Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Galton Bridge/archive1

Galton Bridge

 * Nominator(s): HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 21:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

As my long-suffering wife would say, "it's a bridge". It is, indeed, a bridge. Not an ancient bridge like my previous bridge FA but still nearly 200 years old. An elegant single span in cast iron (then still a novel material) and built by one of the most famous engineers of the 19th century. Both the road it carries and the canal it crosses are vestiges of a transport network that was once Britain's lifeblood.

Until recently, this article was a stub, containing just six sentences (one of them about a different bridge!). It's still not a long article (just under 1500 words), but I think the bibliography shows that I've searched far and wide for information. As always, I'm eager to hear any feedback. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 21:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * Putting this here as a placeholder as I will definitely review this one. I know this bridge pretty well as I live not a million miles away...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:04, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Is there a link (even if only to wiktionary) for "abutments"? Not convinced this is a word that every reader would necessarily know
 * "the nearby Horseley Ironworks, which includes X-shaped bracing" - presume it isn't the Ironworks that includes this bracing?
 * "The structure was named for Samuel Tertius Galton" - in UK English the more common expression is "named after" rather than "named for"
 * "The bridge is single span" => "The bridge is a single span"....?
 * That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:36, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The benefit of a fresh pair of eyes, and a local at that! All addressed I believe. Thank you very much for having a look, . HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 21:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Image review

 * For the drawing of the Galton Bridge (File:Galton Bridge Smethwick Drawing.JPG), please include a PD-US-expired tag to show the image is public domain in the United States.
 * Please include an alt description for the last image. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 16:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Both done. Thank you, Szmenderowiecki. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 21:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review. Almost in my back yard.
 * The lead seems long in proportion to the main article; 313 words to 1,127 or 28%.
 * I always struggle with the lead! Trimmed by 50-odd words.
 * Link abutment.
 * Seems to be a consensus. Done.
 * Excellent use of "spandrel". :-)
 * It is the proper term, but not one we get to use very often!
 * "it was repainted from its original black into a colour scheme that enhanced its features." "enhanced" seems a little nebulous to state as a Wikipedia fact.
 * Fair point. Qualified.
 * "By the 1820s, traffic had grown enormously". Is this quantifiable?
 * It certainly can; there are plenty of stats in the canal history books (the BCN kept good records which are preserved for posterity thanks to post-WWII nationalisation), but it seems a little tangential to the bridge.
 * It doesn't seem tangential to me; it's the base reason for the bridge's existence. If it is that off the point, why is it currently mentioned?
 * It just seemed a step too remote to me. The bridge exists because the cutting exists, the cutting exists to carry the canal, and it's the canal that experienced the increase in traffic, which ideally should be covered in the article on the canal (the two main lines should probably have separate article and Smethwick Cutting might be worthy of its own). But I can track down some stats.
 * Ok, I now see where you are coming from, but I disagree. The reason why the bridge was necessary at all seems crucial to me. If you could add a stat based couple of sentences, that would be good.


 * "The structure was named for". Can a valley be a "structure"?
 * I don't see why a man-made one can't, but it was intended to refer to the bridge. "Galton Valley" is a modern name and I suspect taken from the bridge
 * "replaced with more traditional masonry bridges". More traditional than what? This is the first mention of bridges.
 * Removed "more".
 * Link tension and compression.
 * Done.
 * "All the iron work was cast by". I think that should be 'ironwork'.
 * Wasn't sure about this. Done.
 * "a partial infill of the cutting built for". Can an infill be "built"?
 * I don't see why not but it's not a hill (or infill!) I'd chose to die on so if you have a better verb I'm open to suggestions. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 21:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps something like 'and a now partially infilled cutting originally built for a ...'?
 * I reworded it slightly. See what you think.
 * Looks fine.

