Talk:Marquam Bridge

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

NPOV violation?

edit

Although the criticisms of its appearance are sourced, it seems that other (either favorable or at least neutral) opinions regarding the appearance and esthetics of the bridge should also be taken into account. 66.234.220.195 (talk) 14:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The balance is there, though it is very succinct: Cost. —EncMstr 17:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
I doubt even the designers could say anything positive about the appearance of the bridge. It was designed to be inexpensive above all else. Cacophony (talk) 05:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Vera Katz quote

edit

The City Club has put a ton of videos of their forums on YouTube, including the one containing the Katz quote mentioned in the article. I watched it, and she was actually discussing the Eastbank Freeway and didn't mention the Marquam Bridge.[1] I do know that people can have the same feelings for the bridge as the freeway stretch, even as if the two weren't connected. Jason McHuff (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marquam 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) 22:51, 3 June 2017 (UTC)Reply