Wikipedia:Peer review/George Washington Memorial Bridge/archive1

George Washington Memorial Bridge
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it as a Good Article candidate. I've added many new references and pictures to expand upon the existing sections. Other sections may need to be added, so I would like input on that and where I could add more sources or expand on information already in the article.

Thanks,

Cumulus Clouds 20:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[From MeegsC]: I'll start by saying this is my first bridge article review, so if any of the following doesn't seem appropriate, feel free to ignore it!
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 04:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * There are a couple of problems with the lead. First, it's recommended that you don't include anything there that you don't also include in the article.  That's a bit tough with one this short, but you might want to move very specific details, like the bridge dimensions, down into the article itself.  That said, the lead is currently a bit short.  Generally, you want to include salient facts from each section of the article, so you'll probably want to briefly mention something about it becoming a "suicide bridge".  Not sure if you need to mention the accident, but you might give it a sentence in the same lead paragraph.
 * Is there any information about why the bridge was named for Washington?
 * A re there any details as to what, in particular, justified its listing on the National Register of Historic Places?
 * I've put in a request to NRIS for their file on this property, including its nomination. Once I have that, I'll scan it, put it online and cite the material. They said it would take them 2-3 weeks. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC) ✅
 * Are any stats available re: amount of traffic per year, whether that's increasing or decreasing, etc. How many was it projected to carry? Is the real total higher or lower? Stuff like that.
 * Yes! I found the WSDOT's Annual Traffic Report, and it includes traffic statistics for locations along SR 99. (For my information: 2006-125). Cumulus Clouds (talk) 23:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The article says the design "was awarded to" a local architecture firm. Did they design it?  If so, this statement is confusing and should be reworded. - ✅
 * Were the builders local? Any trouble with schedules, deaths during construction, etc.? (Just trying to think of ways you might expand the article a little, if appropriate...)
 * You should replace the double dashes "--" with em-dashes "&mdash;" to meet WP:MOS standards. ✅

Good luck getting it to GA! MeegsC | Talk 00:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Those are good recommendations and I will be sure to revise accordingly! Thank you! Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)