Talk:Colégio Culto à Ciência

Untitled

The 1964 educational reform would be controversial, but it cannot at all be reffered as "disastrous"

It may reflect my point of view, because I personally lived it (before and after). But you are right, it was disastrous only in terms of quality, but not in terms of quantity. I will rephrase. --R.Sabbatini 18:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this article notable enough?

I don't see it. There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of highschools everywhere with people just as notable if not more notable than these. Anybody care to explain why this article has a place in the english wiki? PHF 04:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

In you generalize this narrow-minded approach of yours, one-third or more of English Wiki will have to go because there are much more arcane and obscure items of information than that. Censorship like yours has no place in Wiki. There is no such a thing as excess information in an on-line encyclopedia. Excess is good. Richness is good. Lots of links is good. If you write that Alberto Santos-Dumont (a very notable person, BTW, the inventor of the aeroplane) studied at the Colégio Culto à Ciência, the thing cries for a link... Access is on demand, an article, however obscure its information may represent, does not occupy mindspace or make things more difficult to work with. You click on the goddamn link to Colégio Culto à Ciência only if you wish to learn about it, otherwise it doesn't exist for you. Right? --R.Sabbatini 18:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I came off as someone who likes to censor everything. I was really just posing a question, since I was really surprised to see such admittedly excessive information on this subject. I am relatively new to the wiki and I am getting used to it's policies as we speak, so obviously I am wrong and I can't tell what is or isn't notable. I will take your word for it, as I can see you are a very experienced contributor. I guess I should take a deeper look into the articles that get do get deleted for being non-notable to get a better idea. I did not imply the inventor of the aeroplane is not a notable person either, I was merely thinking of people who had just as much impact, or even further impact on history, and don't have their schools mentioned in their articles. I do believe our exchange was fulfilling, since I will be able to contribute a lot more with these standards in mind. Keep it up! PHF 04:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so it's a few months later and I have become more used to the policies of wikipedia. I've previously chosen to take the high road and just forget about everything since you got so emotional and phrased such eloquent pearls as "you click on the goddamn link". However, as I was reviewing my contributions so far to reminisce of my days in Wikipedia, I stumbled upon this discussion again. To argue in my favor, something I wasn't experienced enough to do previously, I must quote something written on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents: "Schools are frequently nominated for deletion, but consensus is frequently not reached. Most of the approximately 270 school articles nominated for deletion in the eight months January to August, 2005, resulted in no consensus, with fewer than 15% actually deleted. " 15% is pretty high if you ask me, if you consider even more have been nominated, so accusing my minimalist approach as narrow minded, not only is it an indirect me to attack me (and I must remind you that Ad hominem is forbidden, as per wikipedia policies) is not true to the reality, since discussing this kind of article may prove very fruitful, and maybe it was your response that wasn't open minded enough. Also, since this concerns your behavior and my stay here, I must remind you of another policy, WP:BITE, as I must say your manners kind of bothered me as a fairly new user back then. Since schools are not guaranteed to be notable, I will change my position back to my previous one, to reconsider the notability following a proposal for deletion, and I expect to hear from someone neutral enough, who has probably not contributed as much as user RSabbatini as to keep the discussion neutral, instead of protecting the article as their pet project. PHF 04:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colégio Culto à Ciência. 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/20061208121742/http://www.francisco.paula.nom.br/Culto/index%20culto.htm to http://www.francisco.paula.nom.br/Culto/index%20culto.htm

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)