Talk:RMS Republic (1903)

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

removed copyrighted materiel[edit]

I had to removed server paragraphs that were copied verbatim from http://rms-republic.com/the_ship.html. and http://rms-republic.com/index1.html Seano1 07:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move[edit]

I am proposing moving this page to RMS Republic (1903) to distinguish it from the two other ships that carried the same name. Akradecki 17:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Akradecki 16:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SS City of Everett rescue efforts[edit]

See the article and sources for it, it appears that the Everett offered assistance (and was spurned as it would have cost money) per contemporary accounts, including an NY Times article of the time. This may be worth adding... ++Lar: t/c 17:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Lead[edit]

The lead section contains some claims that are simply inaccurate. The ship was never anywhere near the largest. Nor did she attract millionaires as a rule. She was an intermediate liner that served much of her career on the less prestigious routes. Comfortable by the standards of the time, for those in the First Cabin, but nothing exceptional. Her only real claim to fame was her loss and the famous first use of wireless telegraphy for a distress call. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "millionaires' ship" is a contemporaneous and referenced quote. She was also referred to, generally, as "palatial" at the time. see website RMS-Republic.com, flagship of White Star Line's Boston-to-Mediterranean service, and was cetainly "one of the largest" liners at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.97.44.122 (talk) 17:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RMS-Republic.com is not a reliable source. All of the ships sailing from Boston were intermediate liners. The Republic spent much of her time on the less prestigious Mediterranean route. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She was within the top ten largest liners in the world at the time, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world's_largest_passenger_ships#19th_century — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imagixx (talk • contribs) 21:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, she was not even close. The source you are citing does not support the claim. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on RMS Republic (1903). 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

brackets[edit]

", "The White Star Liner Republic, lost off Nantucket Shoals in 1909, carried $3,000,000 in gold eagles. However, the Republic rests in 185 [270] feet of water." [15]" - What does this mean? 270 is not 185. Is this supposed to be a meters/feet indication? That doesn't work out mathematically. Is it supposed to be a correction? If so, on whose authority? Or is it a range, with the ship perhaps tilted? If so, then it should be made clear. I don't have access to the original article, so I can't check it out. Kdammers (talk) 05:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Treasure?[edit]

I am very uncomfortable with much of the sourcing for the claims that the ship was carrying bullion or any other form of treasure. Most of these claims seem to be coming from sources linked to entities promoting the idea, possibly for commercial reasons. There is very little reliable source support for the existence of any treasure and the sections dealing with it do not reflect this lack of evidence. This looks like a maritime urban legend and we should not be using Wikipedia to promote unverified claims, no matter how sensational, absent in depth coverage from independent reliable sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:20, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very reliable sources, the New York Times and Washington Post among others, are cited. Imagixx (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hull metrics[edit]

Are the figures for "depth of hold" and "draft" (draught) transposed? See this schematic for a typical hull. Kablammo (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As per Infobox usage guide, "depth of hold" is related to Builder's Old Measurement and should not be used for modern ships. Therefore I believe the field is used incorrectly. However, I don't have a source to verify the main dimensions. Obviously draught should be smaller than depth. Tupsumato (talk) 11:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:RMS_Republic_(1903)&oldid=1213147502"