Talk:Brazil/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

The Ancient Brazilian History

You shoulden´t forget that people that came from the middle east ("Fenícios" in Portuguese),almost 1000 years before the Portugueses discover Brazil. Their history is very important for our country, but unfortunatelly almost nobody knows it. I also would like to see something about the people that came from Indonesia and Australia, 11.000 years ago.

Talk Page Archive

I have taken the liberty of archiving the previous talk page because it got too large and confusing. Also, there haven’t been active discussions for over three weeks.

Anyone wishing to resume old debates feel free to continue here.

Sparks1979 23:55, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

History section

I feel we should reorganize the History section according to the classic division Brazilian History books use. Therefore, the section should have only three subsections: the Colonial phase, the Empire of Brazil period, and the Republican era.

I believe the current division seems a bit arbitrary. It looks clustered in an excessive number of subsections.

Is anyone against this change? hey wasts up peoples

Sparks1979 00:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Instance of unintelligible wording

"According to Fundação Getulio Vargas, in June 2006 the rate of poverty based into lacework was of 18.57% of the population..." What does "based into lacework" mean? It seems to me that this is a typo or mistranslation. -Larry Siegel

I've changed it into 'labour income', which is what the report says. Cheers for noticing that! English rosy 00:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

question

What two native tribes still live in the forest of Brazil? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.186.172.24 (talk)

Snow in Brazil

eu acho que seria legal colocar fotos da serra gaúcha nevada pois poucas pessoas imaginam que no brasil neva. obrigada por favor coloquem—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.14.107.250 (talk)

I am not an ace in Portugese but I think you suggested adding a picture of Serra Nevada because some people imagine that there is no snow in Brazil, right? -凶 02:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I will try to translate: I think it will be nice to put some photos from the snowy "serra gaúcha" (mountain range from the southern and coolest brazilian state) because few people imagine that do snow in Brazil. Thanks please put it (has a sidenote, this "thanks" denote a feminine writer). 200.255.9.38 18:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Manipulation of this article

The article Brazil is being manipulated by user João Felipe C.S. I think he has no rights to do that.

The user does not accept other users' contribuitions, erasing them with no justifications.

This user has been trying to sell a wrong image of Brazil. He admited in my talk page his obsession with Europe and is trying to show the image in Wikipedia that Brazil is a copy of Europe.

The user posts various pictures of blond Brazilian models of German descent to represent the Brazilian people. When I post pictures of famous Black Brazilians, such as Pelé, he erases them with no justification. Blacks in Brazil largely outnumber Blonds, and everybody knows that. So why does he try to sell a fake image of a surreal Blond Brazil??

User João Felipe C.S also erased facts about how bad the education system in Brazil is. He was trying to sell the image that Brazil has a perfect education.

Also, he seems to hate the fact that Brazil is a tropical country and erased the pictures of world-famous beaches of Rio de Janeiro and posted in its place a picture of a rare scene of snow in a far away location in Southern Brazil.

I do not know what are his intentions, if they are good or bad. But it seems that João Felipe C.S is trying to sell the image that Brazil is a new Germany, full of blonds in a cold developed country. Brazil is not like that.

Finally, he insists to post a table with many problems. The table cites the city of Recife and other towns more than two times. Many towns are not even listed there either. Moreover, there are pictures of cities above this table, making it impossible to read it. I erased this horrible table, but João Felipe C.S insists to post it again, saying that he worked hard for it. We do not care if he worked hard for it. The table is all-wrong and cannot stay there.

João Felipe C.S should be adviced by some administrators that he cannot manipulate the Brazil article this way. Everybody here has the right to make new contributions. He is hindering that.

His contributions are not necessary here. He cannot even speak or write in English. All he is doing is posting unnecessary pictures and erasing other users' contributions.

In the Afro-Brazilian article he is trying to dimish the Black Brazilian population from 45 million to 11 million. This is unacceptable.

I do not know if the racist or something, but we cannot agree with that.

Please, administrators, do something. Opinoso 14:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

• • I accept all contributions of the users (as he can see in the history), but your editions ruin the article.
  • The images are false? They are not Brazilians? I admitted my obsession for the Europe? I don't think this…
  • I erased facts on the education system in Brazil? Where? Show me…
  • Brazil is a tropical country, but nor all, the South region has temperate climate. Where it snows and is cold (Images of May 2007). The place where I live. And I removed the image.
  • I'm not trying to make this. I don't know why you made this scandal, because of 2 small photos of blond Brazilians.
  • I don't understand this. He must be some problem with the configuration of its computer. The table was removed from the Europen Union article.
  • All can, and must make new contributions. Since that they are for improving, does not to modifying official facts and to ruin the article.
  • My contributions are necessary here to defend articles of users as you. As I made in the Lusophone Wikipedia, when you also it tried to modify the article, many had been against you. And you lost.
  • According to 2000 census, had in Brazil 6,2% of Afro-descendants. Why you don't present sources on these 45 millions afro-descendants?
  • I'm not racist and never go to be. I only present sources, while you invent numbers.

