Talk:MV Doña Paz

Untitled
Have added a reference from Det Norske Veritas. Intend to reword, shortening the discusion about the number of casualties and including more details the unsucessful rescue. Feel free to complain! JRPG 21:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Canezal family
Are the teacher and his daughter notable in any way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.83.30.182 (talk) 08:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please read reference material "Caltex Phil Inc vs Sulpicio Lines Inc : 131166 : September 30, 1999 : J. Pardo : First Division Cdvl (talk) 19:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Expanded and revised
Using references from the New York Times archives and from the print edition of the Philippine Daily Inquirer from the time of the accident.

Accuracy of death toll report
The official death toll for this casualty is 1,565, although some estimates still put the real number over 4,000. The best reference I've found for this is here: http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/750445 Is there something more authoritative to support a higher number?Alan (talk) 17:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The page looks like a mirror of Wikipedia itself; probably an older version on the MV Doña Paz article. &mdash; •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ•  Speak!  13:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Name of oil tanker
Which referenced source gives the name of the oil tanker as Vector? I've followed a few of them (such as this one), but they call it the Victor. Johnson487682 (talk) 17:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Why the uncertainity?
It is hard to fathom the number of victims was not precisely counted in situ? The article says the ships sank in 545 meters of water, which doesn't even require an ROV expedition, as the wreck is also reachable by athmospheric diving suit pilots or tri-mix saturation divers with a diving bell mother-ship. 82.131.128.123 (talk) 21:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on MV Doña Paz. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,966394,00.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.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

WORLD MOST WORST MARITIME DISASTER
... Bwernan (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Lessons learned?
Were any changes in law or safety improvements made in response to this disaster? -- Beland (talk) 01:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MV Doña Paz. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C966394%2C00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080702031151/http://www.hazardcards.com/card.php?id=14 to http://www.hazardcards.com/card.php?id=14

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) 04:19, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Collision?
Although this article has a section named "Collision", it doesn't have actual information about the collision: time of day (night), how it happened, etc. The conditions beforehand are documented, and the aftermath is as well, but nothing about the actual crash. This is perhaps the post important information about this ship. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MV Doña Paz. 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/20090820064224/http://www.ngcasia.com/programmes/asias-titanic to http://www.ngcasia.com/Programmes/asias-titanic

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) 00:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Which vessel was unseaworthy?
This sentence is in the lead: "However, official blame was directed at the tanker Vector, that collided with the Doña Paz, which was found to be unseaworthy and operating without a license, a lookout, or a qualified master." The clause that begins with "which" strictly refers to the Doña Paz — but it's not until the third para of Reactions and aftermath that the reader discovers that the Vector was unseaworthy and operating without a license, a lookout, or a qualified master. I suggest that the sentence be modified by removing "that collided with the Doña Paz", because the first paragraph has already imparted that knowledge to the reader. Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 09:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

"Coalition of Samar and Leyte Organizations" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coalition_of_Samar_and_Leyte_Organizations&redirect=no Coalition of Samar and Leyte Organizations] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

4 Year Old Survivor & Francisco Minggote
All the other survivors have ages listed, except for Francisco Minggote. A 4-year old boy is known to have survived. By process of elimination, one might assume the 4 year-old survivor IS Francisco Minggote. Should this speculation be referenced in the article? Many ages are unsourced.Uchiha Itachi 25 (talk) 05:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Misinformation in Casualty Count
"During January 1999 a presidential task force report estimated... that there were 4,342 passengers. Subtracting the 26 surviving passengers, and adding 58 crew, gives 4,374 on-board fatalities. Adding the 11 dead from the Vector crew, the total becomes 4,385, almost three times the design load."

It was determined that 24 passengers survived along with 2 crew from the Victor and earlier in the wiki article, not 26 passengers. There were a listed 59 crew instead of 58 for the Dona Pas. 4,342 passengers with 24 alive is 4,318. Going with the original 59 crew and 11 dead from The Victor, my math adds the death count up to 4,388 instead of 4,385. Please let me know if I am missing something. Stoinked (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)