Talk:Child labor in Brazil
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jwxsib.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Untitled
editI wrote the first edition of this important issue. Hope people come and contribute!Jwxsib (talk) 01:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 19 February 2019
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Move. The reason to move here is WP:RETAIN: as Dohn joe points out, the article text consistently used American English from its creation. I gave no weight to arguments about WP:TIES since Brazil is not an English-speaking country. However, the RETAIN element of WP:ENGVAR is compelling, so the article will be moved to match the text. Cúchullain t/c 14:11, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Child labour in Brazil → Child labor in Brazil – 'labour' --> 'labor' per WP:ENGVAR; South American (except Falkland Islands and former British territories) usually use AmEng. A redirect at the requested title exists. Baffle☿gab 01:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Support move per ENGVAR. ONR (talk) 05:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Support move per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
*Oppose per WP:ENGVAR (specifically MOS:RETAIN and MOS:TIES). Brazil is not an English-speaking nation, so there are no strong national ties suggesting the use a particular variety of English in the article. Since the article was created with Commonwealth English, there's no good reason to change. Dohn joe (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2019 (UTC) Striking per below. Dohn joe (talk) 15:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Oppose per MOS:RETAIN and MOS:CONSISTENCY. The article primarily uses the British spelling apart from the lede which was changed in this edit. Esiymbro (talk) 08:29, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- Support per Dohn joe's argument below. Esiymbro (talk) 08:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Brazil is not an English-speaking nation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- Support. On further review, the article was actually created using American English, and was not changed until this edit earlier this month. For my previous reasoning (MOS:RETAIN and MOS:TIES - and not per the nom's reasoning), the article should remain in AmEng, and the title should reflect that. Dohn joe (talk) 15:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.