Talk:Shackleton–Rowett Expedition

Featured articleShackleton–Rowett Expedition is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 7, 2009, and on April 5, 2017.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 5, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
December 17, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 5, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

old comment edit

Who was Rowett? Bastie 10:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC) He was John Quiller Rowett one of mission sponsors Marco —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.189.132.66 (talk) 09:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Article expansion & development edit

Under way, November 2008. Brianboulton (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Expanded article now posted. Brianboulton (talk) 21:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Leonard Hussey edit

I have begun the article here. The more informed users who wrote this article may wish to take a look at it. SGGH ping! 16:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

"the final episode in the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration" edit

This sentence (in the lead of this article) directly contradicts the lead sentence of the linked article Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration. Given the ambiguity, something like "so-called Heroic age..." is probably preferable too. Adpete (talk) 02:23, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Heroic Age isn't a formally-defined epoch, so opinions may differ as to when it started and finished. However, the contradiction is within the Heroic Age article itself, which despite saying that the age finished in 1917, includes Shackleton-Rowett as the last on the list of expeditions. Shackelton-Rowett clearly belongs to that era, with many of the same personnel, a wooden ship etc. A slight tweaking of the wording should suffice, but I'd avoid "so-called" which has the whiff of fakery about it. Brianboulton (talk) 09:17, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply