Talk:Sydney Harbour Bridge

Odd assertion

The wikipedia entry for the New York Hell's Gate Bridge makes the following rather odd statement about the Sydney Harbour Brodge:

" (The Hells Gate Bridge) May still be the world's strongest steel arch bridge, though the steel arch Sydney Harbour Bridge, which is believed to have been based on or inspired by the Hell Gate Bridge, has been reinforced since the World Trade Center attack in 2001. "

Is there any basis for this ? It looks like rubbish to me. As far as I know, except for the addition of or numerous under-employed Arab security guards to annoy pedestrians and cyclists, the Sydney Harbour Bridge has had no recent modifications at all. Merkanmich 11:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, someone has added the following odd statement: "The western side being 305mm larger that the east side." Is this supposed to mean the bridge is slightly longer on the western side, or does it mean that the western walkway ( used as a cycleway ), is 305mm wider than the eastern walkway ?? Eregli bob 07:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The Sydney Harbour Bridge has not had any structural modification since building work was completed in 1932. Bridgeclimber 01:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Problem with dates

I did an assignment recently on the Harbour Bridge and I noticed that some of the dates mentioned don't match up with those on the official site. I think the author should take a look at the official site and compare because someone is wrong.

Could you please be more specific? Arno 00:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

What Bridge?

See the article (opening of bridge) - I believe that it was the Bayonne Bridge that you are referring to. Arno

Indeed, the Bayonne bridge is longer by less than the diameter of the support hinges at each end, but is considerably narrower. RoscoHead 00:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The Bayonne Bridge is actually 25 feet longer than the Sydney Harbour Bridge. The story of the American bridge being 2.5 feet longer has been around since both were being built. Many sources carry this mistake including Wikipedia. Check out the offical lengths on the bridges homepages and then look at the lengths on the list of bridges homepage.Bridgeclimber 01:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Photo

All of this description and no photos? Anybody got a good pic of the Sydney Harbour Bridge they can upload here? KJ

I don't even knpw how to load an image, at leats not yet. As for a picture, perhaps something from a NSW tourist site? Arno

A followup answer: Try http://community.webshots.com/photo/4625974/4776846oBjrsCTTov. This is a photo downloading site, so no copyright problems should exist. But placing it in is something I cannot do; you'll need to do it yourself.

Aaaagh, no! (Oh, very funny, I've finally twigged onto this! Arno 02:13, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)) "© 1995-2003 Twofold Photos, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Statement" ... "All of the material on the Webshots Site is protected by the copyright laws of the U. S. and other countries. You are only allowed to use these materials as indicated on the Webshots site; other uses are prohibited by copyright laws." Please, DO NOT use any photos from that website here without the express permission of the individual owner of the particular photo. --Brion 07:01 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)

Oops, I missed that bit. Back to the drawing board, perhaps another search through www.ditto.com may help. Arno

A look at the Sydney Opera House discussion page has revealed this page: http://chmouel.com/web/index.php?/gallery/new_zealand/html/index4.html. The image of the SOH came from there, so perhaps the owner (User:Chmouel) will be happy with us using the shot of the bridge as well..

No problem at all you are free to use it like you want, please send me email if you want much faster answer (User:Chmouel)

Anywhere we might be able to get a pic of end of 2005 fireworks? I think that would be a better photo. Rmccue 04:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Coathanger

I don't doubt you, 203. "Coathanger" is (IMO) a dumb nane for it. It's quite common in other states though, sort of half-joking, half derogatory. Actually, I'd just as soon delete the whole para, but someone would revert me. Tannin

Does anyone actually know anyone from sydney who calls it the coathanger? As a sydneysider of 19 years I've yet to meet one person who has called it the 'coathanger'. The only references I've found to this name have been in overseas publications (National Geographic among others).