Thak you! (And sorry, because my English is bad) :) Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 16:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Why you don't help to add sources and arrange sections, beyond if complaining of the contributions of the users? To improve the article, you does not make nothing. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 16:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about João's supposed obsession with Europe but if something is clear to me is the fact that he and two other users have been editing the article to finally pass GAC and there has been an edit war going on lately that has slowed work down, I recommend you put an end to this now. Though I have to admit I would like to see some photos of Pelé and Ronaldo or Ronaldinho (playing) out there. -凶 16:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

João Felipe C.S, your English is terrible and I did not understand any word you wrote. Sorry.

You should take some English classes before trying to post here.

What have you done for this article? Nothing. I can proudly say that almost 50% of the information in this article I wrote myself.

Nothing that is writen in Brazil's article has been wrotten by you.

If you are trying to put this article in the best article's list, you should improve it with newer and better informations, not posting beautiful pictures of blond models, like Gisele Bündchen.

Wikipedia was made to give information. It is a an encyclopedia.

I will answer you affirmations, though you pathetic English makes it hard to understand.

• My contributions do not ruine the article. A large part of Brazil's article was writeen by me. When I got here, years ago, this article was terrible. I helped to improve it. You got here 3 months ago and is the one who is destroying it with your Blond people obsession.

• The images are not false and they are Brazilians. But blonds represent a tiny minority among Brazilians. If you want to represent the majority of Brazilians, you have to post several pictures of people of Southern European descent, Multiracial and Blacks. They represent 90% of Brazil's population. Not the blond models of German descent.

• Yes, you erased facts about education in Brazil. I won't try to find it, because I am busy and I have no time for it. But another user reverted your vandalism and I saw that.

• Southern Brazil does not have a Temperate climate. You should go back to school and study Geography. Southern Brazil has a sub-tropical climate, which is very diffent. Snowstorms are quite rare in Southern Brazil. What happens there are frosts or snow precipitation. By the way, Brazil is 90% Tropical and the picture that represents the country's weather should be the world-famous beaches of Rio, not an image of snow in a far-away place of Santa Catarina.

• The table you posted is terrible. You did not know how configure it and even though posted it there. The city of Recife is cited twice there. It cannot keep in the article.

• Who is trying to modify facts here is you, posting pictures of Blond Brazilians to represent the country's population and erasing pictures of Black Brazilians and attacking the Afro-Brazilian article with your vandalism. You are Racist, should go to prision.

• There aren't 6% of Afro-descendants in Brazil. People who consider themselves to be of African descent are 45%, which includes those who indentifes themselves as Blacks and those as Multiracial (or Pardo, or Mulatto)

If we go for Genetical reserches, we should put that 86% of Brazil is Afro-descendant, since 146 million Brazilians have more than 10% of their genes coming from Black slaves. [1]

• Your contributions are not necessary here. You cannot even write in English, how can you contribute with something?

Why don't you go take some English classes? They'll keep you away from the computer for some time and, maybe, you will get free from your Blond absession. Opinoso 18:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Take it easy!

I think user João Felipe has made some good contributions regarding the general layout of the article. I’ve also had some disagreements with him, but he always seemed open to conversation when I approached to discuss edits I disliked. Although he is a bit too bold when editing the article, whenever we talked to resolve disputes he normally seemed open to different opinions and generally backed down when convinced mistakes might have been made.

As for some of the points you mention:

1. Images of Brazilians: I complained to João Felipe about this about a week ago. I also felt we shouldn’t have only pictures of white models among the nine images in the demographics section, and he has changed some of them. I think the last version I saw yesterday was ok, because it had 4 pictures of white people, 3 pictures of multi-racial people, 1 picture of an Asian girl and 2 pictures of black individuals. That is consistent with IBGE’s data.

2. I believe we should stick with IBGE’s data in the absence of other reliable sources.

3. I think he erased the entire “Education and Health” section, but after I talked to him, he understood the majority in that moment (Sparks1979, English rosy, Opinoso) wanted the sections in the article and eventually backed down.

4. Your comments regarding the South region climate are correct.

5. The table seems fine to me.

6. According to IBGE, there are about 45% afro-descendents in Brazil. These include 6% black individuals. About 1% represents Asians and indigenous populations. The majority is white.

7. Genetic researches are interesting, but they are very recent and far from being an established set of criteria to base demographic information on. One should be able to tell a person’s race without having to investigate ancestry.

I think you are both trying to improve the article in your own ways. All we have here is a clash of opinions, there’s no vandalism.

Sparks1979 20:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Opinoso, I do not support this edit warring:

You are adding more images to Demographics section. Please limit to 9 images. Also I agree with João Felipe C.S that these images should have same proportion and I like the current revision.

Population table is not so bad. The problems I see here are: it breaks the resolution for 800x600 users and increase the Wikipedia:Article size, but it is looking OK here.

There is no manipulation or vandalism, I liked some images that João added to this article. However some images is not so appropriate to article such as snow in south region. These things can be discussed. Carlosguitar 22:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I’ve already told you I have limitations in English, though I’m making efforts to improve it.

You’ve written 50% of the article? (lol) You are disregarding other users contributions. I can clearly see in the page history that you’ve done almost nothing.

I don’t understand you; if you want to present a faithful image of Brazil, you should present pictures of blondes too, because they also exist in the country. I don’t understand. If there were only pictures of blonde people I could understand you, but there are pictures of blacks, mulatos, Asians and other white people on the side.

This is an encyclopedia and information must be presented from a neutral point of view. Both sides must be shown, the tropical Brazil and Brazil below the tropical line, the Brazil of afro-descendents and of European descendents.

• I don't see your miraculous contributions in the page history.
• The demography section presents all groups of the Brazilian population; I don’t know why you have prejudice towards the blondes.
• Yes, I removed the “Education and Health” section, but if you pay more attention, you will notice everything was resolved through civilized conversation.
• The South Region has annual occurrences of snow, whether the climate is Subtropical or Temperate. Not in distant places. If you look it up, you will find out the town of São Joaquim experienced snowy weather three times last month.
• The table must have suffered distortions because of your computer’s configuration. You will notice no one else complained. The word “Recife” appears twice – once in the table itself, and another in the picture’s footnote.
• Mulatos and pardos can’t be considered black people (this is a joke), because mulatos are descendents of white people, indigenous populations and other groups. Looking at it this way, Brazil has more than 80% of white.
• The genetics argument doesn’t prove anything. Famous Brazilian afro-descendents have European ancestry (such as Daiane dos Santos, 40% European) [2]

Translation by Sparks1979. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Warning: While you are discussing this, I must remind all involved to respect the 3-revert rule. Violation of this rule may result in being blocked. This is so we resolve any issues here, on the talk page, and not on the article. Both of you have been breached this rule, so consider this as a warning. I know Opinoso has just been blocked for that offense on a different page.--Dali-Llama 22:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, having read up on the discussions and studied the reverts, here are my conclusions:

• 1)First of all: both users repeatedly violated the 3-revert rule. That's unacceptable, and I hope Opinoso's block and a warning to Felipe C.S. will suffice in remedying that. Other issues:
• 2) Discussion format: Instead of taking up issue with a particular user, try to structure this in terms of what changes he has made, rather than his edits as a whole. Create headings for each particular change, and address them individually. I think there are legitimate arguments on both side. I'll give an example: Replacing an image of the Amazon with that of snowfall is perfectly legitimate, and should be up for discussion. If most people have a stereotype of Brazil as a purely tropical country and there are in fact more temperate climates, then should we not add a picture of snowfall in Brazil to break the stereotype? On the other hand, would this be characterized as undue weight, breaking policy? Again, these are issues to be discussed, not reverted back and forth.
• 3)Changes: Get out of the bad habit we all have of reverting back and forth. Opinoso, if you have an issue with the formatting of a table (which indeed was formatted incorrectly), instead of reverting and complaining about it, fix it! Format is something to be fixed: content is something to be discussed. Fix the format issue and discuss why you don't agree with it on the talk page. Let others chime in before you unilaterally decide it's bad.
• 4)NPOV: When talking about changes on race and pictures or anything else, don't forget the "counterpoint" to NPOV: Undue weight. If 4% of Brazilians can be classified as "Germanic", then by no means should they account for 25% of the demographic representations. This, however, may not hold true in other sections: If 50% of the population and 10% of the government officials (or however much) are of African descent, that doesn't mean that 50% of the pictures should be of the 10% of officials. So, context and weight are key in NPOV disputes like these.

Last, and certainly not least:

• 5)Assume good faith and no personal attacks: This has gotten way too personal way too fast. Comments like "You should take some English classes before trying to post here.", calling his English "pathetic" and constant sarcasm in personal discussions makes me cringe. Personally, I've been here for nearly 3 years in one shape or another and I'd rather work with a bad editor with a good attitude than a good editor with a bad attitude any day. I don't think Felipe C.S. is a bad editor with intentions to "manipulate" the article and regardless of Felipe's English skills, he has tried to reason amicably and has assumed good faith despite some serious provocation. Opinoso's quip on Felipe's talk page asking if "I gave you permission to do so?" says a lot about the attitude he brings to the table, including general violations of article ownership policies. I think it's incredible that it took less than 12 hours for Opinoso to prove Godwin's Law by sarcastically reminding Felipe that "Hitler died 60 years ago". This type of attitude enrages me beyond belief, and is not conducive to a better Wikipedia.

I echo Carlosguitar's and Sparks' comments on the particulars of the changes. One of Wikipedia's tenets is to be bold, and it's how we respond to bold edits that make for a good progression in article quality. Look, this article has a very clear goal: get it to Good Article status and eventually to Featured Article. There's a clear list of things to be done to get there given to us by Epbr123. Focus on those specific points before you go into any contentious issues which may involve NPOV arguments. I've been involved in a couple of other things this week, but I'll try to help out in achieving that goal.--Dali-Llama 00:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe this discussion is still happening. One can browse the archive and see that these 2 users have been fighting for almost an year, for the same thing. Opinoso: You can have your point of view, but the fact that you wrote a big part of the article DOES NOT make you its owner. All text you write in Wikipedia is becomes automatically property of Wikipedia (not yours), since when you edit an article, above the 'Save page' button, there's a sentence saying: "You agree to license your contributions under the GNU Free Documentation License". So this means ANYBODY can, and WILL modify your contributions, and you should take that easy. If you don't like anybody being able to edit your text, then don't write anything in Wikipedia. Also, Wikipedia is community driven and you MUST NOT MAKE PERSONAL ATTACKS. If you want to make an encyclopedia with your own point of view (and just yours'), then feel free to start your own online encyclopedia. But YOU MUST STOP PERSONAL ATTACKS HERE. Joao: If I were you, I would ignore Opinoso's complains, but avoid to break the three revert rule. Contact Wikipedia's administrators directly to take a further action.

Marcelobulk 23:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)HI, FIRST TIMER HERE! Sorry if I lack identification.

I also endorse the idea to "ease" the discussion. Brazil is a very multicultural culture and the data is correct. We are mostly white until it is proved the opposite. So, I do feel it is important to show all kinds of people don't you think so? Brazil is not only Rio, Sao Paulo or the south. It is really big and with a variety. There are lots of indigenous people too and so on. And, yes, many blonds! We are a bit like Europe. A bit like Africa. A bit like the rest of LatinAmerica. A bit like everything. Even in language differences are so HUGE that I am not able to understand people from the North of the country (I was born in Sao Paulo, but I live in Spanish-speaking countries for more than 15 years, basically I don't speak Portuguese with other people here, only once a year for a few weeks). Whilst watching documentaries coming from the North, I had to read the English translation to understand it. Reason: people ARE different, their ways are so rich. Portuguese is such a beautiful language and IT IS ALIVE, changing all time.

So, please, let's not fight. Everything is allright. We, Brazilians, are used to join, not fight.

Thanks for your time and, MR. OWNER, you can delete this if you think so. No problem...Marcelobulk 23:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Fourth GA review

Marcelobulk 22:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC) The first point about slavery and its relationship with immigrants: http://www.suapesquisa.com/historia/imigracao/ (in Portuguese) It says: "Após a abolição da escravatura (1888), o governo brasileiro incentivou a entrada de imigrantes europeus em nosso território. Com a necessidade de mão-de-obra qualificada, para substituir os escravos, milhares de italianos e alemães chegaram para trabalhar nas fazendas de café do interior de São Paulo, nas indústrias e na zona rural do sul do país." Translates as - "After slavery abolition (1888), Brazilian government incentivated the income of European immigrants to our territory. With the need of a qualified labour force to replace slaves, thousands of Italians and Germans arrived to work in the coffe farms in São Paulo state, factories and the rural zone at the south of the country." HOpe it serves. Marcelo Marcelobulk 22:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I have placed the review on hold. The content of the article is very good but it still has a lack of inline citations. Please provide citations for the following:

• "deep-seated social and economic problems have kept it from realizing its goal of becoming a truly global leader."
• "governments sought to expand Brazil's influence in the world by pursuing a state-led industrial policy and an independent foreign policy."
• "Amerindians, Brazil's indigenous population, came from human groups that migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait around 9000 BC."
• "In the first two centuries of colonization, 100,000 Portuguese arrived in Brazil"
• "In the eighteenth century, 600,000 Portuguese arrived"
• "The original Amerindian population of Brazil (between three and five million)"
• "At first many came from Guinea, although by the end of the eighteenth century many had been taken from Angola and Mozambique (or, in Bahia, from Nigeria)."
• "By the time of the end of the slave trade in 1850, around three to five million slaves had been brought to Brazil – 37% of all slave traffic between Africa and the Americas."
• "These Arab immigrants were -and stFill are- wrongly called "Turks" by many Brazilians"
• "The population of the southern states is mainly of European descent, while the majority of the inhabitants of the north and northeast are of multiracial ancestry"
• "the "language of Camões", who lived in the fifteenth century, sounded closer to modern Brazilian Portuguese, than to the language spoken in Portugal today, and that his work is poetically more perfect when read the Brazilian way"
• "numbers of Pentecostal and Neopentecostal adherents have increased significantly."

Also, these need fixing:

• "In 2000, Cardoso has demanded the disclosure"

Let me know when these are fixed. There may be other things to fix afterwards. Epbr123 19:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

There are too many references cited throughout the article, many of which are unreliable as sources of information (they either don't rely on official statistics, or are not as rigourous as an encyclopedic or academic article should be). Some major cleanup must be performed in those references before this can be considered a "good article" candidate. English rosy 04:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

• Could you state which references are unreliable, please? Epbr123 09:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed some of them already, but it's up to other users to check the reliability of the sources before citing them. English rosy

I would like to suggest this page http://www.fraudes.org/showpage1.asp?pg=175 as reference about corruption in Brazil. This is a well respected site recommended among the others byt UNODC and several other official organizations and reports some useful information and statistics about corruption in Brazil. Review it and if useful please include as a note or reference.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.204.116.116 (talk)

I'm afraid the GA nomination has failed as the on hold time-limit has expired.

