User talk:Guilherme Paula/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.


Contents

Template:Infobox England

I don't think that you TfD'd this correctly because it wasn't listed at WP:TfD. Try it again, if you need help let me know. —MJCdetroit 00:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to do... I'd like to nominate to WP:TfD these templates: Template:Infobox UK nation, Template:Infobox England and Template:Infobox UK N-Ireland (only when unblock the Northern Ireland article to I change the template to Template:Infobox Country. Can you help me? Guilherme Paula 01:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Try here first-- WP:TfD#How to use this page. It is basic cut and paste. I am logging off but I see how you did tomorrow night. Regards, —MJCdetroit 02:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Done :) Guilherme Paula 02:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I cast my vote! I am not crazy about the patron Saint in the Infobox Country but if it keeps people from creating new templates, I'll roll with it. —MJCdetroit 16:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Scotland article

Dear Guilherme Paula, thank-you for your contributions here. Please note that it would be very helpful if you could:

  • a) Provide an edit summary. This page is subject to ongoing vandalism and it is hard to read your intentions re the changes to the Infobox.
  • b) Provide some simple overview of your intentions on the associated Talk page. You are at liberty to edit as you see fit, but candidly I am not sure what your aim is and some of what you have achieved has simply reversed changes which were undertaken after discussion there. Thank-you. Ben MacDui (Talk) 14:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

On Guarani in Mercosur

You have added Guarani as an official language of Mercosur. Is there any new decision? Because as you can see at the talk page of the article up to February 2007 this was just a proposal. Please provide some source on this. --Michkalas 14:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

In portuguese article [1], Guaraní is considered an official language, like spanish and portuguese. Looking at Google, I found these news: [2], [3]. Guilherme Paula 17:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. Correct me if I am wrong, as I do not speak Portuguese, but both the articles you mention state that the Ministers of Culture of Mercosur decided that Guarani will be an official language of Mercorsur, pending on the -highly possible, of course- approval of the decision by the Presidents of the Mercosur countries which was to be held on 18 and 19 January 2007. But, as google it a little bit my self, I could not find something on the presidents meeting related to Guarani. Other Wikipedias articles are not sources. I do not know, probably you are right, but it is also possible that, because of the media present these things, you have been misled. Anyway we need a reference or else we have to add to the article just that Mercosur is planning to have Guarani as its official language. --Michkalas 18:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

No idea why I added that tfd tag. Anyway. If the dispute is resolved, we can just unprotect the page and you can go from there. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 21:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Poked my nose in

Hi! See my answer to your question here -- just a fly by answer, since we nearly had an edit conflict! // FrankB 15:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:Navbox generic

Not sure what's wrong but the template rendering is now broken in IE. Any ideas? Cheers, cab 00:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No ideas... I don't know what more to do. The curious is that nobody leaves it with the same appearance of the others templates. You know somebody who we can ask for aid? Guilherme Paula 01:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Re Template:Infobox European Union and Template:Infobox Country, etc.

Hi Guilherme,

When you have time, could you take a look at the Template:Infobox European Union and check if is possible to merge with Template:Infobox Country? ...

Just to reassure you that I haven't overlooked the above and am planning to take a look during my next Wikipedia session. Thanks for your patience!  Yours, David (talk) 02:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

...Hope the issue is now sorted (cf TfD and the one page that was transcluding the template, Portal:European Union/Content). Yours, David (talk) 03:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization

...and on a related issue, having just noticed your infobox work at African Union, cf work in progress here and here, with checklist here. Yours, David (talk) 01:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Nice work :-) Would you like to apply this model in all these pages ? - Guilherme (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
That's the plan!  I've renamed the template as Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization, as I reckon this is more meaningful; what do you think...?  Yours, David (talk) 21:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
PS Still haven't forgotten the original point of this thread; now aiming to include alongside the above.
I like this name. It is simple and objective. In my opinion, the best is create a generic template, that can be used in all pages. If yours do it, nice. :-) - Guilherme (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your encouragement. I've inserted it at African Union and hope I haven't lost any of the information you included in the {{Infobox Country}} version. Sometime tomorrow I'll try using it in some other articles, so if you spot anything amiss or needing improvement, I'll be grateful to know. Yours, David (talk) 01:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
you are welcome ;) I saw yours modifications and, in my opinion, the template is being with the same (or at least, near the same) appearance of Template:Infobox Country. Have you certain that needs create a new template for it ? Why not you simple modify the Template:Infobox Country. For example, the European Union is considered more almost a country that a simple tradebloc for many people. So, you will only need create an "membership" and a "commission seat" section. Do you think that it is possible? Thanks - Guilherme (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I may well agree; these thoughts have been in the back of my mind while using the African Union as a test article. Not all these organizations can or will have the country-like information carried by the "Statistics" parameters, so perhaps these can be handled by {{Infobox Country or territory}}, while the first set of parameters are used by a simpler {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}}. I'll take a look now. Thanks for the suggestion, David (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
My mixed version looks near like this:
{{Infobox Country
|native_name                 = African Union
|conventional_long_name      = 
|common_name                 = the African Union
|image_flag                  = Flag of the African Union.svg
|image_coat                  = Logo of the African Union.svg
|symbol_type                 = Emblem
|national_motto              = 
|national_anthem             = ''[[Let Us All Unite and Celebrate Together]]''
|image_map                   = LocationAfricanUnion.png
|map_caption                 = 
}}
{{Infobox Geopolitical organization
|membership           = 53 African states
|admin_center         = [[Addis Ababa]], [[Ethiopia]]
}}
{{Infobox Country
|largest_city                = [[Cairo]]
|official_languages          = The [[languages of Africa]], as well as [[Arabic language|Arabic]], [[English language|English]], [[French language|French]], and [[Portuguese language|Portuguese]]<sup>1</sup>
|government_type             = 
|leader_title1               = [[Chairperson of the African Union|Chairperson]]
|leader_name1                = [[John Kufuor]]
|leader_title2               = [[African Union Chairperson of the Commission|Chairperson of the Commission]]
|leader_name2                = [[Alpha Oumar Konaré]]
|sovereignty_type            = [[African_Union#History_of_the_African_Union|Formation]]
|sovereignty_note            = 
|established_event1          = as [[Organisation of African Unity|OAU]]
|established_date1           = [[May 25]], [[1963]]
|established_event2          = as African Union
|established_date2           = [[July 9]], [[2002]]
|area_magnitude              = 1 E+13
|area                        = 29,757,900
|areami²                     = 
|area_rank                   = 1st{{smallsup|2}}
|population_estimate         = 850 million
|population_estimate_year    = 2005
|population_density          = 25.7
|population_densitymi²       = 
|population_density_rank     = 3rd{{smallsup|1}}
|GDP_PPP_year                = 2003
|GDP_PPP                     = US$ 1.515 billion
|GDP_PPP_rank                = 16th{{smallsup|1}}
|GDP_PPP_per_capita          = $1,896
|GDP_PPP_per_capita_rank     = 
|GDP_nominal                 = $514 billion
|GDP_nominal_rank            = 
|GDP_nominal_year            = 2003
|GDP_nominal_per_capita      = $643
|GDP_nominal_per_capita_rank = 
|utc_offset                  = -1 to +4
|footnote1                   = If the African Union considered as a single entity.
}}
{{Infobox Geopolitical organization
|official_website     = http://www.africa-union.org/
}}
Do you think about something similar?

[resetting indentation] Yes, something along these lines; I've tried it at African Union and Arab League and hope the two templates together can handle the remaining organizations!  Yours, David (talk) 21:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Please, take a look here, here and here.

I think now we can use Template:Infobox Country to African Union, Andean Community of Nations, etc. What's your opinion ?

I'm not sure... Although one usually involves the other, I'd say there's a considerable difference between countries/territories and geopolitical organizations; also, I don't think the articles on all these organizations include (or will include) information such as areas, populations, etc. So, looking ahead, I'm thinking it might be better to keep two separate templates, i.e. {{Infobox Country or territory}} as a supplement to {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}}, rather than try mixing them together...

