Talk:Calcasieu River Bridge
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Calcasieu River Bridge was copied or moved into Calcasieu River with this edit on 14:11, 13 October 2017. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Name
editThe name of the bridge is the Calcasieu River Bridge. I think that the name of this article should be changed to reflect that. There are numerous sources that call it the "Calcasieu River Bridge", not "Lake Charles I-10 Bridge". If anyone has anything to add then that's great. If not then I will begin taking steps to rename this article sometime soon.
CTtcg (talk) 15:54, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Expand article and rate
editThe I-10 corridor is the most southern of 3 transcontinental highways with a conservative estimated yearly traffic of 20,880,000 vehicles crossing the I-10 bridge. Any aspect of the bridge would be of local, state, and national importance. I expanded the article and added ratings. Otr500 (talk) 21:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Contamination
editI'm not sure what a pipeline spill has to do with this bridge, unless the bridge carries the pipeline. If the concern is that a truck spill might contaminate the estuary, that's one thing, but it isn't mentioned (and has nothing to do with the pipeline spill that is mentioned). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and merged that section to Calcasieu River (where there was only a single sentence, with no source, about the pipeline event). Unless there was such an event on the bridge, or specific concerns about such an event, then it's really about the river itself, and not the bridge. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Federal ownership
editThe article claimed "when the federal government took it over, they promised to replace the bridge at a later date." I'm pretty sure this is incorrect and I've removed it form the article. For the most part, the components of the Interstate Highway System are owned, operated, and maintained by the states, not the federal government. The cited source for this assertion appears to be a blog, and I'm not sure it's reliable. Meanwhile, the FHWA says "The States own and operate the Interstate highways" with the one exception being the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, prior to its reconstruction (link). (If the source instead meant "when the Feds rolled out the Interstate System", that kind of makes sense -- but it's not what it says.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Structural Description
editI recommend replacing "is a through truss" in the first sentence with the more descriptive "is an arched, rivet-connected Warren through truss cantilever (main span)". This information is available at https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=louisiana/lakecharles/ Each of those elements are interesting aspects of structural design and history which could be hyperlinked to their own pages. Adding a small amount of structural description makes the article more well-rounded as the bridge is significant beyond the current issue of its replacement which the article currently focuses on. The proposed addition provides a succinct launching point for the common question anyone crossing the bridge may wonder..."why is it shaped this way?" SZogg (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)