Talk:Brazilian battleship Aquidabã

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brazilian battleship Aquidabã 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

Brazilian battleship Aquidabã was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 27, 2009	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 3, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Brazil's Aquidabã (pictured) was sunk twice in twelve years?

Military history: Maritime / South America

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	South American military history task force

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 articles

Brazil Mid‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Construction

Conway's 1860-1905 gives the date she was laid down as 18 June 1883, which seems to contradict the statement that construction began in May of that year. Is there anything more specific in the source (i.e., was there some sort of modular construction that began before the keel was laid?) Parsecboy (talk) 23:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Parsec! I was hoping you'd stalk me here. ;-) The source for that is the Brazilian Navy's official history, but they only give May 1883 and nothing more. Since Conway's and Miramar both give that specific date, add it in—replacing "May"—and we'll use an explanatory note for the discrepancy. Thanks dude, —Ed (talk • contribs) 04:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me :) I've added about all I can from Conway's. Oh, do you have any idea what "IC" means in terms of steam engines? Conway's says "2-shaft IC, 8..." I can't for the life of me figure out what IC means. Parsecboy (talk) 11:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch, Parsec. I have no idea what it means; perhaps it has something to do with the coal (maybe a certain type of coal)? I only say that because Miramar says "2C", as in 2-shaft coal-burning. —Ed (talk • contribs) 12:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other Languages

I noticed that this article doesn't link to the article in Portuguese. Alhead (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know how to do it, but now I do. Alhead (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :-) —Ed (talk • contribs) 00:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brazilian battleship Aquidabã/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2009 (UTC) Preliminary comments. Looks pretty good, but a couple of questions: Where are the torpedo tubes? Broadside, bow, stern, do we even know? What caliber are the 1 pounder guns and where are they? Similarly, where are the 5.5-inch guns? Bow and stern as was typical of ironclads with these sorts of turret arrangements? Are the 5.5 guns casemated or are they on CP mounts with gunshields? Where was she modernized in 1904? Do we have a figure for range or endurance?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the technical stuff came from Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1860-1905, which is pretty thin on details. It doesn't give any more information on the armament or on the power plant. Ed may be able to dig up some more details in his sources. Parsecboy (talk) 02:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I figured as much, but I won't hold it against y'all if the info's simply not available.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From my sources, I do not know where the TT are, nor anything about the 1-pounders. The 5.7" are on the upper deck, two fore, two aft. Also have added a location for the modernization and added her endurance. —Ed (talk • contribs) 08:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this review closed, abandoned or forgotten? Just wondering. --Brad (talk) 11:53, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural note: This GAN was failed by the reviewer at 04:05 on 27 December 2009. -MBK₀₀₄ 04:54, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I've done a bit of searching on Google books, and stumbled across these three books which look to have a little more detailed account of the revolt and Aquidabã's first sinking by the torpedo boat. Parsecboy (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also this on the removal of the heavy masts. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First battleship sunk by torpedo?

The Brazilian article on the Gustavo Sampaio cites a contemporary Navy document claiming that the action of 1894 was the first torpedo vs. ironclad kill in history. This seems rather far-fetched; do any scholarly sources support this? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA for lack of completeness.Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:05, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've confirmed that she was the second warship, after the Chilean frigate Blanco Encalada in 1891, to be sunk by a Whitehead torpedo. Warship International 45:4 (2008), p. 290–91--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, my copy of Conway's 1860-1905 confirms that; it states on page 410, in reference to the 1891 revolution, "Most of the navy supported the anti-government party but one vessel which did not was the torpedo gunboat Almirante Lynch which sank the Blanco Encalada - the first successful use of the self-propelled torpedo against an armoured ship." Parsecboy (talk) 13:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brazilian battleship Aquidabã. 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/20110812103536/http://biblioteca.dphdm.mar.mil.br/Internet/navios/Index.asp?codNavio=85 to http://biblioteca.dphdm.mar.mil.br/Internet/navios/Index.asp?codNavio=85

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]