I guess we need more opinions, so if I add {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}}+{{Infobox Country or territory}} to a few more articles on the list, more people might notice them and perhaps comment. Thanks for your continued interest!  David (talk) 04:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

PS Have just thought that it might be possible to call {{Infobox Country or territory}} from within {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}} in order to add area, population, etc data as part of a single continuous template. How about that...?
Certainly have difference between countries and geopolitical organizations, but the statistics are optional. Don't have problem if don't complete all fields. (e.g: Francophonie)
Is a good idea call Template:Infobox Country from within Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization in order to add area, population, etc data as part of a single continuous template. But, despite that the appearance is not full consistent, I don't think that is more necessary since I modified Template:Infobox Country. If you really want that it is the correct, why not use too call the name, flag, map, anthem, motto and others semilars too, to avoid duplication ? Thanks a lot by the answers ;-) — Guilherme (t/c) 15:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
"If you really want that it is the correct, why not use too call the name, flag, map, anthem, motto and others semilars too, to avoid duplication ?"
I guess I'm cautious because geopolitical organizations aren't countries, don't have national mottos or anthems, don't necessarily have capitals or governments, don't carry sovereignty,... Do you see what I mean...?  As you may already have seen on various talk pages, some people's circumstances make them particularly sensitive to these kinds of issues, so I think it might be wise not to try using one template ({{Infobox Country or territory}}) for both countries/territories and geopolitical organizations, even though this might easily be done. In other words, my concern is not so much about the template itself, but people's possible reactions to its use. Hope you understand what I mean, David (talk) 01:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Some organizations have also mottos, anthems or hymn (e.g.1, 2, 3, 4, etc). Really don't have capitals or governments, but carry headquarters, comission seats or other thing. Don't carry sovereingty, but establishment. All these are easily to change or adapt in Template:Infobox Country or territory). I can't understand why create another template only to say: "Editors, it's not a country or territory. It's an geopolical organization." because to the final reader if use one or other, is the same thing. I really don't know what more say to convince you. My last suggestions are, if the problem is the name of template, why not rename to a global name? And... What such to ask for opinions to one third person? Yours truly — Guilherme (t/c) 16:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, let's get some more opinions. I agree that the two templates can be used in similar ways, so, if other people think there should be no problem in merging them, I'll happily come along. To make a start, I've posted this request on Template:Infobox Country's talkpage. Yours, David (talk) 21:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Re Template:Navbox generic request

Can you change the titlestyle of the Template:Navbox generic to keep the same appearance of the buttons [Show], [Hide] and the v • d • e with the others Template:Navigation?...

I agree that this would be useful and have also been meaning to ask about it; as you've probably seen, the key appears to be the interaction between the NavFrame and {{Tnavbar}} elements used by the template, so I was going to approach User:Netscott, Tnavbar's original designer, for his advice/assistance. I've now left a link to on his talkpage to your message above on my talkpage. Yours, David (talk) 01:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

state parameters

Hi again,
Just to say you can default templates with a state parameter to a collapsed state by using state = {{{state|collapsed}}} without removing the option for exceptions. Hope all well, David (talk) 01:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

All right... I will do it in next times :)

Template:Countries of the Baltic region

Not sure if there are sufficient links in this template to merit conversion to {{Navbox generic}} (i.e. either the groups or lists too wide)...?  Yours, David (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

You have reason. The tamplate was strange. Can you revert to back version? thanks — Guilherme (t/c) 02:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Done!  Glad you agreed, David (talk) 03:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Join our project

Mercosur
Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's Mercosur articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining the Mercosur WikiProject? It's a group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Mercosur articles.
Hetfield1987 (Wesborland | James Hetfield) 18:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Re Northern Ireland, Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization

Hi Guilherme,

I think was something wrong in Template:Infobox Country...
Thanks for the alert; hopefully it looks okay now.
Don't forget to see Talk:Northern_Ireland#Suggestions_to_new_infobox— Guilherme (t/c) 00:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I see what you mean!  Have now repaired. David (talk) 00:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
all lines below of map was also changed... see one more time... — Guilherme (t/c) 01:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Now also fixed. Hopefully any further workarounds won't resort to <table>s which may or may not work with the infobox code!  David (talk) 03:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
All good, but I was mentioning this infobox to Northern Ireland. Some minor changes. — Guilherme (t/c) 13:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi again; glad you also happen to be online!  While I look at the above, what do you think about using flag-icons next to leaders' names, as in my recent Mercosur edit...?  (I'm currently looking at Union of South American Nations: "Amb. Jorge D’Escragnolle Taunay Filho" – is there a shorter version of this name...?...!)  Regards, David (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
...Have replaced the infobox code at Northern Ireland with that here; hope that's what you meant. (Pastebin.ca looks a useful site – thanks for pointing me toward it!)  David (talk) 18:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
This site is really cool :)
No problem when don't have too much members, but with more than 8, 10 or 12 it's strange... I like the way that it works on European Union infobox... What's your opinion ?
I don't have certainty how to diminish this name, but try something like "Jorge Taunay Filho". — Guilherme (t/c) 18:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[resetting indentation]
Re lists of members, yes, there can be "too many" for an infobox... I'm not sure, though, if the European Union's infobox solution – more templates within templates – is particularly suitable... Since an organization's members should be clearly listed within the article, how about the simple approach currently used in African Union, Andean Community of Nations, etc...?
Re "Jorge Taunay Filho", thanks for this suggestion; have now implemented it!  Yours, David (talk) 19:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure... it may be too vacant. Agree?
If you mean that a single statement such as "12 South American countries" or "12 member states" for the Union of South American Nations would be too little, then maybe... Here's another possibility: instead of using one column, format the Membership entry in the same way as the Motto and Anthem entries, i.e. using the full width of the infobox. What do you think...?
Changing the subject, can you delete this image? Already has another without legend in commons. — Guilherme (t/c) 22:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
In case it might be useful elsewhere, I've moved it to the Commons as commons:Image:CAN with annotations.png. Thanks for spotting, David (talk) 02:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization

I agree with you and User:MJCdetroit (from the Infobox Country talkpage thread that combining Infobox Country and Infobox Geopolitical organization seems sensible, so I hope the present {{Infobox Country}} – to which {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}} now redirects – meets your approval. I've begun work on a dual-purpose documentation page here; my aim is to limit the widths of the <pre> boxes used so that instead of the current "For syntax and examples, see /doc", the documentation may sit beside two blank versions of the template, one for country/territory use, the other for geopolitical organizations. (Not easy to describe in words!)  Yours, David (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem... nice job :) Some suggestions:
  1. Copy all Template:Infobox Country to another template with a generic name (Sorry, I don't have suggestions to the name)
  2. Create a redirect in Template:Infobox Country to this template..
  3. Delete the redirect Template:Infobox Geopolitical organization (No more necessary... Not too much pages points to it) — Guilherme (t/c) 00:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!  Unfortunately, I'm about to go offline for a while, but here are my first thoughts re your suggestions:
  1. I'd thought of doing this (with the name {{Infobox Territory-related}}) but decided against in case it upset people editing country articles. (For example, I once renamed the template to {{Infobox Country or territory}}, as it was being used for areas other than sovereign states, but this was reverted.)  Perhaps something else to pass by User:MJCdetroit...?
  2. Yes – if the above is agreed!
  3. Not keen on this idea; Infobox Country and Infobox Geopolitical organization share some parameter names, but not all of them. See also MJCdetroit's comments in the thread on the Infobox Country talkpage.
Back later, David (talk) 00:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Parser functions in Template:Infobox Country

Hi again Guilherme,

What do you think about use ParserFunctions to calculate automatically some itens in template? ...

This sounds an excellent idea – something I'd've liked to have thought up!  It reminds me of User:Ezikhi, who (if I've remembered correctly) created a couple of conversion templates a few weeks ago; it may be possible to incorporate them...?  Hope all well, David (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

If it works good, I don't see reasons to don't use. :-) — Guilherme (t/c) 15:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

template on law

Hello Guilherme, I like the new navigation box, but I want to change it so that the side column is bigger, and doesn't squash the titles onto two lines. Can you do this, or tell me how to? Also, the subjects were split onto different lines before because of the groupings (e.g. "Commercial law" should be the start of a new line, under "Further disciplines"). Lastly, it'd be nice to have the old colours, because this fits with the portal. Please get back to me soon, Wikidea 10:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I think now it is ok... check you first. — Guilherme (t/c) 14:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
That's superb, thanks! Could I also ask, since it's so good, to put the side bar into the gold colour - where the titles Legal Subjects, etc stand? Is there a manual on this to read? Wikidea 10:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't put gold in the side bar... It don't have option to set the color because are links to another pages. To learn more about it, search for HTML. — Guilherme (t/c) 16:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Website in Template:Infobox Country

