Talk:Scottish Brazilians

Proposal for deletion

The reason this, and all the other "<nationality> Brazilian" pages, have been prodded is that in these days of easy and widespread travel, being of one ancestry or birth but living in (or having nationality of) another country isn't particularly remarkable, much less notable.

I doubt that there are any (for instance) German British or Czech British pages (at least, I hope those come up as redlinks), despite the notable members of those categories, Gustav Holst and Tom Stoppard respectively. -- 217.171.129.79 (talk) 23:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Your prod was deleted from all of these because you didn't include a deletion reason in the prod. You put the prods back, but once a prod is removed, it can't be put back (per WP:PROD), so I've removed the prods again. You'll need to go through WP:AFD if you want to have these articles deleted. Klausness (talk) 11:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

These articles about ethnic groups in Brazil user Skanter is creating are a complete non-sense. Articles such as Afro-Brazilian, Italian Brazilian or Japanese Brazilians ARE importants, because these are very numerous ethnic groups in Brazil, who really contributed to the ethnic diversity of Brazil.

However, articles like Scottish Brazilian, Belgian Brazilian or Luxembourgian Brazilian are pathetic. These people NEVER immigrated to Brazil in significant numbers to have an article in Wikipedia. I am from Brazil and I really doubt there is any "Scottish Brazilian" living in this country.

By the way, Skanter gave any source to say the number of these ethnic groups members in Brazil. For example, in the article Georgian Brazilian, Skanter put a source claiming there are 18,000 Georgian Brazilians. However, I verified the source and it was a BBC article talking about Georgia, but there was NOWHERE saying there are 18,000 Georgian Brazilians.

Look at the article he used to claim there are 18,000 Georgian in Brazil [1]

This article does not say anything about Brazil....

In the other articles, Skanter also put non-sense sources that did not say about how many people of the article's ethnic group live in Brazil. He put non-sense sources and took the numbers from his own mind.

How about the article Danish Brazilian, where he claimed there are 140,000 Danish people in Brazil? This is ridiculous, because Danish people never immigrated to Brazil in significant numbers. Just find tables about immigration to Brazil, and the Danish are not even listed.

So, I vote for the deletation of these unnecessary articles. I do not like the idea to merge them in the article Immigration to Brazil, because these Danish or Scottish NEVER immigrated to Brazil in significant numbers. There's no reason to cite them in an article about immigration to Brazil.

Portuguese, Italians or Germans are there ones who immigrated in significant numbers to Brazil and deserve an article about them. But these Danish or Scottish never came to Brazil. We must erase these unnecessary articles from wikipedia. Opinoso (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Opinoso, I do agree with you that user Skanter is create pages that are in fact useless. For example, his Austrian Brazilian page, I call for it to be merge to the German Brazilian page since, in Brazil, Austrian did contribute nothing to Brazilian culture and history, and in fact Austrian-Brazilians are viewed as German-Brazilians. I post the merge in the page, but Skanter removes it. This Scottish Brazilian page is quite useless since there contribution to Brazil is little to none. Just delete it. Lehoiberri (talk) 21:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to know why user Klausness removed my deletation request from all these useless articles created by Skanter.

We already explained that these Scottish Brazilian or Belgian Brazilian articles were ridiculous, because these people make up a very small population in Brazil. Opinoso (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

As I explained in the edit summary, I removed the deletion request because once a prod is contested (that is, once someone removes the prod from an article), the article is no longer eligible for the "proposed deletion" process. If you wish to have the articles deleted, you need to nominate them for deletion with the AfD process. This is explained in WP:PROD, under "how it works". Since the articles have previously been proposed for deletion using the {{prod}} process, they are no longer eligible for deletion in this way. The reason that another editor removed the original prod is that it did not include a deletion reason (as explained in WP:PROD, a deletion reason needs to be included as an argument to the prod template, as in {{subst:prod|reason}}). The {{prod}} process is for uncontroversial deletions, which is why any editor can contest a proposed deletion by simply removing the {{prod}} tag, at which point the deletion has to be discussed at WP:AFD. The articles may well be useless, as you say, but they are no longer eligible for an uncontroversial deletion using the {{prod}} process. Klausness (talk) 17:31, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe user Skanter and IP 189.13.180.238 are the same person. Both have been working in these useless Brazilian articles and both have been reverting users who tried to erase or merge the pages.

