Talk:Oaks explosion

oversight
is it meant..."341 of the 360 working that day" ? or perhaps "340 of the 361"...
 * 'The first explosion killed 361 miners of the 340' Bloody stupid oversight! Correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)


 * Please read carefully before making intemperate comments: "340 working below ground in the first explosion (with six survivors) and 27 rescuers" Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Further attempts
The numbers don't quite add up. The article states "All except Sugden were lifted out in six trips of the cage" but then in Oversight states that 27 rescuers died. Now Jeffcock & Brown were clearly still down at the time of the second explosion and Jeffcock went down after the six trips of the cage, Sugden may have still been down and Minto talked to Tewart underground. Did more rescuers go down? Were they killed at the pithead?Julian D (talk) 15:13, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and 6*15 doesn't equal 100 either. Jeffcock covers this, I'll go through the source in more detail this evening. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Copy edit
I found the quality of this article good for a niche topic. I made a few small changes, such as changing the capitalization of the numbered shafts to "No. 1" and "No. 2" (not "no. 1"). Also, I rephrased a sentence that ended in "the bottle was removed!" — somehow the exclamation mark seemed unencyclopedic.

The article uses a lot of technical mining terms. They are explained in line or with notes. Generally, overly technical language is to be avoided (see WP:JARGON), but in this case I think the technical terms are appropriate and maybe even necessary. Roches (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)