Jump to content

Talk:Nuestra Señora de la Concepción: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
updated assessment for b-class criterium b5
BattyBot (talk | contribs)
m Talk page general fixes & other cleanup using AWB (9486)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Spain}}
{{WikiProject Spain}}
{{WikiProject Ships|class=start|B1=n|B2=n|B3=y|B4=y|B5=n|needs-infobox=y}}
{{WikiProject Ships|class=start|B1=n|B2=n|B3=y|B4=y|B5=n|needs-infobox=y}}
{{WPMILHIST|class=start|B1=n|B2=n|B3=y|B4=y|B5=y|Maritime=y|Spanish=y|Early-Modern=y}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=start|B1=n|B2=n|B3=y|B4=y|B5=y|Maritime=y|Spanish=y|Early-Modern=y}}
}}

== Spitfire ==
== Spitfire ==
I have put this explanation separately from [[Spitfire]] and [[HMS_Spitfire]] because the [[euphemism]] needs explaining, but even now some people object to unexpectedly coming actoss the word "shit". [[User:Anthony Appleyard|Anthony Appleyard]] 05:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
I have put this explanation separately from [[Spitfire]] and [[HMS_Spitfire]] because the [[euphemism]] needs explaining, but even now some people object to unexpectedly coming actoss the word "shit". [[User:Anthony Appleyard|Anthony Appleyard]] 05:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:31, 22 September 2013

Spitfire

I have put this explanation separately from Spitfire and HMS_Spitfire because the euphemism needs explaining, but even now some people object to unexpectedly coming actoss the word "shit". Anthony Appleyard 05:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just confused as to what this has to do with 'Spitfire?' 75.75.110.235 15:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert the page move?

I do not think that the present title is very apt. I believe, it should be reverted back to Cacafuego. Or, perhaps, Cagafuego, for that matter. Any objections? --Dart evader 16:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As no one objected, I've moved it back to 'Cacafuego'. Dart evader 06:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly than the title; this page has no sources cited. Network57 05:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O'Brian Reference

Cacafuego was a rather common name for Spanish ships, and was applied to dozens of various vessels. Given this, the Master and Commander reference in this article seems extraordinarily tenuous. Fell Gleamingtalk 11:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disposition of its Treasure

The second paragraph of this section twice refers to the Cacafuego. This should be changed to Cagafuego. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oregontsunami (talkcontribs) 21:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]