Wikipedia

Talk:Póvoa de Varzim

Latest comment: 4 months ago by AirshipJungleman29 in topic GA Reassessment
Learn more about this page
Former good articlePóvoa de Varzim was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 18, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 30, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 12, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
August 16, 2006Good article nomineeListed
August 21, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 17, 2007Peer reviewNot reviewed
July 26, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 19, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
July 5, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

older entries

edit

I'd better explain this so it doens't get reverted again; I removed the link to Villa Euracini as this redircts here. Villa Euracini is a redirect as it contains no information that is not already covered in this article. If it is just the old name of Póvoa de Varzim, it probably doesn't need a separate article. Angela 02:41, Sep 12, 2003 (UTC)

Oop. with the same thought I've made it a redirect here and move all text that wasn't exactly duplicated. The Euracini/Evracini are ambiguous: tribe? Roman settlers? --Wetman 07:34, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • The Euracini were Roman settlers. A villa was a property of a family. -Pedro 19:19, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

City Population and Municipality population

edit

that part of the text is a litle bit confusing.

the city of povoa de varzim doesn't have 63000.

---

well... in fact, most people live in the city, very few out of the urban area, the problem is that the usually given population for the city is is the one for the freguesia (the parish) but noone in Povoa considers the city as just the parish (which is very small). The real number is about 50,000. -Pedro 19:17, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Peer review/what I've done

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
  • I've put comments in the text where I couldn't guess at your meaning.
  • I've generally guessed, so you need to read through and check that I haven't ruined what you were trying to say (e.g. I've tended to use hills for mounts, but sometimes mountains)).
  • I'm only down to the bit about cattle in agriculture so far - I'll do some more next week.
  • I've created an article for Counties of Portucal but it is a translation from the Spanish article so needs checking
  • If the Spanish translation is a direct translation of this one, I'll use that for when I get stuck on your meaning.
  • Citations - please cite the books in the reference section, but not any websites that have referenced the article themselves,since, as you point out, it is bad practice. Yomangani 18:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
  • thx again.
  • The Spanish version is doing some nice research with inline citations, if we later need them, we can get it there :P. --Pedro 20:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've finished copyediting it now - I've tried to stick as closely as possible to your original meaning. There are a couple of comments in there where I couldn't work out what you meant or think of the translation after looking at the ES or PT versions. By the way, the Spanish and Portuguese versions seem to disagree over a lot of figures (population, size of city etc.) Yomangani 12:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
    • I see. It counted one more person and some more land. It is not really a desagreement. I've changed those numbers using the ones from the city hall. BTW, thx a lot. -Pedro 14:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

template

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article uses {{Infobox Municipality portugal}}; and is the only article to do so, {{Infobox Municipality pt}}, on the other hand, is used by every other article about a Portuguese municipality. Can this one be changed over? Andy Mabbett 21:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • that is due to a dispute sometime ago because someone thought he was a designer, I don't like that infobox(used in other articles), it is different from other city templates in wikipedia. -Pedro 17:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Copyedit of lead

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

At the request of SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs), I've made some minor changes to the lead {see changes). If I've misrepresented any of the information, please feel free to revert :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

GA Pass

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review.

However, please provide citations for the following statements:

    • "They still believe that this saint is the "Boatman of Souls" and that he frees the souls of those who drown in the sea, fishing them from the depths of the ocean after a shipwreck. The celebration of Saint Andrew occurs on the dawn of the last day of November, when groups of men and women, wearing black hoods and holding lamps, go to the chapel via the beach."
    • "it is the legislative body of the municipality, consisting of 39 members, twelve of whom are presidents of civil parishes."
    • "The PSD holds the majority of public offices both in the Municipal Assembly and in the civil parishes. After the first free elections, with the end of the Estado Novo period, only right-wing parties have governed the city: the city council was governed by the CDS between 1976 and 1989 and since then by the PSD. The CDS saw its popularity suffer an abrupt decline in 1997, and has since then been the third political party. On the other hand, the PSD in the same year achieved its first absolute majority with 62.4% of the votes."
    • "Between 1939 and 1958, a different coat of Arms and flag were used, which the population criticized; it consisted of a golden shield, covered by a red net, the sea and a black Poveiro boat; the flag was plain red. The population did not accept these new symbols and years later the old ones would be restored."
    • "Colégio do Sagrado Coração de Jesus, where Agustina Bessa-Luís studied, will reopen in the 2007-2008 school year"
    • "Eça de Queirós was a lyceum created in 1904 that maintains its humanist outlook and Rocha Peixoto was a former industrial and commercial school created in 1924."
    • "A little more than one quarter of the population now has intermediate or superior level qualifications. The illiteracy level was reduced between 1991 and 2001 from 7 to 5.9 percent."
    • "The Rocha Peixoto Municipal Library, established in 1880, on the 300th anniversary of the death of Luís de Camões was finally housed in the current building in 1991."
    • "The first healthcare structure, the Santa Casa da Misericórdia da Póvoa de Varzim (Holy House of Mercy), opened in 1756. The hospitals of the city are the São Pedro Pescador Hospital (state-run) and Clipóvoa Hospital (private). The public hospital suffers from lack of bed spaces. Due to this, there is an on-going plan to build a modern hospital, in the border between the cities of Póvoa de Varzim and Vila do Conde"

Also, em dashes should be unspaced, full dates in the footnotes need linking, one image doesn't have a succinct caption and measurements should be formatted as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).

Regards, Epbr123 16:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Póvoa de Varzim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Póvoa de Varzim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Póvoa de Varzim. 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:

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) 08:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 29 external links on Póvoa de Varzim. 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:

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) 20:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Póvoa de Varzim. 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:

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) 16:18, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Póvoa de Varzim. 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:

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) 05:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA concerns

edit
Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

After reviewing this article, I am concerned that it might not meet the good article criteria anymore. I have listed my concerns below:

  • There is a lot of uncited text, including entire sections.
  • At over 11,000 words, this article can certainly be divided and trimmed. Is anyone willing to go through the information and remove what is not necessary?

Is anyone willing to address these concerns? If not, I may nominate it for WP:GAR. Z1720 (talk) 02:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

GA Reassessment

edit
Latest comment: 4 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Póvoa de Varzim

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This article has numerous uncited paragraphs and sections. It is also over 11,000 words, so it is recommended that someone with knowledge on the subject evaluate if anything can be removed or spun out. Z1720 (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Póvoa_de_Varzim&oldid=1232740367"