Talk:SS Royston Grange (1959)

(Redirected from Talk:STV Royston Grange)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Murgatroyd49 in topic Article name

Refrigeration

edit

Your research is incorrect re the set up of refrigeration gasses - carbon Monoxide is not a refrigerant - never has been and never will be - i know ships refrigeration of this erea well as i sailed on many ships like the Royston Grange - i was also on board the ship before it sailed that unfortunate night - i knew most of the Engineers as we had been ashore together.Tikis61 10:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sadly you need a source for this. My research isn't incorrect, since I am merely quoting a reliable source (The Times). Without a reliable source your addition can only be classed as original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp 10:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Casualty lists

edit

I've boldly removed the lists of casualties from the article. I intend no disrespect to any of the victims or their families, but lists such as these are generally not considered encyclopedic, and they push the article into becoming a memorial. If any of the victims are notable outside of this incident, then they should, of course, be linked to and mentioned in the article. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not the first British ship lost with all hands since WW2

edit

The SS Pandora of Beaumaris was lost with all six hands on 22 October 1951. Mjroots (talk) 09:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have corrected the reference to World War II to 1951, and copied the citation onto the page.Cloptonson (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Not: the first British ship lost with all hands since 1951

edit

I have removed the incorrect statement, as the last British ship to be lost with all hands before the Royston Grange was the Lairdsfield, lost off Teesmouth on 6.Feb. 1970.

From 1951 to 1972 the following British ships were lost with all hands: 1953: SS Yewvalley lost off Cromer with all 12 crew; 1957: SS Nordic Star, disappeared in the Bay of Biscay with all 34 crew; 1957: SS Narva, lost in the North Sea with all 28 crew; 1960: SS Lesrix, lost off Dorset with all 8 crew; 1962: MV Ardgarry, lost off Cornwall with all 12 crew; 1967: MV Denny Rose, disappeared between the Philippines and Japan with all 42 crew; 1970: MV Lairdsfield, lost off Teesmouth with all 12 hands. source:[1] HC Stempel (talk) 12:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

References

Miramar

edit

As noted at WT:SHIPS, the Miramar website is now a subscription site. However, it is still a WP:RS, which a blog such as Ships Nostalgia can never be. For this reason, I've reverted the replacement of the Miramar references by a non-RS and a Spanish RS. By all means improve on the referencing, and if that info can be sourced from a free RS, then replace the Miramar reference. Mjroots (talk) 07:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

We should clarify to the readers that "Miramar ship index" suscription is not free.--Darius (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Argentina v. Uruguay

edit

Reference has been added to a political dimension regarding sovereignty over River Plate waters, described as "minor". Not so minor it seems as it seems that the Argentine warships had order to use force of arms if necessary (though they didn't), and the conflict contributed to the need for diplomatic steps towards the conclusion in the following of year of a new treaty between Argentina and Uruguay over the maritime frontier. However, I think that the initial source is doubtful as a RS (looks like the view of an Osvaldo Astiz as a "reader's contribution"); but I have added another which, although from the same website, is an authored conference paper of a Uruguayan maritime research institute - and found a short mention in the accessible pages of a book on the new treaty (hopefully there are other sources on this aspect).Davidships (talk) 02:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Article name

edit

As pointed out by a recent editor, the ship should be referred to as the SS Royston Grange, not STV. Maybe the article should be renamed to reflect that? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply