Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Seattle bridges/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by SchroCat 07:47, 13 January 2015 [1].

List of Seattle bridges edit

List of Seattle bridges (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Cptnono (talk) 13:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it gives details on the most notable bridges in Seattle. Sortable table with images and specs. Cptnono (talk) 13:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great list! I have a few comments:

Thanks!Cptnono (talk) 03:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you wiki-link the first instance of each bridge type? Bascule, Cantilever, etc.
  • Sure thing. I might do every instance in the table since it is sortable.Cptnono (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes a bridge notable? What criteria was used to determine notability? I think this needs to be made clear so we can determine inclusiveness (FL criteria 3a).
  • I tried to go over that in the first sentence but need to copy edit it. I went to every bridge article and verified GNG then created a couple more after finding sources. I really wanted to add an all but defunct rail bridge but the only source only found a single source. If I couldn't find sources on Google Books, News Archive, or other locations I did not add it.
  • The googlemaps coordinates is excellent, however I got a warning "A Google Maps feature used on this page is changing soon. Custom map content will need to be migrated." Can this be fixed?
  • Lame! Google Maps has undergone a massive change and it looks like the KML Data is not supported the same. I'll poke around but might lose it down the road.Cptnono (talk) 03:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink first instance of Seattle.
  • Lead may need copyedit, ex: "The following list in of noteworthy" does not make sense. "Another body of water, Lake Union, is just north of the downtown area" is passive. To make it active consider something like "Lake Union is another body of water just north of the downtown area".
  • Last minute addition that didn't work. I'll try again. Done?Cptnono (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the 1970s, residents grew wary of congestion that made the previous connection the second busiest road in the state." needs a source
  • Hmmm... removed for now. I'll try to pull it up but removing the line made the next concern more readable.
  • " The bridge was left inoperable after" What bridge?
  • Shorten and merge these two sentences: "The area is also serviced by the Spokane Street Bridge. Built in 1991, it is the world's first and only hydraulically operated concrete double-leaf swing bridge"
  • Sources needed for the span of a few of the bridges.
  • A couple more to go but I am hunting them down.Cptnono (talk) 09:45, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a quick glance, once the changes are made I may be able to go over it in finer detail. Mattximus (talk) 17:55, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattximus: Getting those sources in did a lot for list (found a few errors). Any other thoughts?Cptnono (talk) 02:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. A few minor quibbles.
  • The "circa" Arboretum Sewer Trestle bridge is interfering with the ability to sort. I think there is a way around this but I don't know it off hand. Everything else in the list looks good.
  • Adjusted by putting circa after in parentheses.Cptnono (talk) 22:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the lead still needs a good edit. I think the sentence "The following list is of noteworthy spans throughout the city" can go, being almost tautological.
  • The first paragraph needs to link to the idea of bridges, rather then just a description of waterways. The description is a bit confusing, as it's not made clear that Elliott Bay is a part of Puget Sound. If there is no bridge across lake union, is it worth mentioning in the lead? Perhaps I can take a stab at it:
Downtown Seattle is on an isthmus between Lake Washington and Puget Sound which are connected through canals and locks that make up the Lake Washington Ship Canal. Vehicles, trains, and pedestrians cross these bodies of water over X bridges. The largest bridge is… the oldest bridge… (these latter two are trivial and only a suggestion.
  • I tinkered with it more. I kind of like the flow with it sections but I might have looked at it to long and am kind of stuck. I ended up playing with it based on your ideas. I think you might have been on to something. Let me know.Cptnono (talk) 23:09, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mention that Magnolia Bridge is already deteriorated but the source you reference has no mention of this bridge.
  • "A primary span" was left inoperable after being hit by a freighter in 1978, did this span (I think you mean bridge?) have a name?
  • I didn't like the line after looking at it so it was removed/reworked.Cptnono (talk) 22:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That concludes my review, I'm happy to support if the above comments are addressed, good work! Mattximus (talk) 03:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Mattximus: Thanks! I tried to hit some of your points. What do you think?Cptnono (talk) 23:09, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I copy edited the lead a bit more, what do you think? I'm not the best ce, but I think it's better now. I'm happy to support, nice work! Mattximus (talk) 17:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work, @Mattximus:. I was looking at it like a Neanderthal trying to bake the perfect apple pie after awhile. Thank you so much!Cptnono (talk) 07:35, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • You call it the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge in the lead, but that's not its name (and the link is redirecting). The same redirect is happening in the table
DoneCptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Cowen Park Bridge the only one with a source for what road it's a part of? It's not that I think you need sources for that, it's just odd that one of them has a source
  • Cowen Park Bridge needs a source for opening date, as do several others
Phew... Done!Cptnono (talk) 23:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fremont Bridge needs a source for length, as do several others
All leangths are now sourced.Cptnono (talk) 22:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DoneCptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Riged frame"
DoneCptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link Swing bridge in Spokane Street Bridge, also in the lead
DoneCptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two of your "see also" links are redirecting
DoneCptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I kinda wish we had a flat-color city map in the article with the bridges highlighted, but that's a bit much to ask for
I hope the maps at the bottom of the list are sufficient.Cptnono (talk) 22:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The missing references are the big one here, but should be doable. If you found this review helpful, consider optionally reviewing the Hugo Award for Best Fancast FLC, located just below this one. It's short! --PresN 19:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I need to do some reviews since it has been a bit. I need to try to tackle this sourcing issue. I think one issue (besides not having a confirmed length for Fremont it looks like) is that the sources are placed sporadically. Instead of repeating the sources in each cell I can do a column with references.Cptnono (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@PresN: My eyes hurt from going through so many pdfs! All lengths and years sourced (with some corrected). Cptnono (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! Switching to Support. Did one minor reference tweak edit. A thought occurred to me that bold and italics might not meet access requirements for calling out something, as opposed to putting a dagger or * after the word, so I've asked on WT:ACCESS about it to find out. Not going to wait for the answer to support, though. --PresN 03:06, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Daggers and stars are a good idea. I'll make the change today or tomorrow (about to go celebrate a birthday for a friend just under one of those bridges) . Cptnono (talk) 03:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Crisco 1492