I second that. As a fellow Aussie I have never once heard it. Except in the the sentence:'...roughly coathanger shaped...' I vote we remove it.202.63.51.171 04:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)(sorry forgot to log in)Rmccue 04:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

You've gotta be kidding me... I call it the Coathanger, and I'm (fairly) local. It's more of an affectionate thing, really. - 220.237.30.150 10:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Iv'e spent I lot of time in Sydney and the region and the only time iv'e heard it being call the coathanger is in overseas magazines. 58.178.93.152 00:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

My father, aged 70, and a Sydney resident all his life often calls it the coathanger, and I recall the term being used in the local media numerous times over the past few decades. The unfamiliarity of the usage by editors above probably has more to do with age than anything else; younger people seem not to use it, while older generations did, and do. A reflection of the homogenisation of Australian slang under global influences, perhaps. --Centauri 00:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I am in agreement with Centauri. It is a term which has been used, is in use, and will continue to be used as a term to describe the Sydney Harbour Bridge. As such, it should be retained in the article. I have heard the term used countless times myself, so I believe that it adds value to the article by noting it.

--Lucanos 16:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I know that I am abit behind the times here. I have found a local source for the coathanger and it has now been added as a ref. Todd661 02:50, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

Image:Australia sydney-bridge.jpeg was removed from the article, because I didn't like it. I don't know if anyone wants to do something with it, but I think one image is enough for the main article. -- Tim Starling 02:36 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Well, one shot of this kind. It might be nice to have a few different types: e.g. half-constructed, roadway, maybe even with fireworks. -- Tim Starling 02:38 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Agreed, but where does one get them from? Arno 07:24, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Hells Gate and Parliament

A few things.

What evidence is there is that the SBH was based on the Hell's Gate bridge? This sounds speculative to me, even with the "It is now believed" in front. The only source that I was able to detect on the Internet is this one this one and it really is not very authoritive or substantial.

Update : A followup search unearthed this. But its still not quite strong enough to be evidence. Arno 08:11, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The NSW Government passed those laws through its parliament. The use of the term government rather than parliament makes this clearer. Arno 08:03, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

The Hell Gate bridge was completed in 1916. At the time it was considered a major enginering marvel. Bradfield designed the Sydney bridge in 1916. I would think it inconceivable that he wasn't aware of the Hell Gate Bridge, and that this almost wholly influenced his design. --Centauri 06:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The exhibit on the SHB's construction in its southeast pylon (where you can walk to the top) plainly states that Bradfield toured Europe and the U.S. looking at bridges and was impressed by the Hell Gate Bridge, and chose that design for a) load capacity and b) impressive looks. Found a link that talks about it with a bit more detail. Carl Lindberg 03:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

It is true that Bradfield was impressed by Lindenthal's Hell Gate Bridge. He saw it being built in 1914. Infact Lindenthal considered the SHB to be a copy of his bridge. Bradfield was not convinced of the arch design as a solution for the crossing of Syndey Harbour until 1922 when he had the tender documents rewritten to include an arch design. It was a meeting with the Cleveland Bridge Company in London that finally convinced Bradfield that he should accept Arch desings in the tender process. The Hell Gate Bridge was the most impressive arch bridge of the time and the similarities are obvious. Both Bradfield and Freeman used elements of the Hell Gate Bridge in their designs. Bridgeclimber 02:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

James Michener

' "To get on in Australia, you must make two observations. Say, "You have the most beautiful bridge in the world" and "They tell me you trounced England again in the cricket." The first statement will be a lie. '

Sadly the second remains true even 50+ years on...!

Oh well, you are entitled to your opinion.Arno 02:14, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Not anymore, I hate to admit.

The relevant quote is now back in, after a 'leave of absence' of about 3 years! Arno (talk) 00:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

---

Width

This article seems confused about the width of the bridge. At one point it says:

At 48.8m wide, it is listed by Guinness World Records as the widest bridge in the world.

It then goes on to say:

The bridge deck portion of the highway is 17.4 metres wide , and 1.149 km long.

