Talk:Baltic Cable
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ecologists or Environmentalists
[edit]"The construction of the 380kV-link between Luebeck-Herrenwyk and Schwerin is not progressing due to opposition from ecologists." Do you think this might mean opposition from environmentalists, rather than ecologists? (I would expect this if the cable were proposed in Britain). Chris -Thryduulf 03:24, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Financing
[edit]It would be interesting to include something on the investment: The cost, how it was funded, who shared it, and so on. - Pernambuco 02:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Two discrepancies: cable length and fire/fault date
[edit]Found two internal inconsistencies worth flagging.
1. Length discrepancy. The infobox states "Total length: 262 km," but the lead prose says "With a length of 250 kilometres..." for what reads as the same cable. I haven't found a source that resolves this for Baltic Cable specifically. One plausible explanation, based on how comparable HVDC cables are documented elsewhere (Estlink 2, for example, has its 171 km total broken down into submarine, onshore, and overhead sections that sum to that figure), is that 250 km and 262 km here might likewise refer to different scopes, the submarine/underground run versus the full route including the Swedish overhead section. But this is a hypothesis drawn from other articles' conventions, not something I've confirmed for this cable. Does anyone know which figure is right, or whether they measure different things the article should clarify rather than "fix" as a contradiction?
2. Date discrepancy on the fire/fault incident. The article text says the electrode cable fault happened "the night from April 16, 2017 to April 17, 2017," but the citation supporting it (ln-online.de, "Stichflamme aus der Tiefe") is dated 17 April 2016, a full year off from the prose. I couldn't load the primary source directly (the site is blocked from where I'm checking). I did find a mirror of the German Wikipedia article on this same cable, which independently states the fault occurred the night of 16 to 17 April 2016, matching the citation's date, and names the same underlying news article by author and date. That's a mirror of a sister-language Wikipedia article though, not the primary source itself, so I'd call it suggestive rather than confirmed. Does anyone have direct access to that ln-online.de article, or another source, that can confirm 2016 is correct so the English prose can be fixed? ~~~~ Gurung Roshan (talk) 06:30, 29 September 2026 (UTC)