Talk:Portway, Bristol

	Portway, Bristol has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 10, 2016 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 2, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that every year the Portway trunk road in Bristol is closed to traffic to allow inspection of the limestone cliffs of the Avon Gorge and to allow remedial work on loose rocks to be carried out?

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Bristol Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-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.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Highways: United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways 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.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the United Kingdom Roads Task Force.

This article was created or improved during the "The 20,000 Challenge: UK and Ireland", which started on 20 August 2016 and is still open. You can help!

I removed the following, which reads like a cut-and-paste from a civil engineering report:

In 1974 City of Bristol and DTp were advised by the Civil Engineering consultants appointed that the rock wall so favoured by climbers at the car park green recess was impracticable to save and although Bristol Council members and engineers were concerned over services in the Portway road that the precipice needing taking back to relieve the rocking action that had set into the cliff face. The City refused, the prospective engineers resigned the contract as the slab was so unstable and pinning (rock bolt) would have required too great a stress load. Later some cut back had to be enforced with the Portway closed and many net units were rock bolted into the Avon Gorge face. Canopy as described herein was utilized in Austria at that date and adopted for the section below the Suspension Bridge, where the "Brunel" foundations are juxtaposed with highly cavernous solution reduced Cardoniferous Limestone mass blocks at rest (William J. Larnach & Reginald Bradshaw University of Bristol and other reports in Engineering Geology, University of Bristol, aver there is no immediate danger, but the site is less than suited to alteration of high bearing stress dependency if not monitored and for new build). It is likely if the records are read that even with pins the base nature of the riparian edge and types of rock therein do not suit support of block limestone above. The 2010 closure of Portway Bridge Valley Road is just one session in a number of engineering works, including the loss of the basement road river alluvial edge, piled and service pipes.^{[citation needed]}

It could go back if somebody could translate it into English. Chris (talk) 18:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And if citations are added. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With the removal of the above inappropriately-styled paragraph this article meets the criteria for B-class as per

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Portway, Bristol/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 17:08, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Later this evening.♦ Dr. Blofeld

Unlike the M32, which I consider to be hell on concrete, I have fond memories of driving up and down the Portway and admiring the view. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:33, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• " It passes through the suburbs of Sea Mills, " -"suburbs" or "suburb"?

Should be suburb, fixed Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "It was composed of six 42 feet 6 inches (12.95 m)" -can you tweak the converter to inch rather than inches?

{{convert}} doesn't want to play ball, so I've done it manually instead Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Do we know how it slid into the river?

Ground subsidence, basically unstable earth + water = not a good thing to put concrete on. I've clarified a little from the source Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• When is the annual marathon?

September, though as it only started back up last year for the first time in nearly 30 years, I'm a little hesitant to describe is "annual" just yet. Still, I've bolstered it with a source, though the picture kind of makes it obvious the marathon is happening on the Portway.... Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "In 2015, the Portway was closed for five consecutive Sundays over May and June. The Mayor of Bristol, George Ferguson said the closure tied in with Big Green Week, where several events along the road were happening anyway" -what is Big Green Week and how exactly would this affect the road? Not clear.

I've clarified what BGW is, and added a source that shows what was happening along the Portway for the 2015 event. I think a redlink is correct here as I'm sure somebody could create an article out of it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 15 needs reformatting

Damn, missed one. I checked the source, just forgot to update the access date. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: All done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:08, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Right, I've addressed everything, what's left to do? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pass it? ;-)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it
   neutral
   ?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have

   fair use rationales

   :

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with

   suitable captions

   :

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think homage must be paid to Baldy Bill and Jezhotwells who did a lot of ground work on this article in the first place, getting it up to B-class and making the job to lift it up to GA so much easier than some other articles I've looked at. Sadly, it's already had a DYK trip, which is a shame as that "Bristoland" sign is a hook waiting to happen.... Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I should have spotted this sooner, but I have removed the infobox per

1. "Existed: 2 July 1926 – present" sounds silly
2. "Constructed between 1919 and 1926" duplicates this information, and both fields are duplicated in the lead anyway
3. The Portway does not meet the A3029 (which is the Brunel Way Bridge) and the link is a redirect
4. Most people do not know Bridge Valley Road as the "A4176 road" (no article, redirect) and it is not a particularly important junction
5. "A4162 road" has no article and Sylvan Way is not a particularly important junction, certainly no more so than the junction for Shirehampton Station
6. The "Location" only lists Avonmouth - doesn't it go to Bristol?
7. The "Road network" section is largely irrelevant to this article
8. There is no map, probably the most useful thing that an infobox like this could have had

In short, a complete faux-pas. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you could make a highlighter map the infobox would be OK I think, though as you say in terms of actual info it's not exactly of much value. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote something myself ages ago [1] example use, but deployment on here is problematic because a) I don't know who to prod to get it installed and b) the data comes from the OpenStreetMap licence which is not compatible with CC-BY-SA 4.0 that Wikipedia uses (static images are okay, dynamic data creation isn't). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]