Talk:Tasman Bridge disaster

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 5, 2009, January 5, 2010, January 5, 2013, and January 5, 2019.

Australia: Tasmania / History / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Tasman Bridge disaster is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian history (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Tasmania.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles 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.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

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

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Expansion[edit]

I've decided to expand the page into an actual article. I've started work and need contributions of collapse pictures and infobox help. Hothguard11 (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

added some photos to help illustrate the scene, though the quality is poor (extracted from digital video in poor lighting conditions. If any Hobart locals could improve on these shots it would be great (I'm in Perth)GlenDillon 08:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just completed a major revamp of this article; though the extent of the changes shouldn't imply any criticism of the article as it stood. It's just a subject that has held my attention for many years and I thought it deserved a lengthy treatment. I need to tidy up an image or two (eg my photo in the bridge rebuilding section - I put labels on it pointing to "pylon 19" - this needs to be revised as there is no pylon 19 anymore.) Not sure whether I've added too much about "social effects". I guess local editors will address that + other issues. GlenDillon 18:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

added project templates and gave article a C rating. Its the first time I've rated an article and perhaps I should be be more conservative with my assessment etc etc, still, it seems to exceed the criteria for "Start class" and has features in common with C class articles in the Australia project. Best to leave this for others to judge I guess.GlenDillon 15:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic editing so far. Aaroncrick (talk) 09:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism[edit]

I noticed an interesting claim in a paragraph and decided to check the citation to verify its accuracy. It turns out that the entire paragraph, except for the last sentence was copied verbatim from the article (9 sentences total). The material was added by Glen Dillon who passed away recently. It may be a good idea to check the rest of the article to make sure it does not also suffer from plagiarism. Kaldari (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Liability?[edit]

The article mentions the cost of the rebuilding job (and the changes to shipping rules) but there is no mention of the shipping company. Was it held liable? Did executives apologize or play any role in the aftermath? --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 02:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bowen Bridge[edit]

Why is there a "Citation needed" tag on this? The existence of this bridge is not in dispute, and there is a Wikipedia article covering it. Why does it need a citation? If someone doesn't answer this question, I will delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freddy011 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]