Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of largest suspension bridges/archive1

List of largest suspension bridges
This is a self-nom. I started this list a little over a year ago because I was frustrated that all the lists I found on-line were out of date or contained inaccurate data. I now believe this list to be the most comprehensive list available on-line. Unfortunately, there are not Wikipedia articles or pictures for all the bridges on the list. One aspect of this list that is unusual and a little controversial is that the bridge rankings are also external links to each bridge's website. There is no other way that I know of to create an automatically numbered list in a table. The controversial aspect is that some bridges either do not have a website, or do not have an English language version. Rather than make dummy links, I made a link to an error message on a subpage. After some initial resistance, I have not heard any complaints about this for many months. -- Samuel Wantman 08:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Object: A nice start, but there too may redlinks towards the end of the list. Adding images for all listed bridges would be great.  Rather than linking to non-existent websites, I would just remove the links for the bridges that don't have websites.  I think you could remove the links for the dates, but I think the location column should be fully linked (e.g. New York, NY, U.S.A. each time).  Surely there are some paper references that could be added?  Guinness Book of Records? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I cannot travel around the world to find pictures of all these bridges, nor can I create websites that don't exist. If I remove liks for bridges without websites, then they won't be properly ranked.  It is far to much work to renumber an entire list manually each time a new bridge is completed.  I purposely did NOT link the location each time it is mentioned for two reasons; first, it is customary to just link the first occasion in an article; and second, it communicates that this is the longest bridge in the location.  So the first time there is a link for the US, that means that it is the largest bridge in the US.  I have removed the links for dates.  I did not use any paper references for this list. --Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I still think that there are too many redlinks (around a quarter, by my count), and that making external links to non-existent websites is just bad (I understand you wanting to get automatic numbering, but it just does not work in different table cells - it would be better to do the numbering by hand: your numbering will break if someone adds a link to the article above or in the table). I was not asking you to take the photos, but it would still be nice to add them.  The problems with the existing photos identified by Carnildo also need to be addressed.  Don't get me wrong: this list has real potential, but it is not quite there yet, in my opinion.  (I would have added "humble" but I got shot down in flames on FAC the other day for using "IMHO".) -- ALoan (Talk) 15:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a problem with references... If you say those websites are out of date, how did you compile the list? What are your new sources? Also, please format references in reference style (and not external ink style). Renata 12:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It is mainly one or two bridges on each list that is incorrect. Most are missing bridges from the last few years.  I was able to fill those gaps from Bridgemeister.com and from the wikipedia articles about the newer bridges.  The occasional mistake is easy to find when five sources say one thing and only one has different information.  The strangest case was the Izmit Bay Bridge, which is shown as being completed by a few sites.  These sites have different years listed for when it was completed, yet there is no evidence that I could find that construction on the bridge had ever started!  --Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The external links are not references. They are links to the homepages of each bridge.  The references also are a way to autonumber the table.  There is no other way that I know of to autonumber a table. -- Samuel Wantman 07:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm concerned about sources and missing articles, but in principle, I would be willing to support. Do something about those two issues, and you've got my vote. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 12:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Seriously, do you expect me to write articles about bridges all over the world that have little or no information about them available on the web other than the information listed here? They would just be the shortest of stubs.  Why is this list being faulted because the articles have not yet been written?  I could remove the wikilinks and the red would turn to black, but I don't think that is a good idea.  Eventually, there will be articles for all these bridges. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Should this be List of longest bridges, not largest? Rmhermen 02:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This is addressed by the intro paragraph, and there is also discussion about this on the talk page. They are not the longest bridges, they have the largest spans.  This is the common way to discuss suspension bridges.  Calling them the longest confuses the issue. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Object: Major problems with the images
 * The image Image:Akashi-kaikyo bridge3.jpg is sourced as being from the Japanese Wikipedia and licensed under the GFDL. However, it does not include the creator's copyright statement (which is required by the GFDL), and it does not include a link to the original image (which would let the copyright status be verified).
 * I have added a link to the original image which is marked as being GFDL.--Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:StoreBaeltsBroen.jpg is sourced as being from the Netherlands Wikipedia and licensed under the GFDL. However, it does not include the creator's copyright statement (which is required by the GFDL), and it does not include a link to the original image (which would let the copyright status be verified).
 * This has been fixed. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The images Image:Runyan Bridge 1.jpg, Image:Jiangyin bridge.jpeg are tagged as being "fair use". However, in general, bridges are objects that anyone can take a picture of, so there's no reason to use non-free images here.
