Talk:PS Medway Queen

Ships C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Kent Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Kent tasks:

Here are some Kent related tasks you can do:

Clean up an article: Here are automatically generated lists of articles needing cleanup sorted alphabetically and by category.
Edit the Top and High importance articles.
Refine/polish: Ashford, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Canterbury
Expand:: List of churches in Kent, Maidstone Borough Council
NPOV: K College
Citation needed: Unreferenced Kent articles
Cleanup/Copyedit: Kingdom of Kent
Expert attention: Channel Tunnel, Bromley Civic Society
Stubs: see Kent geography stubs articles

Note: These articles may overlap with those on other related lists. If you would like to make a change, either do so yourself, or make a suggestion.

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Location[edit]

Just by way of explanation, a bot had labelled the article as missing coordinates, presumably because of the visitor attractions in Kent category. I know it's a bit debatable whether an article like this should have coordinates, but if it drives a bit more traffic to the article via Google Maps, then they're worth having IMO. However whilst she's in bits it doesn't seem quite right to tag her with Bristol or the office block in Rochester where the charity is based, so for the time being I've tagged her with low-precision coordinates in the middle of the Medway, between Damhead Creek and Chatham Docks. Once she's back in one piece on the Medway, they can be updated with wherever she ends up getting berthed, presumably it'll be at Chatham? 82.2.128.157 (talk) 23:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration or Replica?[edit]

Perhaps the article should make clearer that the MQ's hull has not been "restored" - it's remains are believed to lie at Chatham Dockyard. This is a completely new hull (as is indeed mentioned in the Timeline). It is intended to restore and refit some surviving parts (importantly the engine, as I understand it, and paddle boxes). Of course she will have a new boiler (they have to be replaced periodically anyway). It is also most unlikely that she will be certificated to carry passengers.

The recent IP additions to the Preservation section about the tow home seem far too detailed and journalistic in style, not at all encyclopedic. I'll have a go at improving this in a few days, but don't want to step on anyone's toes.

Incidentally, the first two references seem to be inaccessible to IE users - can others still access them?Davidships (talk) 21:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern and offer to help. I'll answer your questions as far as I am able.
(1) I must declare an interest in that I have been a life member of the Medway Queen Preservation Society (MQPS) since the late 80s. I still have most of the Society magazines and reports. These contain authoritative details of the ship's history, including many witness accounts and old photographs, and are the main first-stop research source.

2) I have so far watched the page to protect it from vandalism, but have resisted editing the page to give precedence to local members, because I live over 200 miles from where the ship lies.

(3) I can see that the page needs copyediting, Wikifying and a general tidy-up, so in response to your comment I'll be doing that in the next week or two. I agree that the first two refs are dead links, and I'll find alternative references.

(4) Wikipedia does give allowances for rotating live news edits, (for example this happened in the days directly after Michael Jackson died - although of course those Death of Michael Jackson edits were all properly referenced). I'll sort out the section about the tow with references, though I should add that I personally have no doubt that it was written in good faith - it just needs a precis and proper refs and updating in line with breaking news.

(5) Regarding your philosophical question about restoration vs replica: as you know, article talk pages are not the place for this, but I guess it's worth making the point that the MQPS is in line with the HMS Victory Preservation Trust, in that a historical ship is still the same ship even though it is a grandfather's axe because it retains both the spirit and symbolism of national or world history - and that is the reason for existence of this kind of preservation trust.

(6) You will also already know that WP article talk pages are not the place to discuss whether the ship is going to be fit to carry passengers, bearing in mind that you do not quote a reference source to confirm your doubt. I have understood so far that it has been the intention of Heritage Lottery and of MQPS to make her seaworthy. The financial award for the re-framing and re-plating would appear to confirm that intention.

I hope this answers your questions. I shall endeavour to improve the article without changing content (which appears satisfactory). I would also thank the editors who have made the effort to keep it up to date over the years. --Storye book (talk) 10:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Storye book. My only intention here is to stimulate debate on what is in the article itself, and I don't think it is philosophical. My understanding is that the MQ as a whole is a restoration, but the hull is a complete replacement, in the form of a close replica (as required by the Lottery Fund), and the boiler will be a replacement. But let's see what the RS have to say. I am glad to see you will give some attention to the page, and are well placed to have good material to hand. That will be needed as MQPS has, since yesterday deleted all its old site and started over again (very skimpy so far). Davidships (talk) 21:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

I have updated the references- John may feel wrongly credited for the website- but he is vice chair -- Clem Rutter (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet review[edit]

In this edit summary User:ClemRutter asks if there was more than one Coronation fleet review. The simple answer is yes, and according to the article, Medway Queen attended two. Not both for QE2 of course but I think the wording can be improved; not necessarily by my replacement of 'the' by 'a'. Help please.SovalValtos (talk) 21:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oops- apologies. Would something like 'the 1953 Coronation fleet review be a way forward- do we need to create an article? --ClemRutter (talk) 22:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some changes. Still room for further improvement.SovalValtos (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add reference?[edit]

Is there a way someone can add in a reference to her being mentioned in a short video from a youtube source. I think this video here did help get her some attention back in 2017 when this video was released by the World of Warships Official Channel. I would do it myself but I'm no wikipedia guru. 2605:A601:A542:2500:F86B:7883:8645:85D6 (talk) 17:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have put the YouTube link in the External links section. You can learn quickly how to make links, by looking at the source; just click on "edit" and check out the formatting. If you want to add information and a citation into the body text of the article, open the edit box, and click on "cite", then chose from the options given (web, news, etc.). That will give you a drop down box with the form for the citation. I hope that helps. Storye book (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]