Talk:PS General Slocum

message: The St. Mark's building is now the Community Synagogue/Max D. Raiskin Center at 325 East Sixth Street.   The congregation of St. Mark's eventually merged with that of another church at 339 E. 84th St. which is now known as Zion St. Mark's Evangelical Lutheran Church. 
I wasn't sure this belonged in the article but put it here in case anyone might be interested. --Cam 00:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: St Mark's

message: I thought I could 'fix' the references - there is a bare (1) and (2) in the text that probably refer to items in the references section, but I am not knowledgeable enough to 'fix' this. Perhaps someone else can take up the challenge? --Dumarest 20:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I converted the footnotes to use the ref format. The references could probably be better, but now that the ref format is applied, it'll be easier for someone to expand upon them. --JerryOrr 11:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes/References

message: It seems like the "Significant Events" section should be incorporated into the rest of the piece, as it just reiterates and/or details things that could reside under existing headers. I don't feel like I know the story well enough to edit myself... but someone must! Snarfa 04:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Repetition

message: In the section describing past problems, the link for "The Battery" no-longer points to a location but some Japanese film. I'm not sure what the correct place known as "The Battery" is, so I haven't corrected the issue myself.  I think it needs something though, because I'm not sure many people easily understand the reference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.49.238 (talk) 00:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Battery 

message: I've copyedited it a bit, and I've also added some references from O'Donnell. --NellieBly (talk) 00:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A few changes

message: Just want to say how happy I am with the article as it stands.  I did a lot of initial research and editing, including the original reference to J Robert Nash (Darkest Hours) and Eric Robinson entry (NY Historical Society).  If I can find the original email I received from Eric, I will post it for those interested.   I admit to a lot of the "significant events" entries (most from Nash's wonderful book) and do like the inclusion of these now into the general narrative format as a result of some smart editing from others.    For those interested, pickup the Nash book if you can find it.  Its never been reprinted and hard to find, but worth the effort if you come across a copy.   24.246.189.162 (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: It's my recollection that nautical people get very touchy about whether something is a ship or a boat.  As I understand it, a ship is generally a larger, grander vessel, and ships tend to be ocean-going.  A boat is smaller and can't generally go to sea (among other apparent distinctions, except that a submarine is always a "boat").  From the descriptions, it seems that this vessel was not seaworthy, sticking to the rivers and harbors of the port where it was built (correct?).  If so, it might be better to call the Slocum a steamboat (and she looks like the Robert E. Lee, etc.) instead of a steamship (like the Titanic).  Thoughts?
--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ship or boat? 

message: Could this incident have inspired the Bob Dylan song?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.137.18 (talk) 17:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Unlikely, as Bear Mountain is on the Hudson River about 60 miles from where the Slocum disaster took place on the East River. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, looking at the lyrics, I suppose the Slocum disaster might have provided the germ of the idea for Dylan's metaphor, and that he moved the action to the Hudson & Bear Mountain so as not to confuse people about his point and avoid the emotions still attached to the Slocum disaster -- but if any of that is true, we'd have to have a very specific citation from a very reliable source (like Dylan himself) in order to mention it in the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely not. Here is the explanation for the Bear Mountain song Talkin' Bear Mountain Picnic Massacre Blues. Dabbler (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice research.  Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Beyond My Ken is still correct. The newspaper story accounts for the 6000 fighting passengers in the song, but not the sinking. Any sinking cruise ship (not necessarily The Slocum) could have inspired the "plot" of the song (even the Lusitania).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.130.88 (talk) 19:42, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talkin' Bear Mountain Picnic Massacre 

message: I'm changing the reference to Clive Cussler's "Sea Hunters 2" from "novel" to "book".  A novel is defined as a fictitious narrative, and I understand "Sea Hunters" to be non-fiction.  Elsquared (talk) 08:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clive Cussler book 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on PS General Slocum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101109192634/http://www.numa.net:80/expeditions/general_slocum.html to http://www.numa.net/expeditions/general_slocum.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There are swaths of text where references do not exist. Per WP:V, "Attribute all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." Please do not remove maintenance tags without addressing the underlying issue. Thanks. —howcheng  {chat} 06:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "challenged or likely to be challenged", not "every fact must be referenced".  Tagging facts which are not "likely to be challenging" is WP:OVERTAGGING, and often an indication that the tagger is ignorant of the subject matter. BMK (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hence why I tagged the entire article now. It still needs to be referenced more. If you need to see how its done , look at any FAC about ships. Llammakey (talk) 11:04, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I did in the first place (a section, not the entire article). "Likely to be challenged" is a matter of opinion, but it's best to write from the assumption that the reader is indeed "ignorant of the subject matter". —howcheng  {chat} 18:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article needs more references 

message: The number of passengers is given differently in different sources. This would not be a problem if the text were properly written. However, when you state as a fact that there were more than 1400 passengers in one spot but also state that there were exactly 1388 people on board you make the article contradictory. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:34, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers