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 WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
A fact from Dalarö wreck appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 September 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
My edits were for tighter construction and improved clarity. I also inserted several invisible ("commented-out") queries in the html. Most notably, I know that dendrochronology can only generally localize the place of growth, though it's accurate at dating the year timber was felled, if the final growth rings are present. That's why I dropped the assertion "The dendrochronological analysis also revealed that the ship was taken from an estate that neighbored the Ogle estate".--Wetman (talk) 21:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
First off, thanks for the copyediting. It obviously needed a run-through.
I don't know the details of the dendrochronological findings, since these were just matter-of-factly presented in the SVT documentary about the wreck. According to that program, the origin of the timber(s) was narrowed down to a specific estate, but I have no idea how they were so sure about it. The problem is that nothing academic has been published about the wreck so far. I've been in contact with some of the SNMM archaeologists concerning sources, but they don't expect an archaeological report to be finished until at the end of this year. I'm sure some of the claims of the documentary and news articles might prove to be exaggerated or maybe even false, but right now they're the only published sources available.
I'm glad if my edits were useful. When the sentence goes back into the text, how the growth site was so narrowly determined is at least as interesting as the conclusion.--Wetman (talk) 04:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
I guess it'll have to wait until the report comes out then, because I know of no sources where that is specified. At least not one I could actually cite as a published source.
