Talk:Queen Anne's Revenge

message: I found no scholarly reference to Queen Anne's Revenge as a frigate. Thus I have replaced all reference with the description as a fully rigged ship. In some languages it is in fact proper to describe a fully rigged ship as such, but otherwise I haven't seen it referred to as a frigate anywhere. Feel free to revert if you can find a source.
169.199.30.128 (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Frigate

message: Oh my, I think Dr. Rodgers may have had a heart attack if he'd seen the previous version of this page...
I fixed the history of this section - Blackbear'd encounter with Maynard was well after he wrecked the Queen Anne's Revenge.  In fact, he was killed during that encounter.  I don't know enough about the early history of the ship to comment on anything in the first paragraph, but if it is as accurate as the rest of thie information in this page's previous incarnations, I'd take it with a grain of salt.  I don't know of any evidence that the Concorde was built in England, though it definitely was a slave-ship.  I don't know about it being captured by Hornigold or used, either.
General information about the loss of the vessel can be found in A General History of the Pyrates by Charles Johnson (sometimes attributed as Daniel Defoe).  For information about the debate surrounding the identity of the wreck, see Bradley Rodgers, Nathan Richards, and Wayne Lusardi, "'Ruling Theories Linger': Questioning the Identity of the Beaufort Inlet Shipwreck," International Journal of Underwater Archaeology 34(1) (2005): 24-27.
Elanya 03:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The ship is described as mounting twenty guns—a lot, I think, for a pirate vessel.  I have therefore deleted as gross exaggeration a short sentence which describes her as mounting forty guns. J S Ayer (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of ship 

message: Excuse me for asking, but is the Queen Anne's Revenge really a Man o war? Because from my research in piratical history, the QAR was a frigate.  75.91.14.251 (talk) 02:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure if it was a frigate by design, but it was in fact, a man o' war. Unlike the portrayals of man o' war in media, a man o' war was simply a ship outfitted for combat, or the flagship of a fleet. There were many pirate man o' war that had not a single cannon and were still able to be a good vessel for pirating expeditions, such as the canoe and piragua. 13BG (talk) 23:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Man o war/Frigate 

message: Regarding this sentence:  "Teach's first mate, Christopher Blackwood (known as Blackbeard's Claw), was feared as a ferocious fighter and led many of Blackbeard's boarding parties."  I have not seen any reference to this in any other sources. Not sure if this is vandalism or just a little known fact, but if the latter it should still at least have a source citation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voidman99 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Mate 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Queen Anne's Revenge. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20150709054722/http://www.islandgazette.net/news-server1/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9534:250000-pieces- to http://www.islandgazette.net/news-server1/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9534:250000-pieces-
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've edited a sentence in (what is currently) the first section of the article, regarding the date and location of the ship's first construction. It had said that these things are "impossible" to determine; such a statement is both semantically problematic, and of a tone which is unencyclopedic and thus improper for Wikipedia. Moreover, the cited source makes no speculation, as to whether this information (about the ship's construction) lies forever beyond our grasp, but merely says that it is "unclear". Therefore, based upon these three reasons, I have changed this sentence, to state (in a manner which reflects the source) that the forementioned facts are "unclear," and not "impossible" to discover. catsmoke (talk) 21:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  From "Impossible" to "Unclear" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Queen Anne's Revenge. 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/20150717033512/http://www.lat3440.com/index.php/qar to http://www.lat3440.com/index.php/qar
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) 20:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This item has some information (all good I am sure) about QAR, but much more about Intersal and their activities. It's all very interesting but not always that relevant. It would be nice (while recognising the work of Intersal) to return the article to being mainly about QAR. What does everyone else think?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plingsby (talk • contribs) 19:09, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balance 

message: The infobox gives the beam as "7.1 m (24.6 ft)". But 7.1 metres is 23.29 feet, or just over 23 feet  inches. Which is correct? Hairy Dude (talk) 01:15, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beam 

message: I've modified a number of facts around the ship's artillery, and one anchor. Please check edits.
Updated artillery counts and artefact weights based on more up to date publications and sources from the official project website. Added a summary of artillery at the bottom. This was partly to deal with a mistranslation/misinterpretation of a 2013 source  which references the contemporary recovery of five 6-pounders, but the quote from Roth is in reference to (at the time) three 1-pounders identified from Ehrendalbruk.
Total cannon count is variable between 29-31 depending on source. All official sources currently cite 30.
Corrected the weight of the ships anchor. Prior source cited 2011 news report, estimating 1.4 tonne weight. Changed to 2017 citation to one from QAR website at 0.9 tonnes. ArchaeoArtillerist (talk) 02:19, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artillery and anchor 

message: I suggest splitting the discussion of ownership, image rights, copyright, legal agreements, and court cases into a separate section (tentatively titled 'Ownership and Legal Controversies') so that this information is no longer intermixed with the "Discovery and excavation" section. I do not think this necessitates any change to the content, just re-categorizing of information. I think this new section should include the paragraphs beginning "Recognizing the significance of..." and "Archaeological recovery ceased on...". I suggest locating the 'Ownership and Legal Controversies' section after "Discovery and excavation," but before "National Register of Historic Places."
ArchaeoArtillerist (talk) 19:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems reasonable to me. Marked as approved to implement the proposed change. SpencerT•C 22:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section - Ownership and Legal Controversies? 

message: To the best of my knowledge, there is no peer-reviewed academic or primary source with knowledge of Queen Anne's Revenge prior to its use as a privateer in 1710. There are suppositions based on the similar name of a Bristol-built frigate Concord, but all archaeological evidence points to a French construction instead. I have corrected the article to reflect the actual state of academic knowledge on the vessel, and would note that a virtually identical correction was made once before (20:08, 7 April 2019). The quality of evidence should be carefully evaluated for any edits made regarding the vessel's origin and construction.
ArchaeoArtillerist (talk) 17:26, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ship's origins