Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Pi.1415926535 ( talk · contribs) 02:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

I'll take this review. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 02:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• The caption can be shorter; I suggest removing (Gov. William Preston Lane Memorial Bridge).
• Please add alt text for the image (and all other images).
• Under "Carries", remove everything after US 301. There's no need for that level of detail in the infobox.
• Two of the other names do not appear in the text; they should either be removed or cited.
• Total length does not agree with the text.
• No need to specify how long ago the bridge opened; that's not relevant.
• No need to specify different tolls in the infobox; $4.00 (eastbound only) should be fine.
• Remove the superfluous locator map - it's been replaced by the integrated mapframe.
• For an article of this length, a three-paragraph lede should be good. I would recommend adding about one sentence each about the previous ferries, the run, the impact of the bridge, and the future.

• I believe all of these are done, though the third lede paragraph looks like it might be a bit choppy to me. AviationFreak 💬 14:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • All looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• The first two sentences are contradictory: was the first proposal in the 1880s or 1907?
• Combine the first two paragraphs.
• A more reliable source is needed to replace source #4.
• The fourth paragraph is entirely uncited.

• All done, I believe. AviationFreak 💬 15:21, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • All looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• I'd recommend breaking this into two paragraphs.
  • While I agree that the paragraph is beefy, it's all one coherent story/thought and I can't see a place that would be good for a break. AviationFreak 💬 15:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply
    • I would recommend the second paragraph begin with Ground was broken. But not a big deal either way. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply
• The last sentence is uncited.
  • Fixed. AviationFreak 💬 15:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• The first paragraph makes a bold claim of "often cited" with a single fluff-piece citation.
• The second sentence should either be cited (if a single citation noting the multiple closures is available) or reworded, as the next two paragraphs do not mention traffic congestion from the closures.
• In the third paragraph, remove "has" both times it is used.

• Done; Second sentence was reworded as no sources I found mentioned congestion. AviationFreak 💬 15:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • All looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Citation needed for the claim of 102nd longest over-water bridge. Given the rate of new bridges of this length (one or more a year), that number is likely to change rather frequently.
  • Done; Looks like rank was inferred from List of longest bridges despite the large warning at the top. Claim removed. AviationFreak 💬 01:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Several uncited points in this section.
  • Can't find much sourcing for this section - The structural details of the bridge don't appear to be stated anywhere particularly reliable, but I think most of the info in this section can be seen in the images on the page. Not sure if this falls under WP:OR. AviationFreak 💬 01:39, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
    • That should be good enough. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• First paragraph is uncited.
• The fourth and especially fifth paragraphs here are very long. I would recommend simplifying some of the details; the exact criteria for two-way traffic and details of when to merge aren't really needed for an article of this scope.
• There's a lot of images here, several of which don't really support the text in the section. For those images that are kept, please have them be default thumbnails (no size specified) and make sure that text isn't squeezed between left-aligned and right-aligned images. (I also recommend using {{ clear}} and its directional variants to make sure that images stay in their proper sections.)

• Done; I'm not great with image formatting or anything in that realm, but I removed the excess images/text and WP:SANDWICH. Added an image that illustrates the text. AviationFreak 💬 02:19, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Looks good. I'd recommend grabbing one of these images of the tollbooth removal (if you haven't transferred images from flickr to Commons before, you can use flickr2commons or UploadWizard). Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Done, that's a neat tool! AviationFreak 💬 22:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• This can be combined into one or two paragraphs.
• All-electronic tolling began on May 12, 2020... is more clear than As of May 12, 2020.

• Done. AviationFreak 💬 02:22, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Is there any summary available of the number of suicides? That would be more useful than "often".
• An image like File:Ocean City Maryland USA 2018-07-14.png that more clearly shows development would be better.

• That image looks like the best one on Commons, and the closest info I can find on a cumulative suicide number/yearly rate is this 1995 article that says ~75 people from 1952-1995. Very much outdated. AviationFreak 💬 02:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Even the older figure is worth having, as it gives a feel for the frequency. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Done. AviationFreak 💬 23:45, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Would you be able to add a map of the proposed crossing locations? There's no need to create your own map from scratch - {{ Overlay}} or {{ Location map+}} should work fine.
• Both current images in this section are good, but would be more useful elsewhere in the article. The large panorama should go under the structural details.

• Done. Added overlay map and moved pano, though I'm not sure where else to put the smaller one. I think it works as-is, personally. AviationFreak 💬 03:18, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Looks great! Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• No need to link to the two neighborhoods (if their relation to the bridge is significant, they should be in the text.)

• Done. AviationFreak 💬 02:36, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Looks good. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• I recommend grabbing one of these pictures
  • Done. AviationFreak 💬 22:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

All reference numbers here are from this version.

• Refs 1 and 2 are permanent dead links. Can they be replaced with a live link (or archived links)?
• There's a mixture of mdy and dmy dates. The former should be used since this is a US article.
• Refs like 8, 33, 34, and 46 can probably have a proper website name (or just MTA as the published), rather than just the url.
• Ref 45 has an error - looks like it should be {{ cite news}} rather than {{ cite journal}}
• Date format on ref 47
• Ref 48 is a permanent dead link.
• Refs 56 through 59 are self-published sources; while they appear to be subject-matter experts, adding some non-self-published sources would be ideal.

• I've done some of these, others might not be possible - Not sure what you mean by "proper website name," but I've added MTA as the publisher. Ref 48 may be unrecoverable and doesn't appear to be archived. 56 was replaced, I couldn't find an alternative for 57. Best source I could find for 58 was here, but it's not clear or in-depth on the subject matter addressed by the current citation. The info for 59 was outdated and I've updated it with a new citation. AviationFreak 💬 23:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Official websites should be the first external links
• The two live videos can probably go on one line.
• That 1950 study looks like it could be a useful citation, but that's not essential.
• Authority control should go below the navigation templates.
• Having the three upstream bridges in the template is rather awkward. I'd say just go with 695.

• Done. I believe authority control is already in place, so I didn't touch it. AviationFreak 💬 23:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC) reply

I just made a few more copyedits. Great work on this article! Passing as GA. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 06:11, 8 October 2020 (UTC) reply