Talk:Clifton Suspension Bridge

A4 roofed section

The roofed section of the A4 was built as part of the scheme to protect the road from falling rocks. It went in at the same time as lots of steel netting and other stabilisation stuff that you can still see - there's always been a problem with bits of the gorge falling off. I don't believe it has anything to do with the suicides and I have removed the bit that claimed this. Nevilley 11:37, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nevilley is correct. I live 12 miles from the Bridge and I recall, at the time it was built, that it was only for rockfall protection.

Adrian Pingstone 14:18, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Adrian! I lived somewhat closer than this - Redland then Clifton - and was quite obsessed with the gorge and bridge at the time (possibly a childhood trauma involving a school project!) and I remember it all pretty clearly despite the haze of the years ... Nevilley 16:19, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Update - same again

Amazingly, someone added that back in, presumably on the basis of their personal opinion or some folklore that they had heard. I have removed it, again. The roofed section is NOT connected with the suicide issue - please see previous user comments above. If someone can come up with good, verifiable evidence for this theory I will be delighted to reconsider. 138.37.199.199 09:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, I made an edit to this effect the other day, since removed. Should have checked here first, my apologies. I think it's easy to assume it's because of suicides because the roof is only over the section under the bridge, but now am I right in thinking that it's the stress that the bridge puts on the surrounding area of gorge, which makes that section most prone to rockfall?

(91.108.126.142 (talk) 23:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC))

Balloon festival closure

It's not quite correct to say that the bridge was closed during the Bristol International Balloon Fiesta in 2004. I was there this year, and it was most certainly open some of the time. However, the Evening Post and other papers reported that the weight of pedestrian traffic was dangerously high, and that the bridge might therefore be closed entirely during such festivals in future years. Given the gridlock in the city centre even this year, the traffic jams next year don't bear thinking about! Loganberry 16:30, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

In fact, it was closed Thursday 0930 - Friday 0700 and Saturday 1200 - Sunday 0900. See [1]. --rbrwr^± 18:48, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes, Gloucestershire.

When Vick made his will, Clifton was still in Gloucestershire. It didn't become part of Bristol until the 1830s. -rbrwr^± 14:34, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Good Article Review - Result: Fail

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

General comments: This article failed fairly quickly, I'm afraid. I didn't feel that it was adequately referenced: this is particularly important in the History section, where verifiable sources would be needed. The idea is that someone could use your reference to do further research on this topic. Examples of things to reference would be the statements:

he judge, Thomas Telford, rejected all designs, and tried to insist on a hugely expensive design of his own. - it would be necessary here, for example to give a reference to this.

An attempt to build Brunel's design in 1831 was stopped by the Bristol Riots... - was it, why? your unreferenced explanation isn't satisfactory, I'm afraid.

These are just two examples of many that require referencing.

Structure and Style: The lead is somewhat short, with an unreferenced statement used as a symbol of Bristol. - I live in Bristol, and even I'd like to see this proven. Take a look at WP:LEAD for more information on how to write a good lead.

I also think that the one-sentence paragraphs in all sections are a failing point. The article reads as a series of disconnected statements in places and does not read well, which is especially true in some areas of the History section, but also in the Suicides section.

Content: There is very little discussion on the process of the bridge's construction, which I would expect from an article about a bridge. Elements of this appear in the history section, but:

1. it gets lost, because its not entirely a historical point.
2. there isn't enough information

My initial recommendations before attempting a re-nomination are therefore:

1. Restructure the article so that relevant content appears under appropriate headings.
2. Include more information on how the bridge was built
3. Copy-editing to remove the short stubby sentences and paragraphs
4. Most importantly, references for everything!

On a positive note, I believe that the article has potential, and with a consolidated effort could be renominated once these issues are resolved. Any further questions, please post them on my talk page.

Regards, Fritzpoll 18:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

How was it built?

Just a point, but this article completely fails to mention HOW the bridge was built. There's a brief section on it on the bridge's FAQ page, but extra info would be needed before this can be included. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

An image for your consideration

A Flickr user recently donates an HDR image of the bridge to the Commons. See File:Clifton Suspension Bridge.jpg. Please consider adding this image to the article. It may go well in the infobox even.-Andrew c ^[talk] 21:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I really like that picture, and so have put in into the infobox, and pasted the old one at the bottom of the article. If anyone decides to revert me, could they at least put the new image somewhere in the article. Martin451 (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

HDR is really, really horrible. Why is this nasty photo on Wikipedia? How about a properly coloured and toned image for this article? --89.240.151.100 (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