These are some further things that need fixing:

• Try to get the article down to about 80kb by removing some of the less important info from some sections.

• Years on there own shouldn't be linked. Full dates and dates with a day and month should be linked, including in the footnotes.
• Common words shouldn't be linked eg. bird and rainfall
• Try to use templates for citations.
• Non-breaking spaces are needed between numbers and units.
• According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style, it is not recommended to specify the size of images, as the size should be what readers have specified in their user preferences. The images in the demographics section may be an exception. Epbr123 23:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

“United States” (149 kb) and “United Kingdom” (121 kb) are both considered “good articles” and they are quite large.

I agree with the other proposals, but for now I’m too busy to contribute effectively.

Sparks1979 16:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Article length isn't part of the “good article” criteria. There has to be a limit to article size for the sake of people with slow computers. Due to "History of Brazil", "Geography of Brazil", "Climate of Brazil" etc. there's no need for the article to be this long. It should be a summary of those sub-articles. Epbr123 16:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Although it’s possible to reduce the article size, you are proposing we remove about 35% of its current contents. That’s not going to be something very easy to carry out. Perhaps it would be interesting if you could actually point out which areas you think have been overdone.

I agree there’s still a lot of work we need to do here, but I disagree about this page being too lengthy. All the information currently summarized in the article seems pretty basic to me. Again, I kindly ask you to point out which sections you think should be made shorter or scrapped altogether. Sparks1979 19:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Using <ref name="X"/> in the Government and politics section will reduce nearly 9000k. I think we have to move current style to sub-section and to use <ref name="X"/>, since this section is using same url. Carlosguitar 07:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I will revert edits of 87.194.40.73 (talk · contribs), because we have to resolve problem of length and unreferenced statement as Epbr123 said, per FA criteria. Adding content now is unhelpful. Carlosguitar 07:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Are large areas of Brazil Spanish speaking?

I am a little confused. According to the Spanish language map large sections of Brazil are Spanish speaking. If this is true you should change the Portuguese map and show the Spanish speaking areas. If it is not then please let the Spanish language page know.

No areas in Brazil are Spanish speaking. The map you mentioned is inaccurate. Sparks1979 14:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

In reality in the areas in the border with other South American countries (Spanish speaking ones) people speak both languages in a mix known as "Portuñol" or "Portunhol".

I was in Tabatinga, in the boundary with Colombia, and they indeed speak and understand fluent Spanish; in my trip from São Paulo to Santiago (Chile - a long one! 3 days by bus, but wonderful landscapes!) same impression: Brazilians in the border spoke Spanish with no problem.

However, I agree that say we speak Spanish in Brazil is a little exagerating. But if you notice the quoted map, the Brazilian areas are CLEAR blue which possibly means it is not completely Spanish.

An example, when they've realised I was Brazilian in Tabatinga, they shifted into Portuguese automatically and they spoke in Portuguese among themselves; one of the signs of a language being spoken is that people speak that language among themselves - and they did not speak Spanish.

Marcelobulk 22:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

You are talking about little towns in the border. That doesn’t mean the entire States of Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina, Acre, Roraima, and a large portion of the States of Amazonas have a significant amount of people that speak Spanish fluently. The map is inaccurate. The only fluent language the people in these States speak is Portuguese; in some rare cases, a random second language. Sparks1979 02:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

brazilian healthcare

Expand brazil healthcare stub signaling the countrys' stride on AIDS/HIV treatment.

Brazil has had universal health care since 1988. The Country has stockpiles of its own generic drugs thus forced phamaceuticals to lower drug costs by as much as 80%.

excellent article on this: http://www.aegis.com/news/upi/2002/UP020511.html

"Federative" vs. "Federal"

I realise that "Federative Republic of Brazil" is the most literal translation of the country's Portuguese name, but wouldn't "Federal Republic of Brazil" make more sense in the context? Soviet Canuckistan 04:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a fair point. However, "Federal" also exists in portuguese, and "federative" also exists in English. If the meaning doesn't differ between the two, then I guess the literal translation is more appropriate. Now, IANAL (I am not a linguist) and my opinion comes from the virtue of speaking both languages at relatively the same level.--Dali-Llama 02:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a difference in English (I'm a native English speaker, no Portuguese); the form 'Federal' is preferred in this context for an article in the English version of Wikipedia. The Federal Republic article provides a number of prominent English examples. -- Rydra Wong 02:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually a native speaker of both, and I'm kinda torn on this issue. It would be perfectly reasonable for someone in Portuguese to say "República Federal do Brasil" rather than "República Federativa do Brasil", but that was not the choice made in Portuguese. The same could be said in English, where Federative Republic of Brazil and Federal Republic of Brazil have the same meaning. Even the Federal Republic article you refer to states:"A close variant is the term federative republic, which appears in the full official title of Brazil.". The CIA translation (found here) uses Federative. I think if Federative is the official translation of a US government agency, then it is reasonable to assume that it's also the correct English translation.--Dali-Llama 03:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

All good points. I don't suppose the Brazilian government has an official translation? Soviet Canuckistan 04:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I just checked. The government uses "Federative." I'm satisfied with that. Soviet Canuckistan 04:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent points and I don't want to run afoul of those guys at the CIA;

"Federative" it is. -- Rydra Wong 04:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Religion of Brazil

I'm curious how Brazil "appears to be a religious nation to outsiders" when the stereotype of Brazilian clothing is one of minimalism and lack of modesty, seemingly in conflict with Catholic values and teachings. Further Rio and several other Brazilian cities are known for their parties and clubs. Moreover, Brazil (I believe) has started offering birth control in schools, again seemingly in conflict with the view that Brazil is a devout nation? Is anyone else in agreement?

To be religious doesn´t mean "to be Islamic".

If we all were as you say, they must had choose the Sambódromo as Wold Wonder, not that giant Christ statue. Wildie 11:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Marcos Pontes the Brazilian hero

At least this article makes this plausible. Is his picture really that necessary? I think that Brazilian progress in space technology would be better illustrated with that picture of Alcantara base, which was a part of this article a few months ago. Greetings 201.58.215.254 14:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

He is no hero and has nothing to do with the Brazilian space technology development. Brazil's government paid millions of dollars for the Russians to put him in the air for a couple of days. He didn't do any significant research whatsoever, returned, quit his military post and now profits giving expensive speeches. What is the difference between him and a space tourist? Of course the picture of Alcantara base was much more significant.Giorgioz 17:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think he was a Brazilian hero, but you're wrong when you say that "he didn't do any significant research whatsoever", Giorgioz. From 8 experiments, almost everyone knows only about the germination of beans (which, along with a chromatography-related experiment, had the purpose of extimulate the scientific spirit in students, so I wouldn't call it useless). Enzyme kinetics, DNA damage and repair, nanotechlogy where some of the others experiments. Even the other seed-germination experiment was relevant, if we want someday try to stay years in space. Wildie 11:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Giorgioz. Though he did relevant research, all of it could be done on Earth. And, as Giorgioz also stated, he sort of "betrayed" the country, using his space experience for his own benefit. I say we should replace his picture. 201.58.217.125 15:23, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is Spanish not mentioned in the article

According to the Spanish language page large sections of Brazil are Spanish speaking. This should be in the article about Brazil. I will add this to the article.

Again? Please, stop disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Wildie 13:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe you will not read this, or just ignore what I say (as you done in other occasion), but I must say where you are wrong:

• The Brazil article DO mention Spanish, in the right place: Spanish is understood to varying degrees by many Brazilians, especially on the borders with Colombia, Peru, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay.
• The Spanish Language article don't SAY that large areas of Brazil speak Spanish. It says almost the same in the quote above.
• The only problem is the MAP you can see in the Spanish Language article, not the text. The image is misleading. Only it must change. It should be discussed there, not here (neither in Portuguese Language, or Brazilian Portuguese, and so on).

I ask it again. Please, stop it. I also think the Spanish language map must be changed, but I cannot suport you vandal actions to promote the change. Wildie 13:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-representative pictures of Brazil-- I ask for administrators' help

Since user João Felipe C.S started to manipulate the Brazil article, it lost all its credibility. The pictures posted by him do not represent Brazil in anything.

I already argued here that he is trying to sell a false idea that Brazil is a copy of Northern Europe, full of blond girls walking in high-tech cities with the best education system in the world, no violence or poverty.

Well, that is not what Brazil looks like. I think not even Sweden or Norway looks like that.

The pictures of this article are so bad that include many undesirable ones and it is even pathetic to see some of them there:

• There is a picture of Brazilian airplanes

Fact: Brazil is now under a aerial crisis. Some weeks ago, an airplane crashed a building in Congonhas's airport, killing 200 people. Brazilian airports are in chaos, with thousand of behing and cancelled flights. It is pathetic to post a picture of airplanes in the Brazil article.

• There are two pictures of president Lula.

Fact: Many Brazilians do not have a good image of Lula, because of the many cases of corruption and scandals in his government. There's no need of two pictures of Lula in the Brazil article, since many Brazilians deslike him. João Felipe C.S seems to love him, that is why he posts so many pictures of the president.

• There is a picture of the Brazilian Crongress.

Fact: Brazil is under a crisis, because of the many curruption cases in the last months. The Congress is under continuous attacks from the media and the Brazilian population. It is a respect lack with the Brazilian population posting the Congress picture there.

• There is a picture of Ministers Guido Mantega and Ellen Gracie.

Fact: Politicians in Brazil are with a bad reputation now, because of all the corruption scandals. There is no need to post pictures of them in the article.

