Talk:MS Hans Hedtoft

the jinx of the "unsinkable" ship
'Dit schip kan niet zinken!' "Het is gemaakt van ijzer, Sir - ik verzeker u, het kan."98.67.187.186 (talk) 06:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Inquest
Was there no inquest? - wloveral — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.105.203.119 (talk) 11:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * They didn't have any survivors and no traces at all of the wreck (a lifebelt washed ashore in the Faroes a couple of months later), while it was clear from the distress calls that the ship had indeed struck an iceberg. Not much material for an inquest there. 195.67.149.173 (talk) 10:32, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

A ship that took four hours to sink should have given crew and passengers plenty of time to take to the lifeboats. And by 1959 lifeboats would have had emergency radios. It says that conditions were the worst seen. Is it known what the conditions were? Was there a storm that could have swamped the lifeboats, or just heavy fog? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.137.134.50 (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on MS Hans Hedtoft. 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/20120318005148/http://www.sbib.dk/documents/Skibslister/1959.pdf to http://www.sbib.dk/documents/Skibslister/1959.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081212164111/http://iserit.greennet.gl:80/bgbw/contact.html to http://iserit.greennet.gl/bgbw/contact.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MS Hans Hedtoft. 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/20160516001806/http://www.arkiv.gl/Forsiden/tabid/36/language/en-US/language/da-DK/Default.aspx to http://www.arkiv.gl/Forsiden/tabid/36/language/en-US/language/da-DK/Default.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050404050613/http://home9.inet.tele.dk/svhh/Hanshedtoft.htm to http://home9.inet.tele.dk/svhh/Hanshedtoft.htm

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) 21:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Unsinkable?
The claim that ship was regarded as unsinkable is almost impossible to credit given the history of that claim as applied to another ship. The claim sounds sensationalist and the source does not strike me as reliable. Per WP:REDFLAG this really needs to be better sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:23, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That's an official gov't site. Removing tag.50.111.34.214 (talk) 15:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It's a municipal website that does not indicate any source for the claim. I have also been unable to find any corroborating evidence. If the claim is accurate there should be some evidence, somewhere else, that predates the sinking. I remain highly dubious about this claim which sounds suspiciously like it was invented to add some kind of connection to the Titanic. If this is the only source, it's not enough for that kind of claim. Again, see WP:REDFLAG. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It's backed up at least in part by the previous Time reference, which states it was "the safest afloat". Mjroots (talk) 06:41, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not the same as "unsinkable." -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)