Talk:Spanish Florida

message: Is it me or is this article identical to this first paragraphs of the History of Florida article? FoekeNoppert 11:49, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The settlement founded in 1559 on what is now Pensacola Bay was called Ochuse. The name "Panzacola" or "Pansacola" does not appear in Spanish records until the middle of the next century. There is no connection between Ochuse and Pensacola, other than that they were both on the shore of the same (rather large) bay. -- Donald Albury 13:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, there used to be a ton of that stuff at Pensacola, Florida and History of Pensacola, but that's been mostly fixed now. But while we're on it, why no mention of Lucas Vazquez de Ayllon? --Cúchullain t/c 13:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not familiar with him. I don't see why his colony shouldn't be added. I don't have time to look into it right now, though. -- Donald Albury 15:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I see it's already mentioned, just not in its own section. That's probably sufficient; I'll see about adding one or two of the sources I have discussing him.--Cúchullain t/c 17:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Pensacola considers its founding to be 1559. It may have used a different name then, but the current city claims continuity with the 1559 settlement. Settlements have gone by different names over different eras. The modern state of Louisiana for example was once the New Orleans territory, and Missiouri was once the Louisiana Territory. Emperor001 (talk) 05:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a classic example of why we rely on reliable, secondary sources rather than what the subject itself says. Pensacola may trace its founding to 1559, but that's just a marketing gimmick. De Luna's settlement at Pensacola Bay lasted only two years, and then the area wasn't resettled again by the Spanish until the end of the 17th century. That's a gap of nearly 140 years. In contrast, settlement in what is now the state of Louisiana has been continuous, even though it changed hands a number of times.--Cúchullain t/c 13:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Founding of Pensacoa 

message: I have removed mention of the Spanish constitution of 1812 from the infobox for a second time. If anyone wants to place this in the infobox again, I request that they cite a reliable source on how it is relevant to the history of Florida. It is not something that I remember seeing in any history of Florida. The events currently in the infobox are changes in de jure possession, or, in the case of Pinckney's Treaty, de jure changes in the boundaries of Florida. Neither happened in 1812. -- Donald Albury 15:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. It's also worth pointing out that if there's nothing about the 1812 Constitution in the body of the article, it certainly should be mentioned in the infobox.--Cúchullain t/c 19:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not be mentioned in the infobox, I assume you meant. Pfly (talk) 19:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I meant "not mentioned" ;)--Cúchullain t/c 20:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish constitution of 1812 

message: We listed this page in our Todo section at the landing page for the Friends of Wikipedia:Viva_Florida_500_WP
Our aim is to assist in getting cites, references and embellish the article with new factual information
by using our state's 500th anniversary to meet and greet new wikipedia editors.--Ourhistory153 (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viva Florida 500 WP will assist in this article's development 

message: Once again someone has added the :Spanish Constitution of 1812 to the list of major events in the infobox, hiding the link under "Provincial constitution". That was certainly not a "provincial constitution", and the article on the constitution makes it clear that it had little effect even in Spain before 1820, and notes that Spain's overseas possessions were in a "power vacuum" at the time. The other events in the infobox were major changes in the status of Spanish Florida, either a transfer between Spain and another country, or a major redefinition of its boundaries (the Pinckney Treaty). I see no evidence that the Constitution of 1812 had any effect on Spanish Florida. -- Donald Albury 14:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish Constitution of 1812 

message: As I've done elsewhere, I've reverted most of the changes replacing the words "colony" and "colonists" with "settlement" and "settler". Once again, as I explained for instance here, the terms were perfectly appropriate, and follow the usage in Michael Gannon's History of Florida and various other sources. The edits were unproductive and were in some cases detrimental, for instance describing Carolina as a "settlement" (it was a colony comprised of several settlements). Additionally, I've had to remove the citation for the Fort Caroline material. The cite given was: . The Google Books link doesn't work and the citation is all wrong; The Empire State of the South was written actually by Christopher C. Meyers, and those pages don't mention anything about Fort Caroline. It's also factually wrong on at least one item; Charlesfort was abandoned in 1563, well before Fort Caroline was founded the following year.--Cúchullain t/c 17:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what happened with the book. The cite is supposed to go to Sixteenth Century North America, which is by Carl Ortwin Sauer. It does not contain the incorrect information about Charlesfort. I'll add it in.--Cúchullain t/c 17:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: "Colony" and Fort Caroline reference

message: The articles in Spanish and French say Ponce de León named it "La Pascua Florida", but this article says he named it "La Florida". Which one is it? Enacional (talk) 19:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's "La Florida" because "La Pascua Florida" (Feast of Flowers) refers to Easter, the day Ponce and his men first sighted the land; he named it "La Florida" after the feast day. See La Florida Del Inca and the Struggle for Social Equality. I have replaced the cite of unreliable website "Findmypast.com" with a reliable source. Carlstak (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense and your source seems good. Thanks! Enacional (talk) 02:11, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pascua 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Spanish Florida. 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/20090502192215/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1028&ResourceType=District to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1028&ResourceType=District
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131116064548/http://teachingflorida.org/article/san-luis-de-talimali-or-mission-san-luis to http://teachingflorida.org/article/san-luis-de-talimali-or-mission-san-luis
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090409093314/http://www.uwf.edu/jworth/spanfla.htm to http://www.uwf.edu/jworth/spanfla.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The current version of the article states as a matter of fact that Florida appears on the Cantino planisphere of 1502, and that this would prove that some unknown Portuguese explored the region prior to that date. I edited the text to clarify that such a theory is only a minority view. However,  reverted my edit saying that "Need some good, credible, readible sources if you're going to reverse the established well-cited cited text to say that "most scholars" don't think that the Catino Planisphere shows Florida". 
Challenge accepted. Here you are a list of sources that argue for and against the identification of that Cantino map feature as Florida.
Those who believe Florida is drawn on the Cantino planisphere:
*
*
*
Those who believe that piece of land on the Cantino is something else, and that there is no support for a Portuguese pre-discovery of Florida:
*
*
*
*
*
Those who explain the debate but do not take side:
* 
The article needs to be modified to reflect this plurality of points of view regarding the Cantino map. The alleged Portuguese pre-discovery can only be mentioned as a hypothesis, and not as a fact as is the case in the current version. --Hispalois (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the current version of the text does a good job explaining the facts and the contrasting opinions. Zeng8r (talk) 20:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Florida in the Cantino planisphere?