Talk:Trinity Bridge, Crowland

Lincolnshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bridges and Tunnels Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Stub class

How much more is there to say about a bridge?

We know where it is, the history of the build, and a bit of social stuff.

We could add 'talk from the bridge', as a croylandism for talking nonsense. There might be a written reference to that in the church guidebook.

What does it take for a bridge article not to be a stub? I do wonder about the expectations of WP --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 12:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More information would be helpful: dimensions, who designed it, how much it cost to build, maintenance information, when the rivers were moved away, why they kept the bridge standing rather than remove it, and information about the wooden bridges which preceded it. If you want some good examples of bridge articles and what's wanted, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and more specifically, the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bridges#Featured articles. - Denimadept (talk) 01:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

River diversion

I do not find anything definitive about when the river was diverted.

A lithograph from 1861 shows water, but this might be sentimental. https://www.wellandantiquemaps.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/irun/uc_product/images/CROWLAND-BRIDGE-LINCOLNSHIRE-by-the-I-L-N-c-1861.jpg?itok=gqO51x7g

A photo, 1859 by Samuel Smith is inconclusive, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/photograph-of-trinity-bridge-at-crowland-by-samuel-smith-on-news-photo/90769944 at least as seen online; the image is indistinct and the surface under the bridge could be water or road; in hand I'd expect the photo would be more discernible.

GeeBee60 (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why would this reduce the need for three bridges?

You only need two bridges (one for the main river and one for the tributary), not three, to do the job of this bridge. Even if there were three bridges beforehand, the structure would still only serve to replace two of them.

The statement about three bridges was added during the rewrite on August 28 2009 alongside other speculation. 2003:F5:CF05:B9D3:B82B:6CFD:DBA7:F2F3 (talk) 13:26, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]