Hi again Guilherme,

I think is better remove website from Template:Infobox Country.
In my opinion, place it in "External links" make a better appearance...
[when {{Infobox Country}} used as {{Infobox Geopolitical organization}}]

Don't think I mind either way; you could try moving a couple to External links on their pages and see if anyone complains...  Yours, David (talk) 04:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Brazilian states by....

Olá João Ví as páginas que você criou e as achei MUITO boas, parabéns. Mas elas estão muito separadas. O que você acha de aplicarmos o modelo adotado em European Union member state? Assim poderíamos agrupa-las em uma só página. Ex. Se o leitor quiser listar os estados por população, ele clica em "Population", se quiser por GPD, clica em "GPD", etc. Acho que fica muito mais consistênte. O quê você acha? — Guilherme (t/c) 18:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Sim, pode ficar bom, mais estou um pouco ocupado, se você puder fazer eu ficaria muito grato. Felipe ( talk ) 00:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Estou iniciando a página aqui. Caso queria comentar, modificar ou criticar, fique a vontade. — Guilherme (t/c) 01:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Está ótimo, no momento estou trabalhando em Portal:Current events/Brazil, uma página que acabei de criar, ainda há muito trabalho pela frente. Felipe ( talk ) 01:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Terminei. Dê uma olhada nela. O que você acha de fundir todas as páginas nela? — Guilherme (t/c) 16:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Template for states of Brazil

Hi again Guilherme,

First, congratulations to Template:Infobox Country or territory, it was incredible!
Thanks for your contributions and sharing your thoughts about it as well! ...
When you finish all your work there, could you help me in creating a infobox template to states of brazil? I'am thinking use the base of Template:Infobox Country or territory and modify only the necessary. How can I do it?
...One of the ideas you mentioned about {{Infobox Country or territory}} (#2 here) has returned here and may be the way forward as regards an infobox for Brazilian states (and, eventually, maybe any country's large subdivisions!). User:MJCdetroit has yet to notice/respond; meanwhile, I imagine you'd be in favor...?  Yours, David Kernow (talk) 08:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Of course! I completely agree! It will be nice ;-) — Guilherme (t/c) 15:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be somewhat low:

Edit summary usage for Guilherme Paula: 66% for major edits and 46% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 37 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 11:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Spain topics

Hi Guilherme,

I [have] replaced the old Template:Spain Close UP 2 [with] Template:Spain topics. Can you review [it] for me?

Just to reassure you that I haven't overlooked the above and aim to visit the template soon!  Yours, David (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
PS Your original inclusion of "it" in your message was correct!  I've also made a couple of other amendments shown in square brackets above. Don't worry, though; your English is understandable – infinitely more so than my Portuguese! ("nenhum"?)

hehehe :) I'am many years without studying english. I started my editions in wikipedia to pratice more...
(hehehe :) I haven't studied English for many years. I started editing Wikipedia to practice more...)
Certainly an interesting place to learn a mixture of English styles (European, American, Commonwealth, Antipodean...)!
Have finally passed by {{Spain topics}} and made only a few minor formatting changes (the &nbsp;s are all just for linewrapping). I also added it to the Category:Country and territory-related topics templates containing similar templates. Thanks for your work!  David (talk) 04:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I think is better I change my knowledge in english to intermediate (or to basic?) in my page :-P
One question: What's the difference between &nbsp; and a simple space? Thanks by your attention with my grammar :) — Guilherme (t/c) 17:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
"I think [it] is better [if] I change my knowledge [of] English to ["]intermediate["] (or to ["]basic["]?) [on] my page :-P"
I don't know how the "basic", "intermediate" and "advanced" levels are described, but I'd certainly say you seem to know more than a "basic" amount of English, so perhaps "intermediate" is most appropriate...?
(I guess you already know about sites such as http://babelfish.altavista.com/ where you can paste any complicated English that I or other native speakers send and receive a rough translation of it...?)
Re &nbsp; vs. space, "nbsp" is (I believe) an abbreviation for "non-breaking space" – follow the link if you need any more explanation!  (Perhaps a Portuguese version "&nqes;" – for "não quebra (o) espaço"(!) – could be implemented...!)
Yours, David (talk) 04:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
PS: "Thanks [for] your attention [to] my grammar :)". "One question..." is perfect!

