User talk:Felipe Menegaz/Archive 12
|
This is an archive of past discussions with Felipe Menegaz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
< Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 > |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - ... (up to 100) |
Contents
- 1 Re: Template:Y/N
- 2 Re:Potential superpowers
- 3 SVG?
- 4 Potential superpowers
- 5 India
- 6 The Brazil Star
- 7 Potential Superpowers
- 8 Re: Unasul
- 9 Página "Brazil"
- 10 City templates
- 11 Template:Largest cities of Australia Australia
- 12 Brazilian Navy
- 13 RE: Brazil
- 14 Brazil como FA
- 15 Response
- 16 WikiProject
- 17 Orphaned non-free media
- 18 Brazilian Portuguese Vs. European Portuguese
- 19 Rio de Janeiro
- 20 Image without license
- 21 Rio 2016 Olympic bid
- 22 America, Brazil
- 23 Proposed deletion of O Sistema
- 24 Speedy deletion of Template:BrazilTasks
- 25 Roman Catholic Church
Re: Template:Y/NHello there. I understand why you don't like them, but this is what it was made for. This is part of the Help:Sorting section of Wikipedia, and a simply "--" doesn't seem to be working for me. A "--" gives the reasoning that there is no information on this topic. Since the Y and N work and give a better understanding for the eye to catch, I installed them. — NuclearVacuum 20:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Re:Potential superpowersObrigado pelo convite, mas eu não tenho base para dar palpite sobre o assunto. O artigo em questão discursa sobre potencialidades. Quem diria que uma ilha com excesso de população e falta de recursos naturais, depois de perder uma guerra e ser ocupada, um dia seria uma super-potência econômica? Mas olhe para o Japão de hoje. O Brasil, ainda numa fase inicial de industrialização, depende da agricultura. Não conseguiu aclimatizar o trigo que importa da Argentina e não controle o clima. O artigo precisa de ser re-escrito com um título menos "guerra fria" e análises mais objetivas. Sempre desconfie quando algo começa com "academics predict..." ou "scientists say...". Abraços, Bill--Wloveral (talk) 22:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
SVG?How do you make a svg map like the ones you did? — NuclearVacuum 21:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Potential superpowersOlá! Obrigado pelo convite para participar na discussão, mas não sei o bastante sobre o assunto para dar qualquer opinião construtiva. Mas para a próxima, estamos às ordens! Goldencako 23:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply IndiaIndia is in the list as an emerging great power until you introduced Brazil and put India to that list. It's incorrect. I don't have objections for you entering Brazil to the list, but dragging India to a list that it did not belong to cannot be agreed. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 05:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Another point I will bring to your notice is that India already is an economic power, similar to Japan and Germany. Also is in the category of Russia which is already considered as a great power in nominal terms. So we can conclude India as a Great economic power. Then why is added below Japan and Germany in overall terms.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 05:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Do you know the reason for the P5 to be considered as Great powers and how this grouping came into existence. It's nuclear weapons. India not inside the NPT is the only reason to keep it inside the P5. Will it make any change in the capability terms compared to the P5.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 05:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply That's the point. We are not adding India as a great power to the list. We are considering her as an emerging Great power. Great power is not about the pinning of the P5 medal on the chest. It's about being recognised as one. Already the world powers recognize this and is acting accordingly. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 05:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply You said, it's a reality, no permeanant seat, no great power. Going by this logic, only India can be a a a great power and become a P5, since it has nuclear weapons. Brazil, Germany, and Japan did not have nuclear weapons and we don't hear anything about them planning to develop one. So how can these nations will ever become a great power. They will not even belong to a potential GP.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 05:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Do you know that India is being welcomed into the nuclear club. Already the P5 has recognised India as a responsible nuclear power. But how can you club India which is in a particular league with other nations. Provide reason.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 02:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply If you consider India to be a potential Global power, I had to remove all other nations in the list, since they are not nuclear powers. They are ineligible to be called a potential power if India is in the list of a potential power. And if India is in the list of emerging great power, we can conclude that the other nations can be potential great power.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 02:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply The Brazil Star
Potential SuperpowersOlá João! Como andam as coisas? Estou trabalhando e estudando muito esse ano, logo tenho tido pouquíssimo tempo para projetos paralelos como a Wikipedia. Venho aqui mais como leitor do que como editor, e mesmo assim tenho acessado o Wikipedia só de vez em quando. Acho que no ano que vem as coisas tenderão a melhorar. Quanto à página "potential superpowers", vi que há intensas polêmicas por lá. Desde 2007 já havia decidido não trabalhar mais em páginas mergulhadas em debates e discussões. Veja tudo que aconteceu na página do Brazil. Ela já poderia ter sido um FA article muito tempo atrás, mas devido a brigas e intolerâncias, o negócio não vai para frente. Tudo isso dá muito trabalho e raramente se alcança uma conclusão produtiva. Como editor, passei a preferir ficar longe de páginas polêmicas. Abraços e boa sorte! Sparks1979 (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply Re: UnasulOlá Felipe
