Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SS Washingtonian


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 02:15, 17 December 2008.

SS Washingtonian

 * Nominator(s): Bellhalla (talk)

This article, which I believe meets the featured article requirements, is about a one-year-old cargo ship that sank in 1915 with a load of sugar off the coast of Delaware. The article has passed both a GA review and a Military History A-Class review. — Bellhalla (talk) 04:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Image review - Image:Ocupación estadounidence de Veracruz.jpg - This image has a speedy deletion tag on it. Please resolve that issue. :) Awadewit (talk) 05:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Swapped it for the newer typo-free name. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:Ocupación estadounidense de Veracruz.jpg - The tag on this image claims it is in the PD because 70 years have elapsed since the death of the author. Who is the author and when did they die? Awadewit (talk) 18:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll just remove it from the article. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * All image issues resolved. Awadewit (talk) 16:39, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Is this an error?
 * ^ "Sugar", The Wall Street Journal (21 January 1915), p. 3.
 * ^ "Sugar", The Wall Street Journal (28 January 1915), p. 3.

Is this one ref with an error (that should be combined to a named ref), or did the WSJ run two articles a week apart with the same name? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was apparently a regular feature in The Wall Street Journal that included sugar futures prices. Both are cited to show the difference between sugar prices before and after the collision. They both happened to be on page 3 of their respective editions. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The final cost of Washingtonian, including financing costs, was $71.49 per deadweight ton, which came out to just under $733,000. - "Came out to" &rarr; "totaled".
 * Changed.
 * Washingtonian had a speed of 12.5 knots (23.2 km/h),[4][5] and was powered by a single steam engine with oil-fired boilers which drove a single screw propellor Washingtonian's cargo holds, which had a storage capacity of 490,858 cubic feet (13,899.6 m3),[2] were outfitted with a complete refrigeration plant so that she could carry perishable products from the West Coast—such as salmon from fisheries in the Pacific Northwest, or fresh produce from Southern California farms—to the East Coast. - Can this sentence be split? Also, should it be "propeller" as opposed to "propellor"? One more thing, remove "that" in "so that".
 * Didn't read this until now, but I fixed all of these items in a copyedit. Maralia (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Maralia!

–Juliancolton Tropical   Cyclone  23:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a big deal, but is there a way to fix the redlink to Delaware Breakwater? A redirect would probably suffice, but I'm interested to find out what the Delaware Breakwater is.
 * I've found that it's part of a place listed on the National Register of Historic Places. I've asked for help with a stub article at WP:NRHP.
 * … And that was fast! — Bellhalla (talk) 15:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any information about why/how the ships collided?
 * Washingtonian's captain/crew misjudged the speed of Elizabeth Palmer and did not take evasive action. I've reworked the paragraph to, I hope, better explain the collision.
 * Thanks for taking the time to review and your good suggestions. (My replies to them interspersed above.) — Bellhalla (talk) 13:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Support I gave it a quick copyedit; didn't find much. Not too keen about it being in Category:World War I merchant ships of the United States and Category:World War I shipwrecks in the Atlantic Ocean; we didn't enter the war until years after she was sunk, and it was not a WWI-related incident. Maralia (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So noted, and changed. Thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: As a diver, I'd be interested in knowing if the underwater remains of the ship have deteriorated over time. Possible impacts might include hurricanes or other storms, further construction of the breakwater, or other damage.  Also, if anyone has salvaged (or pilfered) parts of the ship, that would be worth documenting as well.  I've written about some of these post-depositional impacts at Samuel P. Ely (shipwreck).  If it's a popular scuba diving site, it would be worth knowing these things.  Now that you've piqued my interest, I might end up researching this myself.  (Also, since there are no underwater pictures, I'll have to travel out to Delaware and take them myself... OK, that might be a tall order.)  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 14:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * In looking I found several charter companies that offer trips to dive there, but no photographs. I haven't come across any description of any artifacts from the wreck. I did find one forum posting from July 2008 describing (briefly) a dive to Washingtonian, and the description matches that in the 2007 Shomette book. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Karanacs (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Very interesting and well-written article. Would it be possible to elaborate just a tiny bit on the damage done to the Elizabeth Palmer in the collision? Did it sink as quickly as the Washingtonian?  And do we know how many crew members were rescued from the WAshingtonian? Karanacs (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I added a couple of sentences that explain the sinking of Elizabeth Palmer. There were 39 survivors out of a 40-man crew for Washingtonian; the number of survivors is now noted in the article. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thank you! Karanacs (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments - I have done some copyedits, though still have some concerns. Other than that, the article is a good, interesting read. Aside from aquaventuresonline, the sources look okay to me. --Aude (talk) 18:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The frequent use of dashes within the prose, especially the "In late August, American-Hawaiian announced that Washingtonian..." sentence breaks the flow of the prose and makes it more difficult for readers. This sentence is where you lost me as a reader, then I had to stop and re-read that paragraph.  How about saying something like, "By the time the Panama Canal opened on August 15, the Washingtonian's Navy charter had ended.  In late August, American-Hawaiian ships switched to taking the canal route, sailing on a San Francisco – Panama Canal – Boston route, opposite of the route used by the Mexican, Honolulan, and sister ship Pennsylvanian."
 * I have no problem with changes that make things more accessible, however, the wording you suggest is not necessarily supported by the references. No specific date for the end of the Navy charter is available, so it may or may not have ended before the Panama Canal opened. (I would guess that it did, but it's not supported.)
 * What makes aquaventuresonline.com a reliable source? it's a commercial site, in the business of selling diving adventures, so they might not be the most reliable and neutral source on popular dive sites.  I would like to see better sourcing, if available.
 * Page 212 of the Shomette book is the source for the fact that Washingtonian's wreck site is one of the most visited dive sites on the east coast. I think the additional details provided by the aquaventuresonline.com site help to fill in some "color" for the wreck. Counter to your view, I believe that they, as commercial operators that take tours to that dive site as well as others, are uniquely qualified to comment on it's nighttime popularity, especially given that a printed source already states it's popular. If, however, my opinion is in the minority, the whole last sentence can be excised.
 * Could we get a map showing the location of the shipwreck? I think a dot locator map, using File:Delaware_Locator_Map.PNG, would suffice.
 * I've had a map request on the talk page since September. I have no idea what a "dot locator map" is.
 * Thanks for the comments. My replies are interspersed above. — Bellhalla (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Support. Well-written, well-referenced, well-organized, and comprehensive on the short life of this vessel. Kablammo (talk) 18:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.