Talk:1972 Sidney Lanier Bridge collapse

1972 Sidney Lanier Bridge collapse has been listed as one of the History 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.
Review: January 2, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Bridges and Tunnels Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Georgia (U.S. state) Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia 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.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state)

Low

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

WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)...
Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category.
Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data
Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state)
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state)
Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs.
Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting
- Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention
- Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
- Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner.
- Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:1972 Sidney Lanier Bridge collapse/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: JJonahJackalope (talk · contribs) 14:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Xarinu (talk · contribs) 07:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @JJonahJackalope: I'm reviewing this page for the January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive.

Intro

"...being difficult to navigate, due in part to the small opening." I would recommend changing "due in part to the small opening", as it comes off as a little awkward. The easiest solution is substituting "the" for "its", though you could also write something like "due in part to the small size of the passageway under the bridge."
- Changed "the" to "its".
"...affected roughly 450 feet (140 m) of bridge..." - "of the bridge"
- Added "the".
"...at a cost of $1,300,000 (equivalent to $9,500,000 in 2023)." - Maybe consider updating the USD comparison to 2024/2025
- I am using the inflation template for these values and the most recent year in that template is 2023. Whenever the template is updated with 2024 values, the values in the article should automatically update as well. However, I did go through and edit the phrasing for all of the inflation values throughout the article.
  - Ah, I see. No problem, then!

Other than my notes, really good ^^

Background

Good!

Collapse

"...the shipmaster, with the more senior of the two..." - "shipmaster, ~~with~~ the more" - with is unnecessary in this context, though it would work better if you split the sentence into two and reworked it further.
- I split this sentence into two and rephrased the section. Let me know what you think of this edit.
  - Looks great!
"...received orders to turn the ship's rudder to be turned "LEFT, 10°"" - "the ship's rudder ~~to be turned~~ "LEFT, 10°"" - I think this is just an error.
- Yes, it appears to be an error on my part, apologies. I have removed the "to be turned" section of the sentence.
"...engines to be "FULL AHEAD" and..." "engines set to "FULL AHEAD" and" - or some variation on this.
- Replaced "to be" with "set to".
"...rudder to be turned "LEFT, 20°"." - "turned to "LEFT, 20°"." - Add something along this line.
- Added "to".

Response

Looks good!

Later History

"In total, repairs to the bridge took..." - "Repairs to the bridge took six months to complete in total" - I'd rearrange this, just preference based on word flow, you don't have to.
- Rearranged this section as recommended above.

Y No Deprecated links (Good job)

Y Inline citations appear to lead to where they claim.

Y No Recent Edit Wars

Y Content Appears Neutral & Broad

Initial Copyright Impressions

Very unlikely guilty of any infringement; 20% material on Copyvio isn't noteworthy.

Initial Impressions

This is a great article, very few changes need to be made. Please reply ASAP with all changes, and we can move on to final work/review. 🪐 Xarinu 🪐 (Talk 2 Me :] ) 10:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is very late ATM, sorry if I don't respond to you for a while, I'm going to sleep.

@Xarinu:, I just wanted to ping you to let you know that I have made some edits to the article to address the points you raised in your review. Thank you for initiating this review process, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns regarding this article, please feel free to reach out so we can discuss them further. Thanks, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 13:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JJonahJackalope: Pinging you to tell you that this is a great article, thank you for addressing my notes, and I don't have any more questions. Final impressions are

Y Well-Written: I find this article clear and intelligible, it follows WP:TONE and the like to a satisfactory degree.

Y Broad & Neutral: This article is WP:NEUTRAL, and throughout I found it sufficiently broad.

Y Stable: You are essentially its only editor.

Y Illustrated: Article is accompanied by plenty of media, all of which seems to be properly licensed.

Y Verifiability & Trust: Reviewing the sections marked by Copyvio, I can confidently say that there is a close to null chance that any plagiarism has occurred here. Citations lead where they're supposed to, no WP:DEPS, all looks good.

I am going to give this article a Y Y Y Pass! Thank you for being concise and quick, and congrats on a new GA! 🪐 Xarinu 🪐 (Talk 2 Me :] ) 21:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xarinu: I don't see a spot-check: basically can you list which of the atleast 5-10%+ of the references you have checked to see if they verify the info? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: Ack, sorry! I can remember checking

[2]/Horton, 2014 under section Collapse ("the African Neptune struck the southern portion of the bridge.^[2]") - Which indeed references the ship striking the southern ramp of the bridge within the first few sentences. Links to a TBN site, should be fine.

[11]/Sczurek, 1974 under section Aftermath "where it unloaded its cargo and had permanent repairs made.^[11]" - On pp. 189 of the book, this is stated.

[8]/Davis, 2024 under section Later History "the Ziema Bialostocka, was leaving the port and passing through the bridge opening.^[8]" - This article references the described event, is a news article, looks good.

I am so sorry, I will remember to include a (longer & clearer) spot check in future reviews.
🪐 Xarinu 🪐 (Talk 2 Me :] ) 19:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 talk 20:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The collapsed Sidney Lanier Bridge

... that in 1972, the Sidney Lanier Bridge in the U.S. state of Georgia collapsed (pictured) after being struck by a cargo ship?

Source: The Brunswick News

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Revamped

Improved to Good Article status by JJonahJackalope (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 59 past nominations.

JJonahJackalope (talk) 14:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

As a recently promoted GA, the article easily passes the requirements. The hook is interesting, concise, and verifiable, and so it too passes the DYK requirements. I wonder, however, if it would be possible to produce an even more interesting hook. This topic strikes me as a potential DYK goldmine. Surtsicna (talk) 00:47, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Surtsicna:, sure, how about:

... that the 1972 Sidney Lanier Bridge collapse (pictured), which was caused by a collision from a cargo ship, caused ten deaths and over a million dollars in damages? The source for the damages is here, while the death toll is here. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 01:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JJonahJackalope, I just noticed that the article about the bridge itself is only 1500 characters long. Would it be possible to expand that article fivefold so that we might have a double hook? This is a rare opportunity. Hall of Fame guaranteed! Surtsicna (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Surtsicna:, I was thinking about expanding that article at some point, never done a bridge article before, but I found a few good sources while doing the collapse article, and I'm fairly confident I could get it expanded within a few days. How much time would I have to get it expanded and added to this nomination? -JJonahJackalope (talk) 01:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it's only a few days that you need, @JJonahJackalope:, you can certainly have them! I think if you just copied the "Background" and "Later history" into the main bridge article (where it probably belongs anyway), you could have it in an instant. But see what you think is best. Surtsicna (talk) 10:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let you know as soon as I've completed work on the bridge article and we can move forward from there. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 14:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Surtsicna:, I have expanded the article for Sidney Lanier Bridge five times and have reviewed another DYK nomination, Template:Did you know nominations/Roof-end Tile with Human Face Motif. As a result, if it is possible to add the Sidney Lanier Bridge article to my nomination here, I would simply make the hook:

... that the 1972 collapse of the Sidney Lanier Bridge (pictured), which was caused by a collision from a cargo ship, caused ten deaths and over a million dollars in damages?

Let me know what you think of this and if there is anything else I need to do. Thanks, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 21:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This expansion far exceeds my expectations. You certainly did not cut corners like I suggested that you might. Truly impressive. Thank you. Surtsicna (talk) 22:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]