Talk:Hot Metal Bridge

Comments
I won't try to fathom the philosophical question of bridge identity, but the Hot Metal Bridge and the Mon Con RR Bridge share the same piers and are feet apart. The only thing that originally warranted the two names was that one carried railroad traffic and the other carried strictly crucibles of molten steel. The website Bridges and Tunnels of Allegheny County treats them on a single webpage and gives its (their?) official name as "Monongahela Connecting Railroad Bridge and Hot Metal Bridge". They consider the Mon Con RR Bridge to be the upstream side of the bridge and the hot metal bridge to be the downsteam side of the bridge. People who live in Pittsburgh just call the whole thing the "Hot Metal Bridge".

Ortcutt 20:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with the idea to merge these articles. I think the main article should be Hot Metal Bridge as that's what everyone knows. Heck, even the street signs say Hot Metal Bridge. We can distinguish the bridges on the Hot Metal page. ClarkBHM 20:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. Three Sisters (Pittsburgh) also puts multiple related bridges in the same article. Robshill 21:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Which I for one would prefer to see the Three Sisters broken apart again. You see each individual bridge on a map of Pittsburgh. That's not the case for Hot Metal. ClarkBHM 21:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * My long term plan (as the guy that merged the Three Sisters) is/was to have articles for each separate bridge, all linked to from the Three Sisters article which would then become an overview and history/setting sort of article. Then the nav (crossings box) can weave through the separate bridge articles instead of through it, and the separate bridge articles can carry all the history of the previous bridges (which all is in the history of the 3 sis article as deleted material since it wasn't formatted very well) I confess I may have bitten off more than I can chew because while that's my plan I haven't done it yet which I feel guilty about! More comments to that talk page, perhaps? + +Lar: t/c 01:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I definitely agree that the articles should be merged. As someone who crosses Hot Metal almost every day to and from work, I was confused about the two articles until I read this discussion page.  FishSpeaker 03:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

OK. It's been two weeks since I made the merger proposal, and the consensus seems to be that these should be merged so I'm going to go ahead and do it. Ortcutt 23:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice work. Thanks for that! + +Lar: t/c 00:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Expansion
It would be nice to have details on the bridge architect. Was it fabricated at J&L? Pustelnik (talk) 17:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)