Talk:Eads Bridge

message: The article states: ...one of the first major outbreaks of "caisson disease", and thirteen workers died.  The phrasing is ambiguous.  Did thirteen (or fourteen) die from caisson disease specifically, or from all causes during construction?  In either case, it needs to be made clear.  -- Kbh3rd 00:07, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  caisson disease 

message: the Historic Bridges of the Midwest reference in the article has a great timeline which might be interesting to abridge and include. ++Lar: t/c 03:38, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: "The triple span, tubular naallic, arch construction"   Naallic????   --Marcusscotus1 21:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dunno.  That appeared in this edit by Lar.  --Kbh3rdtalk 03:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the update.  I think the material is great, and I'm glad to learn that it's legit to use. --Kbh3rdtalk 04:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a LOT more there if we wanted it... it's worth picking through and seeing if there is more worth OCRing in to use as material to start from...  Probably it would not want to all be put in, but rather boiled down and cited. ++Lar: t/c 03:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  naallic 

message: Concerning :Image:eads bridge pano.jpg, "A panoramic image of Eads Bridge": The image description page states, "This image has been 'photoshopped' in order to restore the bridge to an earlier era."  Do we want manipulated images in articles?  I do not think that this is necessary.  There are older images freely available, and there are new images that have been contributed.  Where's the need to fake "an earlier era"?  Wikipedia has enough credibility problems as it is.
The photo manipulation article states, "the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) have set out a Code of Ethics promoting the accuracy of published images, advising that photographers 'do not manipulate images [...] that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.'"  In the photos that I've contributed I've lately been explaining what, if any, manipulation has been done to the image since it came from the camera, as a statement of authenticity: e.g., :Image:Great River Road Alton-Grafton 1.jpg. --Kbh3rdtalk 19:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fauxtography? 

message: While adding a new image for the infobox, I noticed that the location was given in the info box as East St. Louis, IL, with an Illinois locator map.  Why was that?  The bridge is where it is because of one city, and I guarantee you that that city is on the west bank of the Mississippi.   --Kbh3rdtalk 01:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Found a little more relevant information... That was the National Historic Landmark infobox I was talking about above, not the leading structure infobox.  The results page of a search for "Eads Bridge" on the official website of the National Historic Landmarks Program list multiple records (for reasons explained there), and each entry shows Missouri as the state and St. Louis as the city.  That should put it to rest right there, at least as far as the NHL infobox is concerned, uppity east-siders notwithstanding. ;)  --Kbh3rdtalk 02:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 

message: It's bothered me for a while that the image in the infobox showed the bridge at flood stage.  IMHO the infobox picture should be such that it illustrates as many features of its subject as possible, and in a normal state.  Flood stage is not its normal state, and the old image possibly misled unknowledgeable readers to assume that the steel arches are meant to descend to normal river level.  (I did like how that image showed the Arch in the background.)  I've put a panoramic picture of the bridge that I made today in the infobox.  I'm willing to entertain arguments that the panorama appears too small in the infobox aspect, but personally I think it's better than the previous one.  Being in color helps, too, IMHO.  --Kbh3rdtalk 01:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New image 

message: Goodness!  The new image in the infobox is terribly over-saturated in my opinion.  I'd change it back, but as I'm the creator of the previously used image, I'm afraid that it would appear that I'd be doing so solely out of proprietary interest.  Instead I'll appeal to others to compare the previous version to the current version (as of this writing) and make a judgement.  There's a lot to recommend the wide picture, though squeezing it into the infobox does make it a bit small.  The picture currently used, besides having unnatural coloration, doesn't do a good job of showing the whole bridge. --Kbh3rdtalk 01:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you need to adjust your monitor.  The image, as I see it, looks really good.  The previous image looked good too, but for the confusing bit with the highway bridge in the background.  - Denimadept (talk) 02:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New image as of 2012-12-02 

message: First, it's alternatively called in some sources the "St. Louis Bridge," and second, there's no mention of Carnegie, except category. Those seem two major oversights. Is there any particular reason for their omission? Shadowjams (talk) 06:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please include the name in the lead with your citation(s).  What is the involvement of Andrew Carnegie here?  Again, if you have a source, please include the information and the citation, or remove the category.  My books, which would include this bridge, are not currently available to me. - Denimadept (talk) 06:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Carnegie's in the category list. He was a major shareholder of the St. Louis Bridge Company. He also staged the infamous Elephant walk across the bridge. Shadowjams (talk) 10:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, so update the article. Please include cites. - Denimadept (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

text: I was mostly asking so that someone who had some insight on the issue might respond. Shadowjams (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: My insight is that you have this information, and you're welcome to fix the article given that you know where the information comes from.  No? - Denimadept (talk) 00:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name and no mention of Carnegie 

message: I cannot reconcile the total length of 6,442 feet (1,964 m) with measurements on Google Earth (nor the 6,220 ft stated on the 1874-poster). --AHert (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Eads 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/20110718143558/http://www.youngsaintlouis.com/archive/June2006/kids/sonder.shtml to http://www.youngsaintlouis.com/archive/June2006/kids/sonder.shtml
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 05:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Eads 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/20050221084235/http://www.icomos.org/studies/bridges.htm to http://www.icomos.org/studies/bridges.htm
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) 18:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Eads 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/20140714201812/http://www.bnd.com/2014/04/14/3161762/experts-new-bridge-carrying-less.html to http://www.bnd.com/2014/04/14/3161762/experts-new-bridge-carrying-less.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206094940/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=716&ResourceType=Structure to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=716&ResourceType=Structure
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012010317/http://www.terminalrailroad.com/history5.php to http://www.terminalrailroad.com/history5.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206094940/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=716&ResourceType=Structure to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=716&ResourceType=Structure
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) 20:34, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Eads 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/20040530072431/http://www.asce.org/history/brdg_eads.html to http://www.asce.org/history/brdg_eads.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051231122226/http://bridgepros.com/projects/eads/ to http://bridgepros.com/projects/eads/
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) 06:58, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified