Talk:SS Normandie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 25 April 2025 by GA-RT-22 in topic Apparent subsidy inconsistency
Jump to navigation Jump to search

<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".

Script error: No such module "Banner shell". User:MiszaBot/config

Call Sign

The correct call sign is FNSK. The F was misread as P from the cited source. 84.148.1.119 (talk) 22:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Apparent subsidy inconsistency

The article does not seem entirely consistent, saying at various points:

  • she was not a commercial success and relied partly on government subsidy to operate.
  • her finances were such that she did not require government subsidies every year.
  • Normandie did not require government subsidies in service

Jontel (talk) 18:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. Two consecutive sentences say "Normandie did not require government subsidies in service, with her income covering not only her operating expenses but generating revenue of 158,000,000 francs. She was not a commercial success and relied partly on government subsidy to operate" ExpatSalopian (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

The sentences were already there but I put them together to highlite the inconsistency. There is no source for "no subsidy" and the source for "subsidy" is not a good one, so we don't really have good sourcing for one or the other. I'm inclined to remove both. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Ship's beam

The infobox says the ship is 35.9 m in beam, and references a Lloyd's report that no longer exists at the stated URL. I've seen the same figure elsewhere online, but I've also seen 36.4 m. This would be worth clearing up. Normandie was either wider than Queen Mary or it wasn't; it certainly *looks* beamier, but I know that isn't a reliable source. Sacxpert (talk) 05:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Angary

The article says the ship was seized under the right of Angary. Is there any information about when, after the war, the required payment was made to the owners? How much was it?

Fustbariclation (talk) 09:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ardman

What's the reason for the "needs independent confirmation" tag on "led many to consider her the greatest"? It was added by an anonymous editor here: [1]. Both cited sources appear to be independent of the subject. A&E is not a great source and probably should just be removed. But Ardman is fine as far as I can tell. He is a long established journalist with many books in print with respectable publishers, has written for PBS, and has no connection to the subject that I can see. He is probably the one source we rely on the most for this article, so if there is a problem with citing him, we've got trouble.

We might want to re-word the sentence, as it's not very close to what Ardman says. But the sourcing itself looks good. GA-RT-22 (talk) 16:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)Reply