This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places
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
Great job with this list-article, Elkman! I just visited the individual bridge articles that have bluelinks and, for the just 3 of those which carry NRHP infoboxes, i wikilinked them back to here. I wonder, it is not really clear in the narration that this was a discrete, one-time study ending in 1989. I think the 1989 date should be clear in the intro. Anyhow, it's very informative. doncram (talk) 04:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Possible development of article and possible rename
Per some ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Article name and missing bridge questions, I wonder if this article should be refocused upon the topic of Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges in Minnesota, and moved away from being about the MPS which was a one-time study in 1989. This would involve renaming to drop MPS from the article title. As a refocused article, a new intro should assert importance of the topic, and that should be explained in the article. I don't think it should be assumed to be clear that just because there was an MPS study, that the topic is wikipedia-notable. I rather expect that the topic is wikipedia-notable, but that should be developed. Can that be done? doncram (talk) 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
