Talk:Fénix capsules

Propose rename to 2010 Copiapó mining accident (Fénix capsules )

Withdrawn. The main article, 2010 Copiapó mining accident, is a current Good Article Nominee, Engineering and has recently been tagged as too long. To migrate the main article to Wikipedia:Summary style we need to create several daughter articles. To maintain consistency in the naming of the daughter articles I suggest that the daughter articles be named in the style of 2010 Copiapó mining accident (xxxxx xxxxx). To support that project, I propose that we rename this article to 2010 Copiapó mining accident (Fénix capsules ) or similar. Feedback please. --Veriss (talk) 05:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there's a need to disambiguate that much :) Otherwise.. we should be moving the article on an aftershock of the Chile earthquake from 2010 Pichilemu earthquake to 2010 Chile earthquake (March aftershock) or something like that, wouldn't look so nice. After all, the Fénix capsules are into the 2010 Copiapó mining accident category. Enough IMO. Diego Grez (talk) 14:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

@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)

The Fenix ancestor

http://avaxnews.com/pictures/15813 used to rescue the miners of Champagnole, France, in July 1964 ! Stephanefr (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Talcahuano

(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 Genius ^talk 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 Genius ^talk 01:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)