Talk:Benjamin Franklin Bridge

message: What is the ID# in the chart? == Samuel Wantman 19:22, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about explaining this at National Bridge Inventory (or whatever it should be titled) and then linking "ID Number" on the chart?  ==Samuel Wantman 23:54, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, not a bad idea. Not sure if that's the best place to have the explanation, as it's a state-level numbering, but I can't think of any better place. Will do. --SPUI (talk) 00:30, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've created a stub there. --SPUI (talk) 00:39, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Chart

message: Here is the discussion regarding categorization: Wikipedia_talk:Categorization#Categories_and_subcategories.  Here is the discussion about bridge categories specificially: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Bridges#Categorization and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Bridges#Bridge_Categorization   Cacophony 08:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cacophony is correct.  The issue has been discussed for over a year, leading to a recent rewrite with the guideline changes. Bridges should be in both geographical subcategories and toll bridge subcategories. -- Samuel Wantman 08:10, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: BTW, this is consistant with the categorization of every other bridge in the USA. -- Samuel Wantman 08:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an "issue", if one can say that, that is being made far more complex and confusing then it need be. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The droping of the Bridges in Foo category, does address this issue, and prevents the redundant listing of articles in both sub-cats and the parent cats, which is the issue that i am trying to address here. The Category of Toll bridges in Foo, does satasify both the so called toll brodge and geographic requirement. This sub cat is listed in Bridges in Foo, which would satasify the Bridges by geeographic location requairment, and Toll Brodges in the United States, which also satasifies geographic requiremnts as well as the toll bridge requiremnt being that the category is also a sub in Toll Bridges. With the one category type meeting the "requirements" then the addation of the Bridges in Foo category to articles with the present Toll Bridges in Foo only goes to create a redudant listing. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: (edit conflict so some of this is duplication)  After a year of discussion, the consensus is that categorization is primarily a means of browsing.  Subcategorization was very important before it was possible to navigate around large categories with a table of contents.  With the advent of CategoryTOC it is now possible to navigate categories with thousands of articles.  Recent discussions have been talking about having sub-categories fully populated up to the "subject article" level, so for example, :Category:Film directors would be fully populated along with all the subcategories of Film directors by nationality.  The reason for this is that users would be as likely and perhaps more likely to want to browse through the large category as they would the small one.  This is also the case with bridges.  Limiting categorization to the lowest level, in this case the subcategories of toll bridges makes it possible to browse through toll bridge categories but very difficult to browse through bridge categories.  At the bridge project we agreed to populate bridges up to the state level.  In a sense this is more complicated, but I think it makes all the categories more useful. -- Samuel Wantman 08:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, see this subpage of Wikipedia:Categorization -- Samuel Wantman 08:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well thats a really poor rational. I would replace you complicated eith confucing, and either way  if you describe something as complicated, its not usefull. If you are going to do it this really inefficent way that you are doing it, then you mine as well either drop the sub cats all together or add the category heriarchy direcly to each article. I am sorry buy your category rational and implementation, consensus or not, is poor and inefficient. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also the page you sited, i do not see as proving your point, matter of fact it works more in opposing the current scheime. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Did you read this paragraph? -- Samuel Wantman 08:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization of bridge articles  

message: The image :File:PATCO Speedline.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --18:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:PATCO Speedline.svg

message: I've just added ref needed tags to the history section pertaining to the existence of the streetcar tracks. From talking with a number of transit historians in the area, consensus is is that the tracks were never installed (due to streetcar gauge incompatibility issues on separate sides of the river), but i have not yet been able to locate any reliable documented sources to prove this either way. I'll be looking into this issue as time permits; but overall the article needs more refs in general. Hiroe (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References, Streetcar Tracks 

message: This article, and all the other sources I've found, say that the Ben Franklin was, when first built, the worlds longest suspension bridge. I'm puzzled about the qualification: wasn't it the longest bridge of any kind? What, in 1926, could possibly have been longer? TypoBoy (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm well out of my depth here. I assume we are referring to the longest span. Is that from pier to pier or what? Pont de Québec, for example is a bit longer and older. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Without knowing any specific facts one way or the other, it is quite possible at any moment in time for a bridge of some other type to be longer than the longest suspension bridge.  The length of suspension bridges is measured by the span from pier to pier, and they are thus limited by the available technology.  Other bridges, however, will be measure by the total length of the bridge, and can involve multiple spans across multiple piers -- see, for instance, Seven Mile Bridge in the Florida Keys. Check out List of longest bridges in the world and compare it to List of longest suspension bridge spans. BMK (talk) 19:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I see I created confusion by using the word "span" when I meant "bridge".  SummerPhD answered the question I was trying to ask. The upshot is that the article is right to qualify the record as "longest suspension span", because the Quebec Bridge is older, and has a longer span. TypoBoy (talk) 15:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never the worlds longest bridge? 

message: Substituted at 09:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Benjamin Franklin 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/20130625051749/http://www.michaelpennphotography.com:80/TheBenFranklinBridge.html to http://www.michaelpennphotography.com/TheBenFranklinBridge.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Benjamin Franklin 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/20120101053527/http://bridgepros.com/projects/Ben_Franklin_Bridge/ben_franklin_bridge_celebration.htm to http://bridgepros.com/projects/Ben_Franklin_Bridge/ben_franklin_bridge_celebration.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110422043723/http://www.drpa.org/commtrav/bridge_fares.html to http://www.drpa.org/commtrav/bridge_fares.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.michaelpennphotography.com/TheBenFranklinBridge.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) 03:56, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified