Talk:Anderton Boat Lift

Cheshire High‑importance

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire 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.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK Waterways Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Waterways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of UK Waterways 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.UK WaterwaysWikipedia:WikiProject UK WaterwaysTemplate:WikiProject UK WaterwaysUK Waterways articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

An Engineering Icon?

I removed the following section from the main article, because it is unsourced and POV:

An interesting diversion is to consider how the appearance of the Anderton Lift relates to the concept of engineering elegance.

There is a way of thinking, probably misguided, that if something looks well, it probably is well. However, the Anderton Lift has to look like one of the most inellegant engineered structures that one might ever encounter. The photographs cannot begin to suggest just how ugly an engineered structure this is; it becomes fully apparent only on first-hand observation. Its ugliness is an aspect of the structure that makes it even more remarkable.

This is not a detraction from its worth, nor a slur. Indeed, it is something that may make the Anderton lift even more remarkable as a piece of mechanical and civil engineering. It shows that it need not look well to work well!

If a third-party discussion of the appearance of the boat lift can be found, then a summary of the contents of this source, with citation, could be included. Without this, this is a statement of the contributor's point of view, and so is unencyclopaedic. Incidentally, the original boat lift, before the addition of the A-frames when it was converted to electric operation, looked much more elegant than it does today. Gandalf61 07:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expand

The bulk of the article is ready to go forward as a GAC, but we need much more on the restoration. Mayalld 06:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anderton Boat Lift. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608133224/http://www.theheritagetrail.co.uk/industrial/anderton_lift.htm to http://www.theheritagetrail.co.uk/industrial/anderton_lift.htm

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) 23:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What year did the restoration start?

What year did the restoration start? I notice that the article is internally inconsistent: 2000 and 2001 Springnuts (talk) 20:00, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]