Talk:Brazil/Archive 06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Contents 1 Pronunciation of "Brazil" 2 Amor, Ordem e Progresso? 3 Per capita GDP of Brazilian states. 4 Archive 5 Text changes (again) 6 Image changes (again) 6.1 "Environment" subsection 6.2 "Social issues" subsection 6.3 "Sports" subsection 6.4 Template for Brazilian states 7 João Felipe C.S, give it up! 8 Leader box in country's profile 9 Brazil is already the 6th largest economy 10 destroys areas the size of a small country each year 11 Minor edits 12 Luiz InÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ... 13 Introduction 14 Crime and Social issues 15 Changes to the article 15.1 Third opinion 16 Latin America 17 Population alongside the coast 18 Bloated again! 19 Poverty and unequality reference 20 Water 21 FAC anyone? 22 Removing The World Factbook: Brazil from Further reading

Pronunciation of "Brazil"

The right pronunciation for Brazil was presented as /brəˈzɪl/. It is correct, but it's the portuguese pronunciation. It'd be good to add the Brazilian Portuguese pronunciation: /bra'ziw/. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.82.8.230 (talk) 19:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Amor, Ordem e Progresso?

According to the entry on Auguste Comte

The motto Ordem e Progresso ("Order and Progress") in the flag of Brazil is inspired by Auguste Comte's motto of positivism: L'amour pour principe et l'ordre pour base; le progrès pour but ("Love as a principle and order as the basis; Progress as the goal"). It was inserted due to the fact that several of the people involved in the military coup d'état that deposed the monarchy and proclaimed Brazil a republic were followers of the ideas of Comte.

There seems to be no doubt about that point. I've heard and read (but have been unable to verify) that Amor was part of the original motto, and that love has (sadly:) been removed at some point of time. The Portuguese WP makes no such statement; could anyone elaborate? Maybe the question should be asked at the Reference Desk? Asav (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Per capita GDP of Brazilian states.

Perhaps someone would include the following map link from "The Economist" magazine's Brazil Survey in April 2007. It highlights the great regional disparities of this continent-sized country. http://www.economist.com/images/20070414/CSU926.gif

Vivaldi4Stagioni 23:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

See List of Brazilian states by GDP per capita. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 23:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Felipe, The difference between the Economist map and the one you refer to is that the former shows the figures according to Purchasing-Power Parity (PPP), a much better way of demonstrating the actual standard of living.

Vivaldi4Stagioni 00:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to talk about this later. It's a valid point, but let's take care of one problem at a time. Sparks1979 21:13, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Archive

The talk page has been quiet for over a week and the past discussions were taking a lot of space, so I just sent them to "archive 5". If anyone one wants to debate the same topics again, please restart here. Sparks1979 17:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Brazilwood (pau brasil) grows mostly along the Atlantic coast and not along the Amazon. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilwood —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.168.127.10 (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Text changes (again)

Brazil-American Relations & Industrialization

Hello, I am a student at University of Toronto and one of my assignments was to make an article for Wikipedia. I chose Brazil-American relations and industrialization on which I wrote about. After writing the article however, I don’t think I posted it properly in congruence with the rest of the section in which I posted my article in: Brazilian Military and Foreign Relations. If anyone can please give me some feedback on the article itself or on the manner in which I can better fit my content, that would be great. Thanks.--HoriaG (talk) 11:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The article need of some alterations for a possible Featured Article Nominee. These changes are mainly concentrated in the "Administrative divisions" and "Geography" sections.

• "Etymology"

In my opinion, this section is too short. Something needs to be changed. We eliminate it or expand it.

• "Administrative divisions"

This section can be expanded. The section could be divided in two sub-sections: "Regions" and "States". However, regions aren't administrative divisions, them are geographic divisions promoted by the IBGE for statistical ends, as the similarity of the States.

The current text was written of "geographic" form and occults the history of the political division of Brazil, the territorial levels (captainships, provinces, territories, states, cities, neutral cities, districts), the annexation and loss of territorial areas. The different divisions in the Colonial, Imperial and Republican periods, need to be shown.

An introduction showing the general history of the Brazilian territorial politics, and the "Regions" and "States" sub-sections detailing its subjects, would make an excellent section.

• "Geography"

In my opnion, this section can be expanded. The content is very reduced and the introduction is minimum, the section needs alterations urgently.

The "Climate" sub-section can be summarized. Average temperatures of the cities aren't so important how much the climatic differences of Brazil. The text could give more emphasis to the diversity, like the wet climate of the Amazonian Forest, the Northeast dry climate, the cold climate of the South… Citations of the registered records temperatures already would be excellent. This would better demonstrate the climate of Brazil.

• "Culture"

The "Sports" subsection can be summarized.

Regards; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Image changes (again)

"Environment" subsection

Option 1	Option 2
The Toco Toucan is a typical animal of the Brazilian rain forests.	Onça is a typical animal of the Brazilian rain forests.

