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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles
See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:
Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
AtWikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon 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.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways 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.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles
Todays useless lesson is how to pay £1 while getting rid of a bunch of coins. Its 20 one penny coins, 10 two pence pieces, and finally 12 five pence pieces. Another useless fact is that Britain has so many brown coins, that everyone should have £7 in coins that are more useless than the facts which are here presented.--88.89.69.55 (talk) 11:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"It is a toll bridge, with a discount available via an electronic payment scheme." -seems strange to mention discount so early in the article! I would probably move mention of that to the last paragraph and add a little more detail on tolls from the Legacy section.
I've moved the toll information. I'm not inclined to add historical tolls (though I've just found a source outlining some more historical tolls which I'll add in a mo) as I don't think they're of pressing importance to anyone who just wants to look at the lead and go further Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"here was an increased requirement" -doesn't quit seem right here, increased demand?
" It has a central span of 335 metres (1,099 ft) and two side spans of 114 metres (374 ft)." in location, I would also put this in the lede as it's important, regardless if the infobox says it!
Seems odd to have these both in the same section. To me, something like toll prices belongs in a lower section. like operation.
The basic idea (and it is consistent with Dartford Crossing which I used as a basic structural template) is to put the "nuts and bolts" of basic information about the bridge first. A casual reader who is prepared to get past the lede may simply be looking to confirm they're looking at the right article, or want to know how much it costs to drive across, and in which direction. I've put "tolls" in a separate sub-section, and added a bit about concessions (if I can find a source that exempts emergency vehicles, I'll pop that in too). While I'm interested to know it was originally 3/- to drive a cross, I don't think so many people are, so I think it belongs later. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Construction
"The alternative was to catch a ferry across the Tamar; the Torpoint Ferry had been running successfully since 1834, and is still in active service,[5] while the Saltash Ferry ran near to the bridge's present location.[6] However" -this grates a little bit, the punctuation in the first and then the However I think. Try to avoid the "However" and make this flow better.
I've copyedited this. While we're here, though, could you double-check the date of the Torpoint Ferry - the source I used gives an 1834 opening date, but our article claims it has been running since the late 18th century. There's no point copyediting something that's not factually accurate! Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"It could support an estimated capacity of 20,000 vehicles a day,[13] with a maximum individual vehicle weight of 38 tons." -I'd also mention this in the lede as it's vital info really.
"The bridge was unofficially opened at 6am on 24 October 1961, when the construction barriers were removed." -vague, as it's not clear what an "unofficial" opening actually is, who were the involved parties? Can you add a bit more on that?
"It was was " ;-)
If I could find a script or highlighter to catch these, I'd use it. Normally it means I've bolted two or more sentences together to reduce waffle and not trimmed down properly. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"The total cost of the bridge was £1.8 million (now £36 million).[13] It was was the first major suspension bridge to be constructed in the UK after World War II, and the longest suspension bridge in Britain.[2]" -also vital info for the lede IMO, inf act I'd be inclined to mention the first major bridge part in the very first paragraph.
Why is hourly in italics?
Torpoint ferry was linked previously, it would probably be best to pipe it in the original instance and link the town and then the ferry rather than linking the town further down here.
Widening
"Work was completed in December 2001 at a total cost of £34 million; the two additional lanes were retained to increase the bridge's capacity.[23] The completed construction weighed 25 tons less than the original bridge,[14] and the design capacity is around 1,800 vehicles per day per direction over the main deck.[24]" -some vital info in there for the lede too.
"The work also inspired engineers in New York to visit the Tamar Bridge to see if the reconstruction methods could be used elsewhere.[26]" -a bit vague, is the anything more specific on this or is it just a passing mention? Sometimes a footnote elaboration might cover something like that.
It turns out the BBC covered this in a little more depth, so I've expanded it with several links to highlight why it's significant. The visit did turn up in at least two other sources, so I think it's worth mentioning. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
"dressed as fake breasts," -mmm. I'm guessing that this is correct and they were actually dressed as giant tits, rather than just wearing fake ones? They'd fit right in on wikipedia ;-)
As GA reviewer, you will have of course examined all the source material for the article and hence you will have seen the large picture in the Plymouth Herald piece cited that gives you your answer :-P Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article could use some updating, it is missing some information about the tolls, could use some clarification on the information about the tamertag. and will soon need to take note of the new bridge office. Dysklyver23:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 2 external links on Tamar 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:
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.
