This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chile 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.
@Diego, I see what you mean and after some poking around a bit for more guidance found this "Do not use titles suggesting that one article forms part of another: Even if an article is considered subsidiary to another (as where summary style is used), it should be named independently. For example, an article on transportation in Azerbaijan should not be given a name like "Azerbaijan/Transportation" or "Azerbaijan (transportation)" – use Transportation in Azerbaijan." at Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Subsidiary articles. I withdraw my rename proposal and will strike out my request above. --Veriss (talk) 04:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
(A) Fenix 2 is on display at the Talcahuano naval base, next to the Huáscar. However, it's unclear whether this is the original or a replica. Talcahuano is the largest naval base in Chile, and given that the capsule was built by the Chilean navy it's not impossible that this is the original. The article doesn't mention Talcahuano or the final location of the capsule after its national tour. I've tried hunting online, but I don't speak Spanish so haven't found any accurate information. Any ideas? If anyone does know, it would be good to add this information to the article. Modest Geniustalk 18:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Can't help finding sources at the moment, but I know that the original capsule is at the Regional Museum of Atacama, in Copiapó. There was some kind of fuzz back in 2010 or 2011 between residents of that city and the government, as this last one wished to keep the capsule in the naval base, while the residents wanted it to stay in the accident place. Küñall (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that makes sense. The one in Talcahuano is also outside on a tsunami-prone coast, which is hardly the best place to preserve an artefact. It's strange that no sources seem to mention either this replica or the final location of the genuine article. Modest Geniustalk 01:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)