Talk:Brazil–Canada relations

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "dfait" :
  • Foreign Affairs Canada [http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/brazil/bilat/index.aspx Canada-Brazil relations]
  • Foreign Affairs Canada "[http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/brazil/bilat/index.aspx Canada-Brazil relations]"
  • dfait
• "focal" :
  • http://www.focal.ca/pdf/canada_brazil.pdf
  • Canadian Foundation for the Americas [http://www.focal.ca/pdf/canada_brazil.pdf "“Getting Over the Jet-Lag” Canada–Brazil Relations 2001"]

DumZiBoT (talk) 14:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg

The image File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Canadianism in Brazil?

Anti-Canadianism in Brazil? I am Brazilian and I can say that never happened. Canada is well regarded in Brazil and it is a "dream of consumption" for several Brazilians who want to move there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.104.50.237 (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brazil–Canada relations. 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/20070403190819/http://www.focal.ca:80/pdf/canada_brazil.pdf to http://www.focal.ca/pdf/canada_brazil.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080218140430/http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca:80/brazil/bilat/index.aspx? to http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/brazil/bilat/index.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070607000356/http://www.mre.gov.br/ingles/index.htm to http://www.mre.gov.br/ingles/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080220103630/http://www.brasembottawa.org:80/ to http://www.brasembottawa.org/

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) 16:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Disputes section

This article formerly had a substantial section on trade disputes. It has been deleted and re-added multiple times (ex. January 2013‎, April 2020). Whether or not people want to admit that trade relations between Canada and Brazil were low in the late 1990s and early 2000s, this information is important to include in the article on a historical basis. I don't think it should be deleted outright just because present-day trade relations are positive and without dispute. GreenVolvox (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)