Jump to content

Talk:Tower Bridge

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeTower Bridge was a Art and architecture good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 6, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 30, 2007, June 30, 2008, June 30, 2009, June 30, 2010, June 30, 2013, June 30, 2015, June 30, 2017, June 30, 2018, June 30, 2021, June 30, 2022, and June 30, 2024.

City of London or not???

[edit]

In the History > Opening section it states: It is the only one of the Trust's bridges not to connect the City of London to the Southwark bank, the northern landfall being in Tower Hamlets. However, in the "Tower Bridge today" section, in the caption to the first picture it states: The bridge connects The Borough (Southwark, south of the river, left of picture) to the heart of the City of London. Clearly both statements can't be true, but I'm afraid I don't know London well enough to know which (if either) is correct. Hoping someone with more knowledge can help. A Long September (talk) 14:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the picture caption may be a case of poetic licence. Removing 'heart of' makes it factually correct. (I don't think mentioning Tower Hamlets here helps. It does connect to the City, albeit 'via Tower Hamlets'!)
In the opening section, we might need a qualifier about the bridge not being within the geographic limits of the City... ? -- EdJogg (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, although I have not changed the earlier text -- EdJogg (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do think mentioning Tower Hamlets is important. If Tower Bridge is connected to The City of London by the sole virtue of the city neighbouring Tower Hamlets, then you could also argue that the bridge connects to Hackney. Nzseries1 (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have modified the text, and I think it addresses your concerns. The earlier text also mentions Tower Hamlets. The City is more significant than Hackney since the bridge is owned by the City... -- EdJogg (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing? Access to elevated walkways? Current pedestrian pathway?

[edit]

The article is completely silent about access to the walkways (now closed, used only for exhibits?). Are there elevators? Or stairs only? Stair count? What is current pedestrian route? Right straight across same as vehicles? When the bridge is open, can pedestrians still cross by going over the upper route? I'm surprised at the silence given to the pedestrian aspect. 63.194.45.199 (talk) 18:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are pedestrian walkways on both sides of the bridge, at road level. These walkways are closed when the bridge opens for shipping. The upper walkways can be accessed via lifts or steps. The upper walkways are not accessible to pedestrians - they are used only by the 'Tower Bridge Experience' tourist, paying exhibition. The inaccessibility of the upper walkways to pedestrian traffic is a source of much inconvenience, particularly to commuters. Stxmld (talk) 20:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of construction - found in a skip!

[edit]

Here you go; they're clearly out of copyright: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertypicturegalleries/8923147/Photographs-of-Tower-Bridge-being-constructed-are-found-in-a-skip.html Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image: London Thames Sunset panorama - Feb 2008.jpg = incorrect description

[edit]

Tower Bridge does not connect with 'The Borough' on the south side of the Thames (that's London Bridge) it connects to Bermondsey, a different part of the London Borough of Southwark.

90.200.226.102 (talk) 17:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC) freddie 90.200.226.102 (talk) 17:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

colors

[edit]

There reads: "The bridge's present colour scheme dates from 1977, when it was painted red, white and blue for the Queen Elizabeth II's silver jubilee." So, where is the red? I can see white and blue but not red. 85.217.36.130 (talk) 03:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James Bond?

[edit]

Wasn't the Tower Bridge also featured as a Secret Service Headquarter in a James Bond movie (or maybe a similar movie)? -- megA (talk) 10:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fatalities during construction

[edit]

Is there a definitive list of the people killed during the construction of Tower Bridge? So far I can find

John Church 1887
William Carnegie 1893
Edward Burns 1894
The Evening Telegraph says there were ten fatalities. jmb (talk) 14:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

replica in Suzhou

[edit]

No information about the replica in Suzhou?

This collection includes even the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Alexandre III Bridge and, of course, the Tower Bridge from London.

http://www.weirdasianews.com/2012/07/24/chinas-builds-tower-bridge/ http://travel.aol.co.uk/2012/07/05/tower-bridge-replica-china/ http://www.nadernazemi.org/2012/07/tower-bridge-in-china-suzhou-builds-its.html#!/2012/07/tower-bridge-in-china-suzhou-builds-its.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.102.130 (talk) 22:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Original hydraulic power source

[edit]

Was the bridge powered by steam pumps right from the start? I remember being told that it was originally connected to the hydraulic mains and the steam engines were installed later, when the mains closed down? --Roly (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The London Hydraulic Main was still serving the Bridge when we installed the first half of the replacement machinery in the 1970s 20:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoffreyBH (talk • contribs)

Commencement of Construction

[edit]

The date in the text was altered from 1886 to 1887 but no authority has been cited, — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoffreyBH (talk • contribs) 20:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

K2 relevance

[edit]

In the incidents section: "At the time, the building contractor Taylor Woodrow Construction Ltd. was in the midst of constructing a new office tower known as "K2""

This doesn't seem relevant to the closure of the bridge.. Philipwhiuk (talk) 16:56, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Named after the Tower?

