Talk:Nuestra Señora de la Concepción

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

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Spain

	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 the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Ships

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

Military history: Maritime / European / Spanish / Early Modern

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	Spanish military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)

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 Gleaming^talk 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 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Source-National Geographic

There is an article in U.S. National Geographic that appears to be about this vessel,

September 1990, Vol. 178, No. 3, pp. 38 - 53, by William M. Mathers

Which says it sank on September, 20, 1638 off Agingan Beach on Saipan. However this page says Drake captured it in 1579. 59+ years seems a long life for a ship in those days, or an I wrong there?

Those are to separate ships with the same name obviously, beside the fact of the capture, the ship that Drake took had only 150 tons (average-big for 1570s) while the HUGE galleon sank at 1638 had 2000 tons!!!. The spanish ships during XVI and XVII century, specially those in transoceanic routes used mostly religious advocations names, virgins, saints, etc and as the number of ships was so numerous (5,000 ships for the 17,000 voyages in the Atlantic route only between 1505 and 1650, e.g.) the names repeated constantly. There were SEVERAL different ships with the same name in few years and sometimes even inside the same fleet. By the way, the usual life for a spanish ship in the transoceanic routes than didn't sank was around 5-10 yeas, 20 for the exceptionally old ones, the absolute record don't even reach 30 years in the Atlantic route, while in the Manila Galleon case, the galleons much bigger and in longer and harder route usually did 2-4 voyages at max.31.222.101.67 (talk) 11:13, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Says gold artifacts from the galleon were first found by divers from the recovery vessel Tengar on March 10, 1988. 220 of ^Borg 00:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]