• There are pictures of German and even Ukrainian influence in Brazil.

Fact: Ukrainians are not even 0.3% of Brazil's population. There are no pictures to represent the Amerindians, Africans and Portuguese people in this article, who may represent most of Brazil's racial origin. João Felipe C.S again tries to sell the idea that Brazilians are all descendants of blond immigrants from Europe.

• There is only one poor picture of São Paulo and another worse of Rio de Janeiro.

Fact: Both cities are the largest ones of Brazil and are known all around the world. There needs to have more pictures of both cities.

• There is a picture of the Federal University of Curitiba.

Fact: This University is not even listed between the best ones of Brazil. João Felipe C.S lives in Curitiba and probably studies at that university and is tryting to make a marketing of it in this article.

• There is a dark picture of a Brazilian favela

Fact: Million of Brazilian live in the favelas. João Felipe C.S erased a good picture of a favela and then posted a dark one to nobody be able to see it. João Felipe C.S tries to sell the idea that everybody in Brazil in rich.

CONCLUSION:

I ask administrators if João Felipe C.S can manipulate an article. Everytime another user tries to change something in this article, he revertes the user's contribuitions with no justification. All the pictures in this article are non-sense, some are even pathetic. Brazil does not look like that, everybody who has been to Brazil knows that.

Why not replace all these non-sense pictures with others who are really representatives of Brazil?

Where are the pictures of Rio de Janeiro's carnival, beaches, favelas, mixed-race people, etc? They are the ones who make part of the real Brazil.

Please, you people must do something. Opinoso 22:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Alternatively, you can "do something" yourself... find some pictures that you think are more representative of Brazil and add them. Blueboar 17:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to do that! But João Felipe C.S revertes what I and other users post here. Can he do that? To me, what he does is vandalism, he must be blocked from Wikipedia.

Please, do something about it. Opinoso 01:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

This is not a newspaper. It's an encyclopaedia. Politicians reputation at the moment is no reason for erasing the Congress picture.

Lula IS still very popular though I don't really see why.

Aircrafts "made-in-Brazil" are between the best in the world and they do represent a good part of our exports.

Federal University of Paraná (not Curitiba) definitely ain't one of the best, can't help but agreeing.

And I do think it's you who has a wrong idea of Brazil. I live in Santa Catarina, and German/Ukranian/Italian/Azorean names are an astounding majority. I can't even pronounce most of them! I come from an Italian background and I can't understand the Southern Florianópolis accent, which lies no more than 150 miles from my home.

And of course there are millions of favela-dwellers, but they're not the whole country. Breaking the stereoptype might be a positive thing. Janiovj 01:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Santa Catarina is the SMALLEST State of Brazil, and it does not represent the country. Breaking the stereoptype is not making a fake Brazil is this article.

The thing is that Brazil is a Continent-country and the pictures in this article do not even represent 5% of the country.

The thing here is that João Felipe C.S is manipulating this article. He does not accept other users's contribuitions. He cannot do that. Opinoso 02:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Santa Catarina was just an example. SC, RS, PR and SP (and parts of other states) are doubtlessly states with an overall development quite above the brazilian average. They concentrate industrial production and R&D and its population should be cited. I don't know what happened here before, but I do see you're being unreasonable. Janiovj 02:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I never said they should not be cited. Opinoso 02:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, Santa Catarina is not the smallest state. Janiovj 02:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, Southern States do not concentrate industrial production. Southeastern States do. Opinoso 02:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a little misunderstanding there. I didn't say southern states. SP is right there, and there's no shadow of doubt over that. São Paulo's GDP alone outnumbers that of any South American country. And most of Brazil R&D is conducted in those states cited above, plus some neighbouring states (e.g. RJ, MG). Janiovj 02:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Again?

I will not say nothing, only look at the old discussions:

• April and May, 2007
• June and July, 2007

Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 03:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

---

Aaaaand here we go again folks. Okay. Like the last time, some meta-comments and then some comments.

1)Opinoso, stop whining. You have valid points, but like always, your approach and your demeanor detract from your points. Asking for "Administrator intervention" and saying that João Felipe is "manipulating" the article sound like arguments made by someone who has NO idea how Wikipedia works. João is free to change the encyclopedia as he sees fit, as are you. What happens next is what has already happened for the 3rd time on this very article between you two: You engage in an edit war, until someone backs off (or is blocked) and you take your arguments to the Talk page. That's okay--that's par for the course, as they say. I do, however, think you should've learned by now that's not the preferred route--you can do that before the warring starts. And like I said, when you do come to the talk page, you make personal attacks and try to paint this as a conspiracy to promote a viewpoint. Whether it's true or not doesn't matter--you don't need to do that. You written down out point-by-point what you think is wrong with his edits and that's fantastic. That's the way it should be. But like I said, the personal attacks are over-the-top and detract from your arguments. Again, watch your wording-- "pathetic" again. I'm not concerned if you'd like to make friends in Wikipedia or not--I'm concerned if people take that the wrong way and don't listen to what you have to say because of it.

