Talk:Nuestra Señora de la Concepción: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:46, 29 June 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nuestra Señora de la Concepción article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Spain Unassessed

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ships Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:Ship infobox request

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 Gleaming^talk 11:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 More importantly than the title; this page has no sources cited.
 [[User:Network57|Network57]] 05:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
+== 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. [[User:FellGleaming|<font color="darkmagenta"><b>F</b>ell <b>G</b>leaming</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:FellGleaming|<font color="black">talk</font>]]</sup> 11:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)