This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
SS Timothy Bloodworth article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
This article is rated A-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was it a V-rocket hit on a port or - what could it be ? I suspect that by December 1944 the Germans already lost all air-to-ship capabilities. NVO ( talk) 20:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
It is not clear what the Memorial section adds. This vessel was not built in Oregon, and a description of the memorial park would be more apropos in an article on the park, rather than in each article on a Liberty ship. A separate article on the park, linked here to a simple statement that this vessel's bow is buried there, would be a better way to handle it. Kablammo ( talk) 20:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
With the recent changes to the article these concerns can be marked Resolved. Kablammo ( talk) 15:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I notice that the measurements of the ship given in the article no longer match the source I used when I added them. Lloyd's Register gives:- length 422 feet 8 inches (128.83 m), beam 57 feet (17.37 m) and draught 34 feet 8 inches (10.57 m); whereas the article now states it as:- length 441 feet 6 inches (134.57 m), beam 56 feet 10.75 inches (17.34 m) and draught 34 feet 8 inches (10.57 m). I would have thought that the measurements given by Lloyd's were accurate, as they would have been taken when the ship was entered on the register. Mjroots ( talk) 07:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I removed the only external link listed in the article because it was not suitable for this article (per WP:ELNO, item 13) — Bellhalla ( talk) 15:02, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all the interest in tidying this article; if any of you have time & resources, I'd suggest looking at the SS John Stagg as well. Cheers! Tad ( talk) 22:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on SS Timothy Bloodworth. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
SS Timothy Bloodworth article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
This article is rated A-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was it a V-rocket hit on a port or - what could it be ? I suspect that by December 1944 the Germans already lost all air-to-ship capabilities. NVO ( talk) 20:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
It is not clear what the Memorial section adds. This vessel was not built in Oregon, and a description of the memorial park would be more apropos in an article on the park, rather than in each article on a Liberty ship. A separate article on the park, linked here to a simple statement that this vessel's bow is buried there, would be a better way to handle it. Kablammo ( talk) 20:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
With the recent changes to the article these concerns can be marked Resolved. Kablammo ( talk) 15:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I notice that the measurements of the ship given in the article no longer match the source I used when I added them. Lloyd's Register gives:- length 422 feet 8 inches (128.83 m), beam 57 feet (17.37 m) and draught 34 feet 8 inches (10.57 m); whereas the article now states it as:- length 441 feet 6 inches (134.57 m), beam 56 feet 10.75 inches (17.34 m) and draught 34 feet 8 inches (10.57 m). I would have thought that the measurements given by Lloyd's were accurate, as they would have been taken when the ship was entered on the register. Mjroots ( talk) 07:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I removed the only external link listed in the article because it was not suitable for this article (per WP:ELNO, item 13) — Bellhalla ( talk) 15:02, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all the interest in tidying this article; if any of you have time & resources, I'd suggest looking at the SS John Stagg as well. Cheers! Tad ( talk) 22:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on SS Timothy Bloodworth. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)