Talk:Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge/Archive 1

question?
"Due to thermal expansion/contraction of steel, the bridge roadway is 12' lower in summer than its winter elevation"

Is that supposed to say 12 feet or 12 inches?? 12 feet seems like an awful lot of expansion/contraction. Possible typo? Eleigh33 19:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * nevermind, it's correct, I found it on an MTA site also stating 12 feet. Eleigh33 00:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

another picture (satellite imagery)


theres already plenty of pics in the article, but this one is pretty cool, shows the bridge from satellite. Thought i'd post it here if anyone wanted to work it into the article.Eleigh33 05:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Longest Suspension Bridge?
The article claims that the bridge is the longes suspension bridge in the United States, but should that be edited to say it has the longest suspended span? For instance, the total length of the Mackinac Bridge in Michigan is over 26,000 feet, much longer than the Verranzano-Narrows. Saying "longest bridge" is up to some interpretation. Jamesfett 14:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * ok i agree i think they should do that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.207.136 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 13 August 2007

$9.00 toll?
Why has there never been any talk about why the toll is NINE DOLLARS?? Will it ever drop? This means that passing through from Jersey to Brooklyn you must pay $15 in tolls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.14.54 (talk) 17:13, August 28, 2007 (UTC)


 * Because this discussion page is for discussion about the article itself, and the amount of the toll is irrelevant to that except for the fact of the amount. Whether it's too much is something more appropriate for a New York–area message board (I assume some such exists). For what it's worth, the toll is the same as the other "major" TBTA facilities in that it adds up to $4.50 each way, but since you only pay one way it hits harder. 1995hoo 22:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

mhhw
Quick note from a mariner: Bridge clearances tend to be given using mean HIGHER high water, and not mean high water. The difference can sometimes be significant. Could we update the vertical clearance to be MHHW, vs MHW. 71.200.92.220 20:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Was Travolta right?
In Saturday night fever, John Travolta's character claims that a guy was buried in cement in one of the supports. Has this ever been a common theory, or was it fabricated for the film? 86.31.87.97 23:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * They say this about every construction project in New York City, after all it was all built by teamsters. --208.120.213.26 (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Bridge Controvercy?
I still do not understand why people didnt want it named after the italian explorer. Like why would anyone care except those people who loved JFK. Tutmosis 02:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I remember when the bridge was planned and built. I don't recall any movement to name for JFK. If there was one, it didn't have enough presence to be debated in the press. As to naming for Verrazano, I don't remember any objections on the basis that it would be a bad name or (implied) anti-Italian. Some people objected because in all its planning it was described a "The Narrows Bridge" and tacking another name on it at naming time seemed like what today would be called "Political Correctness." People liked simplicity. Nowadays of course, we'd probably call it "The Verrazano-Coca-Cola-Sponsored-Michael-Bloomberg-GLBT-Veterans-Memorial-9/11-Remembrance Bridge" -- Cecropia 17:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The official MTA site now says Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. I think the article should be moved accordingly to the appropriate page. --Zimbabweed 23:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Good idea. Mackerm 05:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. Not only does the official name have a hyphen, but omitting it suggests that the name of the body of water is crosses is "Verrazano Narrows." -- Cecropia 17:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the panoramic picture look better in the body of the article because the form factor doesn't fit with the "gallery", but it has absolutely nothing to do with the "naming controversy" section and as such, shouldn't be under that title. If we can't come up with a more appropriate place for it, I think it needs to be in the gallery. Rruss (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Nickname
Should it be mentioned that the bridge was often refered to as the "Guinea Gangplank"?
 * Yes. I put it in; somebody took it out; I've just put it back. RussNelson (talk) 15:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Back in with a reference 30 July 2017.