Página "Brazil"Você tem razão. Aquela pronucnia se adequa ao inglês RP, mas acho que valeria por a pronuncia no português do Brasil. Saudações --Aramaicus (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Reply City templatesI apologize for my actions. But I believe we need to fix the infobox so that the images are not in the middle. Is it possible if we fix this little problem? -- NuclearVacuum 19:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Stop adding your own template to all the country articles. No one likes it. Nikkul (talk) 03:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply I've reverted your most recent changes at Template:Largest cities of Australia. Specifiying the "core city" is WP:OR. The city name should be as listed in the citation because those cities do not have defined "core cities". As I've already explained in a previous edit summary, placing the images in the "middle" of the table causes the table to look lopsided when the cities are correctly named. At Australia, I've changed the article so it uses the template rather than an embedded table. If you're going to use an embedded table, what's the point of the template? As several editors have reverted your edits now, you should not make further changes but should discuss proposed changes at Template talk:Largest cities of Australia and/or Talk:Australia. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply Brazilian NavyCan you update the Brazilian Navy article. I cannot do it since there is limited English sources that I can read and then update the article. I hope that you will be able to read many articles about the Brazilian Navy in native language and then get a good idea about the Brazilian Navy, which will help you to update the article. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 03:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
RE: BrazilYes, I will be glad to help, mostly I expect with topics related to the Brazilian Amazon.--Wloveral (talk) 14:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply Unfortunately I won't be able to help due to lack of free time. jggouvea (talk) 23:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply Brazil como FADei uma olhada e parece que não vai passar. O pessoal tá implicando com as referências. Desde a última vez em que trabalhei na página (na época daquela briga das fotos na parte de esportes) parece que andaram mexendo muito nas referências e fizeram vários erros. É uma pena, pois quando fiz a revisão delas vários meses atrás tinha deixado tudo acertado. Bom, de qualquer modo, ainda acho que a página não está "pronta", pois há os problemas de tamanho e estabilidade. Ainda há discussão referente aos "social issues" em pleno andamento, e os revisores já "plotaram" isso. Sparks1979 (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Na verdade a questão do "social issues" está longe de ser solucionada. Ainda há um debate pendente. Muitos editores sérios como o Dali-Llama (talk) concordavam com sua inclusão no artigo. Era uma parte importante. Ainda assim, mesmo aqueles que se posicionam de modo claramente contrário como o Carlosguitar (Yes Executor?) haviam "autorizado" a inserção de um importantíssimo parágrafo na seção "demographics" mencionando superficialmente a desigualdade social, a pobreza e o crime. Não cheguei a verificar quem fez a remoção desse parágrafo, mas acho que foi vc. Sinceramente, isso me deixou um tanto quanto surpreso. Achei que depois de todas as conversas que já tivemos sobre as famigeradas questões sociais vc já havia concordado com a importância de o "lado ruim" ser mostrado na enciclopédia também, mesmo que sucintamente. Em outras palavras, já começamos mal nessa nova "reforma" do artigo. Tenho uma visão diferente acerca do rumo que o artigo deveria tomar. Quase um ano atrás, quando comecei a meter a mão na massa, as pessoas que pensavam como eu eram a maioria. Agora esse pessoal cansou das brigas e desapareceu. O próprio Dali-Llama (talk), que contribuiu com intervenções valiosíssimas, há muito tempo se foi. Nunca gostei do estilo do Opinoso, com quem inclusive já tive meus problemas. Mas com uma coisa que ele sempre dizia tenho de concordar - vcs tendem a querer pintar uma imagem "maravilhosa" do Brasil no artigo, quando na verdade deveriam estar mostrando os dois lados, o bom e o ruim. O Brasil de fato é uma potência regional, conta com uma estrutura produtiva relativamente bem organizada e tem lá seus méritos econômicos; mas e o outro lado? Não vamos nem mencionar a pobreza, as favelas, o crime, o sistema previdenciário quebrado, o corrupção, o sistema judiciário falido, as forças armadas sem grana para pagar a merenda dos soldados... nada? Nem uma única frase? Tudo bem, mas aí prefiro não participar mais, pois já cansei de ficar tentando convencer vcs. Até as tais enciclopédias "profissionais" das quais o Carlosguitar tanto falava trazem à baila quase todos os problemas que mencionei. João, quem lê esse artigo tá aqui para conhecer o Brasil, não uma versão turística do Brasil. Para isso eles pegam os folhetos nas agências. Meu próximo projeto como editor no Wikipedia é criar uma página para a Escola de Administração do Exército, depois uma para o Colégio Rio Branco. Só não fiz nada disso ainda por falta de tempo. Na página do Brasil não pretendo botar mais a mão, pelo menos enquanto a linha de trabalho continuar com o estilo que tem atualmente. Boa sorte cara. Sparks1979 (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Vc está demasiadamente preocupado com o layout da página, em detrimento do conteúdo. Os gringos estavam reclamando da "poor prose", ou seja, da má redação, e da falta de fontes confiáveis. Dessa vez não vi reclamações