Talk:São Paulo/Archive05 Apl06
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
Helicopter use
I just moved text to this article from a stub page called Helicopter use in Brasil that is VfD. See the section on Transportation. The page is up for deletion, so I refactored the text, what I could, moved it here, and deleted it there. You may notice a "fact" tag on the opening line about per capita ownership of helicopters. It was this assertion, in part, that caused the controversey. Questions, let me know. Paul Klenk 12:14, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
- As noted on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Helicopter use in Brasil, the newspaper article which has been cited as the source of this claim doesn't actually support it, and probably isn't a very good source to cite anyway. So I'd recommend removing this claim unless there is better verification available. Otherwise we will find ourselves cited as the source and it will become an urban legend.
- If you want to preserve the claim and encourage other editors to work on it, put it in the talk page (here), or just link to it in the article's history from the talk page. Then, if it can be verified, that's the time to put it into the article. Andrewa 20:23, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Bias
I would like to thank the Sao Paulo tourism board for such a great Wikipedia entry. 69.196.182.171 03:35, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yes... same pattern applies for other articles related to Brazil (mostly the 'Brazil' article itself, of course). In Wikipedia, historic backgrounds and plurality of thinking seem to be an exclusivity of isolated subjects like Marxism or whatever. What is outside the most accepted word of order seems to be cut, disassociated from the main, most general topics. This is extremely serious, since it means disallowing the still not completely formed minds to acquire social criticism and independence of thinking based on what they read on Wikipedia (aka guides for tourists).
- A Businessman's Encyclopedia?
- Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brazil (specifically the last topic) --Ww2 02:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Problems on Current Critical Problems
On the crime rate paragraph, added ANOTHER Citation Needed tag, since people insist on placing data without sourcing it. Let's help this page by finding souces for these informations and linking it to the text, please.
For the same reason, removed this unproven passage: "It is safe to say that violence in São Paulo is as normal as it is in every big city around the globe, with more critical problems on peripherical areas, like occurs in every city that has the size of São Paulo."
Also, I know most of us working on this page are brazilian and lacking full skill at the English language, so please let's take extra care when editing. Daniel Trielli 15:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I removed an extra paragraph by the same user, 201.51.0.66, also condescending of São Paulo's problems citing the "normal for every big city" excuse. There is no need to de-emphasize the critical problems of the city, and it is also a matter of opinion to determine what is normal and acceptable. The purpose of that section is simply to state what is happening without making judgements. PHF 20:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
On current critical problems, the "fact" that many migrants, especially from the north east of Brazil, do not find job opportunities more often than not, then go live in slums or back to where they came from, is extremelly prejudicial and biased. Sao Paulo was not solely built upon foreign immigrants' work, but it also has a great debt to migrants from all over Brazil, who compose a large percentual of the city's population nowadays.
I strongly suggest that such comment is deleted, since it does not even provide a decent source of information to back it up and is totally based on a sad personal opinion.
Infobox
I believe this article could benefit from the addition of an infobox. I have posted an "Infoboxed" version at the sandbox , and intend to add one to the actual article as soon as I have worked out all the kinks (sources, accurate data etc). I would appreciate comments on this, whether supportive or critical. Thanks, Fvasconcellos 22:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)