89.240, I could not agree more with you. This very weirdly coloured picture looks halfway between a painting and a photograph and makes a very poor start to the article. In the lead we need a photo of how the area around the bridge REALLY looks (I live about 12 miles away and see the bridge frequently) and this one is most unsatisfactory.- Adrian Pingstone (talk) 20:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I like it, but it's still nasty. Are none of commons:Category:Clifton Suspension Bridge suitable? What are we looking for? I can probably go take a few sometime if necessary. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Yuk! ♦ Jongleur¹⁰⁰ ♦ ^talk 20:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, relax everybody. I have removed it. SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 20:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Pity. (although I did think someone would revert it). I don't like the current lead picture, it does not have enough contrast, and the bridge is too small a part of the picture. I think a picture taken from where the HDR was was taken on a clearish day would be good. Might try myself as I live with 2km of the bridge, but I am rubbish at photography. Martin451 (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a go at getting one today! gothick (talk) 13:01, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Right. I've added five more pictures to the commons:Category:Clifton Suspension Bridge category, all of which are variations taken from the same viewpoint as the current headline picture. However, they're all higher res, sharper, and more contrasty. Anyone reckon one of the would be a good choice for the headline picture? gothick (talk) 17:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Well done, Matt. I reckon File:Clifton Suspension Bridge-9350.jpg is best for the lead and support its addition there. Maedin\^talk 17:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Glad to be of service. If any other pictures of the bridge are needed, let me know; I live right next to it and can get to most viewpoints. gothick (talk) 13:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

(←) I agree that the old (reinstated) picture is a bit wishy-washy, but I don't agree that the size of the bridge in the picture is a problem. It's a great view, a classic view, a good view of the bridge in context, reflecting many a first view of it. A better, sharper, more contrasty image from around Cumberland Basin, showing Windsor Terrace and the slopes of Clifton (i.e. the view that I have reinstated), would be better than one from the north. SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 21:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

telford judgement

Mr. Telford was NOT judge of the competition. He was one of the most famous engineer of his age, and was asked to give advice to the committee of Merchant Ventures commissioners,who refused all the 21 competitors of the first turn.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.228.212.126 (talk) 05:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC) 

What else is needed to get this article to GA standard

What else do editors think is needed to get this article to meet the Good article criteria?— Rod ^talk 09:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I feel that the "In Popular Culture" section needs to be drastically trimmed, or moved to its own article, or something. In its present form I feel it's a real obstacle to GA status and it's a terrible hostage to fortune if everyone who ever sees it on TV or in a film wants to add the details: it will just grow, like Topsy. It needs a pretty brief statement of how common, iconic etc the usage is, and maybe an example or two (Points West or whatever) but not details on every time it shows up and who drove what car across etc - I find this terribly boring and distracting. I know it's not quite the same thing but I feel for example that the Colesnaw article was improved massively when the vastly tedious list of Every Gig Ever got shipped off to a new home. I think this article would benefit from similar surgery. I think there is probably policy somewhere on "in popular culture" and "trivia" sections but I am too lazy and incompetent to find it right now. Naturally this is only one view, and no offence whatsoever is meant to those who like this content to be in here. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 09:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I've taken out some of the uncited trivia, but there are still a couple of claims (which illustrate iconic status) which need references.— Rod ^talk 10:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Pedestrian/cyclist toll

there is no clear declaration that there was a pedestrian toll in the history section before stating that there is no longer a pedestrian toll. 68.148.124.160 (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

It was slightly misworded in view of what the source says. In the absence of a source for any past situation I've reworded it so that it just talks about now: the Act has provision for the toll but they don't collect it. I hope this is better and answers your point. (PS I am not per se a reliable source but I do think I remember it being levied years ago. The toll collection regime was however somewhat, ah, unreliable and perhaps a little nonstandard in those days ... since corrected, of course.) Best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

They stopped collecting the toll in 1991 - http://www.civl.port.ac.uk/comp_prog/bridges1/Clifton.htm --Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 23:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

? not Brunel's work

The lead of this article (and the plaque on the bridge) clearly credit Brunel with the design, however a Telegraph article Isambard Kingdom Brunel did not design Clifton Suspension Bridge, says historian suggests William Barlow and Sir John Hawkshaw should be given the credit - any thoughts?— Rod ^talk 19:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I have just drafted the following message on the same subject, and only discovered your three-year-old and as yet totally ignored post, Rod, when I came here to post my message.

The lead of the article says "Designed by Isambard Kingdom Brunel". However, later in the same article we read "A revised design was made by William Henry Barlow and Sir John Hawkshaw ... It has been argued that the size and technology of these revisions was so great that the credit for its design should go the Barlow and Hawkshaw." Now "it has been argued..." is too vague to be much use, but searching I find that there is certainly a significant body of opinion supporting that view. The article Isambard Kingdom Brunel also records the fact that more than one historian has questioned whether the attribution to Brunel is justifiable.

Adrian Vaughan in "The Intemperate Engineer" very forcefully expresses the view that the attribution to Brunel is unjustifiable. He says, amongst many other things, "These are not cosmetic alterations or modifications. It is fundamentally a new design." (A news report outlining some of Vaughan's views is here.)

The article Isambard Kingdom Brunel states that L. T. C. Rolt had much earlier expressed similar views to those of Vaughan.

