Talk:1683 Trent flood

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 01:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that in 1683 ice floes on the River Trent in England badly damaged the bridges at Nottingham and Newark?

• Source: "Even the generally placid and genial Trent has always had its unruly side. There was the flood of 1683, when the bridges at Nottingham and Newark were swept away by ice floes driven on by a roaring torrent of floodwater" from: Fort, Tom (2008). Downstream. Century. p. 68. ISBN 978-1-84605-169-2.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Finn Butcher
• Comment: I had hoped to create a more substantial article but have exhausted all the sources I found

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 864 past nominations.

Dumelow (talk) 08:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC).

• New enough, long enough (still comfortably over 1500 characters having exhausted all sources), hook should be of interest to readers. Will assume good faith on the print source. QPQ done, believe this is good to go. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 02:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Length of rebuilt bridge

This article gives the length of the rebuilt bridge as "205 metres (673 ft)". The Trent Bridge (bridge) article says 538 feet. Tigerboy1966  06:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Tarbotton, Marriott Ogle (1871). History of the Old Trent Bridge, with a Descriptive Account of the New Bridge, Nottingham. Richard Allen and Son. p. 8. has:

"The Bridge as it now stands contains 15 arches in that portion of it which may be termed the Bridge proper; of these arches the first 11 appear to have had each a span originally of 25 feet at the widest points, making an extreme waterway of 275 feet, the remaining 4 arches, varying from 18 feet to 22 feet span, were evidently either for flood water or for sustaining the roadway: the waterway in the aggregate afforded by the 15 arches, measured at the widest parts of the openings, amounts to about 347 feet; but measuring between the platforms of the starlings, the waterway does not exceed 370 feet. The sum of the widths of the several piers amounts to about 191 feet, this gives a total length for the Bridge proper of about 538 feet. Immediately south hereof a mass of masonry occurs, supporting the roadway, and then follow the two small and most ancient arches previously described, probably intended, when they were built, to span some old arm of the river, being each about 17 feet in width. The extreme length of the structure, from the north abutment to the London Road, is about 668 feet."

So looks to be a difference in where it is measured from. I will look to clarify in the article - Dumelow (talk) 09:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)