Talk:List of shipwrecks in May 1916

The finding of a submarine wreck
In the section "10 May", wouldn't it be more prudent to wait for a conformation about the alleged Som submarine, instead of adding, what is right now, only speculations? w.carter -Talk  12:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * As it is, all the info on Som is confirmed (collision, sinking, casualties, date, etc.), except that she is the wreck recently found. My addition does not claim that the wreck is Som, it only mentions that Som is a strong candidate in the incident in question. Even if it turns out the wreck isn't Som, the connection made by several experts should still be mentioned. I think it is fine as it is, but if you'd like we could merely remove the last sentence for now. Manxruler (talk) 12:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand your reasoning that widley publicized speculations could be added. Let the sentence stay, but monitor the situation and alter it when some kind of conformation has been done. Personally, I will not add any speculations to the article about the find. There is no hurry, and I think the WP can stand waiting for facts. Best, w.carter -Talk  12:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll keep a look out, I always do when things are still developing. Manxruler (talk) 12:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)