The engineering historian Julia Elton said in a BBC Radio 4 program on Brunel in the series "Great Lives" (Friday 16 May 2014), "The whole world, as far as I can see, believes that the Clifton Suspension Bridge, as it exists today, was actually designed by I. K. Brunel ... but actually, it was designed after his death by Sir William [sic] Hawkshaw and W. H. Barlow. It's a completely different design." (i.e., a completely different design from the one Brunel made.) (The radio broadcast is still available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b042ztr7. The relevant passage starts at about 14m 00s into the recording.)

On the other hand, this page on Bristol University's web site, stops short of saying with Vaughan and Elton that it was "fundamentally a new design" and "a completely different design", but does say that the design of the bridge was "based on that by Brunels [sic] but with some changes". Likewise this page says that Barlow and Hawkshaw made "some judicious redesign".

It is clear that reliable sources cast enough doubt on the traditional attribution to Brunel to make it unacceptable to simply cite that attribution in the lead of the article without qualification. I am therefore going to edit the wording to add what seems to me to be appropriate qualification. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:52, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I think your revised text "The bridge is built to a design by William Henry Barlow and John Hawkshaw, based on an earlier design by Isambard Kingdom Brunel." is good at encapsulating the history.— Rod ^talk 18:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Why was the bridge built?

Could the article address why the bridge was built. It seems to be in an awkward place, and is it a high traffic route Clifton Downs to Leigh Woods? The article hints that it was originally a vanity project for Vick, but since his invested legacy did not cover the cost of construction, why did it go ahead, and why was did the Government become involved? Why wasn't a cheaper bridge just put in upstream? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBel (talk • contribs) 18:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Bristol Bridge which is upstream and without the cliffs had been in existence (in various forms) for centuries before the suspension bridge was considered. Various private estates were being built on the Leigh Woods side of the gorge in the 18th century but there seems to be little economic justification.[2]— Rod ^talk 19:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Great question. Is it not possible that it was a useful connection to have, anyway? (And yep I have read the link, so I know we'd need sources!) Imagine a world without cars or Avonmouth bridge. If you need to get between NW Bristol places like Clifton, Redland, Stoke Bishop etc and extreme NE Somerset corners like Easton, Portishead etc then the trip down to Bristol Bridge adds miles, and, perhaps worse, quite a bit of descent and climb, to your journey. The Clifton bridge looks like a significant shortcut in that light. Whether the potential traffic for this trip was anything significant we can't know without the sources and obviously the article should not speculate. But it would be good to know if anything was written about this. Also, maybe the posh-people traffic between Clifton and LW actually was potentially significant in its own right? I mean there were other developments around there (Spa, Rocks Railway) where people must have thought they were onto a potential earner from a more sort of leisured economy, not just, er, bolts and wood and cabbages and fish as it were. In other words, money being put deliberately into middle-class moneyspinners? Again, sources needed and no room for speculation, but the thought interests me and if I see a suitable ref to support any of this gossamer tower of weeble I will bring it here. Cheers. DBaK (talk) 13:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The Leigh Woods developments were after the bridge. I now have a copy of Andrews book - which offers better explanations, involving admiralty rules (& cost of building other forms of bridge which would comply, access to Portishead etc - as soon as I've read a bit more I will expand that section.— Rod ^talk 19:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Great! Cheers DBaK (talk) 21:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

If I were in the market for a gossamer tower of weeble, where could I find it and what would it cost? Semiseriously, where did that come from? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I've had a go at adding more explanation but if you could all take a look and copyedit/revise as needed that would be great. My candidate for a gossamer tower of weeble is the pic to the right which was proposed before Brunel was born!— Rod ^talk 21:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Great pic. Something that hobbits could live in. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Excellent pic. Sorry, I have no idea where the gossamer tower of weeble came from but yes, that is probably what one would look like. I like that the article has a failed design proposal in too - weren't there others, or would that become a separate article if taken too far? DBaK (talk) 09:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The article does say "The judging committee rejected most of the 22 plans submitted," about the 1829 competition. I have more on this if needed but it might overload the article.— Rod ^talk 09:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Brilliant. I do remember all the stuff about the other designs, some of which were really quite wacky, but I agree that it might get a bit unbalanced to include it at the article's present size. Might be worth bearing in mind for a possible future expansion or even a separate article one day. Thanks! DBaK (talk) 19:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

A garbled sentence

This does not seem to be a completed thought:
"A ceremony to make the start of the construction works was held on 21 June 1831; however a few days later work was halted by the Bristol Riots, which took place after the House of Lords rejected the second Reform Bill, which aimed to get rid of some of the rotten boroughs and give Britain's fast growing industrial towns such as Bristol.[7]" What?
I have no idea what is intended. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Seems to have been fixed now with a bit about getting parliamentary seats for some less-dodgy places! :) DBaK (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was my change. The purpose of the Act of Parliament referenced in the section was to create broadly equal representation (e.g., one MP per 65,000 electors). At the time, constituencies were very unbalanced with some having 100,000+ electors, others having just a few hundred. QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 12:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ping! 1753

At the moment we say this in the lead: "The idea of building a bridge across the Avon Gorge originated in 1753." and later on we expand this to explain about Vick and his will. It's actually slightly uncomfortable reading because it seems to imply that prior to, say, the moment in which Vick's will was read, or even written, no-one had ever thought of this before and then suddenly, Ping!, lightbulb moment, ah yes jolly good idea. It seems to me much more likely that for decades or even centuries the idea had existed - we knew about bridges, surely, before we had the technology to build Clifton, and we only had to glance across the Gorge - but that Vick's funding made the first serious attempts possible. I don't have the book referenced so I can't see how it puts it but I wonder if it - or just ideas here? - could support a reword that takes some of the edge off the current very blunt statements? (Do you see what I mean at all here or is it just me going nuts again??) Cheers DBaK (talk) 23:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, this source implies that Vick's will was indeed the beginning of the idea ("there was no need for the bridge, but the idea caught on"). QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 13:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha, quite - good ref - but I still find it hard to imagine that the Merchant Venturers all dropped their coffee in astonishment at the idea because none of them had ever heard of such a thing except when OD'd on snuff. I mean, I know new ideas ARE possible - look at Stilton ice-cream! - but I just wonder whether this was truly one. I do realize that I am waffling speculatively and that I can't really go on with this without discovering a manuscript from 1407 saying "whanne thatte manne shalle buildde ye oft-desyred Brigge from Cliftonne to ye Woodes of Lee" so, although it is interesting, I should probably shut up now. Cheers DBaK (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Which Acts?

At the moment we say "The bridge is managed by a charitable trust set up by Acts of Parliament in 1952, 1980 and 1986". This seems unlikely - the trust was surely set up only once even if its supporting legislation was redone at other dates. Does anyone have the knowledge or reference sources to tweak the sentence so it makes better sense? For example maybe the trust was set up in 52 and its Acts were revised in 80 and 86? Or else is it regulated by legislation dated 52, 80 and 86? Or something?? Cheers DBaK (talk) 13:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Set up in 1952 according to the charity itself (here). I'll see if I can find which Act it actually was QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 13:21, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

This link is useful. QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 13:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• Clifton Suspension Bridge Act 1952, c.xli
• Clifton Suspension Bridge Act 1980, c. xxii
• Clifton Suspension Bridge Act 1986, c.xiv

QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 13:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I note also that this says (implies) that the Trust was founded a lot longer ago than 1952, similar to how the Hansard link puts it. If you can find a way to tweak it to get the legislation dates still in, but not seeming to be when or how it was "set up" other than for when it started, I think that would be a great help. I don't think I can do the necessary tweakage myself. Cheers DBaK (talk) 13:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

How about this tweak? QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 16:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that absolutely nails it, thank you! :) DBaK (talk) 16:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Reference form

This article would greatly benefit from using the "SFn" format. That is especially true of the McIlwain citation, which is incessantly repeated (7 X) (owing to the different page numbers). I have other plans for today, and can't help, but that is my suggestion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I've boldly made a start, please continue (or revert). QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 15:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Most Excellent Job! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting out many of the refs I added (while I've been at work). It means I need to learn yet another citation format - but it does look better.— Rod ^talk 19:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

^What Rodw said. And where do we read about this stuff, or is it just a question of Sitting By Nellie?  :) DBaK (talk) 19:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Bedtime reading of the manual(s) of style is where you read about it but I find it difficult to learn anything from the manuals because there are so many options (just working through WP:CT, WP:CITE, WP:CITEX and WP:CITE/ES is a long read). I tend towards small edits to lots of articles and so I have got used to looking things up in the manuals every time I edit to remind myself of what to do.QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 08:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! DBaK (talk) 08:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Bullet point lists on Dimensions and Popular Culture sections

I am hoping to get this article near enough to nominate for GA before long (once we have sorted/replaced the deadlink) but I am worried about the bullet point lists in the Dimensions and Popular Culture sections. It is generally better to turn these into prose - but what do others think?— Rod ^talk 09:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that a list for Dimensions is essential. Less concerned about Popular Culture (which gets banished in many articles it seems), but I think it's easier to read like it is in a list. They are after all, quite unconnected items in themselves. Just my personal opinion. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, I agree with Martinevans123. I also think that this is iconic,so that it's popular culture section is no stretch. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Illegal to fly underneath the bridge since 1911

The date seems dubious (in 1911 flying had barely begun). This site states that 1911 was the first time someone flew under the bridge and the reference website about the bridge here actually says flights were continuing in the 1930s. The only definite reference I can find is that it was banned when the Vampire crashed in 1957. Thoughts? QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 21:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

The reference for the 1911 ban is this. Page 151 doesn't mention it so I would conclude the article is wrong.QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 21:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

So it seems that Ann Wood-Kelly flew (twice) under (another?) bridge, not even this one? That page of the book seems to refer to this one. It's a little frustrating that the essential pages are often missing in a GoogleBooks Search view. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Flying was well established by 1911, especially in Bristol. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Fair point. I really meant (and I know I didn't write this!) that 1911 seemed a bit early to be banning it given how early it was in the development of flight and so I felt it was worth looking into further - thanks QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 22:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I think it was only 1912 when Bristol passed a by-law against propeller-driven road vehicles, because Coanda had already driven one up the Gloucester Road. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I've modified the paragraph as I've found no source backing the 1911 "ban". I've added some additional info and a further ref re the 1957 incident QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 15:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Charity status