189.13.180.238 (and probably Skanter) is, probably, the same IP who, in the past, was vandalizing the articles about demography of Brazil. He used to erase pictures of Black Brazilians in the articles, and posted pictures of White people in their places.

Notice that all these useless Brazilian articles are about European ethnic groups, no African or Native Indian. He is probably that racist IP who was vandalizing the articles of Brazil.

If both are the same persons, is it vandalism? Opinoso (talk) 14:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, Skanter is not me and does not appear to be the person who originally removed your prod, so none of this is really relevant to the proposed deletion. As it is, your prod has been legitimately contested, so any deletion has to go through WP:AFD. Sorry, but no amount of discussion will change that. I've seen much more useless articles have to go to AfD because of a contested prod. By the way, it looks like someone else has already done an AfD for one of these articles (Cubans of Brazil). Feel free to do the same for any others that you think should be deleted. Klausness (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

By the way, can somebody report Skanter as a vandal? Because he is reverting the "merge" claim in all his useless articles. Moreover, he never came to discussion to explain why his useless articles should stay at wikipedia. He only revertes. Opinoso (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I never said Skanter is you. However, I still desagree with you removal of my deletation proposes. It was an IP user who erased them after I posted. Maybe that IP was Skanter. So, an unknown IP change should not be counted. Opinoso (talk) 10:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the edit histories, you'll see that the prod was not removed by an IP address user. For example, the only IP address edits on this article were done by 217.171.129.79 , who incorrectly put back the prod after it was first deleted. I then removed the prod again, because once a prod is removed, it should never be put back. Klausness (talk) 12:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't delete this article!!!

It can be expanded, there is plenty of evidence of Scots settling in Brazil in specific numbers, the Scots in Brazil are credited with bringing associated football (Jock Hamilton) to the Brazilians (visit the Hampden museum for a excellent exibition).

http://www.billykay.co.uk/Pages/TheScottishWorld.asp - This has a chapter dedicated to the Scots in South America. http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/interesting-documentary/archie-mclean.html

Scots settled in Brazil as textile workers and labourers, while British and Irish mainly settled in Argentina for agriculture the Scots mainly chose to settle in Brazil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elitejcx (talk • contribs) 20:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I AGREE. Opinoso, I have been by your side before but I think you should be a little less "oppinionated". I am a scottish Brazilian and quite proud of being one, and I think this article can be greatly expanded. However I can't do all on my own, but I do have a lot of information about the Mac Dowell family in Brazil and how it greatly expanded within the country. I have books, brochures and other sorts of information which I will be happy to share (by email, cloud, etc) as I can't do all by myself, and neither would I like to because the article would be very biased if I did. --Pinnecco (talk) 15:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I have found this list of Scottish, Irish and Welsh immigrants to South America. If you compare the list you can see there is very little or if any Irish and Welsh enquiries from Brazil however if look at the Scottish page you see that it is more frequent from Brazil. [2][3] [4]

There was a documentary on BBC several years ago about the arrival of Football in Brazil, it mentioned that Scottish textile workers were the biggest group on immigrants from the UK and Ireland to Brazil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.249.186 (talk) 14:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

When I have the chance I will scan and a 1940s booklet I have about the Order of Saint Lazarus of Jerusalem in Brazil, which a Mac Dowell was the Grand Master of the order. --Pinnecco (talk) 00:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Macleans in Rio! Related to the Late James Maclean 203.7.64.105 (talk) 11:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)