relacionadas a imagens, ao tamanho ou à apresentação geral da página. Quanto às reclamações referentes à má redação, posso concordar em parte. Muita gente foi fazendo pequenas alterações em locais que já estavam com o texto fechado, provocando quebra de estilo em vários pontos. Outro problema é a falta de precisão de algumas passagens. Também falta uma revisão de um editor com inglês nativo. Enfim, acho que o padrão "floreado" que o texto ganhou também acarretou uma certa antipatia nos revisores da proposta de FA. Já conversamos sobre isso. Já com relação às referências, não sei o que aconteceu. Em meados de 2007 estava tudo bem. Não sei como essa bagunça ocorreu, mas dá para reparar tudo de novo. Sparks1979 (talk) 23:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)Reply ResponseRead this. DS (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Reply WikiProjectHello, as a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Power in international relations we'd like your help in improving the supporting sections of the Potential superpowers. Best wishes! --Hobie Hunter (talk) 01:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply Orphaned non-free mediaThanks for uploading Image:BM&F Bovespa.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply Brazilian Portuguese Vs. European PortugueseOi João, tá rolando uma discussão na página do artigo Brazil, sobre os acréscimos que você fez, baseado num artigo do The Independent. Só quero deixar aqui minha opinião: Eu acho que deve ser mudado. Seguinte, achei totalmente tendencioso aquele artigo do The Independent, foi escrito por gente que não fala a nossa língua, e entoado pela amargura da rixa que eles próprios têm com os Estados Unidos.. Além de ser subjetivo dizer que Portugal está "se curvando ante nós", é principalmente desnecessariamente provocativo, várias pessoas pelo mundo afora podem ler aquele trecho na Wiki, inclusive os portugueses(que já são, em sua maioria, contra as mudanças), o que pode acabar influenciando opiniões, sabe-se lá onde.... Você sabe que estamos tentando fazer esse acordo sair desde 1990? E que o principal culpado por ele não ter saído até hoje é Portugal? Eles podem continuar enrolando indefinidamente, como fizeram nos últimos 20 anos, se quiserem.. por isso eu acho que não é hora de cantarmos de galo, deixa a reforma ser aprovada primeiro, vai beneficiar muito o Brasil política e economicamente se esse negócio finalmente sair... Infinito (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)Reply
Oi, João Felipe C.S. I just reverted part of your recent edit at the Rio de Janeiro article. One was the image of Rio at night (which is a very nice and beautiful picture) but shouldn't be in the info-box since readers won't be able to "discover" Rio. I think you should place this pic somewhere in the article. The other one was about the Brazilian nickname which I sure think should be kept in original language with English translation (as it was). If you'd like to make a change again please give an explanation in your edit-summary so others know how to react. Obregado, --Floridianed (talk) 03:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply Image without licenseThanks for uploading Image:Snapshot20080603015037mf6.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged. As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 21:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)Reply Rio 2016 Olympic bidHi Joao, how are you? :) First, I've been meaning to thank you for all your hard work on the 2016 Olympic bid pages, template, etc. Great work! I wanted to let you know (out of respect for your hard work) that I did some edits on the above mentioned page. That "advertisement" tag had been stuck on there, and to be honest, it was overwritten a bit. I edited it down, but I tried to stay true to your intent. So, please review it and if there is anything that you are devasted is not in there, add it back in. I also added back the logo and outlook sections, primarily to stay consistent with the other Bid City pages so that they go as a "set". If you feel very strongly about it, I will be happy to discuss it with you. Although I am a Chicagoan myself, I am very excited for Rio and I wholeheartedly wish the Cariocas luck! I am also cheering for Brazil in the Olympics--your beach volleyball teams are awesome!! Cheers for now-Cbradshaw (talk) 17:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)Reply Hi. I have a challenge for you. You understand Portuguese right? Could you help translate this article into english? Its been on my to-do list for months. I;ve been hoping to get a few editors to help get it into english. The Bald One White cat 13:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)Reply Proposed deletion of O SistemaA proposed deletion template has been added to the article O Sistema, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. B. Wolterding (talk) 21:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)Reply Speedy deletion of Template:BrazilTasksA tag has been placed on Template:BrazilTasks requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted. If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>). Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Reply Hello, you are receiving this message because you voted in the last FAC for this article. Currently, it is undergoing a peer review and I invite you to come view the page and offer any suggestions for improvement here [1]. Over the past three months, the page has been improved with additional scholarly works, trims, two new sections suggested in and attention to concerns raised during the last FAC. Thanks in advance for your time, attention and help to bring this important article to FA. NancyHeise talk 23:31, 27 September 2008 (UTC)Reply |
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
ERS
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Poverty estimates for 2004-05, Planning commission, Government of India, March 2007. Accessed: August 25, 2007