Option 1

• Support - The onça's distribution goes all the way up to Mexico--it's not an animal exclusive or present mostly in Brazil. The Toucan can, at least claim to be present mostly in Brazil.----Dali-Llama 21:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
• SupportOpinoso 00:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Option 2

• Support - Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

"Social issues" subsection

Option 1	Option 2
Located between some of the richest areas of Rio de Janeiro, the Vidigal favela' is testimony to high economic inequality within Brazil.	Located between some of the richest areas of Rio de Janeiro, the Rocinha favela' is testimony to high economic inequality within Brazil.

Option 1

Option 2

• Support - Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
• Support--Dali-Llama 21:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

"Sports" subsection

Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
Maracanã Stadium at the 2007 Pan American Games.	The Brazilian athletes at the 2007 Pan American Games.	The Maracanã Stadium at the Brazilian Championship.

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

• Support - Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand this last sports vote--are you proposing to replace both with only one?--Dali-Llama 21:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 22:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Jesus Christ...Why are you posting the same stuff? The Sports session has already been voted, the pictures have already been choosen.

This article only has pictures of constructions and politicians. What is this obssession with posting pictures of buildings and other constructions?

Give it up. Opinoso 00:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Leave the sports section as is for now. Let's let things settle.--Dali-Llama 02:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I propose a text change in this: "They have been victorious in the World Cup tournament a record five times, in 1958, 1962, 1970, 1994 and 2002." To "Brazilians have been victorious in the World Cup tournament a record five times, in 1958, 1962, 1970, 1994 and 2002." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tchico (talk • contribs) 00:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Template for Brazilian states

I created a template for use with all brazilian states. I followed the model used by Template:Infobox Country. Some pages, like States of USA, Provinces and territories of Canada, States and territories of Australia, States of Malaysia and all Regional blocs already use this model. So, I think that will be good if Brazil use to standardize. If the template is missing some information, there is no problem in add.
But, Felipe C.S prefers use the model adopt by Portuguese Wikipedia. In his opinion, the appearence is better. — Guilherme ^(t/c) 17:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Some pages, like States and territories of India, States of Germany, Provinces of Argentina, Regions of Italy and France already don't use this model... Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 15:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Option 1: Template:Infobox Brazilian State

Option 2: Template talk:Infobox Brazilian State

São Paulo Motto Pro Brasilia Fiant Eximia (Latin) "For Brazil Great Things Are Done" Anthem Bandeirantes Anthem Capital (and largest city) São Paulo 3°52′N, 11°31′E Demonym Paulista Government  -  Governor José Serra  -  Vice Governor Alberto Goldman Area  -  Total 248.209,426 km² (12th) Population  -  2006 estimate 41.055.734 (1st)  -  2005 census 40,442,795   -  Density 162.93/km² (3th) GDP 2004 estimate  -  Total R$ 546,607,616 (1st)  -  Per capita R$ 13.725 (3th) HDI (2000) 0.820 (high) (3th) Abbreviation BR-SP Time zone BRT (UTC-3)  -  Summer (DST) BRST (UTC-2)

State of Santa Catarina (Flag) (Coat of arms) Anthem: Hino de Santa Catarina Demonym: Catarinense  - Country  Brazil  - Region South  - Neighboring states PR and RS Capital Florianópolis 27°35′S, 48°32′W Government  - Governor Luiz Henrique (PMDB)  - Vice-governor Leonel Pavan (PSDB) Area    - Total 95,346,181 km² (20th) Population    - 2005 estimate 5,866,568 (11th)  - Density 61,53/km² (9th) GDP 2004  - Total R$70,208 billion (7th)  - Per capita R$12,159 (5th) HDI (2000) 0,822 (2nd) – high  - Life expectancy 74,8 years (2nd)  - Infant mortality 15,2‰ (2nd)  - Literacy 95,2% (3th) Time zone BRT (UTC-3)  - Summer (DST) BRST (UTC-2) Climate Subtropical Cfa/Cfb Abbreviation BR-SC Website www.sc.gov.br

Option 1

• Support — Guilherme ^(t/c) 16:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Option 2

• Support - Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

João Felipe C.S, give it up!

Can't you see NOBODY wants to discuss with you here? Nobody here in interested in your horrible changes in Wikipedia.

Let the article the way it is. You had enough fun here, kid. The article is all done but, as you have nothing else to do here, you spend hours trying to find something to change.

What is your problem, child? Why can't you accept Brazil the way it is? Why do you keep erasing the picture of Ipanema beach in the article Rio de Janeiro and posting a dark image to hide the beach?

What do you have against Brazilian beaches, Black Brazilians, poor people and Brazil's carnival?

Why do you insist in creating a fake Brazil: blond supermodels, cold weather, high-tech cities, rich people??

Why do you try to paint Brazil as a copy of Europe?

I wonder, have you ever been out of your house? You need to travel more, kid. Ask your father to leave you go a little around. Because everybody here is laughing at you and at your non-sense.

All I have to say to you, João Felipe C.S: learn some English and...GIVE IT UP. Opinoso 22:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Instead of criticizing and berating other editors, how about participating in the discussion in a constructive manner? I'd honestly recommend Felipe not to reply to this thread.--Dali-Llama 01:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Stop hating so much! D4RK-L3G10N (talk) 18:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Leader box in country's profile

I added three more, as I saw a number of countries with a more complete list too, like Nigeria and USA. User Green Giant thought it made it confusing, but he agreed with me in the end. Then Opinoso undid it, giving no reason at all, so I undid his undo (!). I can see that he already did some other mistakes here in his mindless correcting berserk, hehe. Untouchable777, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I personally think it's fine to add these titles. If you have two people reverting one editor, it's fine, but always use edit summaries.--Dali-Llama (talk) 18:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Brazil is already the 6th largest economy

According to World Bank's International Comparison Program (ICP 2007), Brazil has already the 6th largest economy (PPP). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trabalhosgv (talk • contribs) 00:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe it's actually 10th if you consider the decimals.--Dali-Llama (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

destroys areas the size of a small country each year

destroys areas the size of a small country each year

What is a "small country"? Can somebody improve this? --Taraborn (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I heard on TV it was 21,000 sq km of deforestated areas in 2005 or 2006, and it dropped to 14,000 sq km in the following year, 2006 or 2007 sorry I do not remember the right years. Anyway you have an average of 17,5 sq km of deforestation per year. 21,000 sq km is about the size of El Salvador. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.8.59.57 (talk) 00:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Minor edits

I changed some sentences in order to avoid ludicrous POV and the unencyclopedic "that wasn't our fault" and "Portuguese - bad; Brazilian - good (excelent)" feel which characterize this article and other related articles. Pularoid (talk) 16:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Luiz InÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ...

is it just on my side or the links for articles with characters like "á" in the name are producing bogus links when clicked? (with what seems to be a random number of characters repeated, usually an upper-case version of the non-english character, but I thikn I've seen different a couple of times)--TiagoTiago (talk) 06:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Introduction

It's too huge an introduction. Check Argentina or Guyana for instance. Janiovj (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed.

Lead section

The article should start with a good introduction, giving name of the country, location in the world, bordering countries, seas and the like. Also give other names by which the country may still be known (for example Holland, Persia). Also, add a few facts about the country, the things that it is known for (for example the mentioning of windmills in the Netherlands article).

If the etymology of a country's name is too long to explain in the lead section, split it out into a separate section (titled "Name" or similar). Naming disputes can also be handled in separate sections.

See also: Wikipedia:Lead section —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhsb (talk • contribs)

Stop changing the article without asking people's opinion.

You used Brazil's stereotypes such as "carnival, beaches". I am from Brazil and where I live there are no beaches or carnival.

Stop trying to give stereotypes to a country. By the way, why did you erase the part about social issues? Are you trying to hide Brazil is a violent country with millions of poor people?

Stop this or I will ask some administrator to block you from wikipedia. Opinoso (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Opinoso, please no threats on Wikipedia. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 07:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Yet it is still huge! Quit changing the subject, people. Janiovj (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't help but notice the lack of reference for the statement The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality. Well, there are several studies linking both factors, and it's fairly logical that a mid-income country with such a big amount of poverty must have big economic inequality as well. But enough talking; the most influential and respected studies on the subject are made by Ipea (Economic Applied Research Institute), which published "Desigualdade de Renda no Brasil: uma análise da queda recente" in 2 volumes. On the first volume, the 10th chapter discusses the importance of the recent drop on inequality rate (gini) to poverty. The title: A Importância da Queda Recente da Desigualdade para a Pobreza Authors: Ricardo Paes de Barros, Mirela de Carvalho, Samuel Franco, Rosane Mendonça The link: http://www.ipea.gov.br/sites/000/2/livros/desigualdaderendanobrasil/Cap_10_AImportanciaDaQuedaRecente.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco.natalino (talk • contribs) 16:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

While I haven'read the whole document you're referring to, the income growth of the poorest 20% population segment seems impressive indeed (almost in par with China), and it seems the richest 10% are stagnating. (Graph 3b): However, if I read table 2 (Indicadores de pobreza e extrema pobreza para o Brasil) correctly, the poor segment constitutes roughly one third of the population, and the extremely poor (extremamente pobres) make out 13% (2005 figures). In short, I believe this study confirms the economic inequality cited, and may well be used as a reference. Any objections? Asav (talk) 08:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Crime and Social issues

Hi. I recently removed a section on Social Issues, but if someone here is against this change, let's open a discussion here. It's widely understood that virtually every country in Latin America have the same issues with crime and social issues one of the main subjects. Nevertheless, only Brazil and Colombia articles contemplate those section on their pages. I struggled to insert a section about crime in Mexico, but it seems that the editors there are more patriotic than the editors of this article...--Mhsb (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb, disrupting other articles to make a point is point-blank unacceptable. Your accusations about "patriotism" driving editors to "struggle" against you is uncalled for. I kindly ask you to stop this attitude. As we have already told you in Talk:Mexico, we do not, I will make it clear DO NOT oppose a section on crime. We oppose the tendentious way in which you with to present the information. Please do not produce edit-wars in other articles just because you want to make a point. --the Dúnadan 00:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Dúnadan]]

Are you going to contribute to this article? If not, I kindly ask you not to disrupt if you are not contributing to the article. What I proposed here is to summarise the introduction, it's simple too big. I am also proposing in removing the section about crime. If someone thinks that this is unreasonable, please feel free to revert my changes, but please, have a discussion here as well. Brazil and Colombia are the only two Latim American countries that contemplate such section. Cheers. --Mhsb (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I will be glad to discuss these issues and I agree to summarize the social section as Mhsb suggested. We should keep in mind to not undue weight of this article. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 07:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to bring to the discussion the topic about social issues. The reason why I removed the section, as I had already explained is that this section is tendentious, thus violating NPOV, it's not acurate. I am not proposing to hide social issues on Brazil, but I am proposing to re-edit the section to a more encyclopedic version with neutral point of view. I pasted below the section for further discussion:

Social issues

Main articles: Social issues in Brazil and Crime in Brazil

Brazil has been unable to reflect its recent economic achievements into social development. Poverty, urban violence, growing social security debts, inefficient public services, and the low value of the minimum wage are some of the main social issues that currently challenge the Brazilian government. The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality. Brazil ranks among the world's highest nations in the Gini coefficient index of inequality assessment. According to Fundação Getúlio Vargas, in 2006 the rate of people living below the poverty line based on labour income was of 19.31% of the population^[1] — a 33% reduction considering the previous three years.^[2]

Poverty in Brazil is most visually represented by the various favelas, slums in the country's metropolitan areas and remote upcountry regions that suffer with economic underdevelopment and below-par standards of living. There are also great differences in wealth and welfare between regions. While the Northeast region has the worst economic indicators nationwide, many cities in the South and Southeast enjoy First World socioeconomic standards,^[3] with roughly 23.8 homicides per 100,000 residents.^[4] The level of violence in some large urban centers is comparable to that of a war zone.^[5][6] Analysts generally suggest the alarming social inequality as the major reason behind this problem. Muggings, robberies, kidnappings^[7] and gang violence^[8] are common in the largest cities. Police brutality and corruption are widespread.^[9][10] Innefficient public services,^[11][12][13] especially those related to security, education and health, severely affect quality of life. Minimum wages fail in fulfilling the constitutional requirements set in article 7, IV, regarding living standards. Brazil currently ranks 70th in the Human Development Index list, with a high HDI (0,800). The social security system is considered unreliable and has been historically submerged in large debts and graft, which have been steadily increasing along the 1990s.^[14]

The section has several inconsistencies, several statements are unreferenced. The topic is about social issues, but it creates a link to crime as well without providing any reference to support that argument. Examples:

Several statements extracted from the text are not supported by references, for instance:

• Brazil has been unable to reflect its recent economic achievements into social development
• The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality
• Analysts generally suggest the alarming social inequality as the major reason behind this problem.

Tendentious argumentation:

• Muggings, robberies, kidnappings[129] and gang violence[130] are common in the largest cities.
• Brazil currently ranks 70th in the Human Development Index list, with a high HDI (0,800).
• The social security system is considered unreliable and has been historically submerged in large debts and graft, which have been steadily increasing along the 1990s

And much more I would lik to discuss.--Mhsb (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The social issues is a perfect session. If you do not agree with the statements, you cannot erase them. This is vandalism and you should be blocked for this. Opinoso (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it is far to be a "perfect section", this section is heavy disputed and has problem with undue weight of articles. Opinoso please stop with your personal attacks and threats. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 07:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems that the user Opinoso didn't understand, literally, anything that I proposed. Let's discuss the section about social issues and them we can move to the introduction arena. I raised several concerns about this section but you did not answer a single one, you just expressed your opnion that this section is a perfect one. Where are the references for your argumentation:

• Brazil has been unable to reflect its recent economic achievements into social development - From what source did you get that? This seems to be original resource and that is not allowed on Wikipedia.

• The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality - From where did you get that? This is highly debatable and there is no consensus among scholars linking the two issues.

• Analysts generally suggest the alarming social inequality as the major reason behind this problem. - My God! Which analysts? Where are the references?

Please Opinoso, respond my concerns and let's discuss this in a civil manner. You a calling the changes I made in the page of vandalism and threatening of blocking me. Please, bear in mind that this violates Wikimedia policies such as Wikipedia:NLT and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Please, let's discuss it in a civil manner, be constructive and please, answer my concerns.--Mhsb (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb, I agree with issues that you brought. We may remove this section, reword or summarize to fix the issues which you brought. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 07:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

João Felipe C.S, I have expressed some concerns about that topic for the reasons outlined above and that I'm coping below:

Several statements extracted from the text are not supported by references, for instance:

• Brazil has been unable to reflect its recent economic achievements into social development
• The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality
• Analysts generally suggest the alarming social inequality as the major reason behind this problem.

Tendentious argumentation:

• Muggings, robberies, kidnappings[129] and gang violence[130] are common in the largest cities.
• Brazil currently ranks 70th in the Human Development Index list, with a high HDI (0,800).
• The social security system is considered unreliable and has been historically submerged in large debts and graft, which have been steadily increasing along the 1990s

I would like to pinpoint the tendentious arguments of that section, lack of references for some debatable statements and unencyclopedic look of that section. Notice that a section about social issues, we cannot for sure relate "social issues" with "crime", there is no proven relationship between the two and therefore this matter is highly debatable and disputable. I propose a total revision of that section to remove tendentious argumentation, add references to debatable statements and a more encyclopedic view for that section.

--Mhsb (talk) 02:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I see two problems with the Social issues subsection. First, even though there are source for some data, there is no source for sentences like "Brazil has been unable to reflect its recent economic achievements into social development." It's like the editor use the data to conclude himself about it. I believe, since the subsection has been disputed, either sources for those sentences should be provided or they should be removed. Second, this subsection seems to be too long for this article. --ClaudioMB (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the article

Social issues section and Introduction

I am addressing to Opinoso because he/she is the first user to object to my recent edits. I think you misunderstood me. You even didn't read the discussion page, I kindly ask you to do so before making false acusations against me. I changed the article but I asked for the opnion of other users, please the page above. I don't think we should include a section on social issues since most of the countries in Latin America don't contemplate that very section. With regard to the size of introduction, I think it's too long, my edits suits the recomendations of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries‎, that I will repeat here:

Lead section

The article should start with a good introduction, giving name of the country, location in the world, bordering countries, seas and the like. Also give other names by which the country may still be known (for example Holland, Persia). Also, add a few facts about the country, the things that it is known for (for example the mentioning of windmills in the Netherlands article).

If the etymology of a country's name is too long to explain in the lead section, split it out into a separate section (titled "Name" or similar). Naming disputes can also be handled in separate sections.

See also: Wikipedia:Lead section

So, "by things that it is known for" what I meant is that Brazil is known overseas by its beaches, beautiful women and the carnival. If you have a personal opnion on the matter, you are violating the NPOV and this is not good argument. Please, I am trying to discuss the changes on the article pacifically, don't make false acusations, don't call my edits of vandalism. I kindly ask for your proposals here in the page. Cheers.--Mhsb (talk) 02:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb, stop erasing important informations and adding unsourced stuff.

Did you do an international reaserch to know what Brazil is know for? Where are you researches to say that "country is famous worldwide for its annual carnival celebrations, soccer players, beaches and its abundant wildlife".

Where are you reaserches?

By the way, this is an encyclopedia, and we should avoid stereotypes. We must focus in the truth, not what a country is known for.

Why are you trying to do stereotypes to Brazil such as "beautiful women?". Brazil has no more beautiful women than the rest of the world. Why are you trying to sell this idea? Where is your reaserch saying that Brazilian women are prettier than the other Human being?

I am from Brazil and where I live there are no beaches or carnival. Most Brazilians cities DO NOT have carnival celebrations

Millions of Brazilians live in the interior of the country and do not have any contact with "beaches".

I do not fit in your stereotypes and most Brazilians don't either.

How about "abundant wildlife". Are you talking about Brazil or just a few big towns like São Paulo or Rio?

Millions of Brazilians live in small and quiet towns, where this wildlife style does not fit.

Are you trying to sell the idea that Brazilians do not work and party all day?

Most Brazilians work hard and do not have time to party all day as you are trying to sell. Mhsb, if you don't work, party all day in the beach, play soccer, you are a minority.

Don't try to fit Brazilians in stereotypes.

By the way, why are you erasing the social issues information? Are you trying to hide the bad things of Brazil?

You argue that Latin American articles do not have social issue session. This is not an excuse.

You cannot erase entire sessions here without asking people's opinion.

Stop trying to impose your ideas. Stop giving stereotypes to Brazil.

By the way, if you want to write in Wikipedia, be sure you can write in an acceptable English:

"Brazil is the only portuguese speaking country in Latin America". You must write Portuguese.

It makes me sick to see people trying to sell the idea Brazil is a country where nobody works, everybody party all day naked in a carnival parade.

Most Brazilians don't do this and do not agree with this.

Mhsb, if you do not have the capacity to discern reality from fantasy, should be exempt from writing in Wikipédia.Opinoso (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Again Opinoso is making personal attacks, saying that I do not have the capacity to discern reality from fantasy, a clear violation of Wikipedia Policies. The modification I proposed for the Introduction complies with WikiProject Countries‎ but it seems that you simply negleted my arguments. Please, I ask you again to remain civil! I think that the introduction page is too big and so does the User:Janiovj. I made some proposals to reduce the size of the topic but all you did was to revert my changes and correct my grammar. You didn't understand the meaning of the phrase "abundant wildlife", creating a strange link with "wild life", which has a different meaning. You asked me why am I erasing the social issues information, which evidences the fact you haven't read anything that I proposed. I kindly ask you to make a constructive discussion about the matter. BTW, stop editing my page. Cheers.--Mhsb (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion

To his credit, when Mhsb said "abundant wildlife", that does not refer to a "wild life style", but to an abundance of plants and animals of many types and species, which I think you would agree that Brazil does have.

On the other hand, I think it was wrong of Mhsb to make significant changes (such as drastically shortening the introduction) without *first* discussing it. Major changes to format and content should not be done without discussion. Bishop^ (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I moved the comments from User:Opinoso from the page Talk:Mexico to here since his comments on that page is unconstructive for that article.--Mhsb (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb is disturbing many articles. In Brazil he is erasing information, including non-sense stuff in the article and creating an edit-war.

Please, somebody stop him. Opinoso (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Some remarks from User:Opinoso

• Millions of Brazilians live in the interior of the country and do not have any contact with "beaches".

I will catch that as (correct me if I am wrong):

• Millions of Brazilians live inland and do not have any contact with "beaches".

This contradicts with several references that cleary state that Brazil's population is mostly concentrated alongside the coast.^[15][16]

• It makes me sick to see people trying to sell the idea Brazil is a country where nobody works, everybody party all day naked in a carnival parade.
• Are you trying to sell the idea that Brazilians do not work and party all day?

Can you please indicate where did I say that???

Below are some references to support my arguments that Brazil is famous overseas by its annual carnival celebrations, its beautiful beaches and its wildlife (Flora and Fauna):

Famous Carnival celebrations:

• http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4749594.stm
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7220000/newsid_7225500/7225537.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&asb=1&news=1&bbcws=1
• http://www.brazilcarnival2008.com/

Famous Beaches:

• http://www.gringoguides.com/beach.shtml
• http://www.lonelyplanet.com/theme/beaches/be_copacabana.htm
• http://www.copacabana.info/
• http://www.frommers.com/destinations/brazil/0813020110.html

Abundant Wildlife:

• http://www.vivatravelguides.com/south-america/brazil/brazil-articles/brazils-pantanal-amazingly-rich-in-wildlife/
• http://www.frommers.com/destinations/brazil/0813020325.html
• http://www.surtrek.com/pantanal_wildlife_brazil.html

Famous soccer players:

• http://www.soccer-fans-info.com/famous-soccer-players.html
• http://www.soccerandequipment.com/famous-soccer-players.html

--Mhsb (talk) 00:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I think there is a confusion as to what constitutes a source to cite a claim. What you are actually doing is WP:OR. Let me cite, from that same link:

"Material can often be put together in a way that constitutes original research even if its individual elements have been published by reliable sources. Synthesizing material occurs when an editor tries to demonstrate the validity of his or her own conclusions by citing sources that when put together serve to advance the editor's position. If the sources cited do not explicitly reach the same conclusion, or if the sources cited are not directly related to the subject of the article, then the editor is engaged in original research."

Indeed, carnivals and a passion for soccer are distinctive traits of Brazilian culture; and Brazil has an extraordinary wildlife. However, you are claiming that "Brazil is famous overseas because of" such traits. None of your sources make that claim. These traits are known, but so are other characteristics, both positive and negative, and your selection of three traits is rather subjective. Moreover, citing instances does not prove your claim, and some of the sources above cannot pass the reliability test. I could provide 20 international links that talk about favelas, but that does not prove that "Brazil is famous known overseas because of the favelas". That is Original Research.

--the Dúnadan 00:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There is a little problem with the phrase you've used. I never proposed to write to the introduction that "Brazil is famous overseas...", if you scroll up the page you'll notice that I actually wrote:

"Brazil is known overseas...

--Mhsb (talk) 00:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

True, I corrected my statement. My claim, however, remains the same. Brazil could be known by a thousand things. Listing instances of things does not prove a claim. Citing a valid reputable source that explicitly states your conclusion, would prove your claim. That is the summary of my arguments above, but feel free to review them. --the Dúnadan 00:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if you had a chance to read the article but the article itself contemplates part of my statements:

Brazil's large area comprises different ecosystems, which together sustain some of the world's greatest biodiversity...

...There is a general consensus that Brazil has the highest number of both terrestrial vertebrates and invertebrates of any single country in the world...