Now for the matter at hand. I'm comparing João's edit with the latest Opinoso edit. I apologize if I'm commenting on something where a compromise has already been reached. Here we go:

2) Brazilian aircraft picture: I don't know if you mean an Embraer jet picture which I'm not seeing or the Mirage jets--but my argument goes for either. Regardless of the air crisis, the picture has relevancy to the article and the section it's in. You don't omit pictures from the Iraq War in an article about the US just because the war is going badly. If it's the Embraer picture, how on earth does airplane manufacturing have a relation with air operations? Do you know how many Embraer jets are used by Brazilian airlines in Brazil? None. It's irrelevant to the air crisis. Brazil may not have a decent air traffic control system (I would know--I'm a pilot), but they do make successful aircraft. If the picture in question is the Mirage 2000 image, it's under the military/foreign relations heading. Makes a lot of sense to have that picture there. Kinda kills two birds with one stone: French-made fighters recently sold to Brazil, flown by what looks like a Brazilian and a French pilot. Air crisis has no bearing.

3)Lula Pictures: I agree with the argument that two pictures would be excessive. But it's all about context. In the first instance, There's a clear context in talking about the government. In the second picture instance, Lula is shown to demonstrate diversity as well. The context is different and his approval ratings don't matter one single bit on the merits of inclusion.

4)Congress picture: Again what's the context? If it's to illustrate the branch of government in question, then it is appropriate. So, this congress may not be liked, but what about the next one? You're not illustrating the people holding the office, but the office itself.

5)Ellen Gracie & Guido Mantega picture: Context is to illustrate the law aspects of Brazil. While I can think of better pictures to go there (say, court proceedings or something relating to law enforcement), the picture is adequate and in fact shows an interesting scene of the executive branch interacting with the judicial branch. Again, the people holding the office don't matter. I can take a lot of issue with Ellen Northfleet, but it doesn't matter--her picture is appropriate in the context in which it is shown. And besides, it's noteworthy to point out that Brazil has a woman as the head of the judicial branch of government, which is rare even amongst developed nations.

6)German vs. Ukrainian vs. etc.: Looking at the context of immigration, it is in fact, perhaps overkill to have two pictures of different groups, but the group itself shouldn't matter. Immigration is immigration. One can make the case for the greatest group of immigrants should "have" that picture, but I don't think anyone will want a random picture of an old palace in Rio--that doesn't demonstrate diversity. Honestly, if we had a picture of 300 immigrants from Vanuatu that would still have as much merit for inclusion as anyone else. So, pick a picture, stick with it, pick the better looking one, in my opinion, not the one with the greatest population. I'd go for Italian, but that's just because I think they're late immigrants who had a significant impact in the culture and even language of Brazil.

7)São Paulo and Rio pictures: They're in the right context and there's no need for overkill. Besides, there are in fact 5 pictures of locations in and around Rio. No need to add any more.

8)University picture: I think the absolutely perfect picture would be a picture of a typical Brazilian classroom. I think a good picture would be one of USP, which is a larger institution and perhaps more reflective of the wide range of quality in education in Brazil (I don't know UFPR to make a similar judgment). Universidade do Paraná is okay, as it doesn't show necessarily the "cream of the crop" and therefore putting undue weight to the article. In the absence of an alternative, I support that picture. But I'm very open to alternatives.

9)Dark favela picture: While it may be pretty, we're trying to illustrate conditions, so I'd prefer the current lighted picture.

Feel free to reply indented under my own comments.--Dali-Llama 03:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. That's encyclopaedist spirit! Janiovj 04:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. This article is not owned by João Felipe C.S. with his biased writing. 201.58.217.125 15:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Did you really read the entire thread? Are you sure about that?--Dali-Llama 17:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems Dali-Llama is defending Felipe C.S's manipulation of this article. He probably agrees with a creation of a fake Brazil in this article. It is sad to see that many administrators here are not usefull.

Felipe C.S has many fans here, this is really odd. Opinoso 17:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You didn't read what I wrote. I didn't address Felipe's philosophy or ideology. I talked about specific edits, and what I feel is the most appropriate outcome. It's not about whose side I'm on. It's about the specific points you're bringing up. I disagreed with most of them, with the exception of the favela picture (which I reverted myself). The fact that you did not reply to my points, but chose to paint this some "conspiracy" does not help your case. Administrators are not here to judge content disputes--they're here to enforce policy and regulations. If you feel you need additional input, you can ask for a request for comment or take your case through the dispute resolution mechanism.--Dali-Llama 19:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Large areas of Brazil are Spanish speaking!

According to the Spanish language page large areas of Brazil are Spanish speaking. This should be included in the article!.

When you will stop it? At least, answer the comments, don't run and wait to come back doing the same things again and again. wildie·wild dice·will die 10:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Spanish is not an official language in Brazil. It is understood by brazilians though, but the same happens to any other Portuguese-speaking people. However, the other way round is not true (Spanish speakers do not necessarily comprehend Portuguese). Janiovj 3 August 2007