Bryan Derksen wrote:
If it's a _widespread_ error, then people are
likely to come across it
independently. The information that it's a widespread error is quite
useful in this situation. We have whole entire articles on urban legends
and the like, adding a line to an article like this doesn't seem out of
line to me.
It wouldn't be adding a line. The IP continued to change the mileage in
the infobox, the description of the route, and several other articles to
show that the bridge is part of SR 913.
The inclusive version wouldn't necessarily have to be an exact hybrid of
the two versions you're fighting over. The information on the widespread
error could be in a footnote that all of the "disputed" facts get
labelled with, in which case it would be a single line or so of text
which gets linked to from multiple places within the article.