Even if the 'bridge deck portion of the highway' referes only to the original 6 lane road portion of the bridge (ie. excluding the rail tracks, the tram tracks later converted into two extra road lanes, the footpath and cyclepath) 17.4m seems narrow at less than 3m per lane. And 31.4m (48.8 - 17.4) seems wide for the rest of the bridge. In the absence of an explanation as to exactly is meant by the 'bridge deck portion of the highway, I have removed the reference to 17.4 metres width. -- Chris j wood 21:06, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'll need to check this out, Chris. I didn't add that Guiness World records bit, but that other figure came from a source that I'll check. Arno 02:13, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK, the width is in fact 49 m long. The road part of it is 17.4 m. So you did the right thing, an error did get removed. Arno 04:57, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Infobox

I juggled that glorious night panorama around a bit, but it still over-wrote the infobox no matter where it was placed in the lead section, and as the rest of the article was studded with photographs, I eventually moved it right down to the quotes, where it seemed to fit in. --Jumbo 21:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Climbing the bridge

I think there should be a section added about climbing the bridge. There is only a very small bit of information throughout the article about it. Also if someone does add the section, I'd like to know if you are allowed to take personal cameras when you climb, as I'm visiting Australia in about one week, and I already has a bridge climb booked. I expect you're not allowed, as there are very few photos from the top of the bridge, and if you dropped a camera from that height it could do alot of damage, but imagine the photos you could get!

• No, they don't let you take cameras up. They don't let you take anything up. You do have your photo taken at the top of the bridge, looking east, and you can purchase this photo at the end of the climb. -- Saberwyn 12:29, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the guide takes many photos along the way. At the top, a group photo is taken which is provided free of charge at the end of the tour. The others may be purchased for far too much money. Pbones 16:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The last paragraph of the 'Tourism' section reads as though it is an extract from a tourist information/adverising brochure. 202.59.22.246 (talk) 00:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding photo

A few days ago, I took a (in my opinion) sweet photo of the Bridge, with the Opera House and the city in the background. Because I work at Luna Park Sydney, I was able to get up on our ferris wheel to take the shot. Is there anywhere I can put it so other users can consider it for incusion in this article? -- Saberwyn 12:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Saberwyn. Have you considered opening a Wikimedia Commons account? The first steps help file and FAQ should help you once you register - they explain how to upload files and how to license them for use on Wikimedia projects. Once you've uploaded your photo there, post a link to it here if you want us to have a look at. Or better still, just put it in the Harbour Bridge article yourself! - Gobeirne 05:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello again. I've just noticed you're an experienced editor who's uploaded a heap of photos before - sorry for the newby-condescension tone! In that case, just shove the photo in the article and let's see what happens! :) - Gobeirne 05:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi I also have a photo which is also a little bit sweet - if anyone thinks it worthwhile (actuarial disco boy) 9:36 (AEST) 21 May 06
Image:Sydney_harbour_bridge_dawn.jpg

Hells Gate and SHB

The SHB was actually based on the Tyne bridge in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England, also built by Dorman Long of Middlesbrough. The Tynw bridge was built in 1929 with the SHB opened in 1932. The Tyne bridge was based upon the design of the Hells gate bridge, so in a way SHB was based on Hells gate also, if not directly dj_paul84 23:35 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. The Sydney Harbour Bridge was designed by John Bradfield in 1916 - the same year the Hell Gate Bridge opened - although actual construction was delayed due to WW1, commencing in 1922. The Hell Gate Bridge was a major international engineering achievement, and Brafieled would certainly have known of it. The Tyne Bridge was designed in 1924, and was probably influenced by both the Hell Gate and Sydney designs - although it actually looks more like the Bayonne Bridge than either of them. --Centauri 00:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The Tynne Bridge, The Bayonne Bridge and the Sydney Harbour Bridge are all different arch bridge designs. Dorman Long and Co the company that built the SHB also worked on the Tynne Bridge and Sir Ralph Freeman who designed the SHB was a consultant on the Tynne Bridge. However the designs and dimensions are very different. They were designed and built totally independantly from each other. --Bridgeclimber 03:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Trivia?

