Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge/Archive1

San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
This is the best article I've seen about a bridge, tunnel or road. -- Samuel Wantman 07:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. While it is a good article in many ways, it is too unstable and too weighted towards current events.  Much of the content - somewhere around half - is dedicated to events surrounding the current construction of the Eastern span of the bridge, which are really only momentarily relevant.  As an encyclopedia article, I think that such information should really be put into historical context, in which case it should really just be given a small section at most.  Nothing that is going on with the Eastern span is of more significance than, say, the events going on at the time of the bridge's initial construction.  Additionally, since half of the bridge is about to be replaced, it is about to become a dramatically different bridge.  Much of the current article is going to be out-of-date within a year or two, which makes it ineligible, at least in my interpretation of the "stable" requirement. Jun-Dai 07:27, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * A separate article can and should concentrate on the details of the current reconstruction as well as having an appropriately-sized amount of text in this article that summarizes the most important points about the current reconstruction. --mav 16:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Question about the configuration: It appears from bus schedules that buses go betwen the Transbay Terminal and the bridge. But there is only a connection to the lower level of the bridge. How do inbound buses get to the terminal? --SPUI (talk) 07:41, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * see "http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=37.788602,-122.392856&spn=0.009601,0.009938&t=k&hl=en" - the ramps into and out of the terminal (the loop) are transit only, note the connection with the outbound off ramp that runs parallel to the one with the automobiles (not shown in the map, but present in the satellite image. Leonard G. 8 July 2005 02:16 (UTC)


 * I agree with User:Jun-Dai. The focus on recent modifications of the bridge is too great. Phils 16:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Many of the reasons for objecting above are ironicly what I like about this article and why I chose to nominate it. Wikipedia, by its very nature is able to do things that traditional encyclopedias could only dream about, and one of them is to be extremely current.  We can have articles that are up to date AND encyclopedic.  Think about it, many people more than normal are likely to look up this article because it is a timely subject.  What is being faulted should be held up as an example of what is possible with this media.  -- Samuel Wantman 18:59, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I think that focus on the current popular consciousness of a subject should be the aim of a separate wiki.  I think it is good that we can have up-to-date information on current events, but this should never be used as the focus of an article that is not a current event, and current events should (IMO) never be featured.  Reconstruction of the Eastern span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (or some more suitable title) ought to have up-to-date information on the current ongoings of that project, and over time it should develop a historical perspective.  The article we are discussing, however, is not a current event (even though current events are going on related to it), and it should not be focussed on what is happening now--such things only need a mention and, where someone is willing to supply the details, a separate entry. Jun-Dai 19:36, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've implemented the suggestions above. There is now a separate article entitled: Eastern span replacement of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge --Samuel Wantman 08:00, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I also pulled out the weld controversy details from the replacement article, now in its own sub-sub article.

Think this is close to time to re-submit? Leonard G. 8 July 2005 02:16 (UTC)