Hi Torimem! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 18:01, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for creating José Inácio de Abreu e Lima which I’ve just reviewed. Is it based partly on the pt.wiki article? If so there’s a template I need to add to the talk page. Happy editing and please leave a message in my talk page if you need any help. Mccapra (talk) 07:36, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some parts, yes, but not all of it. I'm trying to find more sources to make it more original though. Torimem (talk) 09:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks. When any material is used across wikis we have to add a translation template to the talk page. This way we have proper attribution for copyright reasons. I’ll add it now and please add it yourself in future if you reuse material from othe4 wikis. All the best Mccapra (talk) 10:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank, I wasn't aware of this. I'll add it from now on and on and also on my previous articles. Torimem (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions in the area of Brazilian military history are wonderful to read! Well written, well cited, and very professional. Please take this Great Editing in Progress Ribbon as a token of appreciation, as well as motivation to continue to do bigger and better things. Fritzmann (message me) 18:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Torimem (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd noticed you've been contributing a lot to Brazil-related articles. I'm working on another at the moment: https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/User:Ttocserp/sandbox see section 2. Would you like to collaborate? Ttocserp 08:09, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to, but unfortunately I'm very busy right now and I also feel like my writing is not that good. That's an interesting topic, despite being a bit forgotten and ignored, good to see someone shedding some light on it. Where are you from? If you don't mind telling me, of course.Torimem (talk) 17:38, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem,

Thank you for creating Attempted assassination of Pedro II of Brazil.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hello, the article has an Unclear citation style - and uncited sections. Additionally this subject is not even mentioned in the main article Pedro II of Brazil. If it is notable it should appear in the main article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bruxton}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bruxton (talk) 15:42, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruxton: "this subject is not even mentioned in the main article Pedro II of Brazil. If it is notable it should appear in the main article" - I've noticed this issue and I agree. It was indeed weird that it isn't mentioned in any of the articles related to Pedro II. The problem is that the Pedro II main article is a featured one and I'm not sure if I'm qualified or allowed to make a big change on it.Torimem (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can always post it on the talk page of the article. But first check if you can edit it yourself. Bruxton (talk) 00:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get it in there? Bruxton (talk) 00:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruxton: Just did it!Torimem (talk) 01:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good! It is amazing that an important event like that was not in a FA. Bruxton (talk) 04:37, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem

Thank you for creating Moderating power (Empire of Brazil).

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:58, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn: You're welcome! Torimem (talk) 02:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen your edits on this article which look good to me. The expression "broke the front" found in the article looks odd to me. Is it a translation from an article or book in Portuguese?. I don't know any of that language. Should "broke" be" broke through" "destroyed" or "attacked" or something else?Spinney Hill (talk) 08:50, 19 July 2022 (UTC),[reply]

@Spinney Hill: Hey, thank you. Regarding the expression "broke the front": it doesn't seem to be a translation from the article in Portuguese. Anyway, I suppose what the person who wrote it meant was "broke through", as you suggested. Torimem (talk) 00:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Spinney Hill (talk) 08:06, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Claro Jansson, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hitro talk 07:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Miguel Costa for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

––FormalDude talk 23:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FormalDude: Hi, I'm creating an article with the same name. I moved the previous one from "Miguel Costa" to "Miguel Costa (sailor)" to make way for the new one. I fixed the links to the article with its new name before deleting the contents on the redirect page. Torimem (talk) 23:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Your contributions and translations are incredible! I can't commend nor thank you enough for your amazing work on Brazilian history articles, especially ones such as the Integralist Uprising and the Cohen Plan. Your edits are much-needed and very appreciated! FredModulars (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: Hey, thank you. You did an amazing job with the 1937 coup article too. Torimem (talk) 23:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And, btw, great job finding the images for the Integralist Uprising.

One question though: For the Integralist Uprising photos, did you find the licensing permission on the Memorial da Democracia website? I'm only asking because some especially vital photos (like, of course, the uprising photos, Vargas's Estado Novo radio address, and photos of people like Francisco Campos) could be free of copyright questions if so. FredModulars (talk) 23:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: I did not find it. When I'm in doubt I upload the pictures with the copyright licensing just in case, though I'm really not sure if that's correct. Torimem (talk) 23:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe what you did is incorrect, but because you did it in good faith and nobody on Wikipedia really cares about either the Vargas Era or its images, I don't think it matters. At this point, I don't even think Vargas's official photo is within Wikipedia's rules, but, again, I'm pretty sure no one cares. Whichever way it goes, I'll try to find the website's licensing in the future. FredModulars (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: I have some more good pictures. Do you think I should still upload them? Torimem (talk) 00:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the source. Are they from a website (like the ones above) or from a book where the source is defined? (Though, honestly, the type doesn't matter if one has a defined source/permission use guideline and the other doesn't.) FredModulars (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: From the exact same website. Torimem (talk) 00:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to search the website for anything about the licensing, but so far, as last time, I can't find anything.

For now, if you would like to upload the images, I would recommend using a fair use rationale, like this (File:MonroePalaceguarded1937.jpeg) or this (File:EstadoNovoRadioAddress1937.jpeg). However, it has a lot of rules attached to it. The photos really have to contribute/depict the events/people of the article (the two for the uprising seem to fit the rules), the quality has to be diminished, there has to be no free equivalent, etc. FredModulars (talk) 00:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, check the source of the image. For example, this one (http://memorialdademocracia.com.br/card/tres-tiros-no-pescoco-quase-tiram-a-vida-do-vice-presidente-da-republica#card-7) of Melo Viana is in the public domain for these reasons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Melo_Viana,_Fundo_Correio_da_Manhã_-_2.png). As a rule of thumb, pretty much all Correio da Manhã photos are public domain. FredModulars (talk) 00:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: They have an "all rights reserved" tag on the bottom, but that's all I could find. No information on "Iconographia" either. What a shame really. I won't upload any more pictures then. Torimem (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, too. I got somewhere (kind of): This image here is dubbed public domain here. I tried to see if alamy counted by contacting the Wikipedia Discord, but, ironically, no one cared and it pretty much got buried quickly. I'll see if I can contact anyone else who knows more about this to find out a solution, because I think these articles are dependent on these illustrations. FredModulars (talk) 02:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted the website, but sadly when I sent the email, it doesn't let you enter your email address... FredModulars (talk) 02:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: Hey, I managed to contact the website. They said they're not the owners of the pictures and actually bought the licensing from an archive to use in their website. In any case, the pics meet the criteria for fair use, right? I'll change the tagging. Torimem (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, since I uploaded the pictures on Commons, I think I'll need to request their deletion first. Could you upload them here under a fair use license for me? Torimem (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'll upload them now under fair use. Sorry for the delay in my reply. FredModulars (talk) 03:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! So I think there may be a problem regarding the licensing.

As you can see here, Fournier's photo is PD per the National Archives. However, scroll a few photos here and even though it is "Iconographia," it appears to be extremely similar if not identical without the "1088." It is probably incorrect to label them as fair use if they are in fact PD/under a different license. If you are able to contact the website again (I failed to reach them by email and tried social media to no avail), see if they can just allow the images they purchased to be used on Wikipedia articles. After that, pretty much all of their images will be free of hassle. FredModulars (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a week later and still no reply... Torimem (talk) 17:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, because of their inefficiency, I guess the only option is to assume the other photo, and all other photos from their website with "Iconographia," is under fair use. I will reupload the photo where Integralists are being jailed soon, though the main photo for Integralist Uprising has already been reuploaded. FredModulars (talk) 01:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem

Thank you for creating Taubaté Agreement.

User:Ovinus, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Awesome stuff! Thanks for working on less-covered topics like this one.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ovinus}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ovinus (talk) 02:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Can you translate and upload the article pt:Palácio Tiradentes in English Wikipedia? This gorgeous Belle Époque building, deserves an article in English Wikipedia.

Yours sincerely, Multituberculata (talk) 20:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Multituberculata: I can do it, but the quality of the sources in the article aren't that good... Torimem (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you for your reply. Multituberculata (talk) 20:45, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Multituberculata: Done: Tiradentes Palace. Torimem (talk) 03:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the new article! Multituberculata (talk) 15:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I know we just talked two days ago, but I was wondering if you would like to work on an article together. I think we both know the sad quality of a lot of articles on Brazilian history (mostly pre-Goulart), and we seem to edit a lot of the same stuff. FredModulars (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: Well, I'm more than willing to help, but I'm afraid to compromise myself to large projects since I'm too busy with work. Anyway, I would like to, yes. What article are you planning to work on? Torimem (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I share the same feeling, which is why I have been on and off Wikipedia for the first half of this year. I've been thinking about improving on the 1935 communist uprising for a while now since it's in terrible shape and is significant. If you'd like more to work on something else instead, I'm fine with that, too. FredModulars (talk) 00:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Let's do it! I'll see if I can gather some good sources and start reading about it. This article would lead to some interesting figures such as Luís Carlos Prestes and his wife Olga. Torimem (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright! I'll be doing the same, just notify me after you have collected the information and have the time to work on it. I'm in the same boat as you (with other priorities), so no rush! FredModulars (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This book by Dulles seems to be a good one on the topic. It is cited by CPDOC in their article about the uprising and given that sources in English are preferred, it could very well be the base source for the article. There are lots of books about it in Portuguese too, but the few ones I've seen so far were written by marxists like Nelson Werneck Sodré or by people directly involved in the event such as Agildo Barata. Is that an issue? Torimem (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen the title before, Dulles is reliable and would be a good source. I also found this one by Levine to be pretty good. I've cited it a lot because it gives a good account of the prelude to and aftermath of the rebellion. And though English sources are preferred, I don't believe I have seen Portuguese sources discouraged upon, like here.

As for sources written by Marxist authors, if we were to use those we should not rely on them, and it would probably be safer to discard the sources altogether unless there would be some section on historiography/legacy. I don't think first-hand accounts and primary sources would be an issue, though. We just have to keep it as objective and unbiased as possible. FredModulars (talk) 20:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FredModulars: I think I'm ready to work on the article now, sorry for the long wait. Torimem (talk) 17:13, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry that I left you hanging. I was off Wikipedia for a while due to real-life demands. I'm not sure if you still want to (or can) work on the article, but if you do, I can promise you I won't disappear again. FredModulars (talk) 21:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright. I'm free to work on it from 30 December onwards. Torimem (talk) 17:59, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. FredModulars (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I meant 30 October, aka next week. My bad lol Torimem (talk) 01:21, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're good. I thought you meant December and I forgot about checking your talk page. Do you want to start working on the article sometime this week? FredModulars (talk) 18:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let me finish the article I'm working on with Ttocserp first. Would you like to help us out? Torimem (talk) 19:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't provide any major help to the Siege of Humaitá because I do not have any sources or solid information to add. However, I can help out as a copyeditor or something to that effect on the sandbox where you both work on the article. If I have time (big if), I can try to read up on one of the free sources you guys are using and help out to a greater degree. If you and Ttocserp are okay with it, I'll jump in.

Sorry that I've been consistently replying late. I've been extremely busy lately because of school and family, but I should be free to help out starting on either tomorrow the fifteenth or Wednesday the sixteenth, and I will have a lot more time to work on Wikipedia thanks to the upcoming holidays. FredModulars (talk) 07:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @FredModulars I'm back! Are you still up to it? Torimem (talk) 03:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am. Let's do this! I started a page User:FredModulars/Communist uprising 1935 here. I say we can start putting down sources and mapping out the article, or whatever way you'd like to start off with. FredModulars (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for creating Tiradentes Palace. For the History section, the article says It's origins date back to 1631, when the members of the Senate and the Chamber of Rio de Janeiro requested the construction of the first building, the Casa de Câmara e Cadeia .... while the first source for that statement says A origem da Casa de Câmara e Cadeia remonta ao ano de 1631, quando os membros do Senado e da Câmara do Rio de Janeiro solicitaram a construção de um edifício especialmente projetado .... I can't speak Spanish but this looks to be a close paraphrase? Ovinus (talk) 05:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, let me rephrase it in a second. Torimem (talk) 05:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks! :) Ovinus (talk)

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for creating Blood tribute. User:VickKiang, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for this translation from here- impressive!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|VickKiang}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

VickKiang 08:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I’ve reviewed a number of your new articles and seen you make improvements to ones I started. Have you considered applying to become autopatrolled? You can request the permission at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled. It means your new articles go straight to search engine indexing without waiting in the new page patrol queue, and you don’t need to wait for them to be reviewed. All the best Mccapra (talk) 07:23, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice @Mccapra, but I actually prefer it this way. Torimem (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on José Joaquim Carneiro de Campos, Marquis of Caravelas. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 17:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Torrimem, we need to rewrite this article. It is a thin article with a completely false map. Have you got time to collaborate? Ttocserp 14:43, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ttocserp; Sure, let's do it. Torimem (talk) 20:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! How shall we proceed?Ttocserp 21:18, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We can divide the work among ourselves by sections, but first I need to read on the topic to take some notes and sort things out. I'll let you know when I'm done. If you already have an idea on what sections you want for the article please let me know. It would be good if we could have access to that book by Hooker, but unfortunately I can't find it anywhere on the internet. Torimem (talk) 21:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have Hooker. Although Hooker is based on Tasso Fragoso (which I also have).