I am surprised that no mention is made of the bridge's charitable status. I have added a templated link to the Clifton Bridge Charitable Trust's profile at the Charity Commission website. It includes a wealth of information about the charity including accounts going back 5 years. Perhaps someone with the time could take a look and see if there is anything useful. At the very least I think we should mention the charitable status and the latest year's financials. --Bob Re-born (talk) 22:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

In the operation section it does say " The bridge is now managed by a charitable trust, originally formed by the Society of Merchant Venturers following Vick's bequest.[26] The trust was authorised to manage the bridge and collect tolls by Acts of Parliament in 1952, 1980 and 1986.[27]", but I would agree something about current finance would be useful.— Rod ^talk 22:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Doh! I searched charity not charitable on the page! Still, as you say it could be improved. --Bob Re-born (talk) 22:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Reference issues

There are a few issues with the referencing of this article which I think need to be sorted before it can be nominated for GA:

• Ref 14 - The Daily Mail 2010 - this needs more detail (or an alternative finding)
• Ref 51 - The Railway Gazette. 1957. p. 74. - this needs more detail (or an alternative finding)
• Ref 53 - BBC West News". TV Ark. Retrieved 5 July 2011 is a deadlink
• Ref 55 - Victorian Jobs: Bridge Builder". The Worst Jobs in History microsite. Channel 4. Retrieved 20 January 2008 is a deadlink

Can anyone help fix or replace these citations?— Rod ^talk 22:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The Railway Gazette is my fault. When I added it I used vol= instead of volume= in the citation template. I've fixed it now. Page number, year and volume number should be sufficient to identify the source uniquely. QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 22:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

TV Ark (ref 53) seems to work OK for me. Nice site too with pictures of the lovely and fragrant Alex Lovell. Mmmmm Alex..... --Bob Re-born (talk) 23:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks both.— Rod ^talk 08:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

The Daily Mail one (which is also one of mine!) should link via the Sfn to "The Clifton Pagoda: How Brunel's iconic bridge nearly had a very Chinese twist (if he had listened to his dad)". The Daily Mail. 17 December 2010. Retrieved 2013-01-17. in the references section. It is a complete reference supporting the content. Just needs the Sfn link fixing. QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 18:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Anything needed before GA nomination?

Can anyone identify anything else which is needed to ensure this article meets the Good article criteria?— Rod ^talk 20:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm hardly an expert, but it looks like we're good to go to me QuiteUnusual ^TalkQu 22:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks I've now nominated it.— Rod ^talk 09:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Clifton Suspension Bridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bruce1ee (talk · contribs) 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this nomination – I'll follow up here with my findings over the next couple of days. —Bruce1ee^talk 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   See comments below ...

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   See comments below ...

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   See comments below ...

   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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   See comments below ...

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• 1A.
  • Lead section: I think the opening sentence should include the year the bridge was completed/opened (1864).
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Plans" section: I think it needs to be said who Thomas Telford was, eg. "Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford".
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operation" section, "although now thousands of electric light bulbs are attached to the bridge instead of flares": is "now" correct, it says later that LEDs were used?
    • YChanged to ...were attached...— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operation" section, "A toll of £0.50 is levied": when was this toll (of £0.50) first introduced?
    • A toll has been levied since the bridge opened, however I will try to check when it was increased to 50p— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • Ythe toll rose to 50p in 2007 - I have added this + the proposal to put it up to £1 this year.— Rod ^talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operation" section, "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge including the strengthening of the chain anchor points in 1925 and 1939": suggest changing to something like "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge, including the strengthening of the chain anchor points, which were done in 1925 and 1939".
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operations" section, "On 4 April 2009, the bridge was shut overnight due to a crack in one of the support hangers.": was the crack repaired?
    • YReworded to show closed for 1 night to allow repairs to take place— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Dimensions" section: "Traffic" is not a dimension – there is "Daily traffic" in the infobox, is "Traffic" in this section necessary?
    • Removed from this section & added to operation— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • Thanks, but I see you've used that troublesome "now" word (see WP:DATED). —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
        • YNow removed.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Dimensions" section: either use "feet" or "ft", but not both.
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Incidents" section, "In 1885, a 22-year-old woman named Sarah Ann Henley survived a fall from the bridge": the source says she "threw herself from the Bridge","fall" suggests an accident – thoughts?
    • Not sure - saying she definately "threw herself" is verifiable but perhaps a "label"— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • YOn second thoughts I think to say "survived a fall" is fine. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • No Close paraphrasing/copyright violations found.
  • "Plans" section: thanks for expanding this section, but I have a query about Telford: "Entries were received from 22 designers ... Telford submitted four entries ... They then called in Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford to make a final selection ... Telford rejected all the remaining designs ... Telford was then asked to produce a design, which he did" – (1) Telford should be introduced at the first appearance of his name; (2) is there a sequencing problem here? If Telford had already submitted four entries, why was he asked to produce a design? —Bruce1ee^talk 06:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
    • YSorry that first Telford (who submitted four entries) should have been Brunel.— Rod ^talk 07:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

• 1B.
  • Lead section: Is there a reason the grade I listing and the B3129 road facts are not mentioned in the body of the article? I know WP:LEAD allows for trivial facts not listed in the article, but are these trivial facts?
    • YI've added these to operations linking to road to the number of cars— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Lead section: plans for a "cast iron structure" is not mentioned in the body of the article.
    • Is this not covered in Engineering?— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • I don't see it in Engineering. Cast iron is not the same as wrought iron. As I understand it, plans for a cast iron structure were abandoned, or have I got it wrong? —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
        • I've gone back to the books - but still having a problem explaining/sourcing this.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
          • I've looked in Andrews, McIlwain & Vaughan. The only one that has anything relevant is Andrews p14 which says (discussing 1793) "Although Bristol had several iron works and trading links with Coalbrookdale, on the River Severn in Shropshire, the power house of the early Industrial Revolution, Bridges did not appear to consider using cast iron." I am not inclined to change this until I've asked on the talk page if anyone has other sources saying anything different, or done a more comprehensive web search - which I may not be able to do until tomorrow.— Rod ^talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
            • YAll the sources I can find say the change was from stone to wrought iron (without any serious consideration of cast iron), so I think the lead was wrong. I have changed this & hopefully now matches the rest of the article.— Rod ^talk 11:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Lead section, "It now has plaques that advertise the telephone number of The Samaritans": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
    • YNow removed— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operation" section, "The bridge is now managed by a charitable trust": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
    • YNow removed— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • The "Operation" section is not summarized in the lead.
    • What part of "Operation" do you think should be added to the lead?— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • The bridge management company, the tolls, "the first modern bungee jumps", for example. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
        • Hopefully done now.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
          • YThat's fine, thanks. —Bruce1ee^talk 13:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

• 2B.
  • There are several offline sources used, for which I've assumed good faith.
  • Infobox: "Total length" is not repeated in the body of the article and is not referenced here – perhaps it could be added to the "Dimensions" section and referenced there.
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Lead section: "forms part of the B3129 road" is not referenced (not included in the body of the article).
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Construction" section: the first half of the last paragraph (starting with "Brunel died in 1859") is not referenced; do the references towards the end of the paragraph cover the first half (I can't check the offline sources)?
    • Refs from the Andrews book added.— Rod ^talk 17:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • I was referring to the last paragraph of the "Construction" section. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
        • YSorry my error - refs now added.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Operation" section, "It was a symbolic moment which commemorated Bristol's feats in engineering.": this statement is not sourced; was there a commemoration of the event?
    • YI have removed this - seems to refer more to Bristol's aeronautical engineering— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Dimensions" section: not all the figures are referenced.
    • Mostly done - but I'm still searching for the sources of Tower Width: 11 feet (3.4 m) in the books etc
      • YI've now removed tower width - pending finding a source.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Popular culture" section: the BBC medical drama Casualty is referenced to a YouTube video – is there not a more reliable source to support this statement?
    • Y2 other refs added — Rod ^talk 17:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "External links" section, Time-lapse video: YouTube videos are generally not accepted in the "External links" section, unless its inclusion can be justified (see WP:YOUTUBE).
    • Removed— Rod ^talk 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • My removal of this has been reverted by another editor as a "good link" - what do you think?— Rod ^talk 18:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
        • YI removed it, citing WP:YOUTUBE, but I see it's been added again with a comment "not a commercial video, no copyright soundtrack, shows the bridge and the river in an interesting context. very relevant to the article". So I guess it's ok then. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • The West Country Tonight Backdrop (currently ref.55) is a dead link (and a blog).
    • Replaced— Rod ^talk 17:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
      • You've replaced it with a forum, which is not a reliable source (see WP:SOURCE). —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
        • YI've removed it until we can find a WP:RS source.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

• 6B.
  • The two images in the "Dimensions" and "Incidents" sections are bunched up; I'd suggest moving the second image (File:Avon gorge and cave arp.jpg) down to the "Popular culture" section.
    • YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Overall it's a nicely written article with a good coverage of the subject, but please have a look at the above issues I've raised. —Bruce1ee^talk 12:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all your changes. I've responded to your queries, and raised a few myself. I see you've requested the help of others for information, so I've put the review on hold until the outstanding issues are dealt with. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the changes, we're almost there. I've added a new query at the end of "1A". —Bruce1ee^talk 06:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

All outstanding issued have been resolved now and I've promoted the article to GA. Thanks for all your hard work. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Help with points raised at GA review

A helpful reviewer at Talk:Clifton Suspension Bridge/GA1 has raised several issues. I have dealt with many of these but there are a few areas where I would appreciate help:

• When was the toll raised to 50p?
• "Incidents" section, "In 1885, a 22-year-old woman named Sarah Ann Henley survived a fall from the bridge": the source says she "threw herself from the Bridge","fall" suggests an accident – thoughts?
• "Lead section: plans for a "cast iron structure" is not mentioned in the body of the article. - do people feel this is covered in "Engineering" or should something else be added?
• The "Operation" section is not summarized in the lead. - what else do you think should be added to the lead to summarise this section?
• Can anyone find a source for the "Tower Width: 11 feet (3.4 m)" figure in the Dimensions section?

