Talk:Timeline of the Magellan–Elcano circumnavigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Spain (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Tambayan Philippines (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Prose[edit]

This could be presented better using prose, but I won't use a template because the title says "timeline" which usually don't have prose. Mr. Spink talkcontribs 14:52, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Prose 2[edit]

I want to write about the voyage in prose, using the Bergreen book among others as a source, with thorough citations. Seeing as the title does not suggest that this is a timeline, and that an article covering the voyage itself is missing, I see no problems with it. Does anyone object? If not, then I'll start this week.--Simen113 (talk) 14:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay I will now start writing this article in prose since no objections were noted. @Ekem: I will keep the timeline at the bottom, and elaborate and cite it. Any objections from your part, since you created the article? @Mr. Spink:, thought I'd notify you too --Simen113 (talk) 18:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
@Simen113:, I wish you the best luck and hope you do well to convert the article. Mr. Spink talkcontribs 19:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Poor[edit]

This isn't very helpful... but this is a damn poor article on one of the most famous nautical events in history, no background no details it's just bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:AA0C:2700:9D79:1576:565A:5452 (talk) 13:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

And the Date they left Rio de Janeiro: December 32, seriously? This is a shame of an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.101.79 (talk) 10:48, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Details in Magellan article[edit]

Although the Ferdinand Magellan article points to this one as the "main" article, that article is considerably comprehensive and has more information than this one.

I suggest that this one be renamed "Timeline of the Magellan–Elcano_circumnavigation" since that is more of what it actually is. NumberC35 (talk) 20:16, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I am currently expanding this to prose.--Simen113 (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Revert undiscussed move[edit]

This page was written in Oct 2012 as a timeline of the Magellan expedition; it was moved without discussion in July 2016 to “Magellan-Elcano circumnavigation”, with the edit summary “better page name”. Well actually, as it was (and still is) a timeline article, then no; it isn't a better page name at all. Also, this move has caused considerable confusion (there have been several short discussions here about this page being converted to prose, “as this is not a timeline”); so I am returning it to its former listing as a timeline (I've kept the hyphen change from February 2017). If anyone thinks it should be at a different title I suggest opening a WP:RM discussion and presenting some valid reasons for doing so.
As for having a prose article on the expedition, I note that we already have a full prose treatment of it at Ferdinand Magellan#Voyage of circumnavigation, and at Armada de Molucca, both of which pre-date these proposals, and even this timeline article: so no, we probably don't need another. I trust everyone is OK with this. Moonraker12 (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)