Talk:Golden Gate Bridge/Archive 1

message: Here is another suggestion: :Image:Golden_Gate_Bridge_2003.jpg would be better suited to illustrate the paintwork section. :Image:Ggb03162006a.jpg could then be moved to the photo section, where it would complement this daytime pano. Any opinions? Oh, and :Image:108972157 l.jpg should be removed from the gallery, it has extremely low quality and is kind of redundant. --Dschwen 15:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Paintwork and nighttime pano

message: I have no source for this, except remembering reading this, perhaps someone can put their hand on it.  The GGB is not continuously painted from one end to the other on a yearly basis, nor does it need repainting because of fading pigments, but mostly needs to be painted at certain points that rust most easily.  BLP 06:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constantly being painted/fading paint 

message: Anyone have a count of how many lives were lost during construction? --Duemellon 14:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ppl dying while building 

message: Article: On weekday mornings, traffic flows mostly southbound into the city, so four of the six lanes run southbound. Conversely, on weekday afternoons, three lanes run northbound.
In the afternoon, isn't the bridge four lanes northbound? I don't want to change the article because I'm not too sure myself. Also, why is this in the history section anyway? Soltras 17:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Lanes 

message: This article needs a picture of the bridge when the fog is rolling in.  Preferably with the towers peeking through the fog bank. That is one of the more distinguishing and signature views of this bridge. i am imagining something along the lines of the following two picture   David D. (Talk) 08:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fog

message: The Golden Gate Bridge is the only toll bridge in the San Francisco Bay Area not maintained by the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), but by the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (as already stated in the infobox).   This is even though U.S. Highway 101 and California State Route 1 traverse across the bridge, in actuality, the highways are discontinued between the ends of the bridge.  Even more, Route 1 is not even legislatively defined where it runs concurrent with Highway 101, as are all state highways that run concurrently with U.S. and Interstate highways in California. Thus, the highways are there by signage only. --Geopgeop 11:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintenance and definition 

message: References is the main reason on why I failed the article, also not a big fan of the gallery section, should be on commons --Jaranda wat's sup 21:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed GA 

message: Is Jump for Life really an alternative to a suicide barrier by any means? Stack 02:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jump for Life in place of a suicide barrier? 

message: Is it true that the Golden Gate Bridge is visible from (outer) space, or even the International Space Station?  User:Raccoon Fox - Talk  14:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visibility 

message: Whoever erased Stunt Island, claiming unsourced edit, might just as well erase all games from the list. Otherwise, please stay put. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.136.128.14 (talk) 04:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The In fiction and film section is excessively large. I support the cleanup suggested above, leaving only the most notable instances, supported by sources independent of the work itself. ✤ JonHarder talk 13:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. Unless sources can be provided for any or all, the list begins to approach original research. Morenooso 00:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To expand on my "most notable instances" above, works that have the bridge in the background or mention the bridge don't belong here, no matter how well they are sourced. The bridge needs to be integral to the plot. The current list is mostly trivia. ✤ JonHarder talk 01:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me say that GTA: San Andreas and Stunt Island are both games where the bridge is an active part of the game. In GTA, even though you can cross the river by air (helicopter or plane) or swimming, the gameplay suggests you drive because it's much easier to steal a car (they're everywhere) and takes less time to cross than swimming. In Stunt Island, one of the stunts requires you to land a plane on the bridge. Actually, they didn't even rename the bridge in SI. 193.136.128.14 01:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like something that is more relevant and approrpiate for the game articles than to this article. The bridge may be important to the game, but the game is not important to (understanding) the bridge. It isn't a symmetric relationship and I don't think it needs to be mentioned here. ✤ JonHarder talk 00:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, but then that applies to many other references there, other than games. I suggest creating a new article about fiction references, done in many other cases like this. Usually, these lists are "reverse lists" that help to find what's related with what, and are not (generally) useful in encyclopedic content. 193.136.128.14 19:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Concur with JonHarder talk. Ronbo76 01:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction - Games - Stunt Island 