I would suggest the first to do is to establish (1) a common user space you and I can work on in relative privacy (2) a list of sources. Obviously it should include Whigham's Road to Armageddon and Doratioto's Maldita Guerra (I only have it in Spanish). Shall I start by opening a user space and sending you the link? Ttocserp 22:35, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I was looking for articles on this topic and found this one which includes that map featured on the Wiki article and even credits it. Torimem (talk) 22:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's make future interchanges on the Talk page of thus userspace User:Ttocserp/Siege of Humaitá. (I wanted to make it TorimemTttocserp/Siegeo of Humaitá but it won't let me.) Ttocserp 23:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you like, I can send you my email. I don't know how to message you.Ttocserp 11:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. We can also talk directly via Telegram if you don't mind. It's a good medium because there's an option to hide your phone number. Torimem (talk) 16:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Capture of Porto Alegre. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Brazilian corvette Pedro II. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 18:11, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for improvements like these! They're very appreciated. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:43, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I hate redlinks lol Torimem (talk) 16:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hear that! Also, I wanted to make sure you saw this edit in case it impacts the Portuguese Wikipedia article. Vanterpool's article isn't necessarily wrong, but it definitely has major missing parts and should be treated carefully. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, are you going to nominate that article for DYK? :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idead how to do it. I don't know if that article is good enough for a DYK either. Also, I've noticed the naval arms race article links to the section in the Decline and Fall of Pedro II article when mentioning the 1889 coup d'etat that installed the republic, instead of linking to the main article for this coup. Is this a deliberate choice? (considering that section seems to be better written and sourced that the main article about the coup) Torimem (talk) 00:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly why I did it and I have no qualms with changing the link later if the main article is improved! Re: DYK, requirements there aren't extremely high; I think Riachuelo definitely qualifies. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your hard work in translate some of my best works. Maikê (talk) 01:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Maikê. Torimem (talk) 05:44, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Claro Jansson, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Torimem. Your translation of work from PT:Revolt of the 18 of the Fort of Copacabana is causing some errors. Do you intend to also translate the required cites to complete the {{sfn}} templates you are using? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 22:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Don't worry, I'm still doing it and will publish the results in a few minutes. Torimem (talk) 22:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Don't mean to jump on you, I've been trying to clear down these errors. I'm currently at 'Dem..', so anything lower alphabetically stock out. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 22:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The orignal creator of the article in the Portuguese Wiki made a lot of changes since last time I've translated it and I'm bringing these changes to the article in english, but I'm doing it by following his steps, edit by edit. Torimem (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Claro Jansson".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Military School of Realengo. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article! Have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Passage of Fortín Island. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thanks for creating this article. I encouraged and hope that you will write more articles! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @SunDawn! Torimem (talk) 03:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conforme informado a você, a fonte condiz com o dado. Porém eu não irei reverter sua edição novamente, pois isso iria configurar uma guerra de edição e certamente enfraqueceria a fidelidade do artigo. Tome nota e acompanhe o assunto na “talk page” do artigo, pois prevendo sua postura, eu abri antecipadamente uma solicitação para moderação da página.

Atenciosamente, B777-300ER (talk) 19:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oi. Podemos trabalhar nisto? Draft:Manuel Jacinto Nogueira da Gama, Marquis of Baependi Gondolabúrguer (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oi, tudo bem? Desculpa pela demora em responder. Bom, não posso te ajudar diretamente, mas posso te passar essa fonte. Na página 68 você vai encontrar várias informações para o artigo.

• Vasconcellos, Barão de; Vasconcellos, Barão Smith de (1918). Archivo Nobiliarchico Brasileiro (in Portuguese). Lausanne: Imprimerie La Concorde.

Torimem (talk) 15:01, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	List of prime ministers of Brazil is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this article there is a section called First Battle of Iasuií whose relevance to me seems doubtful. It is presented devoid of all context and relevance. The sole cited source is Donato, 1996, a work I do not have and whose authenticity I have not been able to establish. Could this even be a hoax? What do you think about it? Ttocserp 22:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ttocserp I don't think it is a hoax, but the relevance argument is on point. In fact I had thought about these sections before (there's another one with questionable relevance). I think we can remove it. Torimem (talk) 22:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's an unregistered user who keeps edit warring on Paraguayan War without leaving edit summaries or discussing on talk page. If you look at View History you'll see what I mean. I have requested a semi-protected status; they may not grant it on the ground that vandalism by a single user doesn't count. Do you know how to get this user blocked? I don't know the procedure.Ttocserp 12:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea either. Torimem (talk) 12:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem,

Thank you for creating Battle of Três Lagoas.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hey! Good work on thr article! I'vr tagged the article that it is an orphan; no other articles link to it. Other than that, looks great!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Tails Wx}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Tails Wx (they/them) ⚧ 07:42, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Brazilian Army in the First Republic. User:Tails Wx, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good work on the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Tails Wx}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Tails Wx 17:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. Thank you for your work on Operation Popeye (Brazil). User:Tails Wx, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Reviewing; good work on the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Tails Wx}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Tails Wx 01:16, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All credit and thanks must go to @Serraria for writing these articles. I'm merely translating them! Torimem (talk) 01:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was wondering if you could take a look at my sandbox to check my translation and the quality of Portuguese-language sources used. If you need any help with obtaining the source or the quotes, just let me know! Thanks! WMrapids (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @WMrapids, I just checked the translation on the news outlet sources and it is all good.

I could not check the Rabela one.

As for their quality, I'm not sure on Wikipedia's guidelines regarding news outlets, but I'd say CNN, Veja, and Estado de S. Paulo are good reputable sources. Not so sure about Brasil de Fato though. Torimem (talk) 15:36, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking a look! WMrapids (talk) 08:47, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Torimem! Thanks for translating Brazilian cruiser Almirante Tamandaré (1890). A question on the first source there—I was excited to see that Histórico dos Navios is back up after being up and down for years.

... but then I clicked the button and got a "Acesso negado" / "Não está autorizado a aceder a esta página" error again. Am I missing something here? Is the link actually in a different place or is it accessible only within Brazil/their museum, perhaps? Thanks for any thoughts you can provide! Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 23:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am getting the same message, unfortunately. Torimem (talk) 00:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Darn. Thanks for trying it! I did discover that you can find the PDFs with trial and error (examples 1, 2, 3), but complicating things I don't know what the second year in the URL is supposed to stand for. Like in that second link, the ship was decommissioned in 1947 and sank without a trace in 1951, but the URL says 1960. Confusing. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 01:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The second year in the URL seems to be the "baixa".

I know what this term means in other contexts, but it can mean something different in the navy, possibly a technical term. It is probably just the term the navy uses for decommissioning (In Portuguese "descomissionamento").

As for São Paulo, the text says:

"On 2 August 1947, in compliance with Ministerial Notice 1,618-B, it was disincorporated [literal translation of "desincorporado"] from the Squadron and subordinated to the Command of the First Naval District. By Ministerial Notice No. 810 of 19 March 1948, the Material Maintenance Group of the battleship São Paulo was created, with the ship remaining in this situation until 14 July 1951, when it was subordinated to the Administrative Department of Material Recovery, based on Ilha das Cobras".

So it seems the ship was not actually decommissioned in 1947, it was just removed from active service and transfered to another command. Given the fact that the ship disappeared, it may be that the navy tried to find it for a while and, after having no success, decided to finally decommission it 1960, but this is just my assumption.

Likewise, the text on Minas Gerais says:

"By Order of the Day No. 0032 of 31 December 1952 of the Command in Chief of the Squadron, the battleship Minas Gerais was disincorporated from the Squadron on 27 January 1953, becoming subordinate to the Command of the First Naval District. On 30 May 1953, the disarmament display was held. In the same year it was sold as scrap to an Italian firm. [It] departed on 11 March 1954, arriving in Spezia, Italy on 22 April 1954".

30 May 1953 is the date given at the top of the PDF as the baixa, and the year 1953 also appears in the URL, which makes me believe the baixa is indeed the decommisioning in this context.

I hope this helps. Torimem (talk) 02:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Torimem, that is helpful. Extremely helpful. I was going off the Wikipedia articles, where both of the equivalent dates are sourced to Whitley's Battleships of World War Two. That particular book has given me trouble in the past with dates that mysteriously differ from more authoritative sources, which is something I discovered when I was writing about Argentina's dreadnoughts... after these articles were completed.

Both of those dates are also cited to sources that use that "disincorporated" line you quoted (Sao Paulo's is an old version of the PDF I linked). I'm guessing I trusted that disincorporating = decommissioning because they were the same date used by Whitley. I will have to build in some time to correct these articles. Thank you for the help. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 03:16, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Torimem,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 15:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

I'm not particulary interest in anarchism per se, but in its intersections with Brazilian history. I was expanding Afonso Pena's article recently and my contribution to Anarchism on Wikipedia will probably be a section related to the anarchist movement in Brazil during his presidency! An user recently translated the Adolfo Gordo Law article from Portuguese, which was approved during Pena's government. Torimem (talk) 15:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar Another intersection with Anarchism during Pena's government was that the movement was anti-war and anti-militarism, which I'll try to cover in this section. Torimem (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Awarded for your work on Afonso Pena! Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've been working on this article for so long and it's still not finished. Torimem (talk) 22:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 January 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brazilian cruiser Almirante Barroso (1882), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Brazilian cruiser Almirante Barroso (pictured) was on a voyage to circumnavigate Earth with Prince August Leopold on board when the republic was proclaimed in Brazil? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brazilian cruiser Almirante Barroso (1882). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Brazilian cruiser Almirante Barroso (1882)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your work on the Joaquim Murtinho article. This late 19th century political period in Brazil is... complicated. Prburley (talk)

Hello @Prburley. No need to worry. I'm the one who should thank you for creating these articles! If you need help with anything, feel free to ask me. Torimem (talk) 21:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take you up on that offer @Torimem. The "history" section I wrote for SESC Arsenal--non-Brazilian readers might need better context for these two points:

1) I glossed over how the arsenal was transferred from the Portuguese to the the Brazilians after 1822. But when and how? I know Salvador had a separate independence date, what about Mato Grosso, 1823? 1824? 1825?

2) I have no idea what this 1st Republic civil war business is about. Did it have a name? "The proclamation of the Republic of Brazil in 1889 led to regional disputes across Brazil." etc. etc. etc. Thanks if possible, Prburley (talk)

1) I'm not sure about this one. I think it was simply "taken over" by the new government, the previous administrators were probably Brazilians themselves (i.e. born in Brazil), but I'll look into it.

2) This one generically refers to a number of regional conflicts that broke out after the republic was proclaimed. In the case of Mato Grosso there's fortunately an article that covers this exact topic in the Portuguese Wiki (which I was already planning to translate to English at some point in the future). You might want to take a look into it here Torimem (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Torimem I'll translate the intro to the article above. I'm going to Mato Grosso in April so I'm trying write about architecture in MT as fast as possible so I know what to photograph, but there are few academic resources to work with. I wrote a Timeline of Cuiabá history from my handwritten notes, there isn't even one in Portuguese. Prburley (talk)

@Prburley, you might want to take a look at this for a list of listed buildings. I also know this thesis (p. 25 onwards) that tells a lot about SESC Arsenal's history, apparently construction began in the early 1800s but it was only finished in 1832, it doesn't say how the "transfer" from Portuguese to Brazilian control happened though. I must admit that I know very little about Mato Grosso (I'm from Minas Gerais), Brazil is so big! But if you're gonna visit Mato Grosso, I suggest that you take some time to visit Cáceres. If you visit Cuiabá, you could also go to or email the local IPHAN center there for more information on historic places to see. Torimem (talk) 22:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Torimem That thesis looks great, thank you. Ideally I'd know a lot about most of the major buildings in a city before I can start the photography more quickly, but there's just not enough written about Cuiabá. There's not even coordinates for some of the sites, but the MT Wiki group is probably back from summer vacation now, I'll message them. I'm relying heavily on Ricardo Silveira Castor's thesis for MT/MS architecture, and after reading his bibliography, he didn't have much to work with either. I mainly like to photograph church architecture, so Minas Gerais is high on my list. #1 on my list is Igarassu, PE. Prburley (talk)

Depois de ver a minha edição revertida duas vezes, tenho de perguntar: se o artigo não diz que Portugal tem 750 mil brasileiros então o que é que diz? Petnog (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

O artigo diz:

"Cerca de 400 mil brasileiros estão legalizados em Portugal, o que a torna a maior comunidade estrangeira residente e há ainda cerca de 150 mil que aguardam pela regularização da documentação e mais de 200 mil têm dupla cidadania".

No máximo alguém poderia dizer que há 550 mil, não 750, pois a fonte não separa explicitamente o número dos que têm dupla cidadania dos demais.

Procurando em outras fontes recentes acerca do número de brasileiros em Portugal, todas condizem que o número de legalizados está em torno de 400 mil. Torimem (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. É justo. Petnog (talk) 19:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you would provide edit summaries however. Since you are primarily fixing up the technical stuff, they don't have to be as elaborate as some of the novels I am writing. For that last one "wl" would have been great. Also since you seem to speak good Portuguese please feel free to point out any errors in the machine translation that some one has provided us with.Thanks and welcome Elinruby (talk) 07:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome @Elinruby. I'll provide the edit summaries from now on, sorry for not doing it earlier. Torimem (talk) 07:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i am glad to have the help. But I think the article may get busy and some people feel strongly about it. It does make things easier when multiple people are working on the article. I checked a few of your edits and they look good; please do continue. Elinruby (talk) 07:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'm more into Brazilian history than politics and I don't really keep track of what is going on these days, but I'm glad to help. Torimem (talk) 07:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

nod nod I do a lot of stuff about medieval Provence etc where I never see another soul, so I get it. Then I said Operation Car Wash huh what's that... Elinruby (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, thanks. Also, would like to have more help at the Brazil PLG glossary. For example: most websites will translate suspeição as 'suspicion', and much of the time, it does mean that—except in the field of law, when it means pt:Suspeição (direito), which is something completely different. I'd like to add suspeição (in the legal sense) to the glossary, but that's just one example. If you feel like adding it or expanding the glossary, please do! Any help there, will help articles like 2022 Brazilian attempted coup plot, and many others. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 11:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Torimem!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful translation of the article on Brazilian Army Aviation (1919–1941)! Klbrain (talk) 09:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boa tarde, caro usuário. Vou escrever em português pois você também é brasileiro. O "Golpe da Maioridade" é considerado um golpe de Estado na historiografia brasileira. Realmente, não foi um golpe de caráter militar - no entanto, a wiki inglesa usa genericamente a expressão "golpe militares" em quase todas as categorias. Vrostky (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Existe a Category:Coups d'état, acho que poderia ser utilizada. Torimem (talk) 16:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mulatto shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. :Jay8g [V•T•E] 02:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Torrimem:

I have recently written an article on the Pelota (boat) and am translating it for es:Wikipedia. Unfortunately the only two images I have found so far are not very good because they illustrate a version with internal wooden bracing, which is not the one travellers carried about to cross a river in an emergency. It occurs to me I ought to look in Portuguese-language sources but don't know where to start. Then I thought: Torrimem will know! Can you help get me started? (According to one source a pelota was called a bangué in Inner Bahia.) Ttocserp 21:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ttocserp, after a quick search I found this 1888 book that (supposedly) talks about it:

CÂMARA, Antônio Alves – Ensaio sobre as contrucções navaes indigenas do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Typ. de G. Leuzinger & Filhos, 1888.

