Talk:MS Ambience

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Consensus to reverse the move   (t · c) buidhe 15:35, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Satoshi (ship) →  – May I suggest that this article be renamed back to Pacific Dawn? Articles about cruise ships are usually given the same name as the current or final name of the ship when she was in service (as opposed to en route to scrapping or other disposal). For example,  is the article about the ship of that name that was eventually sold, renamed MS Qing, and intended to be refurbished into floating accommodation, but sank at her moorings and was later scrapped without having been converted. Even if the subject of this article was ever formally renamed Satoshi, she never went into service under that name, and I have seen no photographs of the ship (as opposed to renderings of her) bearing that name. Additionally, most of the online databases still refer to her as Pacific Dawn. In those circumstances, it's not encyclopedic for this article to bear the name Satoshi. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Response So what? Okay, so there's now evidence that she was renamed for her voyage to Panama. But the sources say that even before she arrived at Panama, she was sold for scrapping in, and announced that she would be resupplied for her final voyage to, India, without going into service under the new name. That makes her position exactly the same as that of MS Qing. Further, it is not uncommon for a ship to be renamed for her voyage to the scrappers, which in this case just happens to be not via a direct route. As for the claim that the scrapping contract has not been finalized, that claim is not supported by any of the numerous sources I have seen. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And even if she reaches the breaking yard and is dismantled by another party, she remains the M S Satoshi and the property of Ocean Builders until such time - regardless of the number of passengers or the value of her cargo. Your so-called "sources" are sensationalist echo chambers.  JLMadrigal @ 01:13, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The article naming policy is WP:COMMONNAME Lyndaship (talk) 07:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 December 2020 

message: I actually went on the Pacific Dawn not a month earlier before her death. I have 10 years of law enforcement training, as well as being a risk consultant. I compiled a pretty lengthy list of all hazards present on the ship that was accessible by a normal passenger. Things most people wouldn't think about. One of my major points was improving the fencing on the absolute top deck of the ship, particularly mid-ship. I sent the report into P&O after my trip. Let's just say the work required would be pretty extensive. It might of been what tipped P&O over the line to try and get rid of it. Not to mention the press involved in regards to the suicide.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.20.69.89 (talk) 13:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2018 death of Natasha Schofield 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Jerm (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: MS Ambience →  – It was announced today that the ship so far best known as Pacific Dawn has been bought for a new cruise company Ambassador Cruises, which intends to rename her Ambience, with business to open in June 2021 for cruises commencing in April 2022. In terms of WP policy, at present it fails the basic naming principle of WP:COMMONNAME, and the additional guidance at WP:SHIPNAME. So far there are no sources found to support even that the change of name of the ship has happened, so it cannot satisfy WP:NAMECHANGES. At some time in the future the ship may become better-known in service as Ambience than Pacific Dawn, but at the moment that is speculative; new plans for the future are appropriately covered under the former article title Pacific Dawn, consistently with WP:CRYSTALBALL. Davidships (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  As original mover  had already reverted my revert it did not seem to be uncontroversial. Davidships (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 13 May 2021 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion