This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
As I promised to Ed, I'm going to lay down a few passages from the Brazilian book "A Marinha Brasileira na Era dos Encouraçados, 1895-1910", written by João Roberto Martins Filho. Since I'm not a usual contributor of this article, I opted to write them down here in the talk page, so that you can pick which one might be useful.
1) The entire chapter 3 is devoted to late 19th century shipyards, including the British Armstrong and Vickers, the German Krupp, the Italian Ansaldo, etc... The author explained those shipyards' roles on influencing directnly and indirectly arms races, wars, etc... Important to this article is perhaps is page 128, where the author told about the Armstrong pressure over Admiral Julio de Noronha (the then-Minister of Navy) to acquire dreadnoughts instead of smaller ships as he had envisioned at first. Noronha refused to compel, but his successor Admiral Alexandrinho yielded, which resulted in the 1906 naval program. Also interesting is that on page 137 has the the curious information that Armstrong gave as a gift to the wife of the Brazilian Plenipotentiary Minister in London a ruby and diamond collar.
2) On page 140 he said the Argentine government decided to purchase two dreadnoughts on 1908 as a response to the Brazil. Although these ships were built by the American company Bethlehem Steel Company, the British Armstrong was contracted to build two ships to Chile on 1911. This was what Armstrong intended from the beginning: a regional naval race that could increase its foreign orders. All this is told on page 140. -- Lecen ( talk) 17:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
As requested by Ed sometime ago, I added a few extra references where possible. I'm really sorry for having taken so long.
There is a passage in this article that says that "with plans for a third dreadnought after the first was completed, two scout cruisers (which became the Bahia class), ten destroyers (the Pará class), and three submarines". According to the book I used as source (which shows the bill promulgated by the Brazilian National Congress) they were three dreadnoughts (18,000 tons each), three scout cruisers (3,100 tons each) and 15 destroyers (650 tons each). p.105
There is no mention of submarines. Perhaps somewhere along the road the government gave up of some of the ships as it did with the third dreadnought. -- Lecen ( talk) 00:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
"At this moment, the launch of the superdreadnought Orion, on 26 November 1909, created in the country [Brazil] a similar situation provoked when of the lauch of the Dreadnought at the end of 1906. On 7 May 1910, Admiral Bacellar, head of the Brazilian Naval Comission in Great Britain, instructed the Armstrong shipyard to interrupt the works on the Rio de Janeiro and asked for projects for a more powerful ship. Brazil was also worried about the two Argentine dreadnoughts then in construction on the United States." p.199
"On 11 October 1910, just three weeks before the change of administration [a new President had been elected], Alexandrino signed a new contract, for a ship with 12 cannons of 14 inches situated on six towers, with a displacement of 30 thousand tons." p.199
"Already chosen to replace Alexandrino, Admiral Marques de Leão made a trip to several shipyards in Europe, with a special stop on Germany, where he was invited to visit not only Kiel, naval headquarters of Krupp, but the Kaiser [Wilhelm II] himself, who -in a long talk- seems to have convinced him of how useless it was to equip great dreadnoughts with cannons larger than 12 inches (300 mm). The detail would leave open the possibility of a construction of the Brazilian ship in Gemrany, in case the contract with Armstrong was annulled." pp.199-200
"As a result of the new situation, between the end of 1910 and the beginning of 1911, the new minister asked Newcastle [Armstrong] for newer projects ... took the minister to accept the new and definite project of a ship with 14 cannons of 12 inches, and yet [it was still] one the largest [ships] in the world. On 3 June 1911, the contract was signed. On 11 January 1912, Marques de Leão left the ministry portfolio, being replaced by Admiral Belfort Vieira. As it always occurred in the Brazilian Navy, he seems to have attempted to change the ships' contract, replacing the 14 cannons mentioned for seven [cannons] of 15 inches (375 mm). Meanwhile, on 22 January 1913 the Rio de Janeiro was launched to the sea. However, at this point, it seemed certain that Brazil would give up of the purchase." p.200
"On September 1913, a month after Alexandrino took office on his second administration in the Ministry of Navy, Brazil instructed the Rothschild to negotiate the selling of the ship ... At the end, the Turkish government acquired the [ship] order. The business transaction was settled on 28 December 1913, and the ship was rechristened Sultan Osman I. When the war [World War I] erupted, the ship was confiscated by the English government on 3 August 1914, receiving the name Agincourt - with which took part on the famous Battle of Jutland, on May and June 1916." p.201 -- Lecen ( talk) 14:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
"For all purposes, here ends for the Brazilian navy the mithological era of the dreadnoughts. As revealed by Francisco Alves de Almeida, the Minas Gerais and the São Paulo were absent of the modest Brazilian naval participation in the last months on World War I. According to this scholar, [who was] ex-director of the Servive of Documentation of the Navy, the emphasis on ships, in detriment of personal's training and infrastructure of [ships'] maintenance, had created an "unprepared and inefficient" Navy ... Already old [outdated] in their youth, the two dreadnoughts [São Paulo and Minas Gerais] ..." p.201 -- Lecen ( talk) 14:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I am posting these here, to avoid cluttering the FAC discussion page. Most of these are, as you will see, pretty minor, but nonetheless need attention. I have only done the first few sections so far; doing the rest will take time, obviously, but I will get to it:-
More on the way. Brianboulton ( talk) 13:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi! two Argentine cruisers, along with Chile's Capitán Prat, were demilitarized. What cruisers were demilitarized and how was it done? -- Maxrossomachin ( talk) 19:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Per WP:IMAGESIZE, we would need extraordinary reasons to hard-code the thumbnail sizes. In he absence of such, we should stick to the default settings, which let users select their own settings. -- John ( talk) 11:44, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I just came accross the article and noted that at least two of the links in the table ″Major Argentine and Chilean warship purchases and orders, 1887–1902″ are incorrect. More specifically, Rivadavia links to Japanese cruiser Kasuga and Mariano Moreno does so to Japanese cruiser Nisshin. If those links are correct, it would be helpful to add a note explaining why. Thanks.-- Jetstreamer Talk 12:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
The article currently states that, in 1910, "the new Brazilian warships were much more powerful than any other vessel in the world..." This statement seems slightly hyperbolic. Do we really think that these warships were significantly more powerful than the British St. Vincent class, for instance, or even the American Delawares? Perhaps slightly more powerful, if based solely on number of guns, but much seems like a stretch. Still, without access to the source, I don't want to change the statement without checking for thoughts first. Jrt989 ( talk) 14:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems from this [2] discussion and WP:CREDITS that the credits in the captions on this page are un-necessary. Unless consensus can be reached on this page to override those two things I believe the "courtesyof" part of the captions should be removed. CombatWombat42 ( talk) 02:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I recently placed {{ bq}} (which used raw styling markup) in this template with {{ quote}}. After an unexplained revert, and another with an abusive edit summary, this has now been replaced with bare HTML markup.
The three versions are styled thus:
Template:BQ (with "style=font-size:90%"):
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Template:Quote:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
<blockquote><span style="font-size:90%;">:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
As can be seen, there are absolutely no style differences between the first two, while the latter has smaller - and thus harder to read - text. Of the three options, only {{ quote}} prevents raw markup from being exposed to editors. It should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
No further comments, so I'm restoring the version that used {{ Quote}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sistemas.dphdm.mar.mil.br/navios/Index.asp?codNavio=155When 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
As I promised to Ed, I'm going to lay down a few passages from the Brazilian book "A Marinha Brasileira na Era dos Encouraçados, 1895-1910", written by João Roberto Martins Filho. Since I'm not a usual contributor of this article, I opted to write them down here in the talk page, so that you can pick which one might be useful.
1) The entire chapter 3 is devoted to late 19th century shipyards, including the British Armstrong and Vickers, the German Krupp, the Italian Ansaldo, etc... The author explained those shipyards' roles on influencing directnly and indirectly arms races, wars, etc... Important to this article is perhaps is page 128, where the author told about the Armstrong pressure over Admiral Julio de Noronha (the then-Minister of Navy) to acquire dreadnoughts instead of smaller ships as he had envisioned at first. Noronha refused to compel, but his successor Admiral Alexandrinho yielded, which resulted in the 1906 naval program. Also interesting is that on page 137 has the the curious information that Armstrong gave as a gift to the wife of the Brazilian Plenipotentiary Minister in London a ruby and diamond collar.
2) On page 140 he said the Argentine government decided to purchase two dreadnoughts on 1908 as a response to the Brazil. Although these ships were built by the American company Bethlehem Steel Company, the British Armstrong was contracted to build two ships to Chile on 1911. This was what Armstrong intended from the beginning: a regional naval race that could increase its foreign orders. All this is told on page 140. -- Lecen ( talk) 17:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
As requested by Ed sometime ago, I added a few extra references where possible. I'm really sorry for having taken so long.
There is a passage in this article that says that "with plans for a third dreadnought after the first was completed, two scout cruisers (which became the Bahia class), ten destroyers (the Pará class), and three submarines". According to the book I used as source (which shows the bill promulgated by the Brazilian National Congress) they were three dreadnoughts (18,000 tons each), three scout cruisers (3,100 tons each) and 15 destroyers (650 tons each). p.105
There is no mention of submarines. Perhaps somewhere along the road the government gave up of some of the ships as it did with the third dreadnought. -- Lecen ( talk) 00:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
"At this moment, the launch of the superdreadnought Orion, on 26 November 1909, created in the country [Brazil] a similar situation provoked when of the lauch of the Dreadnought at the end of 1906. On 7 May 1910, Admiral Bacellar, head of the Brazilian Naval Comission in Great Britain, instructed the Armstrong shipyard to interrupt the works on the Rio de Janeiro and asked for projects for a more powerful ship. Brazil was also worried about the two Argentine dreadnoughts then in construction on the United States." p.199
"On 11 October 1910, just three weeks before the change of administration [a new President had been elected], Alexandrino signed a new contract, for a ship with 12 cannons of 14 inches situated on six towers, with a displacement of 30 thousand tons." p.199
"Already chosen to replace Alexandrino, Admiral Marques de Leão made a trip to several shipyards in Europe, with a special stop on Germany, where he was invited to visit not only Kiel, naval headquarters of Krupp, but the Kaiser [Wilhelm II] himself, who -in a long talk- seems to have convinced him of how useless it was to equip great dreadnoughts with cannons larger than 12 inches (300 mm). The detail would leave open the possibility of a construction of the Brazilian ship in Gemrany, in case the contract with Armstrong was annulled." pp.199-200
"As a result of the new situation, between the end of 1910 and the beginning of 1911, the new minister asked Newcastle [Armstrong] for newer projects ... took the minister to accept the new and definite project of a ship with 14 cannons of 12 inches, and yet [it was still] one the largest [ships] in the world. On 3 June 1911, the contract was signed. On 11 January 1912, Marques de Leão left the ministry portfolio, being replaced by Admiral Belfort Vieira. As it always occurred in the Brazilian Navy, he seems to have attempted to change the ships' contract, replacing the 14 cannons mentioned for seven [cannons] of 15 inches (375 mm). Meanwhile, on 22 January 1913 the Rio de Janeiro was launched to the sea. However, at this point, it seemed certain that Brazil would give up of the purchase." p.200
"On September 1913, a month after Alexandrino took office on his second administration in the Ministry of Navy, Brazil instructed the Rothschild to negotiate the selling of the ship ... At the end, the Turkish government acquired the [ship] order. The business transaction was settled on 28 December 1913, and the ship was rechristened Sultan Osman I. When the war [World War I] erupted, the ship was confiscated by the English government on 3 August 1914, receiving the name Agincourt - with which took part on the famous Battle of Jutland, on May and June 1916." p.201 -- Lecen ( talk) 14:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
"For all purposes, here ends for the Brazilian navy the mithological era of the dreadnoughts. As revealed by Francisco Alves de Almeida, the Minas Gerais and the São Paulo were absent of the modest Brazilian naval participation in the last months on World War I. According to this scholar, [who was] ex-director of the Servive of Documentation of the Navy, the emphasis on ships, in detriment of personal's training and infrastructure of [ships'] maintenance, had created an "unprepared and inefficient" Navy ... Already old [outdated] in their youth, the two dreadnoughts [São Paulo and Minas Gerais] ..." p.201 -- Lecen ( talk) 14:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I am posting these here, to avoid cluttering the FAC discussion page. Most of these are, as you will see, pretty minor, but nonetheless need attention. I have only done the first few sections so far; doing the rest will take time, obviously, but I will get to it:-
More on the way. Brianboulton ( talk) 13:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi! two Argentine cruisers, along with Chile's Capitán Prat, were demilitarized. What cruisers were demilitarized and how was it done? -- Maxrossomachin ( talk) 19:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Per WP:IMAGESIZE, we would need extraordinary reasons to hard-code the thumbnail sizes. In he absence of such, we should stick to the default settings, which let users select their own settings. -- John ( talk) 11:44, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I just came accross the article and noted that at least two of the links in the table ″Major Argentine and Chilean warship purchases and orders, 1887–1902″ are incorrect. More specifically, Rivadavia links to Japanese cruiser Kasuga and Mariano Moreno does so to Japanese cruiser Nisshin. If those links are correct, it would be helpful to add a note explaining why. Thanks.-- Jetstreamer Talk 12:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
The article currently states that, in 1910, "the new Brazilian warships were much more powerful than any other vessel in the world..." This statement seems slightly hyperbolic. Do we really think that these warships were significantly more powerful than the British St. Vincent class, for instance, or even the American Delawares? Perhaps slightly more powerful, if based solely on number of guns, but much seems like a stretch. Still, without access to the source, I don't want to change the statement without checking for thoughts first. Jrt989 ( talk) 14:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems from this [2] discussion and WP:CREDITS that the credits in the captions on this page are un-necessary. Unless consensus can be reached on this page to override those two things I believe the "courtesyof" part of the captions should be removed. CombatWombat42 ( talk) 02:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I recently placed {{ bq}} (which used raw styling markup) in this template with {{ quote}}. After an unexplained revert, and another with an abusive edit summary, this has now been replaced with bare HTML markup.
The three versions are styled thus:
Template:BQ (with "style=font-size:90%"):
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Template:Quote:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
<blockquote><span style="font-size:90%;">:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
As can be seen, there are absolutely no style differences between the first two, while the latter has smaller - and thus harder to read - text. Of the three options, only {{ quote}} prevents raw markup from being exposed to editors. It should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
No further comments, so I'm restoring the version that used {{ Quote}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on South American dreadnought race. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sistemas.dphdm.mar.mil.br/navios/Index.asp?codNavio=155When 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)