Talk:Skinner & Eddy

A fact from Skinner & Eddy appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 September 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that only one Skinner & Eddy ship built for World War I service was lost in that conflict, but 31—including West Lashaway, West Elcasco, West Eldara, West Haven (pictured), West Hobomac, West Humhaw and West Maximus—were lost to enemy action in World War II?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/September.

Wikipedia

What's with all these Wests?

A huge number of the ships listed are named West something-or-other. What is the reason for this? It could make an interesting sidelight to the article.--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 21:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's basically because they were all built on the West coast of the United States. There were a large number of EFT ships given the prefix West in this period, but the naming system AFAIK was not entirely consistent and was eventually dropped. But you're right that something could probably be added about that to the article. Gatoclass (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

establishment of the company

the article as of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Skinner_%26_Eddy&oldid=1119655537 says that skinner and eddy leased seattle construction and drydock to build their first ships, based on http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=4149.

this is probably simply incorrect, as pacific marine review tells a different story in half a dozen articles (everything built in their own yard built starting Feb 16 and having 3 slipways in May 17 when it was expanded to 5).

Skinner and Eddy No. 2 is the old Seattle Constr & DD, not the other way around. this also agrees with the official USSB record, which says there were no requisitions from plant No. 2 (those requisitions are listed under SeattleDD). Nowakki (talk) 09:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]