Talk:RMS Empress of Britain (1930)

message: Is it true that the EofB's third funnel was like Titanic's fourth funnel - not a smoke-producing funnel? 04:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know for sure, but it's quite possible.  A lot of ships were built like that, with a funnel as a dummy.  Queen Mary was like that, with the third funnel being a dummy, and America had the first (of two) funnels as a dummy.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, as you can see in the side elevation in the article, the third funnel does not contain boiler trunks. The Queen Mary's third funnel was partly functional though. John.Conway 10:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third funnel 

message: The process of changing the name of this article revealed a number of links. It is unclear whether these links should or should not be incorporated in the article's "See also" section. They are posted here for evaluation and review by other editors. --Tenmei (talk) 19:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plausibly useful links

message: Changing name from RMS Empress of Britain (1930) to RMS Empress of Britain (1931) because the disambiguation date was wrong -- should have been 1931, date of maiden voyage rather than launch date .... --Tenmei (talk) 20:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant useful links

message: See explanatory comment at Talk:RMS Empress of Canada (1928) --Tenmei (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains]]

message: "...the Empress of Britain was ordered with outer steel plating double the thickness at the stem and for 150 feet (46 m) back at either side, up to the waterline."
Stern?  Shouldn't that be bow?  Jason404 (talk) 02:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you may have misread.  It says "stem", not "stern", and stem = bow.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error? 

message: The japanese carrier Shinano was also sunk by a submarine, and if I remember correctly she was both heavier and longer than the Empress (thus fulfilling multiple definitions of "largest").  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.24.187.32 (talk) 10:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Learn something new every day!  I didn't know that about the I-boat name.  Good to know for future reference.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Point taken, and didn't know about the distinction. Learn something new indeed! I do however think that it would simplify to add "a german U-boat" to avoid misunderstandings, as it has been done under "fate" to the right, and in multiple places in the text.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.235.239.187 (talk) 12:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest ship sunk by u-boat? 

message: I have written permission from Canadian Pacific to use a photo from their archives of the Empress of Britain.
I'm not sure how to add a photo - I can't make it work! Does anyone out there have some quick advice for me, please? Thanks very much. 
Ashley Bodiguel (talk) 23:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New photo to add to the page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on RMS Empress of Britain (1930). 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:
*Added  tag to http://members.tripod.com/~merchantships/cprships2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717033831/http://www.greatships.net/empressbritain2.html to http://www.greatships.net/empressbritain2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified