A fact from List of arches and bridges in Central Park appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 May 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Would wikipedia like to have a separate article on each of these bridges and arches? Or at least the ones that are a bit more interesting? I wandered to this page after reading about the Huddlestone Arch, which was built entirely without mortar or other binding technology. The arch stays together through the force of gravity and friction alone. Is this bit of information enough to warrant its own page? There is also information about when it was built, and who it was designed by. (Calvery Vaux) I am willing to write an article about this arch, if the community thinks this is worthwhile and useful. Let me know.Feelingfancyfree (talk) 08:39, 5 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
Separate articles for each would seem a bit much. One consideration would be Wikipedia:Article size; articles should not be too big or too small. Certainly it's reasonable to expand each little description into a paragraph in this article, as Bow Bridge and Gapstow Arch have already been expanded. As for the various stone arches, it's my understanding that Vaux designed them all, with similar structures, holding together the same way. If this is not so, then properly sourced descriptions of the differences would indeed be appropriate. If my understanding is correct, then one general structural description would be the way to go. And if you are really gathering enough information for several fat and informative paragraphs on one item on the list, I don't see why not separate those paragraphs into an individual article. Easier to start, I think, by expanding the descriptions here and splitting off each when ready. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:25, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
