Talk:Cherry Street lift bridge

I reverted an undiscussed merge and redirect

I reverted an undiscussed merge and redirect of this article and another article on separate but related topic.

I wanted to add more material to this topic, and I wanted to add it in the appropriate place -- here. Geo Swan (talk) 05:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

No, merge the two together. We don't need two articles for two bridges on the same damn site! What don't you get about this?!? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 10:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Each bridge is distinct, and, IMO, since we have sufficient references for both bridges, I think they each merit a separate article.

Note, the title you gave the union article says "lift bridge".

1. Why singular, when you are trying to cover multiple bridges?
2. Your title doesn't distinguish the current bridge over the Keating Channel from the larger lift bridge over the shipping channel.
3. Swing bridges are not lift bridges.
4. Compliant contributors who cut and paste content that was written by other parties, into a different article, have an obligation to make sure the original author's rights to have their intellectual contributions credited to them aren't abridged. You failed to do this. And your multiple and unnecessary renamings made it extremely difficult to even find the original files that contained the revision history -- and I knew what I was looking for.

I am going to seek the opinion of previously uninvolved third parties. Geo Swan (talk) 16:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Just because there are enough references to create two short stubs does not mean we should (WP:AVOIDSPLIT/WP:SIZE and WP:SPLIT sort of touch on this). One article can, should, and would be better at cover(ing) the site and its history; this is why we have section headers instead of splitting each facet of a topic into separate articles... except when WP:SIZE comes in. The larger bridge to the south is not a lift bridge (well... I mean... it lifts, but that's not the "type" of bridge it is). Regarding your last point, I can contact User:Graham87 to merge the histories together properly, but it is bathwater to the baby. I've initiated an RfC to garner independent input since we are at an impasse. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 19:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, from what I can see, there was a swing bridge on this site. It was replaced by a lift bridge. As far as I know, these are not particularly architecturally or historically significant bridges. Unless the swing bridge was somehow historically significant on its own, I think we should have only one article. The title could possibly be changed to Cherry Street Keating Channel bridge. Could we merge this article with the other Cherry Street bridge article and have one "Cherry Street bridges" article that probably would have a nice length? ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 14:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

That's the solution I was hoping for. It's nice for everything under the sun to have its own article; it's nicer to look up something and get a complete amass of knowledge on the subject, including the stuff you didn't even know that you wanted to know! - Floydian ^τ _¢ 03:00, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

update

It's been years since we had this discussion.

The merge and redirect didn't happen, and the other bridge's article is currently at Cherry Street Strauss Trunnion Bascule Bridge - not an ideal name.

I think alaney2k's suggestion this article get a more descriptive name holds merit, and I am with his or her specific suggestion of Cherry Street Keating Channel bridge, or Cherry Street Keating Channel bridges, since it covers multiple bridges. Geo Swan (talk) 18:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cherry Street lift 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:

• Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.nationalpost.com%2F2011%2F07%2F30%2Fold-hands-keep-the-don-flowing-smoothly%2F&date=2012-05-23 with http://www.webcitation.org/67ro2uvoI?url=http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/07/30/old-hands-keep-the-don-flowing-smoothly/ on http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/07/30/old-hands-keep-the-don-flowing-smoothly/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)