message: Before an edit war breaks out here, let's talk about this with all editors. Should this section even be included in the article? It has almost next to nothing to do with the article's subject. Roguegeek (talk) 04:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Too many images, most are "artsy" and do not represent the subject very well.  A few are quite nice, maybe use one of the more striking images that is clearly the GGB in the Aesthetics section, and include a sentence about it in the prose.  The entire section is a non sequitur in content and style, and should not be present.  -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 05:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atmospheric optics 

message: I thought this article  may be interest to those maintaining this article.  --Gopherbone 17:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Charles A. Ellis

message: This section seems rather silly. You could add every representation of the bridge in any TV show or movie that was set in San Francisco. It should be eliminated or reduced to only particular scenes set on or about the bridge itself. Happywaffle (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture

message: Final paragraph of the Design section repeats information from the first paragraph(s) regarding Charles Ellis, and presents it as though it had not been brought up previously. Erendwyn (talk) 20:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Design Section 

message: Why is there a decent-sized chunk-o-text about the ferry service in the history of the Golden Gate Bridge? It might be worth a passing mention, but only a mention... this article *is* about the bridge and not a history of SF bay crossings, right? Any objections if I remove it?
WikiLimey (talk) 07:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ferry service? 

message: I'm considering rewriting the article soon (next few days, when I have a chance) to incorporate some the still-unimplemented 2005 peer review comments, and to improve organization.  So hang on to your hats!  And please suggest anything you think needs attention.Wikidemo 00:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I started by renaming, blocking, and arranging major sections.  It's clear that some of the information is out of place and does not logically flow, or is contradictory, so some of the info will be have to moved among sections.  I'll do that soon.  This also makes the holes in the coverage more obvious.  There's little discussion of the settings, finance/economics, management, or physical description of the bridge.  Although trivia should be discouraged it might be worthwhile to describe how the bridge affects culture in San Francisco, how it is perceived in the world, tourism, etc.  This all messes up the image placement - the images will have to be moved around, but maybe later once the overall text has settled.  Wikidemo 00:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems like a good opportunity to archive this page. ☑ SamuelWantman 03:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I might need to see if there are any strong concerns there but I can just go back in the history.  I'm taking an overnight break now but I'll be tidying up afterwards.  In some cases it gets a little worse before it gets better, e.g. my preliminary sections on the bridge structure and specifications.  Those need to be filled out, but we really ought to have some prose description beyond the infobox of the bridge's basic structure.  Wikidemo 04:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Art section has some peacock language -- and the puzzling assertion that the bridge is more beautiful in Oct.-Nov.? Why? Unimaginative Username 06:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This might be because October and November is a period when fog is less likely to obscure the bridge.  It is always prettier when you can actually see it. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 08:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Raises the interesting philosophical question: If a beautiful woman walks through a forest where no one can see her, is she not beautiful? ok, j/k -- but unless the fog is there 24/7 the other ten months of the year (it isn't; been there, done that), the assertion isn't necessarily true. Your explanation makes sense, but would zero-knowledge readers understand that? Regards, Unimaginative Username 06:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The first paragraph of the art section is fluffly.  Whether true or not it is just praise, opinion, and judgment, not encyclopedic stuff.  If it's still there when I get to it I'll try to replace it with something more authoritative and sourced.  If you find any good sources discussing that, please do add some material there.  Wikidemo 10:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks -- that's what I was trying to say in my OP on the topic. Unimaginative Username 06:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The Golden Gate has the second longest suspension bridge span in the US.  The length of the longest span is the customary way to rank suspension bridges.  This should be made clear by using the term suspension bridge span whenever discussing ranking. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 21:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite article 

message: There are so many petty vandals all of a sudden?  Do vandals have a watch list?  BTW, I've just expanded the part of the history section, though I still need to add more detail, fact-checking, and sources to the design and construction parts.  After that I'll be going through some other sections one by one and probably adding a couple.  So if anyone things I'm going about it wrong or need some pointers, now is the time.  I'm not good enough to bring an article to featured article status all by myself but maybe this can be a good article (GA) again, and a more complete resource for the world to know about the bridge.Wikidemo 18:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Golden Gate has the second longest suspension bridge span in the US.  The length of the longest span is the customary way to rank suspension bridges.  This should be made clear by using the term suspension bridge span whenever discussing ranking. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 21:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How come?