Any help appreciated.— Rod ^talk 18:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Cast Iron v Wrought Iron

This article currently says in the lead "Original plans were for a stone bridge, and later iterations were for a cast iron structure." & in "Plans" "An Act of Parliament was passed to allow a wrought iron suspension bridge to be built instead". Our sharp eyed GA reviewer has picked up on this as needing clarification. I've looked in Andrews, McIlwain & Vaughan. The only one that has anything relevant is Andrews p14 which says (discussing 1793) "Although Bristol had several iron works and trading links with Coalbrookdale, on the River Severn in Shropshire, the power house of the early Industrial Revolution, Bridges did not appear to consider using cast iron." Does anyone have any other sources which could help clarify?— Rod ^talk 18:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The article falls well below GA standard because of the thin coverage of the bridge's design competition - particularly Telford's involvement and his own design. There's no shortage of sourcing for any of this. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I have expanded the text on both the 1830 & 1831 competitions.— Rod ^talk 11:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Also the idea of Marc Brunel suggesting a "central tower" is nonsense (it's cited to an entire year of the Dail Fail which is both impossible to trace and far from a RS). Like Telford's tower design, several architects, including Brunel pere, wanted to place towers closer together to reduce the span. However the wording as it stands suggests that this would be a "central" tower, slap in the middle of the navigable Avon. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:32, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The reference for the Daily Mail article is The Clifton Pagoda: How Brunel's iconic bridge nearly had a very Chinese twist (if he had listened to his dad). I'm investigating this further.— Rod ^talk 09:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

This letter, with a central tower design, received widespread coverage, so I've added lots of references.— Rod ^talk 11:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clifton Suspension Bridge. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150402155224/http://www.farvis.com/2013site/history%20of%20bristol/cliftonsuspension.html to http://www.farvis.com/2013site/history%20of%20bristol/cliftonsuspension.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

The West Country Challenge

Would you like to win up to £250 in Amazon vouchers for participating in The West Country Challenge?

The The West Country Challenge will take place from 8 to 28 August 2016. The idea is to create and improve articles about Bristol, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, like this one.

The format will be based on Wales's successful Awaken the Dragon which saw over 1000 article improvements and creations and 65 GAs/FAs. As with the Dragon contest, the focus is more on improving core articles and breathing new life into those older stale articles and stubs which might otherwise not get edited in years. All contributions, including new articles, are welcome though.

Work on any of the items at:

• Core articles
• Missing article hotlist
• Missing photograph hotlist

or other articles relating to the area.

There will be sub contests focusing on particular areas:

• Bristol (Day 1-3)
• Cornwall and Scilly (Day 4-6)
• Devon (Day 7-9)
• Dorset (Day 10-12)
• Gloucestershire (Day 13-15)
• Somerset (Day 16-18)
• Wiltshire (Day 19-21)

To sign up or get more information visit the contest pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge.— Rod ^talk 15:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Clifton Suspension Bridge. 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/20070205002217/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRbristol.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRbristol.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728105941/http://library.thinkquest.org/C0123122/historybungee.htm to http://library.thinkquest.org/C0123122/historybungee.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071208081658/http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/details/default.aspx?id=379208 to http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/details/default.aspx?id=379208
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929001907/http://archiveshub.ac.uk/data/gb003dm162-gb003dm484 to http://archiveshub.ac.uk/data/gb003dm162-gb003dm484

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 17:33, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Sarah Guppy

The single citation for Guppy's influence on the bridge by the Bristol Post contradicts itself:

• It says: "A Bristol mother-of-six has been unmasked as the TRUE designer of the Clifton Suspension Bridge." and "Sarah Guppy has been added to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography with the revelation that she – and not Brunel – was the brains behind the plans."
• But also quotes the publisher of the source for this claim saying "the precise impact of her [Guppy's] ideas on his [Brunel's] design is unknown".

The Clifton Suspension Bridge Trust itself devotes a page to the subject in which it says that Brunels design did not use her idea (being so far above the tide that protection from water damage is not an issue).

• So while the second mention of Guppy "Sarah Guppy patented designs for a suspension bridge across the gorge which she later gave to Brunel." may be true, it is of questionable relevance if Brunel's design did not use her ideas as his bridge is not constructed under the difficulties Guppy was trying to solve.
• The first mention "The bridge is built to a design by William Henry Barlow and John Hawkshaw,[2] based on an earlier design by Isambard Kingdom Brunel, and contributed to by Sarah Guppy" is not really supported even by the Bristol Post article.

