. Highways
Locations	Minnesota
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Comments[edit]

I kept the first paragraph intact, but I added information about how portions of MN-371 have been upgraded to four-lanes (including the Brainerd Bypass), and the future Nisswa to Pine Rivers project.

SpaceJunkie 04:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits, June 2010[edit]

I've upgraded the assessment on the article. In addition, I've edited the article for some basic standards and consistency.

I've used the jct template. Some situations will need some coding tweaks to the template to switch over the CR usages and the business loop usage.
Other road names should not be in italics. This gives them undue emphasis.
I've converted the abbreviations in the prose to keep them consistent with the template-generated abbreviations. This is for compliance with the concepts behind WP:USSH.
I've updated the junction list to reflect changes at MOS:RJL, the road junction list section of the Manual of Style. Since the table used colors, the legend needed to be added.
"E of Camp Riley" is not a valid location. A specific township, village or city would be a valid location. Additionally, for major river crossings, the river is a location. Some research will reveal the names of the townships for the various junctions, even if the Mn/DOT logs do not.
I've reorganized a few things... the subsection on "Improvements" is better in the History section than the RD section.

—Imzadi 1979 → 16:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]