Talk:Skarnsund Bridge

Skarnsund Bridge has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 18, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

Bridges and Tunnels Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norway

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles

Longest by total length?[edit]

A citation or additional information is needed for the claim in the article that the bridge was the longest cable-stayed bridge in the world by total length when it opened (until beaten by the Millau Bridge). This does not seem to be the case to me; the Sunshine Skyway has a longer total length.

Bridge	Longest Span	Total Length of Cable Supported Spans	Total Length of Bridge (includes all approach spans)	Deck Cross Section Concrete, Steel composite, Orthotropic	Year Opened
Skarnsund Bridge	530 m Longest concrete		1,010 m	Concrete	1991
Sunshine Skyway Bridge	367 m	695 m	8851 m Longest	Concrete	1987
Millau Viaduct	342 m	2460 m Longest	2460 m	Orthotropic	2004

The page says there are eight spans. The pictures of the bridge show the cable-stay back spans have columns. Does the 1,010 m total length include any spans that are not cable supported?

Does anyone know of a page that lists the lengths of the back spans (between columns)? Should the article say longest total cable-supported length?- SCgatorFan 22:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Skarnsund Bridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 13:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

A reasonable, short article on a bridge, at or about GA level.

Comments:

History-

The fatal accident needs a citation.
The loss of the ferry jobs needs a citation.
~~Ref 8 has a broken link.~~

WP:lead and History-

I'm not sure about your translation of the word 'Preserve' as in 'bridge was preserved as a cultural heritage'. I can't find the original Norsk citation; Ref 11 which is listed as Norwegian is mostly an English summary (I much prefer English). Could 'listed' be a better translation?

Pyrotec (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenikk has not been here for a couple of weeks so I'll try to help here. I have not addressed all your points now, but I'll come back. I have updated ref 11. The source refer a proposal and not the actual decision. I have added a ref to the legislation that protects the bridge. Preserved. I agree that this not seem to be a good word for the Norwegian word fredning. I think a better word is protected. Rettetast (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping out. Sorry, I have a Englisk-Norsk / Norsk-Englisk dictionary, which I'm happy to use for one or two words, but I can't cope with whole articles in Norsk. Arsenikk now seems to have been gone for three weeks, so I've taken over one of his outstanding railway reviews.Pyrotec (talk) 16:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to find sources, but have not had any luck. the facts probably comes from offline sources. I have removed them for now. They can be readded later if sources are added. Rettetast (talk) 14:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your assistance. I will now continue the WP:GAN.Pyrotec (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Most are in Norsk, but with my limited linguistics skills they appear to confirm what is being stated

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Most are in Norsk, but with my limited linguistics skills they appear to confirm what is being stated

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Thanks are due to Rettetast for assisting due to the extended absence of the nominator. I'm awarding GA-status to the article.Pyrotec (talk) 19:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]