This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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
Lake Barkley Bridge is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
The figure mentioned on Bridges & Tunnels ($128.3 million) actually doesn't match the FHWA report very well at all ($228.55 million), though when I added in the FHWA citation I mistook them as being very close. That report also lists the Lake Barkley Bridge construction firm as TBD, which makes me think it might be preliminary, however. I will try to track down the KY Transportation Cabinet release Bridges & Tunnels cites. Ullpianissimo (talk) 01:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
I've found the article that Bridges & Tunnels is citing here (however I recommend instead that you visit my archive of the link (today, potential future reference) due to their security certificate not matching up with their website archived). I am not really sure which is more likely to be accurate at this point; FHWA still seems possibly preliminary, but this news article could conceivably contain a typo explaining the discrepancy. Ullpianissimo – (talk) 00:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