[edit]

I've always assumed Tower Bridge to be named after the two towers at either end of the bridge. What evidence is there that it was actually named after the Tower of London? — Smjg (talk) 01:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most bridges in London are named after the area they are in, but a fair question. I can't find a definitive source, but a look round the area also yields "Tower Hill", "Tower Gateway" and "Tower Hamlets" for e.g. Paulbrock (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know about those locations in the vicinity. But this doesn't really tell us what was named after what.... — Smjg (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
https://londonist.com/2015/01/how-londons-thames-bridges-got-their-names Andy Dingley (talk) 23:35, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something in the time lapse video

[edit]

I suppose the best thing to be said for this is the caption 'Time lapse video of Tower Bridge', because that is just what it is. It isn't a time lapse video of Tower Bridge doing anything interesting (like opening), but just of it continuing to exist. Nice time lapse of the clouds going by, admittedly, but that isn't very relevant to this article. Am I missing something?. Does this video actually add anything useful to the story this article tells that isn't already told by all the still pictures?. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 14:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, gone. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tower Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Colorized construction photo

[edit]

Here is an earlier 1899 construction photo. If anyone is interested, then you might want to follow up to determine if the B&W version isn't copyrighted for use on Wikipedia. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An editor has added [1][2][3] a gallery repeatedly, despite it being promptly removed by other editors. Should we keep it?

I find galleries to be a poor way of using images and rarely appropriate. They show images that are too small and crowded to be a useful use of such images; if you want to see what's there, show the image, don't hide it. This gallery is also a poorly chosen set of images, with half of them unrelated to the others and simply too small to make out. The gallery is justified on the basis of being a sequence of the bridge opening (4 images, plus a mismatched one that is important to show the final position, but taken from another sequence) - this might be justified as a gallery, but only if the images were big enough to see.

Overall, I just don't see this article as needing a great many images - Tower Bridge is iconic, but doesn't take many images to show it. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tower 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tower 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weight conversions

[edit]

Currently, mentions of tonnes are converted to short tons but mentions of tons, presumably long tons, are not converted at all. Given that long and short tons and tonnes are all fairly similar, I don't know if changing over 70,000 tons of concrete to over 70,000 long tons (71,000 t; 78,000 short tons) would add much but the current approach does seem inconsistent. Cavrdg (talk) 13:16, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Street signage

[edit]

Hi, the "street signage" photograph in the article in clearly for London Bridge. I don't know what should be done, remove the photo or find an correct one, but obviously, this makes little sense, especially as the article claims how well advised it is earlier

Because of this, Tower Bridge is sometimes confused with London Bridge

Anyway, Shadowssettle(talk) 16:24, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • The street sign in the article would appear to be this one on Googlw Maps which as can be seen was taken on a completely different bridge .... so I'd support removal .... I can't see a reason for the sign being here ? .... –Davey2010Talk 17:06, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The sign "LONDON BRIDGE" quite clearly must have been photographed on London Bridge, the next crossing upstream. It is a common mistake. Geoffrey BH 17:23, 30 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoffreyBH (talk • contribs)

Bascule operation

[edit]

Why is there no mention of the bascule operation in the lead? Jprw (talk) 11:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've dropped a bit in. The lead was out of sync with the body, with claims in the former not in the latter. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Sometimes mistaken for London Bridge"? Should be removed?

[edit]

The article states that Tower Bridge is sometimes mistaken for London Bridge although this is not attributed to any source. Should the article continue to propagate a view that some people that presumably don't know anything about Tower Bridge mistake it for another bridge that, presumably, they also don't know anything about? It would seem this apparent mistaking of Tower Bridge for another bridge should be removed? PSCMol (talk) 11:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mum made tower bridge in 1567 81.103.228.10 (talk) 15:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Messi won the World Cup in 2022 if you don’t know who messi is go to hell 81.103.228.10 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tower_Bridge&oldid=1250800092"