However, I haven't checked the archive to see if it has any info, I'll look into it. Torimem (talk) 22:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Wonder how I missed this one. Ttocserp 23:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good and bad news, @Ttocserp, the link to the book in that website doesn't work, but fortunately I found another one with the entire book on it, however, I think it doesn't go into much detail about its construction.

Here are some passages:

"They make a square of sticks inside which they tie, or sew, the leather, with just two (doesn't mention what "two" he is referring to, I suppose it's two ends of the leather), forming like a bag mouth".

"They are used in almost all of Brazil, mainly in the provinces of Rio Grande do Sul and Mato Grosso, and in rivers where it is easy to obtain ox hides. They are tied by a cable on the opposite bank, or leased against a horse swimming from one to the other side of river".

Auguste de Saint-Hilaire describes them as follows:

"La pelota c'est le nom que l'on donne à ces pirogues, est tout simplement un cuir écru dont on lie les quatre coins et qui, par ce moyen, forme un bateau qu'on peut confrondre, pour la figure, à ces écuelles de papier où l'on met des biscuits. On remplit la pelota d'effets, on y attache un lacet ou une lanière de cuir, un homme se met à la nage, prend le lacet entre ses dents et fait passer ainsi la pirogue. Pour avoir moins de peine, mes gens avaient attaché un lacet d'un bout à l'autre de la rivière et s'en aidaient en nageant". Torimem (talk) 23:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See latest Pelota (boat), which incorporates these references. Ttocserp 02:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And, thank you. Ttocserp 14:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, I'm always glad to help. Torimem (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boa tarde! Eu gostaria de pedir ajuda com um draft meu: Draft:List of ambassadors of Paraguay to Brazil.

Percebo que não é o tipo de coisa que você costumeiramente edita, mas já colaboramos em alguns artigos e eu não sei o que eu poderia fazer com o meu draft para que ele fosse aceito. É uma lista simples, não vejo muito que adicionar, e temos artigos similares já na wiki, como List of ambassadors of Paraguay to Italy. Adicionalmente, se houver algum artigo de história do Brasil ou do Paraguai que você gostaria de uma mãozinha, me avise! Coeusin (talk) 18:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Coeusin, de fato, não entendi o motivo de terem rejeitado o seu draft. Há listas identicas na Wikipedia em inglês (List of ambassadors of the United States to Brazil, List of ambassadors of Peru to Brazil etc., por exemplo). Vou ver o que consigo fazer, talvez se colocarmos mais fontes eles aceitem. Torimem (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Coeusin, o problema com o draft é essa fonte mesmo, porque ela não passa no quesito de confiabilidade. Você precisa encontrar uma fonte oficial. Infelizmente não consegui encontrar nenhuma, tanto em português quanto em espanhol. Torimem (talk) 15:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Torimem, entendo. Algum tempo atrás eu lembro de ter visto no site do ministério das relações exteriores paraguaio um arquivo digital que tinha os recortes do registro geral para as nomeações de embaixadores, é questão de achá-lo novamente e ir à labuta. Ficará como projeto. Obrigado pela ajuda! Coeusin (talk) 12:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nesse caso, você pode tentar buscar essa lista no Wayback Machine, com sorte uma snapshot do site foi salva lá. Torimem (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently reverted several of my edits concerning the term end of brazilian politicians. A 1-year period starting on January 1 ends on December 31 (365 days on a non-leap year). 1 January (full day) to the next 1 January (full day) is a 366-day period on a non-leap year.

A 4-year period starting on January 1 2019 ends on December 31 2022. The current legislation for the term of the brazilian president is given by Article 82 of the constitution: [1].

From 1997 to 2021, the period that concerns the edited articles, it stated that "the 4-year term starts on January 1 of the year following the election". Without a time specification, if properly interpreted, it would mean Jan 1 00:00:00 of Year Y to Dec 31 23:59:59 of Y+3.

I will not fight over this, and my major concern on my previous edits was a series of changes performed by an anonymous IP editor without edit summaries; Either way should be fine provided the articles are all consistent. But do mind that 1 January to 31 December is not a 364-day period (something you stated in one of your reverts). The law is ambiguously written and it appears the actual term observed is late morning Jan 1 to late morning of Jan 1 on Year+4. Fbergo (talk) 14:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Fbergo. Firstly, thanks for your message. The constitution states that the presidential term begins on January 1 and lasts four years (before the current amendment).

I had done a time calculation on this website using 1 January 2019 as start date and 31 December 2022 as end date, the result was "3 years 11 months 30 days, or 47 months 30 days, or 208 weeks 4 days, or 1460 calendar days", this is why I said 3 years and 364 days.

However, now using 1 January 2019 and 1 January 2023 results in "4 years 0 months 0 days, or 48 months 0 days, or 208 weeks 5 days, or 1461 calendar days".

So it seems we have some ambiguity happening here, depending on how we count things.

In any case, I had checked the official president gallery, which states that Lula's second term, for example, lasted from 1 January 2007 to 1 January 2011.

So, what do you think? Torimem (talk) 15:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The current form, Jan 1-Jan 1 is probably best for the presidents who took office under the current constitution (1988-present), we can keep it this way. The power transfer ceremonies have traditionally occurred in the late morning of January 1, which was the case for Lula's second term you mentioned. Apologies for the confusion, have a nice day. Fbergo (talk) 17:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for your input. Torimem (talk) 17:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Torimem. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Afonso Pena at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Dhtwiki (talk) 06:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Torrimen, would you consider doing this in English? https://pt.teknopedia.teknokrat.ac.id/wiki/Queima_dos_arquivos_da_escravid%C3%A3o_no_Brasil Ttocserp 19:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean translating it? Sure, I'll do it. Torimem (talk) 19:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ttocserp, is "Burning of slavery archives in Brazil" a good title? Is it gramatically correct in English? Torimem (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or improve it. They can't have burned the records very thoroughly.

I think the translation is correct. Ttocserp 19:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Torimem (talk) 19:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have this: Slave-owning slaves#Brazil. Ttocserp 06:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The burning of the archives is a controversial topic. I'll look into it carefully. Torimem (talk) 07:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I merely translated it for now. Torimem (talk) 19:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well done Torimem; that was quick!

I wonder how so many records survived, though. Ttocserp 20:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's simply impossible to destroy them all! I suppose Barbosa could only get rid of those under the custody of institutions subordinated to the Minsitry of Finance. Torimem (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just wondering why you are using red for the party in the new election articles rather than the party's black colour. Did it change colour, or should the party's main colour be red? Number 57 21:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used red because the .svg file used red dots for them, in other words, I'm using red to make it consistent with the image and across all the parliamentary election articles, so as not to have a different color in each of them. Torimem (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK – don't think that's how it should be done. If the party's colour is black, the svg should be updated, rather than us use an incorrect colour just to match an image? Number 57 21:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not make the .svg file, but if you think so I have no objection, as I'm not concerned with the color itself, just with consistency. Torimem (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK cool. It appears that pt.wiki uses red for the PRP and en.wiki uses black, so I created a separate diagram for en.wiki. Hopefully the parliament diagram module will be functioning again at some point... Cheers, Number 57 00:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Torimem, recently I completed the article slave-owning slaves, which includes your interest Brazil, but for some reason some editors have taken against it saying it reads like an argumentative essay. I surprised at this myself since any arguments came from the sources, which were very copious. I wonder if you would glance at it when you have time; I'd appreciate your advice.Ttocserp 12:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm out of time right now, but I'll check it out as soon as I can. Torimem (talk) 16:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ttocserp. I think you can rewrite the article while keeping its content. This bit, for example:

"That slaves acquired slaves of their own may seem surprising to Westerners. But their understanding of slavery has been dominated by a stereotype drawn from the plantation economy of the Americas, which was not typical of all times and places."

I'd rewrite it the following way, to give it a more neutral tone:

"The slavery stereotype drawn from the plantation economy of the Americas was not typical of all times and places".

Also remove terms such as, even if sourced:

"In his ground-breaking comparative study Slavery and Social Death (1982), Jamaican scholar Orlando Patterson wrote:"

This paragraph, for instance:

"Most slaves are completely forgotten. A given person could be the slave of a slave without it leaving a trace. For example, classical Chinese historians — thorough and painstaking — did not conceive it was part of their duty to record the doings of low persons; when they mention slavery, it is by chance. Slavery is far better known to us from Roman sources, and this for an unusual combination of circumstances".

As:

"Most slaves left no records. A given person could be the slave of a slave without it leaving a trace. Classical Chinese historians did not conceive it was part of their duty to record the doings of low persons and only mentioned slavery by chance. Slavery is better known from Roman sources".

Torimem (talk) 14:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am a coordinator for the Wikipedia:Military History Project. Among other tasks, coordinators review articles assessed B class by the military history bot to check on whether the bot made a mistake, which it does occasionally. I reviewed your excellent article on Tenentist revolts in Mato Grosso. I noted that you did not capitalize the rank of an officer or soldier preceding the person's name. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Military terms. This is an excerpt from the guideline in that section: "Military ranks follow the same capitalization guidelines as given under § Titles of people, below. For example, Brigadier General John Smith, but John Smith was a brigadier general."

The referenced general section on Titles of people includes: "* In generic use, apply lower case to words such as president, king, and emperor (De Gaulle was a French president; Louis XVI was a French king; Three prime ministers attended the conference)."

Also "Directly juxtaposed with the person's name, such words begin with a capital letter (President Obama, not president Obama). Standard or commonly used names of an office are treated as proper names (David Cameron was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; Hirohito was Emperor of Japan; Louis XVI was King of France). Royal styles are capitalized (Her Majesty; His Highness); exceptions may apply for particular offices.""

These guidelines may seem contrary to Wikipedia's usual preference for lower case but, as noted, some exceptions are stated in the capitalization guidelines article.

Please keep up the good work. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 06:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]