Talk:Boston molasses disaster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
 Boston molasses disaster was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.

Date of review: 16 December 2006
A Wikipedian removed Boston molasses disaster from the good article list. There are suggestions below for improving areas to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, renominate the article as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review.
Removal date: No date specified. Please edit template call function as follows: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster Management.
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Boston; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Issues with the metric numbers=

Something must be wrong with the metric numbers for the size of the tank. The article says 27 meters in diameter, and 15 meters tall. 27*Pi*15 = 1272 cubic meters = 1.272 million liters. Not 8.7 million liters. Unless this article is suggesting that the molasses was compressed by a factor of 8, which sounds impossible. Akeshet 05:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The volume of a cylinder is determined by the formula V = r2πh. Thus the maximum capacity of the tank was 13.5×13.5×п×15 ≈ 9 million liters, slightly more than the 8.7 million liters shown in the article. --Allen3 talk 12:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooops, what the hell was I thinking. Akeshet 02:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nutrition

ps: molasses has health quality iron and minerals for the human body to digest.

What is the point of including that in this article? Why not just link to the molasses article and put the nutritional information there? in fact, I'll do just that. - ElusiveByte 23:46, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)

Bah, I just read the nutritional information of molasses and it says it contains 0% dietary iron. The only mineral of note was calcium at 5% of the recommended daily value per 1 tbsp serving. So I simply deleted this incorrect information rather than moving it - ElusiveByte 23:57, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)

Depends on the molasses. I have some "unsulphured" molasses that claims to have lots of iron and calcium. Tastes kind of like blood, so I believe the iron content. It might also be that the iron is poorly absorbed, like with iron in spinach. --24.16.148.75 22:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You've got to be kidding. Is this article fictional? :D (I assume it's not fiction, but still...) - Gilgamesh 02:49, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Prohibition

I just thought I'd note that I added the timing of the 18th amendment ratification as just sort of an interesting coincidence. It actually went into effect a year after that, and accounts suggesting that the distilling company was "trying to get in one last batch" are more fancy than fact. In reality, the company continued in business right through Prohibition up to the present day. The Cambridge/Boston facilities were closed some time after this incident, but the company continued to produce alcohol through that period (and they still do).

[edit] Elevated tracks

That was a portion of the Atlantic Avenue Elevated line that ran between North (Union) and South Station until 1938, torn down in 1942. Some accounts suggest that this line was used for transporting molasses, but it was for passenger traffic. A second set of rails for the Union Freight Railroad ran beneath the El, and that is what carried goods from the waterfront. --iMb~Mw 03:13, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Popular culture

There is a Ducktales episode called Raiders of the Lost Harp - No. 45, I remeber there is a tank of fluid bubblegum spilling the harbor - quite similar to the Boston molasses disaster. --Abdull 13:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Map

The overview map showing the area of the disaster is anachronistic--it shows the Sumner (1934) and Callahan (1961) tunnels and the Central Artery (1956). That doesn't make it useless, but the Artery construction in particular changed the North End a lot. I'll change the caption to make this a bit more clear. --Jnik 18:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

That seems like a good solution. I used a recent map to make it easier for curioius readers to find the spot, should they choose to check it out for themselves. --iMb~Meow 08:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bubbling Up From the Streets to This Day?

I'd be great if someone could maybe make a note about the scientific feasibilty of this statement. Tomb Ride My Talk 20:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I pointed out the obvious reasons why there won't be anything left. I stopped short of calling it flatly untrue, because there are people who insist that they can still smell it :) --iMb~Meow 08:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
* I am going to remove the "obvious reason", I will also cite at least two article that indicate that the area positively has a molasses smell in the summer. Your reasoning sounds logical but that does not take into account the fact the people’s basements were filled with the goo, On houses that where not destroyed you could see the high ‘molasses’ point which would mean that wooden timbers, brick walls and field stone foundations were permeated. As a local Bostonian I can also attest to the smell which can almost be nauseating at times. Maybe it is just the molasses covered ghosts but it is there. Markco1 01:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Number fixes explained

The article used to describe the tank as 50 ft tall and 240 ft around. After a change made today, it read 50 ft tall and 90 ft around. I changed it to 50 ft tall and 90 ft in diameter, which is supported by other sources.

The content number was clearly bogus. Calculate a volume with any of the numbers above (pick any shape) and you will see what I mean: there's no way 2.5 million gallons fit into such a tank. Therefore, I changed that number from 2.5 to 2.3 (source as above). Rl 19:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYT Article

Does it make sense to use a reprint from the New York Times when the Boston Globe's coverage should be considered definitive? (The Boston Public Library's microfiche room staff can tell you which issue to pull because every 5th grader in town ends up writing a paper on this.... I did.) Alexr wiki 03:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted GA

This article did not go through the current GA nomination process. Looking at the article as is, it fails on criteria 2b of the GA quality standards. Although references are provided, the citation of sources is essential for verifiability. Most Good Articles use inline citations. I would recommend that this be fixed, to reexamine the article against the GA quality standards, and to submit the article through the nomination process. --RelHistBuff 13:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Under the banner of Project Boston I am currently working to clean up citations and add a few more. I will also add some more intersting information about the force of the disaster and the aftermath of the incident. Markco1 02:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article nomination failed

This article is close to GA quality, but requires some copyediting and cleanup. The following issues should be addressed and the article resubmitted for consideration:

1. The style of writing in the article is inconsistent. For example, numbers are alternately spelled out or written in arabic numerals (such as 18th Amendment vs. Eighteenth Amendment). Furthermore, some of the measurements in the article are linked while others aren't, dates are written differently, abbreviations changed, etc. Some members of a series are linked, while others not.

2. Two quotations appear without introduction or qualification and are quite difficult to separate from the text of the actual article. These need qualification and should adhere to the Manual of Style.

3. Copyediting needs to be done for spelling errors, unclosed parentheses, and minor grammatical errors.

4. Statements like "bomb throwing anti-war anarchists" might violate NPOV standards.

5. The references should be cited appropriately. For example, if you go to the website of the first reference, at the bottom of the page (as in the website the link goes to) it demonstrates exactly how the page should be cited. This should be observed. The second reference should be cited appropriately as well, rather than just naming the source. The appropriate style for reference citation should be observed for all the references given.

This article is quite interesting, and with a little polish, will easily pass when resubmitted. Cheers! Chuchunezumi 16:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/o/s/Talk%7EBoston_molasses_disaster_fe87.html"