Talk:MV Princess Victoria (1946)

Untitled

Although this may be an indication of how social attitudes have changed since 1953, it was controversial at the time that there were no women or children among the survivors. If you read "Death in the North Channel" then it was an appalling catalogue of errors. PatGallacher 14:45, 2005 July 21 (UTC)

I agree, and further, see no reason why Wikipedia has to be ground down into bland language for fear of some supposed POV. --mervyn 16:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

If a move like this is to be made, then surely she was the MV Princess Victoria, not the SS Princess Victoria. Or should we check this? What do people think? PatGallacher 16:29, 2005 July 23 (UTC)

08/28/2006-Removed the following external link http://www.merseyshipping.co.uk/features/prinvic/prinvic.htm

I have added some information relating to the sinking and the Court of Inquiry. However, I'm not sure if the references are in the correct format - if not, could someone sort them out? WelshMatt 11:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

Congratulations to whoever got hold of the images for this article, I just have a couple of quibbles. Firstly, is it good practice to have 2 images alonside each other, so that we have the text squeezed into a small area in the middle? Secondly, I am not entirely happy with the photo of the ship, since it includes some blank space and text too small to read. Could we crop this down to just the photo, and then include it in the article at whatever seems like the appropriate size? PatGallacher (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Pat I have absolutely no objections to you fiddling about with it. I've done my best to make it appear as interesting and informed as I can. There's a lot of information on the links I used which I didn't include which another editor might find relevant. As for the pictures; if there was more text then they probably wouldn't appear so squeezed in. I'd be reluctant to take them away. I have edited the image which had too much blank space around it though. I spent a lot of time searching for images of the wreck but it seems none are available from the 1992 expedition.The Thunderer (talk) 12:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Have now updated - I think it looks better. It still needs a ship info panel though, I'll get that sorted out presently.The Thunderer (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Court of Enquiry

The Court of Enquiry section claims that the Court's report ran to 30,000 pages. That cannot be right. By comparison, the full 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary is "only" 22,000 pages and is estimated to contain 120 man-years' worth of typing. Dricherby (talk) 12:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Nine years later - a delayed response! I suggest the writer probably meant 30,000 words, or around 100 pages. Arrivisto (talk) 16:18, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Personal testimonial

The following section was added in 2011 and later added to, by DeslieM. It was removed by Simon Harley in 2014 and readded by DeslieM, in a slightly different form, in January 2016. I'm removing it again as unencyclopaedic, but preserving it here for consideration. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

A personal testimonial from Douglas Mumford

First British Car Ferry

I have some qualms about the claim to be the first British car ferry to operate in British waters, Her predecessor Ship MV Princess Victoria (1939) was built as a car ferry but within two months requisitioned and converted to the minelayer HMS Princess Victoria which was lost 1940. This photograph seems to show her loading cars at Stranraer (but it may have a test or one off). http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/photo?group=Euston&objid=1997-7409_LMS_8995.Wayback copy There is currenly no article for the 1939 but I might to a quick stub article.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:19, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Number of lives lost

The current source (just recoverd from archive) for the number of lives lost says 133. An attempt has been made to change that to 135. Should anyone feel they have a source for number of lives different to 133 can they discuss it here so it can be resolved in the most appropriate way. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:45, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

This source does not give a precise number but indicates two further persons were identified in 2017 which is probably in addition to the 133 idenitified in the archive I previously recovered and mentioned above. Probably this needs checking against other sources. I am not able to put in the effort for this currently. Thankyou,.Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:23, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• MV princess victoria.ferry.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:09, 12 November 2020 (UTC)