Re "New template to collapseable lists"

...Is possible create template to merge all these templates? ...

(Is [it] possible [to] create [a] template [that merges] all these templates?)

...Template:EU languages infobox, Template:EU members infobox and Template:EU currencies infobox ? — Guilherme (t/c) 18:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess it is, but do they need to be separate in order to work with European Union's {{Infobox Geopolitical organisation}}...?  Regards, David (talk) 04:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I am planning for something like this:
{{Collapseable list (or a better name)
|name       = {{subst:PAGENAME}}
|titlestyle = 
|title      = 
|liststyle  = 

|list1  = 
|list2  = 
|list3  = 
...
|listN  =
What do you thing ? — Guilherme (t/c) 17:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
(Please, take a look at the discussion about the EU flag in template... It should be stopped now!)
I think I see what you mean now; it's not how these templates may be merged but whether to create a standardized {{Collapsible list}} template for them – yes?  If so, this might be another good idea (I see South Africa's infobox now includes a collapsed list) but I haven't tried thinking it through. No arguments against it occur to me now!
Re the EU flag issue, I think (hope!) a consensus has now prevailed...
Yours, David (talk) 03:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Please check it. — Guilherme (t/c) 18:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag Infoboxes

Whyare you saying that you are changing the flag in your edit summaries, but you are only switching templates for no reason at all? ANNAfoxlover 00:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I made some mistakes in the edit summaries, sorry. I only changed it for a more flexible version and also for nominate the FlagBox for deletation. — Guilherme (t/c) 00:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Pedido

Obrigado. Eu peço desculpas mas creio que não posso vetorizar os mapas da página States of Brazil, pois os mapas que fiz, são apenas derivações do mapa Image:Brazil State Map.svg. Não sou muito bom em criá-los, eu tentarei, mas não posso garantir nada. Obrigado novamente e bom trabalho. Felipe C.S ( talk ) 01:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Insignia da força aérea brasileira