(futebol) is the most popular sport in Brazil.[145] The Brazilian national football team (Seleção) is currently ranked second in the world according to the FIFA World Rankings. They have been victorious in the World Cup tournament a record five times, in 1958, 1962, 1970, 1994 and 2002. Basketball, volleyball, auto racing, and martial arts also attract large audiences...

--Mhsb (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess you still do not understand what WP:CITE means. Ignoring the rest of the less-than-reliable sources you provided, let's focus on the first. Maybe a clear illustrative example will help you undestand. What does it say? Well it says: "One of the world's biggest carnival celebrations has officially started in the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro."[1]. Well, what can you claim? Well, you can claim that "One of the world's biggest carnival celebrations" is Rio de Jainero's. Nothing more, and nothing else. You cannot claim that "Brazil is famour—er—known overseas because of the carnival. Of the thousands of things by which Brazil is known overseas, the carnival is just one, and your source doesn't make that categorical claim. To use a collection of source to make a point that neither source is making, is WP:OR, and WP:TEND. Is it clear know? --the Dúnadan 01:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you read the references I posted to support my arguments.... Please, read the references first and make a constructive discussion to the topic. Cheers. --Mhsb (talk) 01:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to cite each and every one of references. Could you cite a sentence from your list of references that say "Brazil is known for..."? (Perhaps a tourist brochure...). Cheers! --the Dúnadan 01:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The article below clearly express my statement about carnival in Brazil:

...In many parts of the world, where Catholic Europeans set up colonies and entered into the slave trade, carnival took root. Brazil, once a Portuguese colony, is famous for its carnival, as is Mardi Gras in Louisiana...

Note that now I am using the word famous...

link: http://www.allahwe.org/aboutus.html

--Mhsb (talk) 01:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

You actually mean this link: [2]? OK, good enough, that source (not the rest) can serve as a claim that "Brazil is known or famous for its Carnival". As to why do you select three traits as the paramount exemplary traits above others, that remains to be discussed. --the Dúnadan 01:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Exactly! That's why I am discussing it here, otherwise this would be an imposition of ideas right?--Mhsb (talk) 02:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I did not understand your previous comment, especially given the edit-war you engaged with Opinoso. --the Dúnadan 03:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb is damn right, it is known overseas for all of that and there's no arguing over it. Carnival is not just a stereotype, but the most representative cultural festival in Brazil. We are also a common tourist destination because of our beaches, and there's no denying most people live close to the coastline. I don't see where's Opinoso trying to get. Janiovj (talk) 22:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Latin America

Latin America is one of the subdvisions of the american continent.Every time that i look to this articule i see Brazil is the biggest economy of latin america,the biggest... of latin america. But this is obviously, because it is the biggest country in Latin America , has the biggest population.So why don't put of The Americas instead of Latin America?Because the continent is only one!America.The USA is trying to sepate the things, HAVE YOU EVER SAW THINGS LIKE FRANCE IS THE BIGGEST ECONOMY OF THE LATIN EUROPE?No you hear things like France is the fourth largest economy in Europe. Continents are divided by geographic not language or some other thing.Like south asia , middle east. Augusto Fontes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.17.99.243 (talk) 02:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

First, "Latin America" is a recognized "grouping" of countries. It is as valid a criterion as geography for specifying a particular group of nations. The term has a great deal of historical weight and current usage, unlike your made-up "Latin Europe". It largely serves to differentiate the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries from "Anglo-America", the places where English is primarily spoken. Even as distinguished a publication as The Economist has a section on their web site for "Latin American Economies".

Please don't create controversy where none exists. Brazil may have the largest population in Latin America, but that doesn't mean it's the biggest of everything. Mexico has a higher GDP per capita, for example. Bishop^ (talk) 16:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Latin America is a geopolitical region characterized by language, culture and similitudes in economy. It is used by the United Nations, the World Bank, the IMF, etc. --the Dúnadan 03:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I got the point of 201.17.99.243, but unfortunately I disagree. Latin America is a well established concept in any literature the same way we call the residents of the USA of Americans. One would say that a Latin American is an American as well, but this would create further confusion because everyone knows that Americans are the citizens of the USA.--Mhsb (talk) 06:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Population alongside the coast

Hi... Some people are getting wrong. Saying that most of Brazilian population lives alongside the coast does not mean that they live in coast cities. The statement (correct) means that, considering the dimension of the country, most of Brazilians are concentrated in an area between the coast and an imaginary line we could draw 1000 kilometres inside. This area is less than 50% of the territory, although it is bigger than many countries. But we are comparing areas of a single country.

Bloated again!

I can't believe after the amount of effort it took to bring this article down to size, we're adding sections which were removed outright to conform to the GA review. It befuddles me that tables, whole sections have been added when this article has a chronic "stuff-itis" problem--that is, cramming as much information as possible into one article.

Measuring from this edit to the current one, one can see that the text gained 9Kb in prose, and a whopping 220Kb in file size, due to pictures and tables. I'm reverting the article back to Carlosguitar's last edit--before this spat with content, alignment and tables. That's the closest edit I've found that still maintains some modicum of reason regarding size and the GA requirements. The alternative, unfortunately, is to delist this article as a "Good Article". I hope you'll participate in discussing what changes need to be made prior to adding them.--Dali-Llama (talk) 14:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Somebody should stop João Felipe C.S from editing in this article. He changed all the article, including unnecessary information, unnecessary tables, sandwiched the article with unnnecessary pictures. By the way, he cannot even speak English and does not discuss his changes in the discussion.

Moreover, João Felipe C.S manipulates the article, reverting and creating edit-wars with any user who tries to post here.

In my view, this is vandalism. Opinoso (talk) 15:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

There's no need for an ad hominem argument, Opinoso, nor an attack. My point remains: tables, text additions, etc should be handled individually, gradually and consulting other editors prior to their inclusion because of this article's peculiar size constraints and the amount of effort all editors (including João Felipe), to cut down the article's size. All the content I've removed can and should be easily added to the respective sub-articles. Tables are helpful, but take up a lot of physical space and data--again, perfectly apt to be relocated to subarticles. Everyone has to resist this temptation to include all this data into a single article.--Dali-Llama (talk) 16:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Dali-Llama, If we want this article Featured we must follow WP:SIZE and maintain around 85-90Kb. While tables are useful to show information in a organized matter, it is better to use them on sub-articles where there is no problem with WP:SIZE. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 18:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Poverty and unequality reference

I couldn't help but notice the lack of reference for the statement The rate of poverty is in part attributed to the country's economic inequality. Well, there are several studies linking both factors, and it's fairly logical that a mid-income country with such a big amount of poverty must have big economic inequality as well. But enough talking; the most influential and respected studies on the subject are made by Ipea (Economic Applied Research Institute), which published "Desigualdade de Renda no Brasil: uma análise da queda recente" in 2 volumes. On the first volume, the 10th chapter discusses the importance of the recent drop on inequality rate (gini) to poverty. The title: A Importância da Queda Recente da Desigualdade para a Pobreza Authors: Ricardo Paes de Barros, Mirela de Carvalho, Samuel Franco, Rosane Mendonça The link: http://www.ipea.gov.br/sites/000/2/livros/desigualdaderendanobrasil/Cap_10_AImportanciaDaQuedaRecente.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco.natalino (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Water

Why did you get the information about the percent of water in Brazil is just 0,65%? In other countries they have "more water" than Brazil like Argentina(1,1%) or even Estonia(4,6%), and we know, at least I know(hehe) this is not true. Or, better, someone can explain me what this indice counts? Tks! Leonardomio (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

That is the percent of the area cover by water.--ClaudioMB (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

FAC anyone?

Why has this been not submitted to FAC yet? Looks mighty promising. With very little push this might get through. Anyone hearing this? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This article isn't stable enough, in my view, and the sizing issue is still a concern.--Dali-Llama (talk) 20:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This article will probably not reach FA status for a long long time because of stability problems. I've given up on it and have been focusing my attention on subpages where there are few editors. I've learned in a place like Wikipedia it's almost impossible to work on controversial topics. Sparks1979 (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Removing The World Factbook: Brazil from Further reading

This reference, The World Factbook: Brazil. Central Intelligence Agency., has a grotesque misinformation about Brazil. In its People section they mention that "estimates for this country explicitly take into account the effects of excess mortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates, lower population and growth rates, and changes in the distribution of population by age and sex than would otherwise be expected (July 2007 est.)". This sentence is used in that book for all countries with such a problem. I'm not a health expert, but, that sounds weird for Brazil. I couldn't find another source for that affirmation. There are no mention of such "excess mortality" in HIV/AIDS in Brazil. List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate doesn't show death, but give a good idea that HIV/AIDS in Brazil (0.7) is not that far from the United States (0.6). This report (page 18) also shows that Brazil's numbers are not excessive, not far from the United States' numbers and much smaller than other countries that that book doesn't use that sentence. Even their own number shows that Brazil's numbers (HIV/AIDS deaths/population 0.000088%) are not so far from the United States (0.000057%), and very far from South Africa (0.0082%).
So, until they fix that, it should be removed because it's not a good reference to readers of this article. --ClaudioMB (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S. They've based that affirmation on this report that says that the Brazil's population is around 3.5 millions shorter because AIDS. Man, if they are right, I'm just a stupid ignorant person who should accept everything anyone says and thanks God for my family and I aren't in that number.--ClaudioMB (talk) 21:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed.--ClaudioMB (talk) 05:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed with the removal of CIA's world fact book. Makes Brazil sound like a sub Saharan country in terms of AIDS epidemic, which is far from true. In fact, Brazil is praised for its AIDS prevention scheme. --Pinnecco (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)