Talk:Don Young

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

This article is part of WikiProject Alaska, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Alaska-related articles to a feature-quality standard.

Don Young is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, which collaborates on the United States Congress and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, visit the project page for more information.

[edit] Bridge to Gravina (I refuse to call it "Nowhere"...)

The Gravina Island Bridge article is very well written and brings up the points that are not emphasized by the media (which, as a journalism student, I have to say acted sensationally on this issue) about access to developable land and access to Ketchikan's airport. As some people looking into Don Young may have heard of the issue, would it be a good or bad idea to add just a little more (about access to land) into this article? Perhaps then those people would be inspired to research the issue a little more before declaring it a "Bridge to Nowhere." Also, the link to the Gravina Island Bridge article is buried under the word "bridge," which looks like it would go to the WP article about bridges. It would probably be a good idea if someone could figure out how to rewrite the sentence so the link to the article is a little more obvious. (I actually stumbled across the Gravina Island Bridge article after looking up Gravina, and it wasn't until I came back to edit this section and add it in that I realized it was already in there. I tried to rewrite it but it wasn't working, and I have other homework I've got to do first...) cluth 03:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I was just thinking that about the bridge link. I didn't even notice it there on the first read because I unconsciously assumed it would just go to Bridge, as you say. Linking "an enormous bridge" would be more noticeable, but seems a bit off—possibly giving undue emphasis to the word enormous?

Changing the entire phrase to "the Gravina Island Bridge" would be redundant and flow badly... I'd suggest changing the heading for the paragraph to "Gravina Island Bridge" and linking that, but MoS:HEAD says don't do that. Hmm. That is a tricky one. —Zero Gravitas 03:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

How about:

In 2005, Young and Stevens earmarked $223 million for a project to build an enormous bridge from Ketchikan to Gravina Island (pop. 50) [...]

It's sort of clunky, but "a project" is more obvious as a topical link. —Zero Gravitas 03:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)