Jump to content

Talk:Titanic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Fuck me English

Former featured articleTitanic is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 29, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 16, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
July 9, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
December 10, 2008WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
December 27, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
June 26, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
November 9, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
February 13, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article

A discussion concerning this article is now taking place at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion and/or to help improve the article.

What age was considered to be "child" vs "adult"

This would probably be good info for the statistics section. Doing a quick search online has some inconsistencies (including by those that were on the Titanic). Looks to be about 14 years old was the oldest to be a child in some circumstances. th1rt3en.talk.contribs 22:54, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diving expedition

According to CNN 2017-03-21, London based company Blue Marble Private plans to begin diving expeditions to the Titanic wreck in May 2018. Is this worth mentioning? Soerfm (talk) 11:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2017

It didn't have holes in the side. The 'berg just popped out rivets. Jdw6701 (talk) 16:54, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP (talkcontribs) 17:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New evidence regarding coal bunker fires prior to departure from Belfast and the Inquiry's ignoring of vital evidence.

My edit of yesterday suggesting new evidence that has previously been ignored regarding the effect of the ? several coal bunker fires on the starboard side has been redacted by Dr K. I do not know how to contact him/her directly regarding this edit removal. Wiki is more obtuse than hen's teeth. This is to the great loss of Wiki. I do not know who he is (nor care) but wonder how he has superior knowledge. Eventually, this text will reappear and give a fuller picture. Would someone who can drive this behometh kindly put it right. Thank you