 * When I used this picture the bridge had just been opened, and this was the only image that existed of it on the web. At the time, it was a news photo.  If it gets deleted, the bridge just won't have an image. --Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. --Carnildo 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The images Image:GreatSetoBridgeSmall.jpg, Image:Shimotsui-Seto Bridge.jpg, Image:Manhattan Bridge Sunrise small.jpg are tagged as GFDL. However, they do not include the creator's copyright statement, as required by the GFDL.
 * These have all been updated, and are all from GFDL originals. What do you mean by the "creator's copyright statement?"  They are linked to the original and have the same tags, is anything else needed?  I don't have a clue what is written on these pages, I don't speak Dutch, German or whatever.  Isn't the tag enough? -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * A statement along the lines of "Original copyright (c) 2004 Joe Bloggs". If the original doesn't have a formal copyright statement, something along the lines of "Original image created by Joe Bloggs". --Carnildo 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge small.jpg has an unknown copyright status. It also has some serious color balance problems: the sky's purple.  It only shows one bridge clearly, but is used to illustrate the entries for two bridges. --Carnildo 03:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * There are two bridges in the image, the second is rather small. It is a bad image, probably from a cell phone camera. That is why I presume it is GFDL.  This was the best horizontal image I could find. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:Bb-forthroadbridge detail.jpg is tagged as "GFDL". However, the original that it's a derivative work of is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, so it needs to be licensed under that as well, and needs to indicate the original creator.
 * As I go through this list, I'm realizing that you know much more about how these images should be tagged than I do. I'd appreciate it if you could fix the tags to be the way you want them, I'm probably not doing it the way you would like. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The first rule is to read the license tag and see what it requires of re-users (and yes, modifying an image and re-uploading to Wikipedia is re-use). Free-license tags generally have links to the original license, which you can follow to find the text of the license, which has more details on what's required.  If the license requires attribution, then the name (or Wikipedia username) of the original creator had better appear on the image description page.  If the license is a "share-alike" license (most free licenses are), then the new image needs to have the same license as the original. --Carnildo 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:RedSuspensionBridge2.jpg is tagged as "GFDL". However, the original is licensed under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license, so this image must be as well.
 * Fixed. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:Sfbaybridge.jpg is licensed "for educational use only". This is not an acceptable license for Wikipedia.
 * I've changed the image for this bridge. If the old one is not acceptable for use in Wikipedia, why hasn't it be flagged? -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Because there are a quarter-million images on Wikipedia, and until May of last year, "educational use only" images were allowed. Since there's no "educational use" tag, there's no way of finding such images. --Carnildo 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The images Image:Aerial View of the Whitestone Bridge.jpg, Image:Aerial View of the Throgs Neck Bridge.jpg are tagged as "GFDL", but have no source information.
 * The image Image:Delaware Memorial Bridge.jpg is tagged as "PD-USGov", but the Delaware Bay Authority does not appear to be part of the Federal Government.
 * The images Image:Walt Whitman Bridge1.gif, Image:Tjelsund broen11.jpg have no source information.
 * I don't know anything about these pictures. I found them from the articles about the specific articles, found them tagged as GFDL and used them.  Every so often a picture disappears because it gets flagged and removed.  When this happens I go looking for a new picture.  I don't know the ins and outs of copyright, nor do I think I should be expected to track down the source of all the pictures in this list.  I was under the impression that if a picture is tagged as being GFDL or public domain, I could use it. I'll remove these pictures and look for others if you would like, but that seems unreasonable, until the picture is deleted.  They might be perfectly proper to use.  I have tried to fix all the images that I was personally responsible for. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * As a starting point, you should probably read the image use policy. Having an appropriate tag is only a minor part of this: the tag needs to be correct, the requirements of the license represented by the tag need to be followed, and independent of any requirements of the license, the image needs a source so that the correctness of the tag can be verified. --Carnildo 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:PontTancarville.jpg is sourced as being from the French Wikipedia and licensed under the GFDL. However, it does not include the creator's copyright statement (which is required by the GFDL), and it does not include a link to the original image (which would let the copyright status be verified).
 * This picture has been linked to the original. --Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The image Image:Emmerich am Rhein Osten.jpg doesn't really show the bridge.
 * I know nothing about this bridge and have no other pictures. Eventually, someone will add a better image, but for now, this is all we have. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The lack of images for many of the bridges makes the table spacing irregular. Would it be possible to insert some sort of "placeholder" image for the bridges that don't have pictures yet?
 * Yes this is possible, but most of the pictures are different sizes as well, and sometimes the text is different sizes. This doesn't bother me, and seems to be very difficult to control.  On narrow monitors the spacing changes.  I have thought that sometime in the future, when every bridge has an excellent picture, that it might be possible to get all the pictures to be the same size.  It doesn't seem worth the effort to try and do this now. -- Samuel Wantman 06:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * --Carnildo 03:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)