message: A picture in the Aesthetics section is overlaying some text.  Does anyone know how to fix this? SkipSmith (talk) 06:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a shot at a fix.  The problem was the pictures on the left and right are placed on the same line, and the picture on the right was pushed down past the start of the section by the larger picture above it, pushing down the picture on the left over some text.  I moved the picture on the left down to the next paragraph. SkipSmith (talk) 07:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just finished some pretty extensive style fixes with the layout. The major problems, like text trapping, are fixed. Also did a lot of other style fixes which dealt with things like citation fixes, spacing, and what not. Roguegeek (talk) 10:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem with Picture

message: I'm getting pretty sick of the repeated vandalism of this page by IP-only editors. For that reason I requested and was granted a five day semi-protection status for the page which stops anonymous editors changing the page. This isn't an ideal solution but five days peace and quiet from the constant anti-vandal work on this page might be worth it. When the protected period expires it will be interesting to see if vandalism returns to previous levels. If it does then I'd appreciate other editors support in requesting protection again. --TimTay (talk) 23:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated vandalsim 

message: In the suicide section, it states that the person would be going approximately 75 mi/h or 121 km/h when they hit the water after falling for approximately 4 seconds from a 260 ft (79.25 m) drop. Using basic physics, the 4 seconds time is easily verifiable by the equation x = v0t + (gt2)/2, where x is the distance, v0 is the initial velocity, g is acceleration on Earth for a free falling body, and t is time (comes out to about 4.02 seconds). However, the speed is off by the formula v = v0 + gt. The initial velocity is 0, making it v = gt. Plugging in the known 4.02 seconds for t and 9.8 m/s2 for g, this comes out to about 39.41 m/s, which is equal to 141.88 km/h, or approximately 88 mi/h (87.95 mi/h).--十八 06:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Air resistance. That's probably why it is 121 km/h rather than 141.88 km/h. 140.247.41.252 (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that air resistance would slow you down that much. Read Terminal velocity. - SCgatorFan (talk) 14:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends what you are wearing.  Also, air resistance tends to be roughly proportional to the square of speed.  Perhaps we should give a range of speeds.  Dbfirs 18:27, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Air resistance for a human body in air can't noticeably slow down the person at a 80 meter freefall. The correct speed should be 142 km/h. Even if the 121 km/h figure is correct, that gives a duration of 4.7 s, give or take, which is in turn rounded to five seconds. Thus, either way, the current figures in the article are incorrect. Admiral Norton (talk) 12:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree that air resistance would not make a big difference in most circumstances, so the given figure was too small.  Would you agree on "up to 140 km/mh" ?  I note that the incorrect figure has been changed now.  Dbfirs 17:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that would suffice.  Admiral Norton (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The motion is governed by the Stokes equation. It is a complicated equation, because it depends on the actual shape of the falling object (e.g. a person with a parachute drops slower). Generally speaking, the acceleration is not constant (as assumed by the above equations), but the velocity becomes constant after some time as soon as the air resistance becomes just as strong as the gravity force. I don't have actual numbers but I suspect that air resistance can not be neglected. At nearly 100 mph the air resistance is strong. Rbakels (talk) 06:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slight physics discrepency 

message: The current revision gives an unsatisfying account of the name "Golden Gate Bridge". http://goldengatebridge.org/research/facts.php#Name states: "The Golden Gate Strait is the entrance to the San Francisco Bay from the Pacific Ocean.  The strait is approximately three-miles long by one-mile wide with currents ranging from 4.5 to 7.5 knots.  It is generally accepted that the strait was named "Chrysopylae", or Golden Gate, by John C. Fremont, Captain, topographical Engineers of the U.S. Army circa 1846.  It reminded him of a harbor in Instanbul named Chrysoceras or Golden Horn." I can't find satisfactory references to back this up. Anyone? johndbeatty (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Name 

message: Here is what we can read in the current revision under the suicide section:
"The water may be as cold as 47 °F (8 °C), and great white sharks, which tend to congregate around the Farallon Islands, are sometimes seen under the bridge."
I add [citation needed] because on this article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_Shark, we can read the opposite: 
"There are no known sightings of Great White sharks in San Francisco Bay."
Can somebody please clarify this, on both articles ?
::They're both wrong.  There has been at least one sighting of a White shark in SF Bay, but there has never been a confirmed sighting under the bridge.  http://cbs5.com/goodquestion/good.question.great.2.448521.html SkipSmith (talk) 18:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  White Sharks in the Suicide section 

message: The recent toll increase to $6 had me wondering what the toll history was on the bridge. I found the following toll rates and increases online from the Marin Independent Journal:
May 1937: 50 cents each way, with a 5-cent extra charge if more than three passengers
July 1950: 40 cents each way
February 1955: 30 cents each way
October 1955: 25 cents each way
October 1968: 50 cents southbound
March 1974: 75 cents southbound
November 1977: $1 southbound
March 1981: $1.25 southbound
December 1981: $2 southbound toll on Fridays and Saturdays, $1 on all other days
July 1991: $3 southbound
July 2000: FasTrak implemented
September 2002: $5 cash toll; $4 FasTrak southbound
September 2008: $6 cash toll; $5 FasTrak southbound
I'm not sure how to include that in the article but it might be noteworthy. http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_10367953
Skywayman (talk) 23:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toll History 

message: I notice vid of opening ceremony says 1936. All other facts in article state May 1937
Maybe correct so all is same.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.56.135 (talk) 11:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed the same thing and tried to change the caption under the video. I accidentally changed the name of the file on the Edit page, and the video didn't open. Then I went back in and fixed the video name and changed the caption to 1937, matching the text. But now the vid file won't open. Perhaps someone has some insight? Javalava14 (talk) 03:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? Opening date conflict. 

message: According to many sources (; ), Joshua A Norton, a San Fransiscan who declared himself Emperor Norton of the United States, once ordered a bridge be built in almost the same location, years before the actual bridge was ordered.  There's a section on it on the article about Norton, perhaps there's room to note that somewhere in here? Mnmazur (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong bridge.  Try San Francisco Bay Bridge. - Denimadept (talk) 02:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Aah, I am an idiot ;)  Thanks. Mnmazur (talk) 02:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just sorry to hear that Oakland is being a dick. That bridge should be named for Norton. - Denimadept (talk) 03:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: I happen to be a local of SF, and I think that the Golden Gate Bridge has only 5 lanes. Of course I didn't edit since it is original research 98.248.143.151 (talk) 05:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The image in the article clearly shows 6 lanes. Asher196 (talk) 00:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 6 lanes?

message: WikiProject California take a bow! ----moreno oso (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Woo hoo On This Day

message: This section had turned into a list of only marginally related bridges. It appeared mis-hap which other suspension bridges were selected to be there. I took out the list of bridges and tried to come up with a true list of "related" articles. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 21:59, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also section 

message: "The eastern walkway is for pedestrians and bicycles during the weekdays and during daylight hours only (6:30 am to 3:30 pm), and the western walkway is open to bicyclists on weekday afternoons (after 3:30 pm), weekends, and holidays (3:30 pm to 6:30 am)."
This sentence is ambiguous in about four different ways and needs clarification.   Is the bridge always closed to pedestrians after 3:30 PM ?    Thats what it says....   122.106.246.138 (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous sentence 

message: I've removed the gallery, removed a bunch of pictures including one duplicate, and added a link to Commons.  Some of the removed pictures were wonderful, no lie, but they were showing up as thumbs.  That's too small to do them justice and we have tons of these pictures.  Pruned the images back to ones I think can be more readily justified, and left the others for people to see in Commons.  If you have issues with my selection, please discuss it here rather than just reverting. - Denimadept (talk) 00:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture pruning 