Why Moses?
The naming of the bridge for Verrazzano was highly controversial at the time. It was first proposed in 1951 by the Italian Historical Society of America, when the bridge was in the planning stage. After the initial proposal was turned down by Moses, the society undertook a public relations campaign to both re-establish the reputation of the largely-forgotten Verrazano and to promote the idea of naming the bridge for him —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.53.151 (talk) 00:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

9/11 facts
Whats the point of this entry? In terms of the of the Verrazano bridge I fail to see what the importance of it being closed for one day during a terrorist attack is. Its not like the bridge was hit or anything. Its not even cited, it should probably be removed.--208.120.213.26 (talk) 15:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This relates to . --Una Smith (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Type of suspension bridge?
Is this a suspended-deck suspension bridge or a self-anchored suspension bridge? --Una Smith (talk) 15:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There are various published sources, like Popular Mechanics, which give the total length of the spans (main span plus side spans) measured from "anchorage to anchorage". Additionally, at least one anchorage can be see in the panoramic photo contained in the article. So it is not a self-anchored suspension bridge. There are no published sources found which classify the bridge as suspended-deck suspension bridge. It is always listed as a suspension bridge. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

?
First, sorry for my English, i'm Russian. Could you tell me, please, how correct to talk (and how native English-talking people do it) name of this bridge — [verraZano] ("Z" as simple "z" in English) or [verraCano] ("C" also as "t͡s" in IPA)? 89.17.32.30 05:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope I've been pronouncing the name correctly, but as far as i know, it's a simple "Z". Alansohn 01:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

VeritZano. Like Вепицано —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Gerardi (talk • contribs) 02:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Total Length
I'm not sure if it is even made on the page, but the total length of the bridge (not only span) should be in the info box just like the Golden Gate Bridge has. TostitosAreGross (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Usage of two decks?
Took my own comment back out because I realized it was answered in the info box after all. Closetsingle (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Shortest?
Article states that it is the shortest suspension bridge in the world. See MTA article on the history of the bridge stating that when it was built, it was the longest. http://www.mta.info/bandt/html/veraz.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.205.243 (talk) 19:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

VerraZZano
It's a hard task spelling and transcribing foreign names,but Giovanni da Verrazzano also in his Wikipedia page carry proudly two ZED! Why his own bridge ask him a toll of one Z...? --Kiko 64 (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a good question. I noticed that too. Why would it be spelled with one zed all over the article? Somebody will have to use the "find-replace" function of some computer programme in the end, in order to straighten that out. Thank you, Nerissa-Marie (talk) 01:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Doing a comparative Google book search, there are 3,350 hits for the spelling with one z and 350 hits for the spelling with two z's . Use the spelling with one z. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 02:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The Naming section doesn't remark on the official solipsism of Verrazano.--Wetman (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Pedestrian?
Can pedestrians walk the bridge? Never heard of it, but then, the Brooklyn and Golden Gate are the only ones which are really known as walking destinations.

Seems to me that I walked over this bridge when it opened in late 1964. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.50.250.163 (talk) 04:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Some toll bridges I've seen do not appear to have pedestrian pathways (a couple in Rhode Island, though I may merely have missed them).

As there's no mention of a bicycle/pedestrian fee in the toll discussion, does that mean that pedestrians are barred from walking it or not charged for its use?--71.192.117.127 03:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

-

Sadly pedestrians and cyclists are still not allowed. They have been asking for years but it doesn't look like its happening anytime soon. Mayor Bloomberg promised to look into it (not sure but was it possibly part of plaNYC?), but it remains just that, a politicians empty promise.


 * Maybe that will change. The day of 9/11 many people who normally take a subway to Manhattan walked home across that bridge.  --Una Smith (talk) 15:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

-

It's actually illegal to walk across this bridge. However, in the '70's, the lower level was closed at night, and many of us walked across on the lower level quite regularly. I did it often coming home from PAL football practice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Gerardi (talk • contribs) 02:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Does the name "Verrazano" apply to the Narrows, or just the bridge over it?
"It is named after the explorer Giovanni da Verrazano...." Isn't is supposed to be that the bridge was named after Verrazano Narrows, which was named after the Italian guy? --seav 03:01, Aug 21, 2003 (UTC)

