Talk:Porto
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Porto is part of the selected content on the Portugal Portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality Portugal-related article. |
If anyone wants to add new pictures, please do so in the gallery. The article looked incredibly overloaded with too many pictures scattered everywhere until very recently, the last I'd want would be to have the page this mess again. However, if anyone wants to provide a photo from a university building for the education section, I'd appreciate that (and save me a trip to the architecture campus). wS;✉ 00:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
- Definitely more text needed to fit the photos well. Porto is a beautiful city but as text stands right now it's impossible to fit more photos. New material in photos - ie - more recent, are severely needed. These photos are either outdated or of outdated quality, not nearly doing justice to the real look of the city.
I moved J.K. Rowling from Notable Citizens, since she wasn't one, to the trivia section. The Notable Citizens would be more fitting for famous Portuenses.Vogensen 18:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I have to say that as a Portuense I very seldom experienced 40 degrees in the city.... does anyone have data on temperature averages.. doesn't seem correct. But I might be wrong.
Contents |
[edit] Metro
I just reverted an edit which intimated the metro line to the airport was already running. It isn't. Or am I going to get a shock when I jump on the train in the morning? Deizio 23:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Porto
The Porto project is now live. Anyone with an interest in Porto-related content ideas is very welcome to sign up and participate. Hope to see you there, Deizio 16:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Galiza Sul (Regiao Norte)
I think that it is frequently overlooked the strong cultural and ethnic ties that link the Regiao Norte with Galicia (Galiza in Galician-Portuguese language)as for centuries they were the same country and even today the similarities are appalling. Does not even the very name Galicia come from this part of nowdays Portugal? It is said that this relationship has been alienated by the shared need from Lisbon and Madrid to impose the borders over the reality of a common culture and (almost) similar language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maeloc (talk • contribs)
The traffic in Porto is not that bad. In fact when comparing with Lisbon it's amazing...--LeRobert 21:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Intro section and Transporation
I removed too much information about Port wine in the introduction. This article is about Porto, which aside from its name has little to do with Port wine these days. Also, I added some requests for citations for some statements. For instance, was Portugal named after Porto or was it the other way around? Different people I have spoken to seem to disagree on this point. Sources are needed.
I also removed the sentence "It is the seat of the Porto district and capital of the Norte region." which I believe only a few english speaking people will understand. Seat of what? The reference to it being Capital do Norte is repeated later anyway.
Also, I think the transportation section should refer to the metro as a completed project. It is basically finished as far as I know and has been fully adopted by area residents. Also, don't the buses run on natural gas? That is fairly ecofriendly and should be mentioned. If no one edits, I will edit later, will also add more to this section.
Oh, and there are nonstop flights from Porto to Toronto and Newark, NJ; so you don't have to go to Lisbon anymore to get to North America.
Added an informative climate section. Maybe too informative. Feel free to cut down. Someone should add something about geography. It's very hilly like Lisbon and San Francisco, and city residents have one of the lowest rates of heart disease in Europe. Also, Porto residents never get tired of walking and its fun to pace around the city even if you have nowhere specific to go.
Problems: Someone should describe the problem with residents leaving the city for the suburbs. Baixa (midtown) is still pretty crowded during the day but gets empty at night except for a few special bars districts. Before the metro and suburban trains, this was putting strain on the public transportation system. I also heard the city is trying to make owners pay for renovations of abandoned houses in the center, sounds like the city should be subsidizing this.
--Dba5 19:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)dbandrade
- Well, as far as I know, and the article seems to oppose that idea, the name Portugal actually comes from the combination of Portus (Porto) with Cale (nowadays Vila Nova de Gaia). The fact that it comes more recently from the name Portucale doesn't reject the hypothesis. Actually, Portucale also comes from Porto. So, Portus + Cale —> Portucal —> Portugal. What is called popular belief in the article is defended by most (if not all) historians. I think that statement should be corrected. Malafaya 09:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Say what
- The country of Portugal was not (contrary to popular but unfounded beliefs) named after this city and is on the contrary an etymological evolution of the original name, the county of Portucale.
The county of Portucale was named after the city of Portucale aka Porto.--Pedro 19:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] not rational
In a study concerning competitiveness of the 18 Portuguese district capitals, Porto was the worst-ranked. The study was made by Minho University economics researchers and was published in Público newspaper on 30th September 2006. The best-ranked cities in the study were Évora, Lisbon and Coimbra.[3] Although, the validity of this study was questioned by some Porto's notable figures (such as local politicians and businesspersons) who argued that the city proper do not functions independently but in conurbation with other municipalities.[4] This point of view cannot harm the research study by itself, which was made in accordance with the criteriously selected World Economic Forum scientific methodology[5], because the same situation is what exactly happens with other higher ranked cities, like Lisbon, which were similarly considered alone without its satellite cities or towns.
This is not rational because of simple facts:
- not only Lisbon was in that study and no other district capitals functions like Lisbon and Porto
- the conurbantion of Porto is different from Lisbon's and can not be compared. The city of Porto proper is very old and small.
- it isn't NPOV nether, and contradicts itself in the last sentence: "because the same situation is what exactly happens with other higher ranked cities, like Lisbon, which were similarly considered alone without its satellite cities or towns" who said this? What is wikipedia to contradict geographers and economists? Besides Lisbon which cities are those?! --Pedro 19:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Population
The population figure of 326,654 given in the article is wrong. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatísica) presents the following figures: 263,131 (2001) and 238,954 (estimated 2004/12/31). Portuguese Wikipedia uses the former. I couldn't find figures for 2006. It is well known that the municipality of Porto has been facing serious decline in resident population. Cigsandalcohol 08:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nortenho accent
It's stupid to say that "they are known throughout the country for their "nortenho" accent". Noone in the north calls it "nortenho accent"... (And, I dare say, the north is part of the country...) If it were "people from the north are known in the south because of their "Nortenho accent"" it'd make sense... But as the opposite is also applied I don't really see the point in making such an assertion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LeRobert (talk • contribs) 21:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Transportation section
Why does the transportation section begin with a blurb about a bridge that was sabatoged? That should be in the history section. People that read this article want to know about currently available transportation. Also the fact that it has several bridges, is interesting, but not really that relevant. Many things were left out. For instance, someone should mention that taxicabs are usually picked up at praças, instead of hailing, though you can hail (this is different in many places outside europe). Nothing was mentioned about the existing tram lines (i.e. the eletrico, now being expanded), nor the funicular that gets you quickly from the baixa to the ribeira. Fare information needs to be included. It should also be mentioned that traffic congestion is pretty bad (though alot better than it use to be, especially in the evenings and early mornings since fewer and fewer people are living in the city). Also isn't the metro complete? Are they building new lines? In general, the transportation section should quickly convey the 1) methods and options used to travel around the city and their costs, 2) how to get to the city, 3) any pecularities that might help foreigners (for instance, you don't drive in the metro tunnels hah), finally, any interesting facts such as the various bridges etc ...
Hope someone that knows this stuff well can fix it, otherwise I'll do it after some time. --Dba5 12:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Population
The figure "2,99 million people in agglomeration" includes the cities of Braga and Guimarães, right?Page Up 19:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- And Famalicão too. NUTS III Greater Porto, Ave, Cavado and Entre-Douro-e-Vouga, and parts of Tâmega, I believe, they now call it the metropolitan Arc of Porto. it is of course a polycentric area. --Pedro 17:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sincerely, I don't see the relevance of such figure. The area considered is too broad, so I don't think it makes sense to have it under the article "Porto"... The reference to the source does not justify it as well since the author was just trying to make a point in what homogeneous economic development within regions was concerned. Actually, the text is a mess in what division of territory is concerned: we have city, Greater Metropolitan Area of Porto, Northern Littoral Urban-Metropolitan Region, Greater Porto NUTS III subregion, Norte region, Norte and Norte NUTS II region. Cigsandalcohol 22:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- welcome to Portugal! The country is redefining most of the organization of its territory, so it is normal to be a mess in this period. I bet it is less broad than London or Paris, or Madrid. And those places even use the word "city" for an huge region, that is everything but a city. But that "Northern Littoral Urban-Metropolitan Region" is now pretty much spoken, and often known as "Metropolitan arc", but to use here, we need proper references. This article just needs some attention, and I think that population is useful. --Pedro 22:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] External Link
Hello Porto Editors! I figured it might be relevant for you to show - as a supplement to your more factual article - how a traveller presented Porto, using Ponte Luis I as a special angle. So I took the liberty to insert a link to "A Connection in Porto". Keep it if you like. There are no commercial interests behind my initiative. Scribbleman (talk) 17:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- External links policy on Advertising and conflicts of interest states You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, and in this case, you are Terje Raa[1] . Unfortunately your conflict of interest editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote yourself and your articles. Such a conflict is strongly discouraged. Your contributions to wikipedia under Scribbleman consist entirely of promoting Terje Raa / bootsnall.com / travellady.com and is considered WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole, the all seem to be Terje Raa/bootsnall.com/travellady.com related only. Please do not continue adding links to your own websites to Wikipedia. It has become apparent that your account are only being used for spamming inappropriate external links and for self-promotion. Wikipedia is NOT a "repository of links" or a "vehicle for advertising" and persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted. Any further spamming may result in your account and/or your IP address being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines. You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to promote yourself, right? --Hu12 13:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Images
Many of the images on this article were either taken out or resized dramatically in a few edits a few days ago. This included a beautiful panoramic shot that was actually a featured picture, and I can't see any reason why such a shot would be taken out. The justification for removing many of these pictures was that there were too many, which was true to an extent, but it seems to have gone too far the other way, and doesn't do justice to Porto. With this in mind I've put back the featured panormaic shot and a few other pictures, as well as resized some of the others. I think it is best if a compromise is reached between how the article was before I put these back in, and how the article was before any of these were taken out. If you have a particular view on this please put a post here. Norman22b (talk) 10:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
