Talk:Braga

This was poorly written

Sorry to the writer, but the English and grammar were very poor. Braga is much more than is included in this and it needs updating badly. Maluka 04:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

• Yes, it is a very bad article, considering the historical importance of the city, that is pretty sad... Why don't you update yourself? --Pedro 19:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I plan to when I can find the time. There are too many mistakes. Maluka 07:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki

I try to investigate the interwiki screwup, but I am sure it is not the bot(s) who are stupid, but some interwiki links is mixed up. --grin ✎ 10:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, the result: es:Braga (Rio Grande do Sul) was referenced from:

• hu
• nl
• ... many other places which I do not have the time to fix :(

I try to convince the nice bot people to make it possible to revert such a mispropagated link, but don't hold your breath. Would be useful to:

• include the correct es link (this would prevent the bots to repropagate the incorrect one),
• fix the incorrect ones by hand (which may mean too many projects, so it's pretty futile without bot help).

I do not have the time to track down who was the first to insert the bad interwiki; it is possible, but very very time consuming. --grin ✎ 10:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Problem with including the correct es: link is that currently es wiki does not have an article about this Portuguese city. See the disambig page. Maybe I'll have to create a stub there to get the interwiki stuff sorted without too much hassle :) --Jonik 18:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Parishes is wrong

"Braga (pron. IPA /'bɾa.ɣɐ/) is a city in northwestern Portugal, in the province of Minho. It is the capital of Braga district and an important city of continental Portugal with a population of 112,089 in 23 parishes (urban area). The municipality has 62 parishes and 163,784 inhabitants (2001 census) Braga is also the center of the Greater Metropolitan Area of Minho with a population of 798,137 one of the fastest growing urban areas in the European Union. Under the Roman Empire, as Bracara Augusta, it was capital of the province Gallaecia."

Parishes are religious divisions. Freguesia's are what should be mentioned. Maybe this will help.

"A freguesia is a subdivision of a concelho (municipality). It is governed by a junta de freguesia.

Each concelho can contain many freguesias, but six contain only one: Alpiarça, Barrancos, Corvo, Porto Santo, São Brás de Alportel and São João da Madeira. The concelho and freguesia, in these six cases, are coterminous and share the same name. Entroncamento had only one freguesia until January 1 2004, but it was then divided into two. Barcelos is the concelho with the most freguesias; it has 89.

According to the Instituto Nacional de Estatística, there are 4,257 freguesias in Portugal."

---Both Parishes and freguesias aren't right for the English version. Counties or Districts would be better. No non-Portuguese speaking person would understand either word. Maluka (talk) 15:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

• Actually, the US state of Louisiana is divided into parishes instead of counties. It doesn't have to mean exclusively a religious division. (ESkog)^(Talk) 19:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Please don't use Babelfish

Some of the words here may be great in Portuguese but they don't translate well to English. This site is for people who don't speak Portuguese and want to learn something about Braga as well as Portugal and as long as the English is bad or doesn't make sense, the whole thing sucks. Maluka 05:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Third city

I think nobody can say Coimbra (or Braga) is the third city alone without hesitation. So it is a much more balanced approach talking about Braga and Coimbra as the third cities in the country outside Lisbon and Porto metropolitan areas. Page Up 17:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Amadora, Almada and Gaia are larger than Coimbra and Braga, I think. (anonymous)

• I corrected the article, Braga is the third city in Portugal, no doubt about that, by anyone who knows and reads about these things. Amadora, Almada and Gaia are not independent cities, but bedroom communities, or urban expansions of Porto and Lisbon. --Pedro 16:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

According to the IGP - Instituto Geográfico Português (Portuguese Geographic Institute), a reputed state-run organisation in demographics, topographics and map making, the city of Braga had 109,460 and the city of Coimbra had 101,069 inhabitants in 2004 [1]. It isn't such a big difference. This excludes thousands of students living in Coimbra or Braga, but as we know that number is larger in Coimbra which has more higher learning institutions and a huge population of students arrived from every corner of Portugal (not to mention those from a number of foreign countries like Brazil and Portuguese speaking African countries). Saying that Braga is the third city of Portugal without mentioning Coimbra isn't an easy and pacific claim - is definitely POV pushing.Page Up 16:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Water power lift

The Saltburn page has it that Braga has the world's oldest water-powered cliff lift. Is this true? JohnYeadon 00:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article about that. See Bom Jesus funicular. Miguelzinho 22:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Socialist Party

The Socialist Party link at the end of the lede (re the city's mayor) incorrectly directs to the now-defunct Portuguese Socialist Party instead of the contemporary party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.129.91.72 (talk) 23:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Oldest city

The article states: "Braga is the oldest Portuguese city and one of the oldest Christian cities in the World." this is probably unreliable and probably not true, Braga wasnt even the city with most inhabitans in ancient times, it was a provincial capital, but indigenous cities could even have more inhabitants. There was until recently prejudice or ignorance about indigenous Castro culture cities, but that changed. As for being the oldest Christian cities, as far as I recall, Christianity had an hard time spreading in Northern Portugal and it was already widespread in other regions of the Ancient World. It needs sources too. --PedroPVZ (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Braga. 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/20140906094624/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/nuts_nomenclature/documents/PT-LAU.xls to http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/nuts_nomenclature/documents/PT-LAU.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120317130402/http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=762 to http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=762
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160821211406/http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=207 to http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=207
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131112034135/http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=1114 to http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=1114
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401044642/http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=770 to http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=770
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203072716/http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=1903 to http://www.monumentos.pt/Site/APP_PagesUser/SIPA.aspx?id=1903
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.cncd.fr/frontoffice/bdd-region.asp?action=getRegion&id=3#tabs3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 05:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Braga. 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/20120504074531/http://www.bragacej2012.com/?lang=en_GB to http://www.bragacej2012.com/?lang=en_GB

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) 13:19, 24 July 2017 (UTC)