message: The text currently reads, "one young woman, Sara Birnbaum, survived, but..."one young man survived a jump in 1979, swam to shore, and drove himself to a hospital. " Using the term "young woman" or "young man" is non-specific and does not fit in an "encyclopedia" Their age needs to be stated, or the adjective removed.  Since "citation needed" is used with one of the claims, then the entire things is ultimately pointless. If there is no citation, then it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Oh, wait, that's right, wikipedia isn't a real encyclopedia. never mind.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.22.92.21 (talk) 02:47, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was an article, merged into "The Bridge" article.  If you go to Gene Sprague, you'll find it's a redirect.  It used to be its own article.  I've removed the link from this article because we've already got a link to The Bridge. - Denimadept (talk) 20:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

text: The Nanjing Yangtze River Bridge doesn't have a cite for that figure.  I've requested one.  The GGB does have a cite. - Denimadept (talk) 21:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suicide section 

message: ... according to Frommers, a US source.
As opposed to much older bridges, like the Brooklyn Bridge, Tower Bridge, the Ponte Vecchio, the Rialto Bridge, the Bridge of Sighs?
Why does this sound like a throwaway remark by a Frommers author?
Varlaam (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Most photographed" ... 

message: When did those come to an end?
I happen to have seen a movie showing northbound booths obstructing traffic in 1967.
Varlaam (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northbound tolls 

message: Surely this is worthy of mention, near the suicide area of the page, or anywhere else.
There was a gap in the bridge between the walkway and the road, and a little girl died falling through it in 1997.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/e/a/1997/12/23/NEWS5572.dtl 
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1997/12/24/MN56134.DTL
That story is very sad, and very personal to me, because my brothers and I were walking across the bridge in about 1994-1995 (I lived in SF all my life) and my little brother (about 5 or 6 at the time) fell through the exact same gap on accident after tripping, and my dad dove up to his shoulder in that hole, and barely grabbed my brother's ankle before he fell through to his death. One quarter second more, and my brother would have been the one that died, and not the little girl. I have no doubt they would have fixed it if my brother had fallen (we were about 2/3 of the way back from the north end to the SF end), but unfortunately the city did not listen to my father's complaint, and the tragic part is that the little girl's death could have been prevented if SF would have listened, and fixed the problem two years before that girl had ever died.
I thank God that my brother is alive today. He's turning 23 this year, and just graduated from college last spring.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.27.133 (talk) 10:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walkway Gap 

message: Any damage, was it closed? 209.225.141.253 (talk) 17:03, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1989 Earthquake 

message: —′You forgot to mention in your article the John A. Roebling Steel and Wire Co.  How dare you!!  They made the cables for the suspension part of the bridge.  Their factory was located in Roebling, NJ.  My paternal grandfather, a Hungarian immigrant, helped make the wires that made up that bridge. The Roeblings would turn over in their graves knowing that you grossly neglected to mention them. And Roebling had factories in Trenton, NJ, and I lived near them as a child.  FIX THIS ARTICLE!!!  Marilyn R. Carrier May 27, 2012  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.68.136 (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't insult, write yourself. BTW, the company clearly is mentioned in the picture about the cable display. --79.229.156.18 (talk) 08:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Gate Bridge 

message: This sfgate article says "officers rode an elevator to the top of the tower."
I assume there's an elevator shaft inside each tower.  this document (on PDF page 13 which is page 11 of the scanned document) mentions an elevator but that was during construction of the bridge and may well have been an external elevator that was later removed. This report seems to confirm there was an external construction elevator.
The internal elevators seem to exist.
this page has an image of the motor (image 17 on the page) and a link to the controller.
The main issue I see with documenting the elevators for Wikipedia is that the sources are not good quality WP:RS. --Marc Kupper|talk 22:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevator 

message: I recently added information about bus service to the "Traffic" section of the article. There is also already information about walking and bicycling. Given that this section seems to be as much about bridge access and users than, say, traffic volumes, maybe it's time to rename the section or create separate sections about the number of users and the types of users. How do people feel about renaming it to something like "Bridge Users and Access"? Sirwalterralegh (talk) 21:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems like a good idea but rather than renaming the section I split it into two sections with the first dedicated to vehicle traffic and the second to the other users. I called the new section "Visiting the bridge" though it's not clear if those bus lines are all for getting to the bridge or if some of them cross the bridge without stopping. --Marc Kupper|talk 00:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traffic 

