This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
@Manxruler: 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)[reply]
@W.carter: 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)[reply]
@Manxruler: 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)[reply]
@W.carter: I'll keep a look out, I always do when things are still developing. Manxruler (talk) 12:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
