Talk:Santarém, Portugal
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Santarém pertence à província do Ribatejo e não do Alentejo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.137.1.102 (talk) 14:58, August 22, 2007 (UTC)
- That was in the past, but not anymore. Check out the pages of Ribatejo and Alentejo. Fsouza 23:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Subregions of Portugal (Ribatejo and others)
editIn 1998, there was a referendum on regionalization in Portugal (about the creation of new administrative regions) which was rejected in 1998. Neither were any EU statistical regions approved, nor they were recognized by the people who had the word according to the 1998 referendum. Therefore, the NUTS regions (apart from Azores and Madeira which are autonomous regions and apart from Algarve, which matches the Faro District) should not be considered as Portuguese subregions, since they were only created and redrawn for statistical purposes.
I'd suggest that some sort of compromise could be made concerning to some particular regions, specially concerning to Ribatejo, since the NUTS II classification was made only for statistical purposes (and were redrawn, for those purposes, namely not to let some parts of the former NUTS II region of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo (Ribatejo and the North side of Estremadura) to be affected in relation to the allocation EU funds.
Besides that everyone in Portugal calls the territory roughly corresponding to the {Santarém District) as Ribatejo, not Alentejo (apart from Ponte de Sôr, which is in another district and sometimes is considered to be in Ribatejo though most of the times is considered to be in Alentejo. There are plenty of sites that show that Alentejo doesn't include Ribatejo, like the following ones: [1], [2], [3] (published by the Portuguese Government itself), [4], etc. (note: I only indicated maps published after the redrawing of the NUTS II region in 2011).
The other regions are also commonly called by their traditional names, but in a broader sense there are indeed the North, Center, Alentejo (this one not with the borders defined by NUTS II) and Algarve regions, along with the Metropolitan area of Lisbon, which corresponds to the NUTS II region of Lisbon. I don't disagree, at all, that the NUTS II and NUTS III are included in the location of the places, though I'd prefer that the proper context would be provided and the traditional regions would be added to the description (preferably those established in 1936), with an explanation that those regions are not administrative (since their administrative functions were later transfered to the districts), but they're historical and cultural regions, with their designations being broadly used in Portugal (unlike many of the NUTS regions). Thanks a lot the attention of the users who may wish to participate in this discussion. Greetings!
P.S.: Portuguese editors (and particularly from Ribatejo are very welcome to this discussion, since it's an issue that concerns to Portugal and to Ribatejo.Viet-hoian1 (talk) 02:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Santarém, Portugal. 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://archive.is/20140929112522/http://www.dgterritorio.pt/ficheiros/cadastro/caop/caop_download/caop_2014_0/areasfregmundistcaop2014_2 to http://www.dgterritorio.pt/ficheiros/cadastro/caop/caop_download/caop_2014_0/areasfregmundistcaop2014_2
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) 05:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)