User talk:Lecen

Note: contents of this page are periodically archived by a bot. If there have been no recent posts here, that can result in no messages being displayed below. Older messages are still readable in the archives (above). New messages may be added here.

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil

Hi Lecen, I could not find anything wrong with the Afonso article, it looks good to me. - The sources are okay - Images are also okay - Grammar looks okay, I would have somebody else take a look at this, it is not my forte. I like the article, short and to the point, very good. P.S. I really liked the new pictures of the Count D'Eu that you uploaded to commons, nice. Regards, Paulista01 (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Guerra da Cisplatina

Lecen, se você ler os artigos na wikipedia em Espanhol sobre a Guerra Cisplatina você vai ver que viés! A batalha de Monte Santiago é diminuída, a do Passo Rosário (Ituzaingó na wiki espanhola) é descrita de forma inadequada, e o conflito inteiro é descrito de forma errada (Guerra del Brasil na wiki espanhola). As Províncias do Prata ambicionavam a incorporação do Uruguai. Não conseguiram, mesmo com os inúmeros conflitos internos que sacudiam o Brasil naquela época. O resultado não foi vitória deles, como apregoado. O bloqueio naval brasileiro foi forte. E o Brasil, nas conversações que resultaram no acordo de paz, incorporou um bom terreno ao Rio Grande do Sul. Saudações pelo bom trabalho, principalmente na questão do Rosas. O Rosas chamou o Dom Pedro II de "su mayordomo", e o Estanislao Zeballos, além de ter falsificado um telegrama do Barão do Rio Branco, planejou a invasão e ocupação do Rio de Janeiro, mas isso quase não é falado.

Abraços Grenzer22 (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Pictures in Princess Maria article

thanks for your message. i removed some of the px sizes as they were unnecessary e.g. they weren't detailed maps. i added an upright parameter on the picture of the Prince as that was quite large but the image is unfocused either way. good work on the article, keep it up Tom B (talk) 00:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Brazil

Hey. I asked a question about the edit you brought up. I don't know if you've noticed, so I'm placing a talk back message here. Elockid (Alternate) ^(Talk) 19:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Comment discussion

You may be interested in the discussion I started at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#Collapsed comments, it directly relates to your FAC. --Gyrobo (talk) 19:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

You may want to sign up for Credo

I do not know if it will help for researching articles, but you may want to sign up for one of the free Credo accounts. I paused editing on the Isabel article because of the other people who seemed to want to interject their own views. I intend to resume after a few more days. • Astynax ^talk 17:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

3RR

You breached the three-revert rule on Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil, and so consequently should undo the last revert. DrKiernan (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

"An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period." (emphasis mine) ―Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule --Eisfbnore ^talk 11:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether your message is a warning to Lecen or saying that he didn't break the rule. If the latter, there are four reverts in the space of 20 minutes: [1][2][3][4]. DrKiernan (talk) 12:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Ow, not it has become personal? You want to see me blocked? Don't you have anything better to do in your life? --Lecen (talk) 12:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

No, you're the one taking it personally. DrKiernan (talk) 12:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Princess_Maria_Amélia_of_Brazil/archive1

I've had a chance to read over the discussion. I'm striking my support for the moment while we clear up this last point; I asked a question in my section. - Dank (push to talk) 23:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't leave

It's a given that those who find a "problem" with an article will comment, while those who like it are much less likely to comment. I keep an eye on your page and always try to read your new articles, yet I rarely comment. I'm sure many, many others do the same. Keep that in mind, and please return. Your friend, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Ed, you're good and loyal person and I really appreciate all your concern. You've been always very helpful and never asked anything in return. Thanks a lot. I mean it. However, I'm very tired and I need a break. How long it will last I'm not sure but I want to be far away from the FAC for quite some time. I wish I had interesting discussions in here but all I see are stuff like "I don't like this picture, so I'll oppose until you put that picture that I like" or "I oppose because you did not fix that template at the bottom of the article [which has nothing to to with the article itself]." Enough is enough, but I'm semi-retired, not completely retired. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 03:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. Feel free to take a break, but make sure you keep writing articles at some point – even if they don't go through FAC, I want to read them! (yes, that's slightly selfish. Oh well. :-) ) I always seem to have nice FACs... I dunno why yours are so contentious. Especially when they aren't even big issues...that whole template fiasco was a bit ridiculous. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed with all that, and I'll go further. If you like, I'll fight your battles (in the main text, I don't cover infoboxes and end sections) in this and future articles, but only if you stop making my job harder. WP:NONENG is Wikipedia's policy, and you don't understand what it's saying. When questions come up about whether to use English and where to get translations from, please ask me. - Dank (push to talk) 02:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Dank, thank you very much for your support and the will to help me. I'm really glad to hear that.

