Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cogan House Covered Bridge


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

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:14, 28 May 2008.

Cogan House Covered Bridge
Nominator: Cogan House Covered Bridge has had a very helpful peer review, which found no major problems and the suggestions for improvement from it have all been addressed. I believe this article meets all of the Featured Article criteria. This is a self-nomination in that I have made most of the edits to the article, but I have sought feedback from many and have received positive comments. This is a relatively obscure, but quite interesting bridge and I believe the article does it justice. Thanks for any feedback, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * The only concern (?) I have is This site, which I'm being told is actually a reformatted scrape of some US governmental data. Since the data isn't exactly contentious, it can probably scrape by (oooh, puns!). It'd be nice if another source could be found for the information, or at least a link to the original data was included in with the nicely formatted link also.
 * Thanks for the suggestion - I have added the original ref to the formatted ref in the article. There is a website here that explains the situation - you can either try to puzzle out the official Federal Highway Administration page, or pay $60 for a company to give you the data in Excel format, or go to Svirsky's website. There are some interactive maps (msnbc.com has one) but they are for the biggest and busiest bridges in the US (10,000 cars a day or more) and the Cogan House Covered Bridge is not on them. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the putting both links in is the best solution, and solves all RS concerns. We have the (ugly) but ultra reliable governement source and the (prettier) but self-published not as reliable source for the same data both listed for folks. It's US government data, so it isn't a copyvio we're linking to on the second site, so all is good.


 * That has got to be the longest freaking title link I've ever seen. It can probably be shortened to History of Lycoming County Pennsylvania (grins). Although I do like the perfectionist-ness of the full verbose Victorian title..
 * Respectfully disagree — the full title stays, and it is already in four featured articles (Larrys Creek, White Deer Hole Creek, Plunketts Creek (Loyalsock Creek), and Black Moshannon State Park) as well as three featured lists. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a big worry, but gah, that's a lot of blue! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, sources look good, links checked out fine with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much and thanks too for your helpful comments at Peer Review Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * PS If you want to see the original data from FHA NBI, I dug it out and pasted it into the talk page here Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Support An excellent article about a bridge that you'd have to try really hard to find. Well written, fully referenced and a very enjoyable read, especially the part about the construction of the bridge. Dincher (talk) 20:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support, kind words, and helpful peer review comments, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I really like the use of maps and pictures to make this a better, and more interesting article. References look good, and use of a geobox is a great touch too.--Kranar drogin (talk) 04:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support and kind words, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:10, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support Nice work. Keep it up. — Wackymacs ( talk  ~  edits ) 10:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your support and kind words. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support for an engaging and well-written article. Graham Colm Talk 16:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Support for a top-notch article, well-written, well-supported, and nicely illustrated. The prose flows and informs. I want to visit this bridge. Finetooth (talk) 23:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support, copyedits, and kind words (it is a great place to visit - very peaceful), Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Support:Details, prose, refs, tables all look good to me. (fixed a few dashes and date formats, kingly recheck them) - KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 08:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thnaks for your support, edit and kind words. My understanding was that if a full date was wikilinked no comma is needed as the software puts one in. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Amazing work! Plenty of reliable references and sources that I don't know how you found, well-written, and just an all-around great article. I am always amazed at how much information you can find on minor parks, rivers, towns and such. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  20:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your support and kind words - there are 7 covered bridges on this NRHP nomination form and this is the one with the most information available by far. There is one other with enough details to make FA perhaps, or at least GA. I am not sure the other 5 have enough available information to even make GA, but I will try. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I look foreward to seeing that one at FAC sometime soon. It might need a bit of expansion, though. :) Once again, good work! 02:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the vote of confidence - it may take me a while, but I'll work on it. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, as a peer reviewer. Who knew I could enjoy reading about a covered bridge so much? --Moni3 (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.