Cecropia. I believe the name has no hyphen in it. At least that's what the MTA site says is the official name. I think some web sites mistakenly put in the comma. -- Decumanus 08:51, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Decumanus. What we are dealing with is a name in common usage vs. its legal name. I rely for legal names on the MTA's financial filings (which are pretty much Hoyle, since they have legal meaning), which consistently has the hyphen. Likewise the name of the agency that runs the bridge (MTA B&T vs. TBTA). As you say, there is no body of water named "Verrazano Narrows," it is "The Narrows." Cecropia 14:18, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * But if the MTA is Hoyle, then surely Wikipedia should be using a hyphen, not an en dash. It's a hyphen in every MTA document I've been able to find (starting with the main website at ). Ditto NYC's paper of record, the Times . Think on this, en dash proponents: the fact that The Times's copy desk differs with you ought to be enough to give you pause. Look, I'm a professional copyeditor, and probably the weeniest en-dash weenie of them all, but this one makes no sense. It is a contrived construction that flies in the face of convention.  You can tie yourself up in pretzels arguing that it's not a bridge over the Verrazano Narrows (The Narrows themselves not being named for Verrazzano), but the terms "Verrazano" and "Narrows" are still not coordinate ones.  Really, though, what's wrong with it is that it snags the eye.  Furthermore, it's been applied even in places like the Gay Talese book title, where it is clearly wrong.


 * Wikipedia is widely viewed as an authoritative source, so the usage here matters. We have no place renaming a major public work. Gould363 (talk) 04:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Silence giving assent, I'll change it to a hyphen & try to sort out what points here. Gould363 (talk) 02:22, 31 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Gould363, Just because no one responded does not mean that the request is uncontroversial. You need to notify WP:BRIDGES and WP:NYC of this discussion. 188.15.62.50 (talk) 14:26, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


 * A sidenote: The MTA uses hyphens everywhere, never uses endashes in any of its media. (I speak as a native New Yorker currently in Italy.) 188.15.62.50 (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I'll do that, thanks.


 * Ah, the NY Times doesn't use en dashes at all either. (I neglected the all-important positive control!  Should have looked for how they treat Brooklyn–Battery Tunnel etc, which does take an en dash.)  So yes, Wikipedia usage will need to be decided from first principles -- which clearly dictate hyphen in this case, but I'll be happy to make the case for that. Gould363 (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

marcusmv3. I have seen in Italy the name written with two z's ("Verrazzano") and correctly pronounced with the same sound that a double-z makes in "pizza", thus it would sound, phoenetically "Verratzano." My grandfather, an Italian-American and Brooklyn or Staten Island resident his whole life swears that our current spelling of the name stems from a spelling error made when the signs for the bridge were made to be put up around metro area highways. Of course I am skeptical of this, but I do believe that the name is spelled incorrectly in America. Can anyone explain this? marcusmv3 0:12, 5 Apr 2006 (UTC)


 * Most of the references cite as the correct spelling for the Italian explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano. Both en.wiki and it.wiki explorer's pages are double z. Surely in origin it was double z: I am Italian and I can tell you it's unnatural for us to say "Verrazano" with only one z, so I suggest to change the name of the explorer in Verrazzano, in the page. I also think your grandfather was right, and the bridge was named after a sort of spelling error. My discussion page is here . Kiban --87.8.134.197 (talk) 18:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This discussion got off-topic without responding to the question with which Seav started it. The answer to Seav's question, as the "Naming" section of the article now makes clear, is no: the body of water that the bridge spans is called "The Narrows". Only the modern bridge, and not the strait it spans, carries the name of the Italian explorer.


 * Whether the bridge should have one Z or two is a separate topic, and one that should be taken up with the folks who run the bridge. Whatever they decide -- and they have, at this point, settled pretty firmly on a single Z -- WIkipedia must follow. TypoBoy (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

3 deaths?
We can't say "there were three deaths" and then name two of the victims. It's disrespectful to the third! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.77.151.204 (talk) 02:32, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Name Change
Duly confirmed by Governor Cuomo today. Name change time? Governor Cuomo signs legislation to correct spelling of Verrazzano Narrows BridgeTurini2 (talk) 17:41, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 1 October 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 21:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Verrazano-Narrows Bridge → Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge – The name of the bridge has always been misspelled since opening. On 1st October 2018, New York State Governor confirmed the name of the bridge would change to Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge. Governor Cuomo signs legislation to correct spelling of Verrazzano Narrows Bridge Turini2 (talk) 17:51, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:39, 1 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Support, a misspelling that a good spell-checker of the time may have caught. If there had only been a Wikipedia....per Giovanni da Verrazzano. Good catch. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support I have had some time to look into it and I think Wikipedia should use the corrected spelling. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 20:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Starting today this is effectively the name of the bridge. &mdash; Articlist (Talk) 20:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support --Zimbabweed (talk) 03:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - per WP:COMMONNAME, the "misspelling" has been used for the past 50 years of the bridge's history, and according to the sources, the name change is being gradually phased in. I'm not strictly opposing the name change, and I wouldn't mind if this page was moved, either. epicgenius (talk) 11:51, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's the thing, though. The existing references to "Verrazano", in image names and source titles, should be kept. Changing them would be incorrect. An anonymous editor already tried that, with the result that two images broke and at least three references now had incorrect titles. Also, I would say that mentions of the "Verrazano Bridge" during its construction and opening should be kept that way, because that was how it was known at the time. epicgenius (talk) 12:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support I agree. Maybe a notice could be added while people edit or on this talk page.
 * Support MTA has already updated the spelling at its official webpage: http://web.mta.info/bandt/html/veraz.html —74.101.35.44 (talk) 00:07, 3 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Thanks for the improvement
Thanks, that's a lot better! 209.209.238.189 (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. epicgenius (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

The new lead image


While I do agree that the lead image, File:USS Leyte Gulf (CG 55) under the Verrazano Narrows Bridge.jpg needs to be replaced with another image, File:VerrazanoBridge.jpg is not better than the aerial image for several reasons:
 * 1) It's grainy and very low resolution (maximum resolution is 1,125 × 717 pixels, the ship image is 1,500 × 2,100 pixels despite the preview being narrower)
 * 2) The subject of the article is in the background, the foreground is a ramp and streetlamps (which distract from the main subject)
 * 3) It shows even less of the bridge than the ship image does. The ship image at least shows the main span and one-and-a-half towers. The second image barely shows one tower.
 * 4) The second image is already used further down in the article. epicgenius (talk) 23:06, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I think there definitely should be another lead image, just not the one that you uploaded. epicgenius (talk) 23:07, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Then use a different image from the article, but the image you're pushing hardly captures the subject, and who says it has to be high resolution? TheEditster (talk) 00:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * , A decent image would not be a low-res jpeg. The second image shows even less of the subject than the first, and as I said above, the ramps and streetlights distract from the main subject of the page. The article shouldn't look like a bunch of amateurs wrote it, but that is honestly the vibe I'm getting from the new image, because it manages to focus even less on the bridge than the boat image does. epicgenius (talk) 01:10, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Here are the lead images from different languages' versions of this page. Do you have objections to any of these? epicgenius (talk) 01:15, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Not at all, the one you selected is much better. When consensus wins, the site wins. TheEditster (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * , That's good to hear. I truly appreciate your feedback, and I agree that it's much better than either of the images we originally selected. epicgenius (talk) 12:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd like to look for alternatives; I see that most of these, even ones with high pixel count, appear blurry/not focused properly or low-res... ɱ  (talk) 15:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you all like File:Verrazano–Narrows Bridge 0116.jpg? Higher-res, shows more of the bridge, etc. Much more detail when zooming in. ɱ  (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * , sure, we can go with that. epicgenius (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2019 (UTC)