Talk:Arch Bridge (Bellows Falls)

Ruhrfisch comments
Good start and interesting article - here are some comments with an eye toward improvement.
 * The lead needs to be expanded so it is an overview of the whole article
 * The lead should also not contain anyhting that is not repeated in the rest of the article - the longest in the US claim is only in the lead now.
 * The article has a fair number of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and even a whole section (on the current bridge). These should be combined with others or expanded to improve the flow.
 * I would at least provide a description of the current bridge on the site in tat section (length, width, style, cost)
 * I would try to find sources other than "plaques on the site" - the HAER document seems like it has a lot of material that could be used for expanding the article / providing more details. If a plaque is used as a source, could you take a photo of it and upload it here and link to it?
 * The inflation template may be useful here
 * See WP:OVERLINK - sSince the bridge is in the US, I also would not link US dollar. Units like feet and meters are also not usually linked
 * There are technical terms like falsework that should be linked
 * The HAER images are all free for use here and some of them are quite nice.
 * Article needs a copyedit - I noticed present tense where past was needed, for example.

Has this been nominated at WP:DYK? I think the hook could include that it was the longest bridge of its type when built in 1905 and that it took five tries to knock it down.

Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It does help some, yes. I can't post images of the plaques due to copyright issues.  I tried that with the Harvard Bridge and got my wrists slapped.  It's ridiculous but what can I do?  The main reason I tried to find sources other than the HAER report is that I didn't want to effectively just copy that report.  As it is, I've only really got two sources: the HAER report and the Jackson book (and he worked on the HAER report, too).  Then there are the plaques, which date from around when the original bridge was built, and from when the bridge was removed.


 * Not every reader is in the US, so I prefer to be clear on the matter, just like I specify "short ton" instead of just "ton". I know when I see a reference in this country refer to "ton", it means what everyone else calls a short ton, so I keep it clear.


 * I might copy one or two of the HAER images if I can. There's a nice set of three engineering drawings of the arch, for instance.


 * I used the inflation template in three places as an argument to formatprice.


 * Thanks for the feedback. I'll have to get to this later. - Denimadept (talk) 18:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * If the plaques are from 1905 they should be free to use (published before 1923). Things published in the United States between 1923 and 1977, inclusive, without a copyright notice are free too. Sorry I missed the inflation template. COuld you look in newspaper archives from the time when the bridge was built or torn down? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The 1905ish plaques, true, could do. The others are likely from 1982ish.  The one from the Harvard Bridge was dated 1994, so no such escape.  Found the plaques.  There's a total of four, two of which were clearly moved from the original bridge, the other two are new, no earlier than 1984 since one speaks of the new bridge being completed in 1984. - Denimadept (talk) 05:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

New refs to go through
(used)

(used)

This guy seems to have taken similar pics to what I did, including the plaques, and he posted one of the postcards too.

I kinda wonder about this guy's refs.

Not much new here, but it may have info for other Connecticut River bridges.

I'm going to bed! - Denimadept (talk) 07:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Worcester refers to the document by Lewis D. Rights regarding the construction of the structure, on p.291. - Denimadept (talk) 16:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Replacement bridge project info, minimal. - Denimadept (talk) 14:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

History of Bridge Engineering. Google seems to be helping me recreate the research done by HAER in 1973, if not better. The ASCE report by Worcester himself has to be at the root of a lot of the subsequent docs, and this Tyrell book was definitely used by HAER. There're more on the HAER report's refs page, but I've not yet found the others. - Denimadept (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Information about [http://vermont-archives.org/bxdescription.asp?RS=A-318&rsCreator=Vermont.+Division+for+Historic+Preservation.&rsTitle=Project+files%2C+circa+1977-1990. preservation attempts] which requires physical access to a library in Vermont. - Denimadept (talk) 15:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Article name
Does anyone agree that Bellows Falls arch bridge would be a more appropriate name for this article? —MegaPedant 12:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not the way articles get named. The bridge was called "Arch Bridge".  Using that title w/o a location would be too confusing, so I named it as it is.  Naming it as PLACE OBJECTNAME is just not the way things work here. - Denimadept (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You're in the happy position of knowing that "Arch Bridge" was the (somewhat unimaginative, if I may say so) name of the structure, as opposed to merely its description, as I had assumed. —MegaPedant 11:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why it's "Arch Bridge" rather than "Arch bridge". :-D - Denimadept (talk) 12:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, I suspect that situations like this happen when no one bothers to actually name the structure, so it defaults to whatever people happen to call it. I figure the reason it's not imaginative is that no one tried.  These days, they could sell the rights to name it. :-> - Denimadept (talk) 00:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)