Talk:Richard Phillips (merchant mariner)
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 September 2013. The result of the discussion was SNOW keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
A note
[edit]A section about the lawsuit and controversy should be added to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.51.48.58 (talk) 07:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Refs
[edit]The references have a very weird format style (in text editor) - they should be fixed to be included in standard form. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 06:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
The entire section summarizing the pirate hijacking and subsequent hostage negotiation is either poorly written, or is a series of cut and pasted sentences from a different piece attempting a condensed summary. It jumps all over the place, starting out with the pirates on board the Maersk, followed by the Maersk leaving port headed for Mumbasa with this much cargo etc. Then flash to the pirate boat was sunk after the pirates were on board. What?? Later it's talking about the four pirates, then how the snipers killed all three pirates (All??), then out of nowhere giving the names of three of the pirates, then it reveals one pirate was taken into custody aboard the naval ship (how'd he get there?) It's discombobulated, and needs serious revision. -Paul 96.41.88.23 (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2014 (UTC)