  • the city's unique topography. - Who says the topography is "unique"? Feels WP:WEASELy to me.
  • I'll change it to hills and water. American Scietific added as a source.[2]Cptnono (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Fremont Bridge crosses the center of the canal and is one of the most raised bridges in the world due to its clearance over the water of only 30 feet (9.1 m). - forgive me, but how does having a low clearance make a bridge "one of the most raised" in the world
  • Sail boats and large vessels would hit the bridge deck at that height. Sources:[4][5][6][7] I'm not sure what change, if any, would be best here. Oh wait! I think that "raised" was a confusing term. Adjusted.Cptnono (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Titles of books etc. should be capitalized
  • 1991-built Spokane Street Bridge - Is 1991-built a standard term? Feels like this should be reworked; it's quite rough
  • The year isn't needed since it s in the list and not the focal point of the line. Removed.Cptnono (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps someone else knows the exact guideline, but to the best of my understanding a header is necessary between the lead and the list proper to allow easier access for screenreaders and the like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not seeing anything mandating a section for the list at WP:LEADFORALIST. I would like to make it easy on screen readers, though, if you have any suggestions on the headings title.Cptnono (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Crisco 1492: Thanks for the review. I believe everything is now addressed except for the screen reader suggestion at the end. Thanks for noticing that CAPS in refs and a couple other things that look like no brainers after looking at it a little closer.Cptnono (talk) 05:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose; good work! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - Only really small stuff. Bit confused why the list is part of the Lead. Notes b and f should end with a full stop. Ref 26 has no retrieval date. YellowStahh (talk) 21:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! Fixed.Cptnono (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Seattle_bridges/archive1&oldid=642971229"