Talk:RMS Lusitania: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:38, 17 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the RMS Lusitania 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

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 3 months

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 7, 2005, May 7, 2006, May 7, 2007, May 7, 2009, May 7, 2010, and May 7, 2011.

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Military history: Maritime / British / European / German / North America / United States / World War I

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War I task force

Shipwrecks Top‑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

Top

This article has been rated as Top-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

Scotland Mid‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Irish Maritime

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish Maritime, a collaborative effort to improve and standardise the content and structure of maritime, seafaring and inland waterways articles associated with the island of Ireland. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Irish MaritimeWikipedia:WikiProject Irish MaritimeTemplate:WikiProject Irish MaritimeIrish Maritime

Underwater diving Low‑importance

	Underwater diving portal This article is part of WikiProject Underwater diving, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Underwater diving-related articles to a feature-quality standard, and to comprehensively cover the topic with quality encyclopedic articles.Underwater divingWikipedia:WikiProject Underwater divingTemplate:WikiProject Underwater divingUnderwater diving
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

British Empire Mid‑importance

	British Empire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire 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.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Conspiracy Theories"

The current section on "conspiracy theories" seems to contain evidence of these theories and I'm not sure why they are listed as "conspiracy theories" without counter evidence. 125.239.164.43 (talk) 08:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is some really odd wording and I would go for something less aggressive. How about "Unanswered Questions" or "Open Debates" or something like this? I know this issue is still political today, but seriously, who benefits from presenting such a charged view of a historical event more than 100 years ago? 00:22, 25 April 2020 (CET).

I changed the section to controversies, since the heading is an inaccurate description of the undeclared munitions, under Wikipedia's own definition of conspiracy of "an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." The fact that there were undeclared munitions found is completely separate from whether there were sinister groups behind it. Sugaki (talk) 06:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "Bombardment / destruction of the wreck" section lacks reasoning and proof. It's flat-out misinformation. Possibly it can be updated to "Rumored Bombardment / destruction of the wreck," and then reworded to be more objective and only include rock-solid sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielsparks11 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated content

The article header says that the article is about the ship, and points to a separate article for details of its sinking. Yet there’s a substantial, detailed, section on the sinking here, without a heading and before even describing construction. The material needs to be largely removed from this page and any additional detail merged into the separate article on the sinking. SLR Ellison (talk) 00:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lusitania Class Ocean Liner link

It seems odd that there is no linking article on Wikipedia for 'Lusitania Class Ocean Liner', in the General Characteristics: Type field, both for the Lusitania and the Mauretania pages. The ships were both built to the same design plans and only had minor variations between them. The Olympic, Titanic and Britannic pages all have a common Olympic Class Ocean Liner linking article despite the alterations between those three ships being far more drastic than the two Cunard greyhounds. The same is true with other major contemporary liners such as the Imperator, Vaterland and Bismark all having a shared Imperator Class Ocean Liner page too. Conversely would use the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth as a good example of two sister ships that differed in design so much in that case both should indeed be considered entirely separate classes. Lusitania and Mauretania though are both definitely Lusitania Class Ocean Liners SomethingAboutShips (talk) 06:16, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Explosives?

This phrase in the lede " In 1982, the head of the Foreign Office's American department finally admitted that there is a large amount of ammunition in the wreck, some of which is highly dangerous and poses a safety risk to salvage teams.^[1]^[2]" I checked the Guardian sources and it doesn't support the claim made, there was noted to be 5000 cases of small arms ammunition aboard but that has been known about since 1918 in the NY case. I'm loath to remove it as I don't have access to the second source. Anyone able to help? W C M_email 14:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC) W C M_email 14:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ The Guardian & 1 May 2014.
^ "Government papers released in 2014 confirmed the ship was carrying war material" Archived 24 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine, BBC History Magazine via History Extra; accessed 23 February 2017.

American flag Ruse de guerre Lusitania

The article Ruse de guerre says Lusitania flew an American flag without specifying when or giving a reference. The article RMS Lusitania makes no mention of American flags. These two articles need to be reconciled. Reports at the time were coloured by politics but modern assessments should be able to clarify it. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 00:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

9 Passenger Decks?

From what I can see, this is incorrect, what is the citation for this? Isz Chepewéssin (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[FOOTNOTEThe_Guardian1_May_2014-1] The Guardian & 1 May 2014.

[2] "Government papers released in 2014 confirmed the ship was carrying war material" Archived 24 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine, BBC History Magazine via History Extra; accessed 23 February 2017.

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 The article Ruse de guerre says Lusitania flew an American flag without specifying when or giving a reference. The article RMS Lusitania makes no mention of American flags. These two articles need to be reconciled. Reports at the time were coloured by politics but modern assessments should be able to clarify it. [[User:Humphrey Tribble|Humphrey Tribble]] ([[User talk:Humphrey Tribble|talk]]) 00:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
+== 9 Passenger Decks? ==
+From what I can see, this is incorrect, what is the citation for this? [[User:Isz Chepewéssin|Isz Chepewéssin]] ([[User talk:Isz Chepewéssin|talk]]) 21:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)