Talk:Soviet submarine K-278 Komsomolets

message: :Rename page to Soviet submarine K-278 Komsomolets
====Support====
# Note that I didn't propose this. However it does seems logical given the contents of the Russian Navy Submarines and Soviet Navy Submarines categories. Support. Megapixie 06:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to Soviet submarine K-278 Komsomolets 

message: # Note that I didn't propose this. However it does seems logical given the contents of the Russian Navy Submarines and Soviet Navy Submarines categories. Support. Megapixie 06:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: To me all the "Russian/Soviet submarine..." article titles seem overly disambiguated. I'd suggest something more like Komsomolets (K-278). It's simpler and more consistent with other navy's submarine articles. Niteowlneils 22:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Soviet submarine K-278 Komsomolets. 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/20050217030152/http://www.bellona.no/en/10118.html to http://www.bellona.no/en/10118.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050207144612/http://submarine.id.ru/memory/K278.htm to http://submarine.id.ru/memory/K278.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070224131344/http://www.cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/komsom.htm to http://www.cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/komsom.htm
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/61CSJQXXq?url=http://submarine.id.ru/book/l220.shtml to http://submarine.id.ru/book/l220.shtml
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/61CSLt0xg?url=http://aqua.sm.bmstu.ru/projects/komsomolets/komsomolets_r.htm to http://aqua.sm.bmstu.ru/projects/komsomolets/komsomolets_r.htm
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/61CSNJ01g?url=http://submarine.id.ru/api/w88.shtml to http://submarine.id.ru/api/w88.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This edit with Edit Summary "copyedit" deleted the paragraph describing the damages to the hull detected 1992 and earlier. Why, if intentional? --Rainald62 (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost paragraph 

message: There seems to be a fair amount of confusion on the internet over how many people died, how many survived, and how many died subsequently on the rescue ship.
- https://www.wrecksite.eu/wreck.aspx?115318 The ship Aleksandr Khlobystsov arrived and took aboard 25 survivors and 5 fatalities. In total, 42 men died in the accident (Site lists number of casualties as 47)
- https://english.pravda.ru/russia/124221-memory_komsomolets/ 42 people were killed, 27 were rescued
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2322&v=rHYeE6YpyhM&feature=youtu.be Of the 69 crew, 30 are rescued, 3 die before they get medical attention
- https://barentsobserver.com/en/node/19353 25 of the 67 crew members from Komsomolets survived.
- https://www.npr.org/2019/07/11/740691307/norway-surveys-sunken-soviet-submarine Of the 69 crew, only 27 survived the incident, and the submarine sank to the ocean floor in the Norwegian Sea. 
- https://nonproliferation.org/komsomolets-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen/ Twenty-nine men were rescued alive, but two of them later died from shock. Of the forty-two casualties, only four were reported to have died from the fire and subsequent explosions; the rest drowned or died from immersion in the icy water while awaiting help.
Can someone sort this out?
- 92.236.89.138 (talk) 11:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many actually died? 

message: Removed this.  If sources found, re-add.  Tagged in 2016.  --> "Because of the loss of life, a public enquiry was conducted and, as a result, many formerly classified details were revealed by the Soviet news media.[not verified in body]"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.51.247 (talk) 11:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  5-yrs tagged for reference 

message: According to WP:SHIPPRONOUN, "each article should be internally consistent and employ one or the other exclusively." The Chicago Manual of Style (16th edition), as well as the style books of the Associated Press and the New York Times, recommend using "it" or "its" to refer to ships. Before your edits, first pronominal reference to the ship in the article was "its NATO reporting name of 'Mike'-class," using "it" rather than "she". I am improving the article's consistency. Without catering to your tradition-based preference.
Talib1101 (talk) 09:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ship pronouns