Talk:Brazil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet several criteria. Please feel free to leave comments.

This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Brazil, or visit the project page for more details. B This article has been rated as B-Class on its quality.

A Wikipedian removed Brazil from the good article list. There are suggestions below for improving areas to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, renominate the article as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Removal date: September 14, 2006

	This article is part of WikiProject Mercosur, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to the Mercosur on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

Brazil is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Geography article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brazil article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This article is a current candidate for the Article Creation and Improvement Drive. Please see the project page to find this article's entry to support or comment on the nomination.

WikiProject Echo has identified Brazil as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Kannada language Wikipedia.

<

Archives

/Archive 01

Contents 1 Spelling Standard 2 ANDRE 4 ROSIE 3 The Topic is About Brazil, not about the Model of States used in the USA 4 Favela picture 5 O Brasil não conhece o brazil 6 Lithuanians 7 Conflicting Facts about Japanese Population. 8 Article's Introduction - Brazil's Economy 9 Brasil. 10 Delisted GA 11 Unrepresentative picture 12 I give up. 13 Hipocrisy? 14 Bankruptcy 15 November vandalism 16 Picture removed 17 Too beautiful to be true 18 Proclamation of Republic 19 Phonetic Changes 20 Information Out of Place 21 Tendency to whiter answers

[edit] Spelling Standard

I'd like to suggest that we adopted UK spelling in the main article. This standard is used throughout most of the English speaking world, with the lone exception of the US. It is also used by internationl organisations, including the UN.--200.103.134.164 14:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

That's biased. Even if you look at most country articles American spelling is used, your not going to force every single country article that doesn't have english as a language to use UK spellings, are you? And 67.2% of the English speakers in the world are American, and I can't possibly biased because I'm Canadian (well i can be 8-) ). Sum1else 15:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ANDRE 4 ROSIE

Add [[sr:Бразил]] instead of [[sr:?????]]. Thanks.

[edit] The Topic is About Brazil, not about the Model of States used in the USA

Text says: Brazil is organizated as a federation based on the model created in United States of America, although the Brazilian states have much less power than the north-American counterparts.

It should be: Brazil is organizated as a federation. The Brazilian states have its own laws and etc, etc.

It is not good compare a country with other. The text above is a bad comparisson. If it is to compare, why not so, compare the model of states with, The Klingon Empire, or anyother else? No thanks! I am of opinion that these part of the text sould be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.138.44.127 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC).

It is not a just comparison; the creators of the Brazilian Republic wanted to have a federation based [1] on the model of the United States. But you are right, it is quite misplaced. The topic is about the Brazilian States, not about the History of the Brazilian Republic...

Please have the honour of changing it. José San Martin 00:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, I see. This page is semi-protected. (Why? Recent vandalism?) So, I changed what you asked. Please have also the honour of registering yourself, if it's the case. José San Martin 00:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Favela picture

It seems that some users do not agree with the addition of the picture of Rocinha Favela. In my opinion this is a must, as this is an article about Brazil that ought to be exposing the poverty in the country as well, as it is definetly not a land full of Itaim Bibi's and wealthy districts. Readers of this article should see some of our poverty, in order to really know what is really going on in this country. That is just something that we cannot hide, we cannot close our eyes to reality.

I would like to remember that economically, Rocinha may be poor; it's additions to our culture however were always very important. As a Brazilian I am not ashamed of this picture and I really don't think that it depreciate our country. In honour to poor Brazilians, I shall be adding this picture everytime it gets deleted. Cheers, Cheiro de lysoform 01:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't see why the picture of a slum should be deleted. Wikipedia's not a Travel Agency, Its an encyclopedia. Repeat after me: E-N-C-Y-C-L-O-P-E-D-I-A. Rafael "Banzai" 04:08, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Agree with all comments. The picture should stay --Pinnecco 09:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] O Brasil não conhece o brazil

Let us not forget, fellow Brasileiros, that for Brasileiros there's no better culture than the Brasileira. The brazilian culture is garbage, "playas belas", "soccer", "popozudas" is all garbage. The Brasileira culture, with our artists, musicians, dances, the Frevo, the Capoeira, the Candomblé, the Gaúchos, and every other true original Brasileiro aspect is perhaps the only thing that should pride ourselves, filling our lungs so that we can say "Orgulho de ser Brasileiro". Viva a cultura Brasileira meus irmãos. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.164.54.15 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC).

Agreed. Guess that the true vandalism is protecting braZil instead of Brasil. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brasilfreedom (talk • contribs) 14:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC).

If you don't like the English language, what are you doing here in the English Wikipedia? Please, go to http://pt.wikipedia.org/ José San Martin 15:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Because most of brazilians use Wikipedia in English, sir. I do not intend to vandalize Wikipedia as this is very disrespectful to such a large comunity of incredible minds. What I really want is that brazilians like you think about how vandalized is our own culture, and moreover, what can be done in order to promote it.

All brazilians who can read this must have known other cultures better, and many of them prefer other civilization's aspects. I do not blame them, as they were gifted with all the free will necessary in order to choose whatever path they want to follow in their lifes. On the other hand, denying one's own identity is something that cannot be considered healthy, together with the fact that this is one of the many causes of the appaling conditions of our Brasil.

Let us use the English language as a tool to repatriate as many intelectual brazilians as we can, and grow together a better, stronger and culturaly unified country with the help of intelectual Brasilians. You have my invitation to contribute for a Brasilisation of Brazil. Will you join me, contributing to Brasilian articles, contributing for a richer Brasilian Wikipedia, as well as knowing better your own nation and peoples and recognizing how valuable they are, or will you just close your eyes to this sad reality pretending to be something you are not?

If you agree, what are you waiting for? Go show the world how much you enjoy being Brasilian. If you do not, I am really sorry for disrespecting your English, and all I can do is to hope that when you are reborn, it happens in the home of the culture you admire. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.78.16.59 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC).

Oh. José San Martin 00:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Typical. My best wishes to you sir. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.78.16.59 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC).

Okay. José San Martin 01:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Please protect Brazil related articles from ufanism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.181.175.214 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC).

(EconomistBR 21:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC))

The Brazilian page in english is very important, this is how the rest of the world first knows about Brazil, so let's keep this page as accurate as possible

[edit] Lithuanians

There is a factual error: Lithuanians are listed as Slavs which they are NOT. Let's keep the facts straight in order not to undermine Wiki's reliability. - 81.151.193.118 00:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)Martin

Corrected! José San Martin 00:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conflicting Facts about Japanese Population.

Hello, I was doing some research on the Japanese people. In the section "Japanese Living Abroad" on that page, it states "The number of Japanese citizens living abroad is estimated to be over 1 million persons, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. By country, the highest number, were living in the United States, followed by People's Republic of China. The number of person who reside in Brazil was the third largest and that of United Kingdom came fourth." When I came upon this page and looked in the section Demographics, it stated " ...and Japanese-Brazilians are the largest Japanese population outside of Japan (1.5 million)." Which is the true fact? Thanks. --PinkCrayon 21:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It must be checked more accurately, but I think both are correct. Probably anyone with japanese descent is included in this 1.5 million, while only born Japaneses are included in that 1 million. José San Martin 22:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It is important to mentionate the Korean descendants in Brazil. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.26.60.28 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Article's Introduction - Brazil's Economy

Brazil's Article Introduction

In the introduction of the Brazil’s article there is the following phrase: “Brazil is home to both extensive agricultural lands and rain forests. Exploring vast natural resources and a large labor pool, it is South America's leading economic power and a regional leader”

Although it’s true that Brazil has an extensive agricultural lands and rain forests, it may lead the reader to the usual, but fake, view of the country. Brazil does not only have the biggest economy in South America. Considering the entire Latin America, Brazil has the economy almost as the size as Mexico (the 2nd) and Argentina (the 3rd) together. In the world, Brazil has the 9th or 10th economy. Please, see the link below.

It’s not likely that one country has such a big economy based only on natural and agricultural resources. The fact of the matter is that Brazil’s GDP has the following composition: agriculture: 8.4%; industry: 40%; services: 51,6% (according to CIA World Factbook).

GDP Ranking [[2]]

Please, help to clarify this so unknown and image distorted country.

Best regards, Flavio Rocha

Yes I do quite agree with you, the Brasilian economy is based mainly on the country's industries and services. However the main difference between Brasil and other South American countries is the vast land area available for development and plenty of natural resources. I do not really think that, considering the Brasilian population, the country would be so economically successful in Chilean lands, for instance. Therefore, I think that this statement is quite relevant. Let's see what do the others think. Cheers, Cheiro de lysoform 12:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brasil.

Alot of people think that "Brazil" is a spelling mistake. I think that's why people keep trying to change it. Zazaban 01:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that "brazil" really is spelled wrong. I'm pretty sure that Brasil would sound just the same as brazil, but the anglophone countries don't care wether they are snubing our culture and preferences or not, together with a handful of anglophilic brazilians, to whom many times other civilization's cultures worth a lot more than our own. brazil is a romantism and it should be banned, simply because it never existed. Someday, perhaps, when the US dominate the Amazon, there may be such a thing as Brazil. While we still have our country in our hands, we should be doing everything we can in order to prevent cultural dependency which has already started to become a reality. We could be a candidate for 51st state, and this would be a funny and ironic thing because 51 is a very popular number in Brasil.

Our people enjoy Hollywood better than Brasilian cinema. Many youngsters do not know how true samba and Brasilian music sound anymore. Brasilian literature is being replaced by subliterature like Harry Potter and Dan Brown. And, to cap it all, the majority of intelectual people agree that brazil is right and Brasil is wrong, despite of the fact that "o Brasil não conhece o brazil".

The brazilians don't agree with me and think that "ufanism" is ridiculous, but it's a matter of time to see who is right. A country with strong cultural identity cannot be pushed around by anyone. Nevertheless, judging by how things are going, when it comes the time that Brasil represent a peril to the allies (and it sure will, as we have plenty of the fuel of life itself), there will be no need for a war on terror, as people will find it marvelous to be bullied.

Like stated before, my group and I will not be changing brazil to Brasil anymore, that's a promise as we respect the wikicommunity. This is a humble try to make people seize the Brasilian culture a bit more while it still exists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.195.68 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC).

I think you're a crazy nationalist if you're upset by a letter. Zazaban 17:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't see people vandalizing the Germany article because they think think it's insulting to called it germany when they call it "Deutschland". Why is Brazil so special? countries are called different things in different languages, and it will be a long and futile fight if you plan to change that. same goes for Zhonghua, Nippon, Polski and Italia. Zazaban 05:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't you mind when they call us ბრაზილია|? Isn't insulting to be treated as hy:Բրազիլիա?José San Martin 12:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

<---- No problem with Բրազիլիա or w/e. These languages with ideograms may sometimes lack a symbol or leter that correspond to some names, like in Japanese, the don't have the sound "lee" and so on. So if they call us Basil in chinese, it can be justified. Considering the English language though, Deustchland sounds way different from Germany, as well as Nippon or Italia. The point is that Brasil sounds just like brazil, the Z is a unnecessary romantism, and proving that is your own statement that many people don't know wether it is Brasil or brazil.

However, you as foreigner may spell the name brazil the way you want, it will not make much difference, people even think that we are country in Africa called Argentina! I'm already glad enough that you came here and got to know a bit more about our country. Culturally speaking, now you know that Brasil is more correct although it really is written wrong. It's your call anyway.

Our problem, once again, is with brazilians who consider Brasil a sin in English language. It may sound a bit paranoic, but a brazilian who agrees with brazil so much might as well consider our very own culture garbage comparing to others or at least subconciously prefer other identities. The name brazil is the flag of the depredation of our culture and I'm very sad to see that some of my fellow Brasilians will fight for it until the end. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.78.10.89 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC).

I think we should in the very least mention in the main body of the article the spelling controversy.--200.140.231.216 16:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Does any English dictionary approved the s-spelling? Have any newspaper ever endorsed the s-spelling? If not, including a note about this claimed spelling controverse would be a blatant violation of the principle of No original research. José San Martin 19:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

<---- Following Jozé San Martin's request for evidences of spelling controversies, here are a few newspaper articles that contain the s-spelling:

A New York Times article, paragraph 4, line 2

A Forbes article, paragraph 7, line 2

A The China Post article, paragraph 3, line 2

A Turkish Daily News report, paragraph 1, line 6

An Eurosport.com article, paragraph 4, line 2

An Artdaily.com article, paragraph 2, lines 1 and 2

A City Vision (South African news website) article, paragraph 12, line 2

A Motorsport.com (Canadian Automobilistic news website) article, paragraph 2, line 4

An article from the Pan American Health Organization, in the featured photo's caption

An article from the British website about diving Deeper Blue, paragraph 7, line 2

An article from the Northern Irish 4 Film & Video website, paragraph 2, line 1

The mistake is even commited by scientists all around the world, including some who speak English as a mother language, as seen in these articles from several scientific publications:

McIntyre P., Wheaton G., Erlich J., Hansman D.:"Brasilian purpuric fever in central Australia", in The Lancet Journal, 1987

Raffaelli, M., Koller, S.: "Future expectations of Brasilian street youth", in Journal of Adolescence, April 2005

Volland-Tuduri, N., Brossard, M., Bruand, A., Garreau, H.:"Direct analysis of microaggregates shrinkage for drying: Application to microaggregates from a Brasilian clayey Ferralsol", in Comptes Rendus Geosciences, August 2004

Foissner, W.:"Morphology and ontogenesis of Lambornella trichoglossa nov. spec., a new tetrahymenid ciliate (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Brasilian tank bromeliads (Bromeliaceae)", in European Journal of Protistology, 2003

M. F. Benedetti, J. F. Ranvilleb, T. Allardc, A. J. Bednarb, N. Menguyc.: "The iron status in colloidal matter from the Rio Negro, Brasil", in Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, April 2003

A few dictionaries aknowlledged the s-spelling:

This online dictionary states that indeed "Brasil" is a common typo for "brazil"

The online dictionaries dictionary.com and Wordnet have search results for "Brasil"]

The online dictionary thefreedictionary.com has a search result for "Brasil"

Note: everyone is free to check that we never stated that "Brasil" is official and that it is also the correct spelling for our country's name in English. Culturally speaking however, Brasil is indeed the correct form.

As seen in these sources (some from worldwide known newspapers), misspelling brazil with Brasil is bound to happen as Brasil and brazil sound just the same.

To the ones who are thinking that we are trying to change the English language, we'd like to say that this is not our goal as this is absurd. Once more, our objective in having replaced the z for an s was to make brazilian people think about how vandalized is our own culture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.237.178 (talk • contribs) 22:43 - 22:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC).

It's interesting to see this discussion here because I always used Brasil instead of Brazil, intentionally, by the same reasons pointed by this person. Of course, while editing wiki articles, or whenever such unnapropiate writing is unacceptable, I use the Z, even considering it wrong.

I have to say that I quite agree with this anonymous user, despite of so much fuss about a single letter. Wether we like it or not, some things he said are actually true, and like suggested before, are worth at least a discussion about mentioning them in this article. The Brazilian culture indeed was once more valuable to Brazilians. Then, with the modernization of the telecommunications, I consider that we were overexposed to other standards and naturally some people fell in love with them.

I would also like to remember that the talk pages should be used for article-related discussions only, so you guys should consider talking about these issues in some sort of forum. I think that this struggle has already taken too many Kbytes ;).

Hope you guys reach a consensus soon! Cheers, Cheiro de lysoform 00:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see an edit war in the denmark article because people think it's called "danmark". oh, and this is the english wikipedia, if you want to make a point to brazillians I suggest you go to the Portuguese version. and edit an article just to make a point is vandalism. Zazaban 02:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Zazaban, how are you doing? Please say out loud "Denmark" and then "Danmark". Now say "Brazil" and then "Brasil". Please tell us now which pair of names sounded the same.

Another question for you sir, have we ever said that we were innocent? Yes, we did change the S for a Z, according to wikirules, it is indeed a sort of vandalism and we know it. We admit all that we have done here so far. Ok, it was not the best way of making a point, and we are sorry for other users.

I think that you will never understand why we did this because you are from the so called "dominant culture".

Why do you consider this an edit war? Have you seen "Brasil" in the main article in the past weeks? I don't see how that is possible because the article is well protected now. This is a civilized discussion, not a war whatsoever.

Thank you very much for your suggestion, but in Portuguese, Brasil is plain Brasil, there's no way we can make a point there. Moreover, the majority of "brazilians" are english speakers, you see. Making them furious about "Brasil" is making them think about our present conditions.

I shall not discuss this matter with you anymore because I already understood that you chose brazil. We have got no problem with that, that is our own fault as many brazilians agree with that as well. That's why I envy the Iranians, because now they are making themselves known as what they always were, Iranians, and not "arabs". They may have awkward politics and foreign policies, but they sure have the strong cultural identity that we lack.

Best regards to you, and please have a splendid week. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.206.155 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC).

<---- Please note that this article is protected not due to your single edit, but due to a serie of vandalism edits. Please see the page history to understand what I mean.

You proved me that Brasil is indeed a typo for Brazil. Nevertheless, it's still original research. Spelling controversy is a conclusion you took when reading those articles. Reading WP:OR: All articles on Wikipedia should be based on information collected from published primary and secondary sources. This is not "original research"; it is "source-based research", and it is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia.. Thus, even if you are/were right, it's not something that had been published and submitted to discussion in the proper scientific society. Wikipedia is not a proper place for discussing new theories.

Therefore, all this stuff is only valid in the article Alternative political spelling. Please note that the typo "Brasil" is already there.

Anyway, our country is much bigger than a single damned letter. José San Martin 22:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear José San Martin, thank you for your kind answer, and for clarifying such wikirules. We did not know that there existed such an article and indeed places like these are more apropriate for this discussion.

Honestly, do you think that this is worth an article (at least in Portuguese perhaps), about the depreciation of Brasilian culture in contemporary times? In an encyclopedia where there are articles like Tubcat or even The Smurfs and communism, I guess that it would not make much difference anyway. We care about your opinion - even if conflicting with ours - as an experienced and cultured Wikipedia user.

We were very glad to read your last statement. Best regards, Brasilfreedom 01:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Since many people interested in this debate are foreigners and thus don't have in-depth knowledge of Brazilian History, I want to add Brazil used to be officially called "Imperio do Brazil". To check this information, see the 1824 Brazilian Constitution in http://www.presidencia.gov.br/legislacao/constituicao/ where it’s published with the original grammar.

After the Republic was established, the country officially adopted "Republica dos Estados Unidos do Brazil" as its name. Yes, that's right. Brazil with a "Z". It surely gives us a very good explanation to why Brazil is spelt with a "z" in English - it's the way it was originally spelt in Brazilian Portuguese too. Later, of course, "Brasil" was incorporated by grammar reforms and "Brazil" was scrapped, though in other languages (like English) the original spelling was maintained.

Ironically, turns out spelling Brazil with a “z” actually supports the original Brazilian Portuguese roots and therefore in no way diminishes Brazilian culture.

Hopefully that puts an end to this discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sparks1979 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC).

It smells like trolling. And I am Brazilian. BraZilian. Daniel Trielli 02:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

What is it exactly you think smells like trolling? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sparks1979 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC).

I wonder why they did not keep the Z in spanish then. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.224.216 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC).

<---- They didn't keep, they never wrote Brazil. The letter Z has a different value Spanish language. In the European accent, s is pronouced as s, and z is pronouced like th in thin. It would be quite strange pronouce it like Brathil. Moreover, Spanish language preffers to write c instead of z, when the following vowel is e, i. Thus, they had to choose between Bracil (pron. Brathil) and Brasil and they obviously chose the latter. José San Martin 14:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

French Brésil, Italian Brasile, Spanish Brasil, German Brasilien... I think there's plenty of evidence that the original spelling was with an S. However, it is also true that the word was also spelled sometimes with a Z in Portuguese itself for many centuries. Later, it was recognized that the spelling with an S was the etymologically correct one, and that's why it is the one used in modern Portuguese. However, English is not bound by the orthographic conventions of Portuguese. FilipeS 20:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

White flag. Sirs do as you wish, like I said I shall not be editing this again, call it Brazil, Brasil, I do not care. Learned a lesson afterall, ok the letter makes no difference. My point is and always were, respect your own culture, for you were born here. You can not chop your roots off, or else you will get yourself into trouble. I know you like Brazilian stuff and so on, but a lot of people nowadays do not think so and I am pretty sure you know what I am talking about. peace. PS: Vote 50. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.209.141 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC).

Geographical determinism sounds like a really primitive and stupid thing to dictate one's views and lifestyle. It's a shame one can't chop off his roots nowadays, makes you wonder if you are really born free. Anyway, wikipedia is not a soapbox, and adding political campaigning to the end of your comments is ridiculous. This does not bode well for you if you consider being a serious editor and contributor to wikipedia. I sincerely hope you are capable of doing something useful instead of trying to further an agenda. Starghost (talk | contribs) 03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

All this fuss because Brazil should be written with S and not Z? So far in english Brazil is written with Z and this article is from the English wikipedia - So be it. Brasil redirects to Brazil, and the article clearly explains the official name of our country in Portuguese. If you are willing to pick up a fight because of our country's name in other languages, then you guys should be ready for a big headache. Brazil in Mandarin is pronounced Bazhía, and in many eastern European languages (i.e.: Russian) Brazil is called Brasilia (thus conficting with the name of our capital).

If you want to make people more aware of Brazilian culture, instead of being a Troll about silly stuff like Brazil with Z or S, why don't you take the initiative of writing articles about Brazilian Folklore? (Saci Pererê, Boto Rosa, Cuca, Sítio do Pica-pau Amarelo, etc) --Pinnecco 08:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Many languages, English especially, stand out for having orthography which is strongly influenced by tradition and/or etymology. That is even clearer with place names, like Gloucester, for example. In a nutshell, English usually ignores phonetics and the practical use of a word and sticks with the traditional spelling. The ones who aren't familiarized with such concept, see the Great Vowel Shift article, for an example. So I think that sticking to the spelling Brazil is consistent and coherent with the English language tradition of keeping the orthography that was first spread and then officialized. And, in my opinion, this issue of Z representing some kind of dependency is overrated and paranoia. When writing in Polish, for example, should I not write the name of my country as Brazylia fearing that I will be nurturing some kind of Polish imperialism? And I think that there is some ufanism in the way some Brazilians protect our so-called "culture" (most times the examples given are only folklore). I think that Brazilian culture is not just frevo and samba. I think orkut and its deliciously nonsensical smart communities are a much better example of true Brazilian culture. And of that culture I am proud of, if you ask me. Not that only, of course. 201.24.97.43 06:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)Radek Piskorski

[edit] Delisted GA

This article has a few references, but i'm afraid not enough to make an article of this scope count as "well-referenced". The CIA factbook alone probably doesn't cover most of this article, and even if it does, relying on a single broad references to cover most of the article isn't very reliable. Also, nobody seems to of even reviewed this article in the first place, so that looks suspicious as well. Improve the number of references, and then try to re-nominate this article for Good Article status. Homestarmy 14:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unrepresentative picture

However beautiful the southern Brazilian girls on this article, i think they give a very poor representation of the population of Brazil. There are only two pictures of Brazilian population: one of Olodum players and the other one of the girls. Besides the fact that even in the south such blonde people are not predominant, they're dressed with typical European costumes. Those people are immigrants that kept their culture, and are very small minority of the population. That is similar to choosing two pictures from the American population, one representing a Wasp, the other an Amish community. Furthermore, there is also a picture of a German style house. The influence of non-Portuguese Europe is surely present in Brazil, but is not that important. --Ezadarque 22:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Please return with the favela and police incursion pictures as well. This is not a travel guide, this is an article about Brazil, so it should be as genuine as it can be. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.228.96 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] I give up.

It seems that everyone agree with the prestige that the German influence related pictures have in this article, so I think that we should also change the official language to German as well, as it looks as if we were colonized by Germans. What about pictures of Quilombos? Pictures of streets of favelas? Oh, right, they show a third-world country and therefore foreign people will not visit Brazil, and moreover, the people who would be related to these pictures are less Brazilian than those german ladies¿

Reading this article, one may also think, judging by posh office buildings shown, that Brazil is like Dubai. No contrast is being shown, right in the article of a country with perhaps the most serious social inequalty issues in the world.

The emphasis on the pictures of beaches also endorses the jargon of Brazil being a land solely of "Playas belas". Not that they are unnecessary - Brazil has plenty of playas belas - but we should add pictures of universities, Embraer workshops, Alcantara Space Launcher, or anything that could depict how advanced is Brazilian technology instead of filling it up with tropical scenarios.

Reality is harsh, you cannot deny it pretending that here it's all about parties, Olodum and beaches. People may think that I am making a fuss about nothing, but the pictures are what draw most of any user's atention while visiting an article - many reading only the sections with the most interesting illustrations.

But there is no need for worries. I shall not be replacing the current photos again. I also send my congratulations to user João Felipe C.S, for showing the world the real Brazil that I was unaware of. He is so right, that he added all these pictures without any discussion here first, and I guess that plenty of Brazilians agree with him having not protested at all. I give up then, but I am very happy though, because my country is so rich and I did not even know it!

Best regards,

From a Brazilian who seems to know pretty much nothing about his own country. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.220.155 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC).

Dont give up. It seems to me that not everyone thinks those pictures should be there, I know I do not. This article will give the first impression of Brazil to thousands of people, we should really try to make it the most accurate possible. Let's try not to stereotype the population: I think the three pictures, the olodum players, the southern girls, and the indians give an idea of distinct ethnicities that is opposite to the reality of Brazil. Brazil is probably the country with more racial mixture, that is what should be pictured.

As Brazilian culture is concerned, I don't think that we should picture any museums. Brazilian culture is not famous for its museums, but for its music. I put a picture of a Carnival parade, which, in my opinion, would be the most representative, but I think that a capoeira picture is also pretty good. Ipiranga and MAC, however, are not well-known even within Brazil.

Furthermore, I don't think that Blumenau or Curitiba should be pictured. I really don't see the informational value for a foreigner that wants to know about Brazil.

Let's not forget that this article (as almost every article in wikipedia) is probably the most influential piece of information on the country. We should put regional vanities and nationalism aside and try to make a good text.--Ezadarque 01:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Tosh. This is the problem with Brazilians. Anything from the North and the Northeast is proudly exhibited as an icon of Brazil, no matter how non-representative, whereas people from Southern Brazil are never considered "Brazilian" enough. If THAT isn't racism, I don't know what is. What is the problem of including a few pictures from typical places in Southern Brazil? There's Olodum already (quite "African", uh?) and Indians. Now Blumenau is too much "European" for your taste? Well, I'm sorry, but it's in Brazil too. And many places in that forgotten corner of Southern Brazil are just like that, like it or not. Don't try to erase history and simply ignore the importance of Southern Brazil. 201.21.200.15 14:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand my point. I am alson in favor of removing the olodum players, and the indians. That's not how most of our population looks like. I repeat, we are probably the most mixed people in the world, and an article should show what is particular of a country, not what is equal. There would be no point in showing that in Brazil the red light means "stop" in traffic, because that's the same all over the world. Similarly, even though those girls and the Blumenau house are in Brazil, they don't picture anything particularly Brazilian. Capoeira does. Carnival does. The contemporary art museum in Niterói does not. This article is not to show everything that is in Brazil, only the most remarkable about it.

If instead of the girls, a gaucho was pictured, it would be a lot more representative. So the problem is not that those pictures are from the south, only that they add a lot less to the understanding of Brazil than other pictures could.--Ezadarque 20:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not complaining about the German related pictures, and I do not think that they should be removed. I am against the prestige that they have in this article. There is more German culture depicted than African, and that is really unfair since there is more people and things related to Africa than to Germany in Brazil. Moreover, this article is not accurate as it does not show the poverty that exists in this country, which cannot be denied. Anyone who checks our country's streets with his own eyes will see how false is the idea of Brazil that this article conveys. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.197.20 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Hipocrisy?

Wow.. what a beautiful place.. ppl must see the real brazil not only glamourized rocinha. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.79.32.19 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC).

Like stated above, I give up lad, let these people show the world how perfect our country is! Remember that favelas are very third-worldist, and we're so rich that they do not correspond to our reality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.253.56 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC).

why do this? You Know that USA have a crime rate times bigger than brasil? They said it to you? When they admin it, when everyone admit from were came all the guns used there(yes, they are not home made, here we control guns), than you can say it. Try to put the good side out. The bad things should be forgotten —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.164.85.254 (talk • contribs) 13:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC).

"bad things should be forgotten"... is this an encyclopedia or a tourism magazine? Oh well, you are probably just another troll. Sparks1979 15:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah this is ridiculous. This article indeed does not deserve the good article status, as many contributors seem to be alienated! And by the way the US may have bigger crime rates, but criminality is not part of their culture as it is in Brazil. Would you buy a Porsche Cayenne if you had the money? Many Brazilian people would answer negatively as they would be afraid of getting kidnapped while driving it. Americans would, however, not even think twice.

We live in something very close to a civil war, and people like you, who think that "bad things should be forgotten", make great contributions to the maintenance of this status. Try reading more sections of the newspapers other than sports and soap opera gossip, and you will see how perfect is your Brazil! Or even, go out on the beautiful streets of your city, and you'll see no homeless people and absolutely no poverty!

I belive that the truth is that some people seem to live in a paralel Brazil, from another dimension, and accidentaly got lost here, where we have a country so full of issues. 201.58.220.163 02:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bankruptcy

I heard that brazil decalred national bankruptcy long time ago after ww2. I don't know if there is any truth to that but it would be nice to know —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.108.138.142 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC).

several times(2 or three), but honred its payment later. Just need someone to translate what is actually in portuguese under the economics topic —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.164.85.254 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC).

"bankruptcy" is not a proper term for a country. I believe you mean "default"--Ezadarque 15:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] November vandalism

Flag
Why is the flag shown the old republican flag from the 19th century? Makerowner 16:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

People have been destroying this page!

This is vandalism!!!! Please, lock this page for new users and non registered user!

Meyer —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.24.179.28 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC).

Page DESTROYED
Some vandals are destroying the page.
I hope some administrator blocks this page as SOON as possible!!!!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.68.203.246 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC).

Yes you are right, this article is very surreal. Hipocrisy at its best is seen here. Contributors neglect the poverty in this country, supporting the use of pictures that show only the rich Brazil!

Look at the size of the favela picture, and thus the importance of it in this article. The vast majority of Brazilians do not even know the wealthy districts of São Paulo or Ipanema beach, and what they do really know is how their neighbourhoods are lacking infrastructure. Instead of these rare Brazilian landscapes, the favelas, the Sertão, the outrageous criminality or the disgraceful health conditions of Brazilians should be put in evidence.

As long as Brazilians do not acknowledge how poor their country is, as well as how much they can do about this instead of pretending to be in Europe or North America, the Tupiniquim lands will remain in disgrace. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.58.247.26 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC).

There's a lot of vandalism
Brazil article is being attacked by vandals.
I think the article should keep closed to unregistered people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Opinoso (talk • contribs) 19:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Picture removed

Due to regionalism, the picture of South was removed. We shouldn't use this page thinking in a regional way. Brazil is much bigger than the south, and we should try to represent the country as a whole.

--208.24.179.29 18:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too beautiful to be true

Where are the favelas, poverty and other common issues in Brazil? Are you trying to represent the Brazil you want or the real Brazil? I don't agree with this article! --201.27.181.198 10:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Brazil have less favelas or poverty than Mexico, USA and many others countries?Have you been in Brazil?So shup up!Brazil is not Africa or Asia. 89.124.154.99 00:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

False, both the US and Mexico have less porverty than Brazil. However that is not on discussion but the lack of this information in the article. AlexCovarrubias.

I have been in Mexico, belive me, there is 10 times more favelas than there are in Brazil, and I know that 30% of americans are poors isn't?And 80% of the population of the rest os the world live in a country more poor than Brazil (India and China alone have 2,4 bilions), why you don't want show your Bronx (I don't saw pic from Bronx or any american favela here in wikipedia). 87.192.59.201 12:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I've always thought so about this article. I wrote most of the related complaints above. Contributors won't listen though, they still believe that "bad things should be forgotten" and that Brazil is a rich place, while it is definetly very far away from this. I think we would better shup up (sic) and enjoy our wealthy place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.78.18.221 (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

I have been in Mexico, belive me, there is 10 times more favelas than there are in Brazil, and I know that 30% of americans are poors isn't?And 80% of the population of the rest os the world live in a country more poor than Brazil (India and China alone have 2,4 bilions), why you don't want show your Bronx (I don't saw pic from Bronx or any american favela here in wikipedia). 87.192.59.201 12:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proclamation of Republic

From the main page: "In order to avoid a civil war between Army and Navy, Pedro II renounced the throne on 15 November 1889". This is quite different from what Brazilian schoolbooks register, and there are no mentions here or in the "History of Brazil" page about a civil war threat or a voluntary abdication. Can anyone provide a source for this? 201.52.26.10 19:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phonetic Changes

"Portuguese as spoken in Brazil has developed independently of the European mother tongue, and it has undergone fewer phonetic changes than the language spoken in Portugal". Ok, now this definitely needs a quote. ptknight 18:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

A couple of points: first of all, it has nothing to do with “spelling standard”, as we are basically talking about sound change, which, in the case of Portuguese since the 16th century, has only marginally been captured by spelling reforms. Now, the sentence may indeed need a reference (or even a slight touch-up), although I should remind you that this information is pretty much common ground among linguists, so it wouldn’t be a big deal if there were no quotes at all anyway. Unchallenged verities hardly need quotes.Giorgioz 19:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, I changed the topic to "Phonetic Changes".

My point it that you don't hear the same sound in other latins languages as you do in Brazilian Portuguese. In Portuguese, Spanish, French and Italian, the "l" in the end of a word sounds the same, but in Brazilian Portuguese sounds like an "u". "Emanuel" -> "Emanueu". If a word ends with "te", it's replaced by the sound "tchi", "contente" (happy) -> "contentchi" - another thing the other latin languages don't have. And there are a lot more examples. I find it hard to believe that Portuguese diverted from these so called original sounds, when they never existed in the first place in the other latin variations, where Portuguese got the biggest influences from. That's why I requested a quote. "[...] this information is pretty much common ground among linguists [...]", so I guess finding a quote wont be that hard. I myself have never heard or read this.

I did find an interesting book from a Portuguese phonetician, "Exposição da Pronúncia Normal Portuguesa" (Lisboa, 1892), "Exposition of the Normal Portuguese Pronunciation", that states quite the opposite (§§ 58 to 70). He says that the Brazilian pronunciation does not reflect the archaic Portuguese spoken in the XV century, but that there sure are some interesting facts regarding the lexicon, where in Brazil words kept their original meaning.

Anyway, I always thought that the different sounds came from the African languages spoken by the slaves (mainly from Angola, Sierra Leone, Guine, and so on)

FWIW, I'm Portuguese but I actually prefer the Brazilian accent - much more melodic - and I have no problems accepting this statement as long as it is the truth. If it is the truth, then I'm sure a lot of people won't know about this, which makes the reference even more important. Pedro Vaz 11:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Pedro Vaz

[edit] Information Out of Place

I do not think it is not necessary, or encyclopedic to say in the poverty section "Despite being a large country with extensive resources and a huge economy,". I think it is more than enough to say "Brazil currently has more than 22 million people living in state of extreme poverty" Chico 03:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tendency to whiter answers

These IBGE numbers are biased, people in Brazil have a great tendency give answers closer to the white end of the spectrum, for example, black people tend to answer they are mulattos, and mulattos tend to say they are white. I am not saying every person will answer that way, but some do; and the questioner has to write as they say, even if a black person answer they're white. Anyone who knows Brazil knows these number are way of mark, and I think the article should reflect that, I am going to change it again and I hope it is not regarded as vandalism again. Chico 03:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it not the same way in the United States (to an extent)? Just the complete opposite? Even "if" the numbers were biased WP:NOR doesn't allow us to refute their census data. Shakam 03:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

All right I'm going to travel today so I don't have the time to look for the sources, but i know they exist and I'll post back as soon as I find them. Chico 05:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)