Talk:MS Queen Elizabeth

message: I'm removing this paragraph:
:"As experienced with Queen Victoria ship aficionados have criticised Cunard for naming this ship as a Queen. This is a designation customarily applied to the line's ocean liners and flagships: Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth 2, and Queen Mary 2. It has been suggested that the Queen Elizabeth should have borne the name of one of Cunard's previous smaller ships, such as the Mauretania or Aquitania, as was done with the last Caronia, which served Cunard between 1999 and 2004."
The reference given is to http://www.cruisepage.com, which seems to be a site for booking cruises, and has no editorial content.  If the reference is supposed to be to the forums on that site, I would say that it fails WP:RS.  Rojomoke (talk) 13:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming Criticism 

message: Replaced photograph from here [] has no licensing information, no authorship information, no date information, no category information, no copyright, licensing information or permission, and without this will be automatically deleted seven days from 12 October 2010. George.Hutchinson (talk) 22:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Replaced Caption Box photograph

message: Is this ship a Signature Class or an Enlarged Vista Class? This page and the Vista class cruise ship article don't match up. - 63.70.138.254 (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class of this ship 

message: The current one is just called QE. Why was this one not? Or, why is the current one not called QE3?
Some discussion in the article and sources would be good. 5.148.109.26 (talk) 08:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Why QE2?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MS Queen Elizabeth. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100304155922/http://www.cunard.co.uk/OurShips/default.asp?Ship=QE&main=acc&sub=clb to http://www.cunard.co.uk/OurShips/default.asp?Ship=QE&main=acc&sub=clb
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) 21:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

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: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 04:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: MS Queen Elizabeth →  – We do not need ship prefix "MS" for cruise ships, as per WP:SHIPPREFIX. 49.150.12.134 (talk) 03:51, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Comment: According to WP:SHIPPREFIX "the optional prefix is, in fact, optional, it may be omitted for ships with unambiguous names even when common prefixes (e.g. MS or MV) are sometimes used for them in other sources". It does not say that MS should not be used. This proposed move would apply to a series of other ships as well e.g. MS Queen Victoria and MS Queen Anne to name just two. Dormskirk (talk) 10:02, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Lyndaship - Oppose Dormskirk (talk) 11:52, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose We need a dab of some sort and MS is both shorter and more natural than 2010 ship Lyndaship (talk) 10:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose I agree with Lyndaship Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose per WP:NATURAL. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 14 December 2023