Talk:Port of Southampton

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

Recent post[edit]

In the last post, the two-year-old list of ships using Southampton as home port was updated. This needed to be done, and the community's collective thanks are due to user 86.134.141.242 for undertaking this task. However the wikilinks for the P&O Cruises ships were actually correct the way they were. For example Arcadia linking to the 2004 ship, was changed to Arcadia linking to the article about the region in Greece known as Arcadia. As for Adonia, this ship is named 'Royal Princess' right now, and the only Wikipedia article about her has this as its title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oojamaflip2 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the writing style for the Port of Southampton page reads more like a travel brochure than like an encyclopedia. A specific example is the section on the cruise lines and the commentary regarding their targeted passenger markets. While this may be useful information on the pages for their respective companies, it is superfluous to discussion regarding the Port. Mariepr (talk) 16:33, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Port of Southampton. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ocean terminal[edit]

The rationale for referring to it as the new Ocean Terminal is that it effectively replaces the old Ocean Terminal destroyed in the late 70s - early 80s. Just giving the date doesn't convey that information. Also it is the only new construction, the other terminals are conversions of existing warehouses. I chose the original caption quite deliberately, bearing those considerations in mind. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know that (and, for myself, agree with you) because I'm familiar with the location and its history. We need to hear from Palmiped (talk · contribs) really but I imagine he was thinking of MOS:RELTIME and that "new" is maybe pushing it a bit for something that was built ten years ago. Mind you, in the 1970s, people were still calling the berths near Mayflower Park the "new docks"! --Northernhenge (talk) 20:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The expression "new docks" (and "old docks") was still in regular use when I left in 2017! Murgatroyd49 (talk) 20:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes thought as Ocean Terminal was built over eleven ago calling it new was not correct, also wasn’t the original on the opposite side of the dock? --palmiped |  Talk  08:37, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
New is relative, I assume you have no problems referring to the New Forest which is a mere 1000 years old. Yes, the original Ocean Terminal was near what is now the QEII terminal. My point is that the current Ocean Terminal is the newest of the 4 and the only purpose built one since the original Art Deco terminal was destroyed. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
NB "new" is not one of the terms deprecated in MOS:RELTIME. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How about adding something in the prose to explain that the old Ocean Terminal was replaced by a new Ocean Terminal in 2009 which is still commonly known as the New Ocean Terminal? The caption on the photo could then be changed to Azura with the New Ocean Terminal in the foreground Lyndaship (talk) 09:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see that ABP calls it the "Ocean Cruise Terminal". If that's its official name, we should use that (and it solves the "new" problem).

Fairy snuff! Done. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Port_of_Southampton&oldid=1203192071"