Talk:Vale of Avoca (bridge)

Ravine or bridge or both?
I know this is picky, but the article (which is excellent, by the way) states that "In 1973, Toronto officially named the bridge structure and the ravine as The Vale of Avoca", but the citation provided doesn't really say this -- it just says that "In 1973 the vale was formaly named as a vale, after Avoca St". Since a vale is a valley, all this says is that "the valley was formally named as a vale." It doesn't say anything about the bridge.

I'm not saying that local people don't call the bridge a vale -- I live in a different neighbourhood so I don't know -- I'm just saying that the source doesn't confirm this. And it's a weird enough thing that I think it could use a source -- calling a bridge a vale (i.e. a valley) is rather odd, after all...it's like calling the Bloor viaduct the "Don Valley". WillNL (talk) 17:24, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It could probably be rewritten slightly. Most of the article is based on a historical file at the Deer Park library but is sourced to additional writings. The bridge doesn't appear to have its own formal name, and so its just the Vale of Avoca bridge I believe. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  20:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)