Jump to content

Talk:MS Marco Polo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proof of details

[edit]

I can vouch for the fact that the Pushkin traveled the Bremerhaven—Montreal route in the summers... my parents arrived in Montreal on 24 June 1969. Dyslexic agnostic (talk) 03:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I sailed on the Alexandr Pushkin when I was 12 years old. The CTC Cruise went from Sydney to Port Vila, Vanuatu, to Noumea and Ille de Pines in New Caledonia. Anecdotal for sure, but this was in 1988 and the article currently states the ship was leased to CTC from 1985-19??, so it's at least a step closer to fixing that ugliness. 220.233.34.248 (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In July 1966, our family sailed from Montreal, to London (Tilbury), Copenhagen, Helsinki, and Leningrad. The passengers were mainly Canadian and American. The ship had daily "news" broadcast in English each morning, and the Americans were upset with their (the Russian) slant on the Viet Nam War, with the American being the aggressors, etc. The broadcasts were modified to make the news sound more neutral. The services and staff were excellent and it was a most enjoyable trip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.54.68.231 (talk) 00:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

External links were added but removed by administrator for being commericial.

The link added was a ship tracking and information site that I found and would imagine that wiki users would appreciate. Additionally most other cruise ship pages include tracking links to commercial pages so I don't see why this one is any different.

The link added doesn't appear to be particularly commercial and I can find no evidence of selling on the site.

Edit undone.

Spaceship Earth (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Engine type

[edit]

The main page lists propulsion as 7RND76 engines but the link to the classification society states 7RD76. (Both designs are Sulzer - Winterthur, Switzerland). I suspect 7RD76 to be correct due to a)date of construction and b)in a TV documentary the chief engineer refers to an overhaul of the rotary cylinder valve, a feature of the RD exhaust system but not RND which was a later design. Snsbtech (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another source for RD: http://english.metalock.de/Default.aspx?page=1795 Class and an engine repair specialist are more trustworthy than the rest of the sources on the net who are all perpetuating an old mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.207.90.18 (talk) 11:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1974

[edit]

Some confusion as there was what appears to be another MV Marco Polo, operated by Dominion Lines cruising out of Australia from 1970 to 1978DDWT (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MS Marco Polo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MS Marco Polo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MS Marco Polo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MS Marco Polo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:01, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of illegality

[edit]

I will not re-revert the editor, but it should be noted here that Pol098 has now twice reintroduced the same BBC News source that I had added for the ship being scrapped, with polemical statements about illegality. The BBC source is clear that the resale for scrap, while contrary to the spirit of the law, was legal, and this is in any case overemphasis placed in the intro. If further discussion of the resale for scrap—and the price—occurs in reliable sources, then the place to note that the resale occasioned disapproval because of the law is at the end of the history, and in any case the reference should only be named and templated once. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it. Definitely doesn't belong in lead. Furthermore although the BBC article is RS its a very poor piece of journalism basically just quoting two single issue pressure groups. I'm not even sure of the claim about its illegal for the ship to be scrapped in a developing country. Miramar which is RS has slightly different dates for scrapping but I've held off amending the article in case they are confused about a delayed arrival Lyndaship (talk) 08:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added indubitably reliable sources on the illegality of exporting ships to developing countries for scrapping. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well found but shes not a UK ship, being Bahamian flagged Lyndaship (talk) 13:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are also international guidelines, in advance of the not-yet-in-force Hong Kong International Convention for the safe and environmentally sound recycling of ships, supported by the Bahamas. But, thinking about it, I think all such regulations are toothless; you sell a ship, at scrap value, for "continued trading"; the purchaser either sells it on to make a complicated chain, or simply, if in a jurisdiction not bound by the rules, sends it for scrapping. While I'm not directly involved in shipping, I'm scandalised by the "developing countries" ship scrapping "industries" (people on a seashore hacking away), which pollutes and kills massively. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So are the BBC journalists, clearly. And that story links to previous coverage of the issue. But it's inappropriate to shoehorn the issue into this article unless Marco Polo becomes widely discussed as a notorious example; especially not in the lead paragraph; and it's always going to be inappropriate to speak in Wikipedia's voice here of either sale at the end of the ship's life as illegal unless reliable sources say so (that would be after a conviction, and the BBC source we have now clearly states that neither sale was illegal), or to emphasize that the second was at about double the price or otherwise be emotional about it. WP:NPOV. Note also that Lyndaship, above, regards the BBC source as poor journalism. What you might consider doing is collecting reliable sources on the beach-front ship scrapping industries and their deleterious effects, like the earlier BBC coverage, and then seeing whether our coverage at Ship breaking needs improvement; I see that that article covers environmental risks in its own section but also in the earlier section on developing countries. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:MS_Marco_Polo&oldid=1212845130"