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

Bridges and Tunnels Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Washington / Seattle Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle (assessed as High-importance).

This seems to be approaching live article quality. Any thoughts on what must get done first? - Brianhe (talk) 19:21, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Design section needs work, with construction a close second in priority. Background and planning can be left short until I can come back to it. I'd like to have the page live before April 11 (opening to traffic). SounderBruce 05:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This kind of looks like an article now, what do you think? - Brianhe (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is clear about the length of the floating portion, which is what the world record is based on, but doesn't give (as far as I can see) the total length of the bridge. The 1963 bridge article does give the total length, but there's a 2-foot discrepancy between the lengths by which the new span is said to exceed the old (one article says 130 feet, the other 132). On another note, I think it might be time to change the name of the 1963 article to Evergreen Point Floating Bridge '''(1963)''' instead of leaving it the default. If there is to be a default (rather than a disambig) I would think it should be the current bridge that is defaulted to, with a disambig note at the top to send people to the old bridge. --Haruo (talk) 15:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The measurement of the new bridge's length has been a bit inconsistent, between WSDOT's figure (7,710) and the Guinness Book of Record's figure (7,708). I'm waiting for the National Bridge Inventory to update for the year and get an official length (and the total length including the old approach spans to the west). As for the page move, I agree and tried to do so a few weeks ago but was reverted. I've started a request to move it on the other talk page. SounderBruce 21:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• April 2017 booklet about the project

SounderBruce 22:42, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So the original bridge had a moveable span to allow vessels to pass, then new one hasn’t but still floats on the water. So what then? They blocked that whole gigantic body of water off for all water traffic?? And everyone on the shores of it just accepted that?? Or does it have a raised fixed part that allows vessels to pass underneath?

Looking at aerial photos, article should mention that the west end of the bridge (though possibly technically beyond the floating portion, but still before the next interchange) is not complete, with a section that is still 4 lanes wide. This apparently is the SR 520 Montlake Project | WSDOT. Jason McHuff (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added a short mention, but much of this is already covered in Washington State Route 520. SounderBruce 02:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]