Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/RMS Titanic/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] RMS Titanic

I think it's long enough, has lots of info and is accurate. It was also one of the greatest events of the 20th century.- B-101 01:47, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Support [Why is this under archive1?]  =Nichalp (Talk)=
  • Support. Looks good, although expantion wouldn't hurt. Last two sections are made of short paras, please merge/expand. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 09:41, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Minor Object- Agree with Piotrus, last two sections are too short to be in a FA. Please expand those and I will support- otherwise looks excellent, though! Keep up the good work! Flcelloguy 12:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Upon revisions/expansions, I beleive the article is ready to be a FA. (i.e. support!) Question: I'm not sure, but does Wikipedia have a policy regarding commas in numbers larger than 4 digits? (i.e. 1,500 or 1500)? I re-read the article and wasn't sure whether or not Wikipedia had a policy saying yes or no for commas in numbers. Flcelloguy 15:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) says commas should be used. MechBrowman 02:54, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
    • Do you mean Current Condition of wreck and Comparable maritime disasters should be expanded? Expanding Comparable maritime disasters, which really has little to do with Titanic, would seem superfluous. MechBrowman 17:00, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
      • Comparable maritime disasters should perhaps be mained (main article templated) to maritime disasters. I think I meant the 'Titanic in popular culture' section - it's lenght has improved, but it's lot of tiny paras, please merge. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:20, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • I understand what you mean now, I expanded and condensed both Comparable maritime disasters and Titanic in popular culture. Tell me if it needs further adjustments. MechBrowman 01:18, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Minor Object. I agree with Piotrus and Flcelloguy, a few details in the final paragraphs esepcially the composers and lyricists for the musicals as well as some of the details of both shows would be good. I'm willing to expand them for you if you wish as I know both shows. I also think the lead could be longer, it could be a bit more detailed such as including White Star Lines, Harland and Wolff, Thomas Andrews and Robert Ballard. The lead should summarize the article. I'll be more than happy to change my vote if these are addressed. Ganymead 16:40, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Support. Ganymead 22:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I added the information you requested, expanded the intro slightly and made Current condition of the wreck a Subsection. MechBrowman 19:42, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Excellent Giano | talk 22:13, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, it has much improved since I last read it in full and I believe this article to be comprehensive. Mgm|(talk) 09:49, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, good article on important event. Phoenix2 23:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Excellent article. 205.217.105.2 15:14, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)