Dunno if it counts as trivia, but related: I once built a replica of SHB in LEGO bricks - http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=192403 —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoscoHead (talk • contribs)

Different trivia. I've heard some people refer to the rightmost lane of traffic travelling in each direction as the "lane of death" (because of its closeness to traffic coming in the other direction, and perceived risk of collision). Is this common usage or just something one of my friends thought up? Paddles ^T_C 12:06, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't think it's common knowledge. I've never heard anybody calling it that and certainly not these days anyway. It's certainly a perceived risk of collision more than anything anyway. --Stephen Mok (in Sydney) 12:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've certainly heard the middle lanes referred to as the "death lanes" for the reasons mentioned above. I've also heard and seen such terms used in the media many times over the years. --Centauri 13:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not like it's the only road with fast moving traffic going in different directions. A head-on can happen anywhere. Yes, a perceived risk indeed. --Merbabu 13:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course not - but the point is that the term is used specifically with reference to this Bridge. --Centauri 23:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not that bad. I've done a u-turn on it without being killed (was accidently heading back into the city... country driver's shouldn't come past Goulburn really!)Garrie 02:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Where is 'Hoges' NO mention is made of the bridges most famous rigger, Paul Hogan. Its worth a mention , I suggest.

Ebbw Vale controversy

The page on Ebbw Vale in says that its steel built the bridge yet here it says most came from Middlesborough and the rest was sourced locally. Can somebody clear up this contradiction?-163.1.223.30 13:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Bridgebuilder nationality

The design bears a marked resemblance to that of the New York Hell Gate Bridge. Its design was later used as a basis for the Tyne Bridge in Newcastle upon Tyne, England. The bridge itself is built from 95% British steel by a British workforce[citation needed].

Wasn't it built during the depression in part to provide capital works jobs for Australians? I thought most of the workforce were locals even if the design/management/engineering team were British.

Garrie 02:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the "British workforce" is supposed to refer to the manufacturers of the steel, not the construction of the bridge itself, which was carried out by Australians. --Centauri 06:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course all this talk and possible argument about a "British" workforce or "British" steel is all a bit silly as at least 90% of Australians at that time regarded themselves as proud patriotic members of the great British Empire-that many were soon to die for- and proud subjects of their King -George V-indeed since virtually the whole population turned out to cheer QE II on her visit in 1954 the Aussies were proudly British until quite recently.Nowadays they keep talking about "finding their identity" What a wonderful happy country Australia used to be.....Aberdale

The figures regarding steel (95%) are wrong. I've deleted this as the correct numbers are already given later in the article. (www.sydneyharbourbridge.info is one online reference. I have seen the correct ratio 79% British, 21% Australian in many hardcopy publications also.

Also, the claim that it was the basis for the Tyne Bridge is tenuous. The Tyne Bridge was opened in 1928, four years before the SHB. I think it more likely that the Bayonne Bridge was the basis for the Tyne Bridge. I've deleted this claim, unless someone can back it up with a reference. -- Sulvo 12:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually it's a very well-known link - the same UK engineering company (Dorman & Long) was involved in the design and construction of both the SHB and Tyne bridge. Don't forget that the SHB was designed in 1916 - years before the Tyne Bridge. --Centauri 11:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/northeast/series3/tyne_bridge_northeasthistory.shtml

this BBC website says the SHB provided the template for the Tyne Bridge...

"The Tyne Bridge was designed by Mott, Hay and Anderson who based their design on the Sydney Harbour Bridge."

Also from the same site:

"Work started on the Sydney Bridge before building began on the Tyne Bridge.

The confusion arises because the Sydney Harbour Bridge took longer to complete due to its larger size.

The Sydney Harbour Bridge finally opened in 1932, three years after the Tyne Bridge." - Maudlingothic 05:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistancies regarding source of steel

Para 3 of the lead section states

The bridge itself is built from 95% British steel.

