Talk:List of bridges in Seattle

List of bridges in Seattle is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on May 28, 2018.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 8, 2011	Peer review	Reviewed
January 13, 2015	Featured list candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured list

Bridges and Tunnels Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Civil engineering Mid‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCivil engineering
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle (assessed as Low-importance).

A template for bridge lists

Hello,

I saw this article was a FAC, so I took a look. The Bridge project doesn't seem to have a template to make lists, because of that, lists are inconsistent. For highways we have {{Routelist row}} (top, bottom). I think this would be a good idea for this project/article as well. I tried to make a simple template on a user page: User:TheWombatGuru/TestBridgelist . As you can see it has the same info as the article, and when editing looks a lot clearer. Of course it's not finished and won't work in all cases because of that. Any thoughts about this? TheWombatGuru (talk) 12:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about a separate column for refs?Cptnono (talk) 19:10, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We could do that, but then you won't see immediately what ref is for what column. TheWombatGuru (talk) 12:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on the fence. It would make creation a little easier. It could even help the reader in fact checking. There would be some things lost. Not sure how I feel about it.Cptnono (talk) 05:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For fact checking the reader could easily go to the references section as the references are listed together if they are all in the table. TheWombatGuru (talk) 13:47, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of bridges in Seattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090217203510/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/pacificnw/2001/0812/nowthen.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/pacificnw/2001/0812/nowthen.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of bridges in Seattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:34, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of bridges in Seattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060330171012/http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/magbridgenews020906.htm to http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/magbridgenews020906.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of bridges in Seattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160417205923/http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/F8E05309-7D6F-4A83-801F-A69BB5369D51/0/2016_FBL_TrafficSwitch_Overview.pdf to http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/F8E05309-7D6F-4A83-801F-A69BB5369D51/0/2016_FBL_TrafficSwitch_Overview.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Demolished or defunct bridges

I've added four that were missing, and three photos. There are quite a few others, perhaps as many as a dozen. There is a lot of work to do here. - Jmabel | Talk 04:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably limit it to major bridges, otherwise there will be a lot of entries that will be hard to find good sources for. Sounder Bruce 05:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but all four I recently added were at least as prominent in their time as the ones that were already here, and there are other quite prominent ones that are still missing. - Jmabel | Talk 01:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm worried about maintaining the FL status for this list, so perhaps we should pare it down to bridges with articles and complete data (e.g. no circa or estimated dates). Sounder Bruce 02:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, if you push back to the 19th- and early 20th-century, and if you stick to what is actually known with confidence, you inevitably get a lot of "circa" dates. As Rob Ketcherside's recent research has been showing, a lot of supposedly definitive dates from that era just trace back to early Seattle historians making stuff up and not acknowledging the uncertainty. So you can find plenty of confident statements in secondary sources, but most of those are based on very little.

I think it's absurd to say that the article is somehow better if it completely omits mention of important bridges because the information about them is less exactly known. If the only reason it's featured is that the reviewers don't know what was left out, that is not an argument to leave things out to keep it featured. - Jmabel | Talk 05:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's about scope creep. The FL was passed when the list only included current/standing bridges. I started the Defunct section in order to preserve the viaduct entry. Sounder Bruce 05:44, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then maybe we need a separate list article on defunct bridges, because there are a ton of them, and Wikipedia has largely overlooked them. - Jmabel | Talk 06:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is pretty cool you two added old bridges. When I was going for FL I was focused on current bridges that were at least notable enough to have there own article (I spent a surprising amount of time looking for more info on the BNSF Duwamish bridge https://bridgehunter.com/wa/king/bh48614/ but couldn't find enough to include it). I really am interested in the bridge seen in the oldest drawings that show a pier or bridge around where the stadiums are now. I don't think we are risk of losing the featured status just yet so I added a few myself. Obviously not good enough yet, but I don't think the readers will mind as much as a peer reviewer. Also, Jmabel should be best friends with this guy: https://pauldorpat.com/ Really cool shit. Cptnono (talk) 05:39, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So poking around more and I get the reservation since there are so many random bridges in the history of the city that aren't worthy of attention. I don't think an FL can support non-notable spans. However, I do think several defunct bridges are notable. My quick thoughts 1) I added Grant Street Bridge and think it is notable (will create an article). The previous Fremont spans may not be notable; not redlinked but not sure if they belong. 3) I added Latona, Fairview, and Post... at least Post is not notable and will never link to an article. 4) This has still been a good exercise and bridges and sources and always be cut and paste into the appropriate articles. 5) Part of me wants to see if we can almost duplicate this to a tunnel list or merge it here. I don't have strong feelings on any of it either way at the moment.Cptnono (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to set a minimum standard for what can be included in this list, much like how List of tallest buildings in Seattle does not include high-rises under 400 feet. Otherwise we are going to have a lot of weird entries, like highway overpasses and short pedestrian bridges. Sounder Bruce 06:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a solution.

1) Remove the defunct table

2) Add a column to the main list titled "previous spans or future replacements"--This will allow for bluelinks to articles and even non-linked notes regarding history and/or future.

3) Add a grey coloring to cells in the rows of bridges that are no longer in use or undergoing replacement.

This keeps all notable bridges, past (like the Viaduct) and present, in the article while eliminating multiple Fremont or 520 rows. Will be better organized and should be better for the reader.

I do plan on screwing around with the current format for a bit more since it is a good depository, but I will make the change if I get to it and will be OK if people revert due to it sucking. I will attempt to move all the West Seattle stuff in to the article so it is not lost. Sound like a possible option?Cptnono (talk) 06:56, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For review: [1]

Here's at least one useful reference if anyone wants to expand this. https://streetsmartnaturalist.substack.com/p/bridges-of-the-ship-canal-part-1?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR3eT_Zx1UUDxJqtFk6hwRBLjmZKYQu2Axe6FmCCdOyWRPy-8j84PCMi-mY David B. Williams should count as a reliable source, he has written several books on Seattle published by major presses. - Jmabel | Talk 15:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]