# Talk:SS Suevic

The line "The RNLI continue to perpetuate a myth that there was dense fog AND a strong gale simultaneously. This, of course, is impossible." seems both partial and unverified, representing an opinion as well as accusing the RNLI of deliberate falsehood. Surely this should be amended or removed to maintain the article's status as a Good Article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:B639:8D01:E002:7E80:2535:D71B (talk) 02:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC) 

Yes removed the sentence. G-13114 (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Firstly, good work on a useful and interesting article.  Here are my comments post-review with GA in mind.

Thanks. Responses interspersed below in green. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 01:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Citations should be placed in accordance with WP:CITE.
Done!
"...most remarkable..." - this is a bit POV - can you find a citation which quotes this?
I see your point, I've pulled the term. Several of the refs describe the rescue in similar terms, but not this exact one.
"Because these ships were launched in the last year of the 19th century, they were referred to as the "Jubilee Class"." - can you explain the connection?
The dawning of the 20th century was generally heralded in the popular press at the time as something remarkable (they obviously didn't have the doomsday worries of Y2K!). I've added the clarifying phrase, "reflecting the popular mood regarding the coming of the new century" to the article. Hope that helps.
"...the danger..." - can you clarify the what the danger was?
Section re-written/expanded to clarify the dangers, with surrounding sentences modified for flow. Please let me know if this works for you. 
"...a quarter mile..." - British English ought to apply here so let's use "a quarter of a mile".
Done!
Reduce the number of sub-sections in the Shipwreck section.
Down to 3 now.
Merge "The damaged bow was left to break up on the rocks.[7]" into previous para.
Done!
British English once more so let's use First World War and Second World War instead of the WWI and it's sequel, and instead of "Her crew was taken as prisoners of war.[2] " Brits would say "Her crew were taken as prisoners of war.[2]", despite the grammatical debate this usually conjures up!
Done!
External links go last, and See also comes first - References in between them, per WP:HEAD.
Done, and thanks for the nudge on this. I spend most of my time over at WP:AIR, and that project has a variant set of guidelines where SAs come after ELs...sometimes I forget that the rest of Wikipedia is the other way around!
It's a really good article and very close indeed to GA so I'll put the review on hold - please tidy up the above and I'll gladly pass the article.  The Rambling Man 16:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, there you have it. Hope I've met your concerns, but if there are others, I'd be happy to work up changes for them as well. Cheers, and many thanks for the review! AKRadeckiSpeaketh 01:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Great work, I'm happy to promote to WP:GA immediately.  All the best. The Rambling Man 07:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I had to consider this for a while, as many of the sources in this article are not from sources that necessarily qualify under WP:RS. In the end however I have decided to pass it. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Skytteren, som ligger på botten       

 utanför Lysekil, är Sveriges miljö-   
 farligaste vrak.                      
                                       
 Det kommer en riskanalys från Chalmers
 som presenteras på torsdag att visa,  
 skriver Bohusläningen.                
                                       
 När fartyget sjönk 1942 fanns 500     
 kubikmeter olja ombord, och den läcker
 fortfarande ut. Hur mycket som finns  
 kvar i dag vet man inte.

That's in swedish (from SVT Text). Hopefully somebody can add in some english text and a proper reference. Thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.229.34.175 (talk) 09:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on SS Suevic. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518213251/http://www.rnli.org.uk/assets/news/National/2007/March/Suevic%20article%20from%20The%20Lifeboat%201907.pdf to http://www.rnli.org.uk/assets/news/National/2007/March/Suevic%20article%20from%20The%20Lifeboat%201907.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071031150109/http://lizard-lifeboat.co.uk/pages/S.S-Suevic/front-page.htm to http://www.lizard-lifeboat.co.uk/pages/S.S-Suevic/front-page.htm
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 04:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

This ship last known as SS Skyterren was monitored for its hull integrity because she had held some 175,000 litres of oil. In 2021-2022 salvage of the oil was successfully carried out. There's much information on the internet about it.
— Please take into consideration GTO3DEUCES (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done thank you for alerting me to this, I've updated the page with new information. G-13114 (talk) 15:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)