Olá! Gostaria apenas de observar que a insignia e o brasão da FAB são coisas distintas. Abraços! --Tonyjeff 16:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Guilherme, eu posso vetorizá-lo, pois no geral é simples (à exceção da coroa naval). Minha dúvida é se legalmente haveria algum embaraço para a WP, principalmente pelo fato de eles não quererem mais oferecer o brasão para o público. Será que a lei que garante todos os símbolos cívicos definidos por lei como de direito público se extende aos símbolos militares? Abs. --Tonyjeff 16:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Pode enviar-mo para este e-mail. Abs. --Tonyjeff 21:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Patz, muito ruim. Aliás, muitas vezes as versões vetorizadas são melhores do que as orginais, mas como não são "oficiais" o pessoal torce o bico, preferindo que fique exatamente igual. Na verdade, na tradição heráldica a padronização exata dos símbolos só se deu a partir de meados do século XIX, quando se popularizaram os meios de impressão gráfica. Bom, eu posso tentar vetorizar -- aliás, a bandeira catarinense fui em quem fiz, já a viu? Abs. --Tonyjeff 21:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Se o brasão que mandaram é igual ao do preview em JPG, realmente está bem ruim. A bandeira que você fez de Santa Catarina ficou MUITO boa. Inclusive ví uns trabalhos seus e realmente são excelêntes! Eu inclusive utilizei umas de suas bandeiras para gerar algumas bandeiras de portugal que podem ser conferidas na minha página com o Inkscape. Não ficaram que nem as suas, mas acho que deram para enganar. ;-)
Se você puder vetorizar as bandeiras do Rio Grande do Norte e de Alagoas, será de GRANDE valia. Enquanto isso estou na espera da resposta do email sobre brasão da Marinha hehehe. Abraços — Guilherme (t/c) 23:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Agora que percebi que foi você quem fez o brasão do Exército e outros. Parabéns a si também, principalmente pela bandeira portuguesa de 1616! Olhe, eu ia justamente fazer-lhe uma sugestão: colocar uma estrela na guarda da espada do brasão do Exército, como o fiz no da Aeronáutica (aí fui eu quem aproveitou um tantinho de seu trabalho, eheh). Apesar de poder não está visível na imagem presente na página do Exército, é o correto, pois a espada de ambos os brasões é a mesma do brasão da República! Abs.! --Tonyjeff 00:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Eu não fiz o Brasão do exército, apenas tirei do site oficial. As que eu fiz foram as bandeiras, usando o seu escudo português como base. — Guilherme (t/c) 13:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Pois, percebo o que digo? Falta a estrela (símbolo adotado inicialmente pela República) na guarda daquela espada, como no brasão da Aeronáutica e da República. Mas enfim, como é oficial... --Tonyjeff 13:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Desculpe-me, foi desatenção minha. Estive tentando aqui, mas quando mandava agrupar as seleções dava um erro e mudava o gradiente. Você se encomodaria em modificar para mim? — Guilherme (t/c) 14:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
OBS: Me enviaram a insígnia da Marinha. Estou encaminhando para seu email para que você converta para SVG e faça as modificações que achar necessário. Abraços Guilherme Paula 18h57min de 4 de Julho de 2007 (UTC)
Está muito boa a insígnia! Já a subi no Commons, mas reparei que é preciso fazer uns pequenos ajustes. Até amanhã eu os faço! Abraços e parabéns por ter conseguido-a! --Tonyjeff 21:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Ví agora (não tenho CorelDraw) e realmente precisa de uns pequenos ajustes. Ilustrei aqui, para facilitar seu ajuste, os pequenos problemas das insígnias do Exército. No número 1 a pontinha precisa ficar atrás da espada e no número 2 precisa da estrela como você falou. Abraços — Guilherme (t/c) 03:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Terminei de fazer os ajustes, creio ter ficado bem melhor. Sobre os nomes, confesso que não presto muita atenção no of, mas sinceramente prefiro COA a Coat of arms, haja vista que fica muito comprido o nome. De qualquer forma, acho que não deveríamos preocupar-nos agora com isso, pois independentemente do formato que combinarmos, eventualmente uma votação oficial a decidirá, como fizeram com as bandeiras, tornando nossos esforços assim infrutíferos. Trabalharei agora no brasão do Exército. Abs. --201.6.119.5 11:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Está ótimo! Parabéns. Você sabe onde ocorre discussões desse tipo na wikipédia? Abraços — Guilherme (t/c) 15:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Guilherme, não consigo acessar a ligação que me enviou, com o exemplo do brasão do Exército. Haveria como enviar-mo por e-mail? Abs. --Tonyjeff 18:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Pronto — Guilherme (t/c) 18:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Acabei de arrumar o brasão do Exército. Sobre as bandeiras que me enviou, acredito que se possam aproveitar alguns elementos, mas no geral acho que teremos que redesenhar as duas remanescentes. Eu desenhei o brasão de Brasília, você viu? Sobre onde as discussões sobre padronização de título se dão lá no Commons, realmente não sei, mas se eu ouvir algum rumor eu lhe chamo. Abraços e bom feriado. --Tonyjeff 21:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Ficou legal o brasão. O brasão de brasília ficou também... eu inclusive tinha tentado, sem sucesso, desenhar. No momento estou tentando vetorizar a bandeira da minha cidade. Parabéns pelo trabalho — Guilherme (t/c) 02:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Olá Guilherme, apenas uma dica: quando mover os ficheiros no Commons por qüestão de padronização dos títulos, procure manter as informações contidas no descritivo original, ok? Abraços. --Tonyjeff 17:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Padrão de nomenclatura

Não seria melhor padronizar a nomenclatura dos arquivos de escudo das armas para evitar confusões? Assim como foi feito com as bandeiras (Flag of lugar.svg). O escudo das armas da aeronáutica está com o nome COA of Brazilian Air Force.svg, o do exército como Coat of arms of the Brazilian Army.svg e agora, o da marinha está como COA Brazilian Navy.svg. Creio que quanto antes isso for feito, melhor, pois depois serão menos links para consertar e arquivos para deletar. — Guilherme (t/c) 03:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Brazil-related topics