--Thehalfone (talk) 11:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for contributions. Would you like to suggest some alternative wording? There are some other sources which might be relevant:

• Sunday Express Did 'genius' Brunel need help from a woman engineer to build Clifton Suspension Bridge?
• Independent Sarah Guppy: The woman behind Britain's most famous bridge
• History Extra Was Sarah Guppy the real inventor of the Clifton Suspension Bridge?
• Intriguing History Sarah Guppy was an English inventor who lived between 1770 and 1852
• Guardian Uncovering the lives of women in science and technology: the case of Sarah Guppy
• Amazing Women in History Sarah Guppy, Eclectic English Inventor
• BBC The life of 19th century inventor Sarah Guppy

Some of these might be more appropriate at Sarah Guppy but could also be useful here.— Rod ^talk 14:14, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Clifton Suspension Bridge. 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/20101114083521/http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Suspension-bridge-toll-double-163-1/article-2882722-detail/article.html to http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Suspension-bridge-toll-double-163-1/article-2882722-detail/article.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160528144235/http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Recognition-mum-designed-Bristol-s-Clifton/story-29325251-detail/story.html to http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Recognition-mum-designed-Bristol-s-Clifton/story-29325251-detail/story.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121223074202/http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/pound-1-3m-lottery-windfall-enhance-finest/story-17635298-detail/story.html to http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/pound-1-3m-lottery-windfall-enhance-finest/story-17635298-detail/story.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Latin

Just saw SUSPENSA VIX VIA FIT and the translation provided here as "The road becomes barely suspended" which reads poorly (and now appears to have been proliferated in a few sites), however the Clifton Suspension Bridge website provides an alternative; "A suspended way made with difficulty". Is there an authoritative source for the alternative other than those now copying wikipedia? Koncorde (talk) 15:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

What I can remember of Latin GCSE would indicate that suspensa agrees with via, therefore the translation should be "suspended road" not "road becomes suspended". -mattbuck (Talk) 01:34, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

I was trying to avoid my own interpretation (Latin phrases like this are often poetic rather than adhering to literal...but then can be quite literal elsewhere, often for humour) but it could be read as "The floating road" but it all depends on sources. At the moment Cliftonbridge website would be "authoritative". Koncorde (talk) 10:23, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Minor Improvements?

The caption on "St Vincent Rock before construction began" mentions local mythology; a search does not easily turn up said mythology, briefly summarized in the second to last paragraph of the Wikipedia article Goram and Vincent.

The article mentions the blasting operation prior to the building of the bridge. Wikipedia has relevant media--Blasting St. Vincent's Rock, Clifton.

Concerning the rock itself, a write-up at an art emporium has this to say

Now within the boundaries of Bristol, St Vincent’s Rock (or Rocks) comprises one of the most prominent landmarks on the Avon gorge. It is named after the medieval hermitage and chapel of St Vincent, which was recorded by William Worcestre in 1480 as being ‘on a most dangerous rock called Ghyston Cliff, in a deep place of the rock twenty yards in depth in the said rock above the river Avon’ (Frances Neale (ed), William Worcestre: The Topography of Medieval Bristol, Bristol Record Society, 2000, Page 227). The rock contains not only a cave, which was possibly the site of the hermitage, but also quartz crystals, known as ‘Bristol Diamonds’, and a warm spring.

By the 1690s, the spring water was considered to have such curative properties that a pump room with lodgings was built below the rocks and close to the river. Called Hotwell House, this gave its name to the area of Bristol still known as Hotwells. For more than a century, it attracted invalids and other visitors who, at the same time, would often acquire Bristol Diamonds as souvenirs. However, by the 1820s, interest in the spa was beginning to flag, as many of its former clientele preferred to stay in the elegant new terraces built in Clifton on the hill above. The construction in 1822 of New Hotwell House failed to halt the spa’s decline. The development of the aesthetic categories of the Sublime and the Picturesque during the eighteenth century made St Vincent’s Rock a popular subject for many artists and writers; they included those involved in the compilation of guide books and topographical volumes, such as that for which Francis Nicholson produced the present image. The local artist, William West, even settled on the rock in 1828, transforming a disused windmill into an observatory, and later creating an underground passage to connect it to the cave. The view was changed irrevocably in 1831, with the construction of Clifton Suspension Bridge. https://chrisbeetles.com/artwork/13991/st-vincent-s-rock-near-clifton-gloucestershire 192.198.57.207 (talk) 17:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Bristol

On the River Avon. It Is in the west of England combined authority and the most populous Urban area in the united Kingdom.🫢💅🏻 93.34.89.197 (talk) 19:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

History of tolls

Does anyone have a good source for the history of tolls on the bridge? I couldn't find one in the history section of the bridge's website. Recently the article had come to claim:

A toll, initially of £0.50, has been levied on vehicles since 2007

Which is absolutely not true, it was 50p from 2007 but was levied long before that (5p in the 1970s, I believe), and presumably from opening. But I can't find a clear source for what and when. A link given in a section above (now apparently dead but available on the Wayback Machine) gives 1991 as the date pedestrian and cyclist tolls were abolished.-- rbrwr^± 16:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)