Talk:SS Suevic

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SS Suevic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

SS Suevic has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 22, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
June 16, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 10, 2007.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the SS Suevic of the White Star Line ran into rocks off the coast of England while steaming at full speed in dense fog at night in 1907 but everyone on board survived?

Current status: Good article

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War I / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Belfast Low‑importance

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belfast, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the City of Belfast, Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.BelfastWikipedia:WikiProject BelfastTemplate:WikiProject BelfastBelfast-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-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.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cornwall Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

Northern Ireland Low‑importance

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland 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.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

The line "The RNLI continue to perpetuate a myth that there was dense fog AND a strong gale simultaneously. This, of course, is impossible." seems both partial and unverified, representing an opinion as well as accusing the RNLI of deliberate falsehood. Surely this should be amended or removed to maintain the article's status as a Good Article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:B639:8D01:E002:7E80:2535:D71B (talk) 02:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes removed the sentence. G-13114 (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review comments

Firstly, good work on a useful and interesting article. Here are my comments post-review with GA in mind.

Thanks. Responses interspersed below in green. AKRadecki^Speaketh 01:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations should be placed in accordance with WP:CITE.
- Done!
"...most remarkable..." - this is a bit POV - can you find a citation which quotes this?
- I see your point, I've pulled the term. Several of the refs describe the rescue in similar terms, but not this exact one.
"Because these ships were launched in the last year of the 19th century, they were referred to as the "Jubilee Class"." - can you explain the connection?
- The dawning of the 20th century was generally heralded in the popular press at the time as something remarkable (they obviously didn't have the doomsday worries of Y2K!). I've added the clarifying phrase, "reflecting the popular mood regarding the coming of the new century" to the article. Hope that helps.
"...the danger..." - can you clarify the what the danger was?
- Section re-written/expanded to clarify the dangers, with surrounding sentences modified for flow. Please let me know if this works for you.
"...a quarter mile..." - British English ought to apply here so let's use "a quarter of a mile".
- Done!
Reduce the number of sub-sections in the Shipwreck section.
- Down to 3 now.
Merge "The damaged bow was left to break up on the rocks.[7]" into previous para.
- Done!
British English once more so let's use First World War and Second World War instead of the WWI and it's sequel, and instead of "Her crew was taken as prisoners of war.[2] " Brits would say "Her crew were taken as prisoners of war.[2]", despite the grammatical debate this usually conjures up!
- Done!
External links go last, and See also comes first - References in between them, per WP:HEAD.
- Done, and thanks for the nudge on this. I spend most of my time over at WP:AIR, and that project has a variant set of guidelines where SAs come after ELs...sometimes I forget that the rest of Wikipedia is the other way around!

It's a really good article and very close indeed to GA so I'll put the review on hold - please tidy up the above and I'll gladly pass the article. The Rambling Man 16:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, there you have it. Hope I've met your concerns, but if there are others, I'd be happy to work up changes for them as well. Cheers, and many thanks for the review! AKRadecki^Speaketh 01:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, I'm happy to promote to WP:GA immediately. All the best. The Rambling Man 07:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I had to consider this for a while, as many of the sources in this article are not from sources that necessarily qualify under WP:RS. In the end however I have decided to pass it. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden's biggest environmental hazard

Skytteren, som ligger på botten

 utanför Lysekil, är Sveriges miljö-   
 farligaste vrak.                      
                                       
 Det kommer en riskanalys från Chalmers
 som presenteras på torsdag att visa,  
 skriver Bohusläningen.                
                                       
 När fartyget sjönk 1942 fanns 500     
 kubikmeter olja ombord, och den läcker
 fortfarande ut. Hur mycket som finns  
 kvar i dag vet man inte.

That's in swedish (from SVT Text). Hopefully somebody can add in some english text and a proper reference. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.229.34.175 (talk) 09:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on SS Suevic. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 04:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]