Talk:Tongjiang-Nizhneleninskoye railway bridge

(Redirected from Talk:Amur Bridge Project)
Latest comment: 11 years ago by 24.108.58.1 in topic the importance of this article

Using the Russian government site [[1]] I found that there was no evidence of such a bridge, and at the cost that they had been referring to, it seems that it would have been publicized. A Chinese website cited a pontoon boat, but this pontoon boat is currently in use (2008)...

Josef Carozza Loeffler —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.loeffler (talkcontribs) 15:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Additionally the links seemed to be dead. josef.loeffler--Josef.loeffler (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)TReply

This is not the first railway bridge over the Amur River, one was completed in 1916, almost destroyed in WWI, and rebuilt by March 1925. Mary Garmon

What about an update? edit

Hey you wikipedos, this is a very old article. Fix it. It makes this thing look like Enyclopaedia Britannica. 203.218.80.74 (talk) 03:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

the importance of this article edit

There is a dearth of information on the current status (at least in English - I will look in Russian later today.)

News might be expectedto appear at the offical federation web portal: http://www.eao.ru/eng/?p=343

The article is important as one of the few topics which keeps the very fact of the existence of the Jewish Autonomous Oblast in the internet news stream. The Oblast's continued existence and the preservation of it very name prevents historical revisionism on a subject where the historical truth is still debated.

G. Robert Shiplett 12:50, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

This bridge is a mere chimera, I suspect that Gurevich has been putting something funny in his samovar. (The much-touted Bridge of the Horns is equally fantasy). Unless someone can come up with hard evidence that construction has been started, I will nominate this article for deletion. You notice there are no links to the Russian wikipedia.

I am sure the Jewish Autonomous Oblast can come up with something more convincing than this.24.108.58.1 (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)Reply