Template talk:Did you know/Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1[edit]

Archived nomination
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk)

Steam train crossing BNSF Bridge 5.1

  • ALT1:... that the Willamette River Bridge of BNSF in Portland, Oregon, which once had the world's longest swing span, was converted in 1989 to one of the world's highest vertical-lift spans?
  • ALT2:... that the Willamette River Bridge of BNSF in Portland, Oregon, which was built in 1908 with the world's longest swing span, was converted in 1989 to one of the world's highest vertical-lift spans?
  • Reviewed: The First Domino ([1])
  • Comment: Alts 1 and 2 use a different name for the article, but it is one of multiple common names for this bridge, as the article's lead indicates (with supporting citations); I used another in the caption, to keep it short, but that can be changed if desired. Alts 1 and 2 give more geographical info. (name of river) and allow the owner railway to be linked separately but Alt1 omits year of bridge's original construction (as a swing-span bridge). All are under 200 characters. Other name+phrasing combinations are possible. For the article, I had to rely heavily on offline sources, but they are RS, and I worked hard to ensure there was no close paraphrasing of sources. (Indeed, if the reviewer finds the occasional awkward phrasing, a likely reason for it is my effort to avoid close paraphrasing.) Regarding the railroad names: BNSF has owned the bridge for 15 years, but predecessor Burlington Northern owned it for 26 years and owned it at the time of the major change from swing span to vertical lift. For these and other reasons, I've left the article's title unchanged, using the name of 1970-1996 owner (BN).

5x expanded by SJ Morg (talk). Self nom at 10:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please add a comment and signature (or just a signature if endorsing) after each aspect you have reviewed:
Hook

Article

Comments/discussion:

Could the hooks be trimmed? Otherwise, everything is fine. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted to Prep with hook shortened to "that the Willamette River Bridge in Portland, Oregon, which once had the world's longest swing span, was converted in 1989 to one of the world's highest vertical-lift spans?". Removed from prep after complaint by author to await a hook that has everybody's approval Sharktopus talk 20:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Creator expressed concerns on talk page about hook wording. Here's a possible alt to address the concerns:
  • Thanks, Orlady, but this is actually 11 characters longer than my Alt1. (I count 182 for Alt1, 196 for Alt2, 193 for Alt3.) Sharktopus, I hope you are not implying I expected "approval" rights for the hook. I only expected to have a chance to comment, but the hook went from being completely unreviewed by anyone to being in Prep within about a 3-hour period, so even though I was watching carefully, that happened while I was sleeping (literally).
    As to shortening it: I'll try here, but not sure what to suggest, because: (1) the bridge's name cannot easily be shortened and (2) the bridge had two major distinctions, and are you (Crisco) suggesting we mention only one? If so, it's a reasonable suggestion (although my opinion would differ), but I would not be able easily to pick one to include — The vertical-lift configuration is the current configuration and the subject of most of the available photos (in article and in linked Commons cat), but is only "one of the world's highest", whereas the swing span config. is a "world's longest" distinction and lasted for 81 years (4x the other configuration). So, which one is more notable? If omitting one of those was not what you had in mind, I'd welcome more input. The year 1908 could be omitted (as I did myself in Alt1).
  • Last I knew (although I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Tony1 has unilaterally decreed otherwise), the character count limit for hooks was 200, so all of these would qualify. --Orlady (talk) 13:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing has changed, just worried about the hook being a little long. Succinct is usually better, and a great improvement like this deserves as many views as possible. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the bridge's name: As I wrote on the main DYK talk page, the city of Portland alone has eleven "Willamette River bridges" and three two are railroad bridges. The hook needs to include "of BNSF Railway" or "of BNSF", because without that, the name "Willamette River Bridge" is an incorrect name, too vague (it's a common name for it, here, but only in context). As mentioned in the article's lead, "BNSF Railway Bridge 5.1" and "St. Johns Railroad Bridge" are alternative names for the bridge (and both are a few characters shorter than the two I suggested for the hook), but both are less commonly used here in Portland than the two names I'd offered. However, I wouldn't have any objection to using one of those as a substitute in the original hook or in Alts 1 or 2, if preferred, saving about 15 characters. For example, taking Alt1 and substituting:

BNSF Bridge 5.1 fully raised

If you find any of these acceptable, my personal preference would be for Alt6, or second Alt5, for the reasons I mentioned in parentheses after Alt4. Thanks for opportunity to comment. SJ Morg (talk) 07:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If a name using "Willamette River" is greatly preferred, how about my Alt2 but with the words "which was" deleted:
If possible, just the swing span information would be enough (in my opinion). Otherwise, ALT5 is nice. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be perfectly happy with ALT5. SJ Morg (talk) 11:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT5 good to go. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. By the way, there are other images available for consideration, and I've placed one next to ALT5. The one I submitted with the nom, although very nice (it has a steam train crossing), I concede may not look very good at 100px. One of the others might be appealing, the one I've placed next to ALT5 or possibly this one, but I realize an image is not essential. SJ Morg (talk) 14:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The one next to ALT5 is nice. The raised one isn't that good, methinks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know/Burlington_Northern_Railroad_Bridge_5.1&oldid=1138629267"