message: The article compares the Golden Gate Bridge with Aokigahara forest in terms of numbers of suicides. The wording is just problematic, because it compares a suicide rate of every two weeks for the Golden Gate Bridge with a suicide rate of 30 per year for Aokigahara Forest. Logically, this would make Golden Gate Bridge #2 because it has around 26 suicides on average. Maybe someone can fix the wording, perhaps just by removing the over-detailed information about the forest in Japan. Twocs (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suicide Section 

message: The construction date and cost $35M had an invisible question which I have removed and post here.
'note: this contradicts later statements. What was initial budget?'.   Cites say the amount and that it was ahead of schedule and under budget, but to make sure this isn't revisionist history, can anyone cite the actual initial budget or estimates which is prior to 1933 ? Markbassett (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction query 

message: Dd  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.24.201.149 (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the Golden Gate Bridge located? 

message: Per discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Page murder/suicide incident, I made a WP:BOLD move and created a separate article, Suicides at the Golden Gate Bridge.  I'm letting those who have watchlisted this article know so that the appropriate discussion about merging can take place. -- WV ● ✉ ✓  19:55, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  Note the section two above this one. - Denimadept (talk) 23:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I saw it after I had written this.  Then had to make sure I didn't make a major error and created another "Suicides..." article.  I didn't, thank goodness! -- WV ● ✉ ✓  23:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suicides at bridge article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Golden Gate Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100802060056/http://www.asce.org:80/Content.aspx?id=2147487305 to http://www.asce.org/Content.aspx?id=2147487305
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150112124008/http://goldengatebridge.org/projects/MovableMedianBarrier.php to http://goldengatebridge.org/projects/MovableMedianBarrier.php
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://keerc.snu.ac.kr/bridge/lecture/bridge/Bridge%20Design-3.pdf
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/031013fa_fact?
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Golden Gate Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110716104648/http://www.sonomanews.com/articles/2008/05/30/news/doc482cdfd074f2a552247919.txt to http://www.sonomanews.com/articles/2008/05/30/news/doc482cdfd074f2a552247919.txt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is 80 years old vice 79 76.217.132.35 (talk) 19:24, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. ChamithN (talk) 21:13, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

text: I have tweaked the start date and age unit from the Brooklyn Bridge and it has changed to 80. Britmax (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2017 

message: The section "Traffic" includes this sentence:
″To improve safety, the speed limit on the Golden Gate Bridge was reduced from 50 to 45 mph (80 to 72 km/h) on October 1, 1989.[52]″
However the link in footnote 52 states the date as October 1, 1983.
Paul Penna (talk) 05:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speed limit citation misquoted 

message: In the opening text, change 1,300 m to 1.280 m, otherwise the span appears longer than Verrazano-Narrows (1.298 m), a bridge which surpassed it in span record. The 1.280 m appear in other places on the page, but the opening text is the most read for this information. JohnTerp (talk) 04:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done  The change seems reasonable, so I've changed the conversion to use 3 significant figures.  Murph9000 (talk) 11:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2017 

message: Theroadgal 23:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2017 

message: PLEASE CHANGE "The color of the bridge is officially an orange vermilion called international orange.[43]" TO "The color of the bridge is officially Grey." 
THE COLOR IS OFFICIALLY GREY. IT HAS BEEN FOR YEARS. THIS IS PROVEN WITH PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE. I TRIED TO UPLOAD AN IMAGE AS PROOF BUT YOUR SITE WILL NOT ALLOW IT. Fusionsportusa (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. See Help:Menu/Images and media for image uploading information.  We generally don't, however, change factual statements that are supported by cited sources just because of one person's interpretation of a photo.  Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Golden Gate Bridge. 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/20060718052702/http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/news_events/exhibits/bridge/up028.html to http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/news_events/exhibits/bridge/up028.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article incorrectly states the date the speed limit was changed from 50 MPH to 45 MPH as October 1, 1989. The citation for that claim, http://goldengatebridge.org/research/dates.php, lists the date of that change as October 1, 1983. 199.106.103.55 (talk) 01:30, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done  Ivecos (t) 06:27, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2018