Para 7 section 1 states

The steel used for the bridge was largely imported. About 79% came from Middlesbrough in the North East of England, the rest was Australian-made

Clearly one of these statements are wrong but neither of them is explicitly referenced.

Garrie 22:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Garrie, the 79/21 proportions are correct. Although to say that the steel actually came from Middlesbrough may not be true. Certainly, Dorman Long and Co who built the bridge were from Middlesbrough, but I've not heard that the steel itself came from that particular part of Britain. -- Sulvo 12:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

But perhaps the proportions might reach 95% if the weight of the huge numbers of rivets made in another part of the UK were added as a separate item?

Yes Sulvo, the steel was made in Middlesbrough, as that is whts Middlesbrough is famous for, its Steel and Iron production (Ironopolis). Middlesbrough had 1/3 of the nations Iron stone deposit n the Cleveland hills and at one point was the world leader in Steel production. Over 30 blast furnaces were stuated in the Middlesbrough district alone dj_paul84 20:34 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting article

For anyone interested: There's an article in this weekend's Sydney Morning Herald. Click here: [1]. It talks a bit about the history, and also about a seemingly lavish new book on the bridge. --Merbabu 02:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

18-Mar-07 Bridgewalk

I will be participating in the deck bridgewalk on the 18th of March (the one mentioned in the Celebrations section of the article. Are there any particular photographs editors would like me to try and get while walking across/ -- saberwyn 05:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Just snap away and put a few of your best pics into the gallery at the bottom of the article. If any are particularly pertinent, they can be incorporated.

--Amandajm 10:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Dimensions

I have noticed that a number of the dimensions for the Sydney Harbour Bridge in the text are incorrect. Also some of the conversions from metres to feet do not add up. I have changed these; length of the main span from 509m (1559ft) to 503m (1650ft), Height of the bridge from 134m (415.4ft) to 134m (440ft). Bridgeclimber 06:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The Sydney harbor bridge

The Sydney harbor bridge got built at Sydney .The Sydney Harbor Bridge had opened in 19th march 1932. It is the largest but not longest metal bridge. It was beaten in length, by New York’s Bayonne Bridge it is 25 feet longer and opened just four months earlier. Dr John Job Crew Bradfield was the one that designed Sydney Harbor BridgeJohn 'Jack' T. Lang, declared the Bridge open. In 1998 people could climb the bridge. The top of the arch actually rises and falls because of the changes in the temperature. Did you no a famous celebrate name paul hogan re-painted it with 270,000 liters of paint. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.51.103.34 (talk) 10:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

This is great. Make this the main part of the article. It's more to Wiki standards... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.23.146.66 (talk) 00:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Image at State Library of NSW

An image with the caption Secretary for Public Works & Minister for Railways, Richard T. Ball, lays the foundation stone, Sydney Harbour Bridge, 26 Mar 1925 is located here. The photo would be {{PD-Australia}} and it seems that would make the scanned image also PD. But the library claims copyright to the scanned image. I am trying to work out if that holds water [[2]]. Will update when I get an answer.Garrie 06:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Ribbon cutting at opening

"The article claims that de Groot slashed the ribbon at the opening ceremony. Watching a short film called Rosie's Sercet it becomes clear this is false and that a cover-up of events was conducted. Video of the event shows his horse was pushed away from an intact ribbon, before he fell off and was arrested. The real ribbon cutter was Rosie Foster. The film contains interviews with people that explain who Rosie was, including some who saw her cut the ribbon and explains how research for a book revealed this cover-up. - Shiftchange (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)"

We later find out that this movie was fake. These were NOT the actual events of the Bridge opening. De Groot DID slash the ribbon with a sword and WAS mounted on a horse.

New walkways?

Can anyone shed any light on the huge new - and apparently permanent - construction on the northern half of the bridge? Looks like fully-enclosed walkways around 10m above deck level. A new BridgeClimb variant?? Whatever it is, I don't like it. It alters the appearance of the Bridge radically - and is easily visible from as far away as Vaucluse! Ian Page (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't actually seen or heard of this but when I get a chance I will look into it and bring it up next time I'm in Parliament. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 00:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Way too many pictures

This article seems to have become a collection of pictures of the same object. Just because someone took a cool picture of the bridge does not mean it should be included. Please remove some of the redundant pictures. Brothejr (talk) 10:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, unless there is a specific part of the article that the image relates to. --Merbabu (talk) 11:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Agree, I used to have in this article and image of one of the pylons at night. I removed this image to make room for other photos. Now that these are gone I think the image would be appropriate for the pylon section.. Adam (talk) 02:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The issue was too many photos. remember, wikipedia is not a gallery for your images, particularly disurpitve landscape shots of debatable merit. --Merbabu (talk) 06:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Do we need to keep this in the article. Adam (talk) 02:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

"There the proud arch, colossus-like, bestride
Yon glittering streams and bound the chasing tide"

— Prophetic observation of Sydney Cove by Erasmus Darwin.

your question is really: "is it notable?" From what I can see it just appears to be something that an editor thought was cool, rather than a quote that is famously linked with the bridge. If it cannot be established that this quote is famously linked, then it should go. --Merbabu (talk) 02:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I have gone through and removed the other shots that should have been removed. Wikipedia is not an image gallery. This means that while you may have taken this great image of the bridge, it does not mean you should add it to the article. If you really want to showcase your image, Wikipedia is not the place. This is per: WP:IMAGES —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brothejr (talk • contribs)

Thanks - it can be a difficult job, and it is helpful that someone outside of the usual Sydney editors did it. --Merbabu (talk) 11:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I have not added these images for decorative purposes. The one photo of my own that I have restored is relevant to that section and shows the public access to the bridge and fits in with that section. I took this image with this particular section of text in mind. The other image is a historical picture from the 1980's, it is not an art image, it does not belong to me, it is just an ordinary picture which is also relevant to the history of the bridge and Sydney. There are other images of my own that I have decided not to re add . Adam (talk) 06:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

What does the "historical picture" add to the article specifically on the harbour bridge? Nothing. On the other hand, it might be useful for the Rocks, but really it is too misty. (by the way, it is at least the 70's if not the 60's)? As for the picture of the stairs, while there might be an argument for the a picture of the stairs, it should be a straight pciture of normal aspect ratio that doesn't warp the image and make it confusing.

Further, once again you are acting unilaterally and insisting on your photos despite questions of their appropriateness, despite the discussion here. At least take solace in that fact that the current lead pic (and the one before??) is yours and most worthy of the lead pic - and I made a point to say that before. The pic of the stairs is unencyclopedic. If people question your picture, you should not insist on it - poor form. --Merbabu (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

In that case just remove them: I can crop the stairs and re upload at a later date or even make two separate images out of it for use else where. Also if you are going to pic on the amount of images in this article then why isn't something being done about articles like Surry Hills, New South Wales which at one stage had 30 images, some of of which have been culled. I could find much worse than this . Adam (talk) 07:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I could probably straighten the image as well. Adam (talk) 07:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I think cropping the stairs or even you re-taking it (I dared not replace it with my pic), would be a good compromise - I'm actually not convinced that we really need a pic of the stairs, but that's not an encyclopedic pic (even if is an interesting effect or does show some artistic and/or technical skill - ie, better in flickr than wikipedia). As for the Surry Hills example, I;m sure there are "much worse". try Guide to the Blue Mountains, but no editor is obliged to fix "worse" mistakes in other articles before fixing them here. I'm focussed on this article, not surry hills. And, you should remember I have long been against the number of photos in Sydney suburb articles - these articles seemed to be ruled by Jbar, yourself and sardarka and you all insist on loading them up with your own photos of trivial buildings, the choice of which shows you actually don't have much clue about what is significant to a suburb (case in point the faux-Georgian terraces and "The Manor" in the mosman article).

