User talk:Cloretti2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] RE Goldman Sachs
- Thanks for the comments re. Brazil on the Major Powers page. My thinking was that Brazil, at present, is a country of economic potential. Its economic potential, probably the primary concern of Goldman Sachs, is undoubted; however there is more to Major Power status than economic potential. Diplomatically and militarily Brazil is far behind all the other accepted Major Powers. Does Brazil really bear comparison with countries which have permament seats on the UN sceurity council, membership of the G8 etc? My feeling is that the concept of Major Power cannot include Brazil on economic grounds alone. Should Brazil aquire more military clout, or succeed in its objective of getting a permanent security council seat then it may well qualify (All IMHO of course). - - I'd be interested in any thoughts you have, I had looked on the Superpower page but didn't come across a great deal of discussion on Brazil. - - Xdamr 11:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Global city
- - I'm not restoring the table; I've restored the list which was previously compiled and discussed. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC) - - :Please be more discriminatory and collaborative in your edits, and consult the talk pages concerning this article. This topic has been contentious. I am clearly distinguishing between the list of Other global cities and the Table of the cities of the world. I've restored the former, not the latter. Though both table and list were included as a concession to better balance the article, the joy of the list (which took awhile to compile) is that it points to many authoritative data files that Wikipedians do not and need not have to update. Moreover, this was discussed some time ago. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC) - - ::Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC) - - :::Great, and not a problem! Like I said, the topic has been contentious and the article can still stand for improvement. Don't be surprised, though, if another Wikipedian in particular decides to revert the table removal ... I won't. Thanks again! :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] MST
Cloretti,
Até onde eu saiba, o MST é um pouco mais do bando de vândalos descrito naquele parágrafo. O MST até onde eu saiba não é um movimento criminoso e nem é poderoso o suficiente para merecer um destaque especial em "major issues" da seção de economia.
Um incidente ocorrido na Aracruz celuloso, por favor, não é uma "major issue" da economia nacional! José San Martin 03:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
They are communists, aren't they? :) José San Martin 03:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Cloretti, já que não vamos chegar a nenhum acordo, mesmo, só pensa nessa sugestão. Já que você cita o incidente da Aracruz celulose, não seria melhor colocar o parágrafo em current events? Não é nenhuma discussão política isso, é apenas formatação, mesmo. José San Martin 03:27, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
All right, I agree. But don't you really think that "vandal" is a little POV? José San Martin 03:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, I didn't know that MST was a governmental agency... Everyone is robbed in every country in the world there are criminal organizations everywhere. It is the same violation of private proprety. Why Brazil (or MST is special) ? Wow, best regards and good night. José San Martin 03:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC) (uhm, should I tell him that there's a battle Sorbonne today?)
[edit] Novo Wikiproject
Hi, I created a new Wiki project that you may be interested in. It is long overdue. It is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Brazil. Please feel free to participate!--Kungfu Adam (talk) 20:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article Economy of Brazil vs. section Brazil#Economy
Dear Cloretti,
After that incident about MST, I wouldn't dare change the section Brazil#Economy without talking to you first...
But I'm here to talk about something else. The article on Brazil still has to be improved. Few sections have to be enlargened, but others have to be shortened and have its content transfered to the sub-articles. I think that is the case with the section on Economy, that is pretty big, whereas the article on Economy of Brazil is still a little poor.
So, I'll ask you to help me to move some information from the section to the sub-article, while improving both.
Regards,
José San Martin 01:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hello and questions with India and China
Sorry for slow reply. I think I have made it clear nauseatingly often that the underlying problem with this whole nest of articles is that the criteria they are based on are made up. That's OR straight away. Then you have the layer upon layer of OR that constitutes the individual articles. Fancy an AfD? I'm afraid that may be the only way forward. --Guinnog 11:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Wowsuper7lg.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Wowsuper7lg.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 15:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
