Talk:North River Steamboat

message: anyone out there?  JoeBrennan 17:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early uncategorized discussions 

message: I think more people know it as the Clermont, though linking both names to the same article would have been fine.  Moving the article seems like overkill to me... dm 05:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just read the article, Camelbinky. I did never edit it, I just read it. It makes sense, and it is sourced. Moving the article is unnecessary, in my opinion, even if Clermont were the real name, since "Clermont (steamboat)" redirects here, and "Clermont" could never be the name, since that is a dab page already, no escape from that. To change the name and the redirect does not make any practical difference. Nevertheless, if you can move it, and if you want to move it, I won't stop you. About the historical correct naming (the text should be historically correct, even if the article's name is not), see what is in the article (it quotes the original re-enrolment!) and if you have sources that say otherwise (be careful about the publication date, everything published after 1817 could have copied the misnomer), add the sources to the article. Consider discussing changes to the text, and giving the sources, here on the talk page. (Please do never ask people to look something up on google or googlebooks, you should do that yourself, and propose changes stating what you have found. This is a general guideline of historical researchers' good manners.)Kraxler (talk) 01:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Sutcliffe p. 269 says it was Clermont until the 1807 remodel, and North River after. Fulton never uses a name to refer to the boat in any of his letters quoted by Sutcliffe. It's always "the boat" or "the steamboat." Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:40, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clermont vs North River Steamboat 

message: See the very good dissection made by this person:
http://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/cfgkt/apparently_people_were_terrified_of_the_first/c0s7uj3  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.53.93.159 (talk) 15:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accounts of fear are exaggerated 

message: Hi Guys I just added the Citation needed Banner. There is some things needing to be proven. 
August 17 2012 Deunick (talk) 22:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Banner  

message: We've got three different numbers for draft: 2 feet, 28 inches, and 7 feet. None of them are supported by a source citation. I wonder which is correct? Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I see that the draft is a bit over two feet. The 7 foot number is depth, although there are different kinds of depth and we don't know which one it is. I have fixed the mis-labeled "draught". Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft 

message: Sutcliffe p. 192 quotes Fulton saying "she displaced 36.40 cubic feet" but that would only be one tonne so is obviously wrong. I suspect this should be 3640, which would be 100 tonnes. Fulton gives the displacement as "100 tons of water." Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displacement 

message: I think the steamboat is doo doo  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:1021:8509:BC1E:7B42:5695:2CD (talk) 14:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  oof