Ótima idéia. O Brasil tinha uma página como esta, não sei porquê deletaram. Eu até tentei criar novamente, mais foi muito trabalhoso e desisti. Se você quiser, posso ajudar, mas estou bastante ocupado reformulando o Wikipedia:WikiProject Brazil. Obrigado e bom trabahlo! Felipe C.S ( talk ) 17:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Simplifiquei bastante, seguindo o padrão das outras páginas. Dá uma olhadada Template:Brazil topics — Guilherme (t/c) 20:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Bom... eu estou sem tempo para corrigir as páginas que têm ligação para o template. Você já criou a página List of Brazil-related topics? Acho que só devemos simplificar o template depois de ter criado a lista. Reverti a sua edição por enquanto, assim que a página estiver pronta nós podemos simplificar o template. Obrigado. Felipe C.S ( talk ) 15:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Olhei o motivo do porque de deletarem a página. Alegaram que não havia necessidade de criar uma lista extensa com os tópicos do Brasil. Realmente tenho que concordar com eles. Fica muito confuso uma lista com todos os tópicos de um país grande como o Brasil. As Categories fazem melhor esse trabalho e de uma forma mais organizada. Não acho também que o template tenha algo a ver com isso. Ele só tem a função de mostrar os tópicos realmente mais importantes. Por mais confuso que estava (e agora voltou a estar) foi porque tinha muitos links até desnecessários para a função do template. Acredito que do modo que eu tinha deixado fica melhor, pois todas as páginas que estavam são facilmente acessíveis pelas que coloquei. O quê você acha? Abraços — Guilherme (t/c) 16:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, restaurei sua edição. Acho que a solução é criar outros templates que reúnam artigos sobre o mesmo assunto. O que acha? Felipe C.S ( talk ) 16:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Se não fugir dos padrões, não vejo porquê de não criar. Quais você pretende? — Guilherme (t/c) 16:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Na verdade eu só restaurei o Template:Lists of Brazilian states, mais acho importante criar um template para subdivisões como os estados e as regiões. Felipe C.S ( talk ) 16:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Ops, este template já existe (rs). Felipe C.S ( talk ) 16:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Acho que não precisamos de algo mais que [Template:States of Brazil|isso]], afinal, ele já cumpre bem seu papel. Sobre o da lista, ao invés de criar um template, acho melhor padronizarmos os infobox dos estados do Brasil e colocar as colocações dos rankings (de área, população, HDI, etc) apontando para cada página, como já é feito nos infobox para países e no infobox dos estados do Brasil na wikipédia em português. O que acha?

Regarding your "PNG -> SVG" edits on the Tux article

The SVG version is not the original version. The Tux page is meant to show the original version of the image. The SVG version is not identical to the original version. Therefore we should not use the SVG version. Instead, we will use the original version in the PNG format. Thank you. --Ysangkok 20:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Bandeiras

Pois é, houve um transtorno no Commons. O administrador Dantadd disse que eu estava desrespeitando os autores das imagens. E estava mesmo, não havia pensado nessa questão quando carreguei as imagens, então as marquei para eliminação. E agora o CommonsDelinker está trocando as bandeiras novamente. Felipe C.S ( talk ) 00:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

{{Collapsible list}}

We are using the template you created within the infobox on the India page. Is there a way to have the box collapsed by default ? Thanks Abecedare 21:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. It is weird, since the same template on Vancouver] seems to work as expected (and as we would like it to behave on the India page). Well, this is not an urgent content issue, so perhaps we can wait till somebody has a bright idea. Cheers. Abecedare 00:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
That's what I was coming here to ask: Can you include a collapsed option in this template. I understand that when more than two collapsible lists are present (like in the Vancouver example) all the lists will collapse. However, I need the ability to have just one list collapsed from the start. Thanks, —MJCdetroit 17:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I know a couple people who might know. I'll ask them. —MJCdetroit 19:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
{{Collapsible list collapsed}}
—MJCdetroit 16:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind. I thought I had something but too many bugs. —MJCdetroit 18:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)