And that trivia is all from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Just the stats bit left from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Gog, I'm having more trouble with this than I anticipated. There are a lot of stats in the books but mostly about shareholder dividends and amalgamations of various canal companies rather than traffic volumes. They talk at some length about the queues that formed at the locks but there's no statistic for how much traffic had grown, even less so on this one canal as the owning company was constantly building and acquiring new bits of canal. It turns out, though, that the immediate impetus for the development was the imminent threat of railway competition, which I've added. <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 20:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments Support from Tim riley
A pleasing article. A few minor drafting points: That's my lot. Nothing to frighten the horses (if, that is, horses are allowed over the bridge nowadays). –  Tim riley  talk   14:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "The metalwork … includes X-shaped bracing in the spandrels and decorative lamp posts" – ambiguous: is the bracing in both the spandrels and the posts or do you mean the metalwork includes decorative lamp posts and X-shaped bracing in the spandrels?
 * The OED hyphenates "lamp-post".
 * "the ground conditions were not suitable so the canal was carried over the hill by a flight of locks" – I take the traditional view that in formal English "so" is not used as a conjunction. See the current (2015) edition of Fowler, p. 757. Either an "and", "and so" or simply a semicolon would be preferable here.
 * "Telford felt a lighter structure was necessary" – do engineers go by such subjective things as feelings? Something a bit less airy-fairy such as thought or considered might be kinder to Telford.
 * "strong under compression, so, in bridge construction, tended to be used" – another dubious "so".
 * "Instead of constructing a new bridge, the canal cutting was partially infilled" − two things here: first, it's a clunky dangling modifier − grammatically the present text says that the canal did not construct a new bridge, which is hardly surprising. You need something on the lines of "Instead of the construction of a new bridge". Secondly, "partially" when you mean "partly" seems woolly and would be better in the concise form. (And would it be too much to suggest that "infilled" might be a plain "filled in" (though I shall not upstand and outflounce if you disagree)?)
 * "was repainted in colour to enhance its features" – might be good to say what the colours are. One can't be entirely sure from the photos, and this info should probably be in the text in any case.
 * Tim, I pride myself on writing to a high standard but I learn something new about the English language every time every time you review one of my FACs! Though I'm surprised to see you popping up in the Black Country! Fear not, my likely next FAC is inside the M25! ;) I think I've addressed all but the last of your comments. Would you believe that none of the sources deem it important to mention what colour the bridge was painted? It looks largely black to me, but with redish-brown highlights, but that's veering dangerously close to original research. Thank you! <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 23:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * How nice! Thank you, Harry. (My mother taught English and some of it rubbed off on me.) I am perfectly prepared to venture outside the M25 – armed with a stout stick, of course – but I look forward to your next FAC nearer home. As to this one, it seems to me to meet all the FA criteria: comprehensive, as far as I can see, well and widely sourced, nicely illustrated and an excellent read. Keep 'em coming, I say. –  Tim riley  talk   12:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Support Comments from JennyOz
Thanks for enhancing this article on a bridge that is both pretty and handsome. I only have a few questions and suggestions... Consistencies Refs Possible categories Clarification? That's all from me. JennyOz (talk) 05:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * By the 1820s, traffic had grown enormously and the narrowness of the canal caused congestion. - this threw me as I assumed it was referring to road traffic. Could be reworded? Eg By the 1820s, traffic on the canal had grown enormously and its narrow width caused congestion.
 * Reworded.
 * fights often broke out among boat crews - do refs say whether physical or quarrels?
 * Yes, physical.
 * a railway bridge was built from one of the abutments - not being familiar with engineering, I don't quite understand this. Was Telford's abutment large and strong enough to anchor another bridge?
 * As far as I can tell, the railway company hacked or blasted out the rock on the other side of the abutment and built their own bridge from there.
 * until it was bypassed by a new road - and bridge?
 * No. This is elaborated on in the body.
 * designed a new, straighter, route - not sure second comma needed?
 * deck plate - wlink Deck (bridge)
 * I think most people understand what a deck is.
 * added a decorative parapet - link parapet again? (beyond lede)
 * tense: - "Telford wrote in his memoirs", "Telford wrote that the" v "In his memoirs, published posthumously, Telford describes", "He explains"
 * compass: north-eastern Scotland v north east Wales
 * Broadbridge, S. R. - authorlink Stan Broadbridge
 * Category:Deck arch bridges or its subcat Category:Open-spandrel deck arch bridges
 * Category:Cast-iron arch bridges in England
 * Category:1829 establishments in England
 * Category:Pedestrian bridges in England
 * Added those that are defining and not already covered.
 * Maybe add something to Samuel Tertius Galton - his father's article Samuel Galton Jr. (Samuel "John" Galton) says the bridge was named in his honour.
 * I removed the (unsourced) claim from the father's article.
 * Hi JennyOz, a few replies above but otherwise all addressed. <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 14:35, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * All fine. Thanks. JennyOz (talk) 15:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Brown or Browne?
 * Be consistent in how you format edition statements
 * Ranges should use endashes, including in titles
 * The Proceedings refs include ISSN in one but not the other - why?
 * David & Charles appears to focus on crafting titles - what makes Broadbridge a high-quality reliable source? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That seems to be the focus of D&C these days (according to the relatively recent rewrite of its article by one of its employees) but in the 70s and 80s it was a well-regarded publisher on transport topics, mostly canal and railway history. Everything else addressed I believe. Thanks, Nikki. <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 14:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 19:47, 28 October 2022 (UTC)