As I have said in the past, rather than suburb articles, I'm *generally* sticking to the more important articles which get a lot more editors and as a result a lot less pictures. --Merbabu (talk) 07:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

What faux-Georgian terraces are you talking about. Adam (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I believe there was a discussion about having that Blue Mountains article deleted, Why didn't you voice you objection 07:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about deletion of the Blue Mtns list (although I'm more sure now). However, I am sure it should not be anything but a list, not a "guide", not full of photos, and not have a large lead - it has all three. You will see I modified it recently to conform, but surprise-surprise i was reverted. --Merbabu (talk) 08:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I have removed one of the construction pictures due to the fact that there was way too many pictures in that section. Most of the sections either had one or no images in them, yet the historical had three? How pictures are needed to illustrate the bridge being built? Brothejr (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I have restored the historical image. The three historical images showed the bridge in three different phases of construction and are highly relevant to text and should remain . Adam (talk) 22:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I have re removed the image that I restored previously after coming to the conclusion that that section was overloaded, but do plan on adding that picture to another section later on. Adam (talk) 23:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, instead of worrying about the pictures, you might try to improve the article by finding references for those areas that have none. Brothejr (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

All good articles have at least one picture/photo/diagram per page. We now have a number of pages in here with nothing but text. Check out any top rated article, and try to find a whole page with nothing but text! An image I uploaded to show the tital flow system, which related specifically to text adjacent to it, was removed. I consider this vandalism. You picture haters have wrecked a good article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.255.43 (talk) 09:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Bridge type

This bridge is listed in the article Compression arch suspended-deck bridge as being of that type. I cannot find any references that says this is a valid type, nor that this bridge is one of those type. I found this ref which says it is a "two-hinged braced-rib type." - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Why are electronic tolls "problematic"?

Why are electronic tolls "problematic"? I have tagged this as a point of view concern. This is because there are probably just as many folks who say they eliminate problems as those who say they create them. Hopefully, someone can provide an in-line reference for this statement. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Because visitors to Sydney won't have an 'e-tag' on their car, or in all likelihood any idea what an 'e-tag' even is. And the unfortunate visitor/victim doesn't get informed that an e-tag (whatever that is) is their only payment option UNTIL AFTER THEY ARE ON THE BRIDGE. So instead of the excessive $3 toll, visitors to Sydney get slugged a $130 fine. Calling it 'problematic' is polite - it's a simple rip-off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.3.142.228 (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like you are one of the people that forgot to read the signs. Again, this is "point of view". Look at the comments posted for this youtube video. You will see someone with the opposite point of view. That is, the cash lanes were a problem that slowed traffic getting on the bridge. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 18:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistent facts and figures

A number of measurements in the article didn't have imperial equivalents so I've added conversions. I've also replaced all existing manual conversions with {{Convert}}. In doing so I've noticed there are a number of inconsistencies and conversion errors. Inconsistencies included the height of the bridge, which was 139m/456ft in the infobox but 134m/429.6ft in the prose. The automatic conversions result in the figure in the prose being 134m/440ft, a difference of 10ft. I'm not sure what the correct figure actually is. Another figure of 89m was converted to 276ft but the correct distance is 292ft. Other similar conversions exist and I suspect that the problem with the figures may be that they were incorrectly converted from the original imperially measured units. This needs to be addressed when someone has the time. I've also changed the distances for Tottenham and Moruya, Tottenham from 550 km down to 515km and Moruya up from 250km to 314km, using GPS measured road distances. As we use road distances in {{Infobox Australian place}} this seemed more consistent. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Coathanger

I've lived in Sydney for all my 33 years and have never once heard "a local" refer to the bridge as "the coathanger". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomfrh (talk • contribs) 03:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I did a poll at work today with 68 people. I asked them "If I said the word "coathanger" which landmark would I be referring to?" 65 people replied immediately "SHB". I know Sydneysiders today who are in their 40-60's who refer to this name. Stevefrommelbourne (talk) 23:56, 15 September 2010 (UTC)