Don't worry, I know about Wikipedia's policy. See this excelent English biography of Pedro I (Maria Amélia's father) or this oustanding English biograph of Pedro II (Maria Amélia's brother). The given name "Amélia" can also be spelled as "Amelia" or even "Amalia" in Portuguese. You can see that in this English biography of Isabel, niece of Maria Amélia. Let's take a look at three English biographies of Maximilian, Emperor of Mexico and fiancée of Maria Amélia:

• "Maria da Gloria's father, Dom Pedro, who had been Emperor of Brazil as well as King of Portugal, was twice married. His first wife, the Archduchess Leopoldine of Hapsburg, was a daughter of the Austrian Emperor Francis and thus Maximilian's paternal aunt. His second wife, Amelia Princes of Leuchtenberg [...]. Their only child was born in Paris shortly before his death. The young Princess Maria Amelia of Braganza was now twenty years old, and a girl of striking beauty as well as cultivated intelligence." Source: Hyde, H. Montgomery. Mexican Empire: the history of Maximilian and Carlota of Mexico. London: MacMillan % Co., 1946, pp.35-36
• "At his urging Archduchess Sophie entered preliminary negotiations with the House of Braganza. A tentative marriage contract was drawn up, disregarding the fact that Princess Maria Amelia was tubercular and her father, Dom Pedro of Brazil, had died of the disease. Before Maximilian could journey to Lisbon and seal the bargain, in fact, she suddenly died." Source: O'Connor, Richard. Cactus Throne: the tragedy of Maximilian and Carlota. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1971, p.47
• "Maria da Gloria's father had been the turbulent Pedro I, Emperor of Brazil, who on his own father's death had renounced his claim to Portugal in favor of his seven-year-old daughter, only to find her inheritance usurped by his brother Miguel. When a revolution in Brazil forced Pedro to abdicate, he returned to Europe and, putting himself at the head of the Liveral Party in Portugal, had reconquered his kingdom for his daughter. [...] Before leaving Brazil, Pedro had married for the second time, yet another of Ferdinand Maximilian's relatives, the beautiful and talented Amalia of Leuchtenberg [...]. From all accounts Maria Amalia must have been esquisitely lovely with that fair, transparent skin which is all too often the sign of a consumptive." Source: Haslip, Joan (1971). The Crown of Mexico: Maximilian and His Empress Carlota. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p.52

As you can see, although the historians call the other European royals by their anglicized names, they also opt to call the Brazilian royals by their original, Portuguese names. Ok, that's not the problem, but how the name "Maria Amélia" should be translated to English. You wrote in the FAC nomination: "I see a couple of English-language reliable sources for the princess's name above; does anyone have others". Well, in case you didn't notice, The Times newspaper called her "Princess Maria". Nowhere it says that this Maria is the English Maria. By seeing at the newspaper's archives, it seems that the newspaper also used to call the Brazilian royals by their Portuguese names (see here). The second "reliable" source is a book called "The Napoleon Dynasty", which calles her by the French version (not Portuguese, and certainly not English) of her name: "Marie Amelie Auguste Eugenie Theodolinde". So, this one is obviously out of question.

You might be wondering how many books about Brazilian (and Mexican where it's related to Brazil) history I own. I have plenty. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. You may also want to see Mary (given name) and Emily (given name). I can't, however, is lose my time with DrKiernan who knows nothing about Brazilian history but act as he does at the same time that he is unwilling to hear someone who does. As Ed said, this is no more than "pedantic disputes". --Lecen (talk) 03:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay I'm falling asleep, I'll be back in about 12 hours. Don't worry about the article, we'll get it through FAC and it looks to me like you've done all you need to do. - Dank (push to talk) 03:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your own sources above show that the name is not translated into English as Mary Emily. You may know more about Brazilian history, but I know more about the English language. You think that because Mary is translated into Portuguese as Maria that the reverse holds, but it does not. "Marie Amelie" is perfectly acceptable in English, as are the forms used by the English-language sources above. If you must include a translation, then you should use an English form that is used in reliable sources, such as one of those above or the ones I have provided. DrKiernan (talk) 07:23, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the reverse is true. And you are wrong. Pedro means Peter. Carlos means Charles. Henrique meaas Henry. José meaas Joseph. João means John. Ana means Anna. Maria means Mary. Amélia means Emily. Beatriz means Beatrice, etc, etc... Any dictionary of names can give you that. Portuguese and English are both Western languages. We're not talking about Arabic or Japanese. --Lecen (talk) 11:25, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on April 14, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 14, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 06:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Pedro Álvares Cabral (c. 1467-c. 1520) was a Portuguese noble, military commander, navigator and explorer regarded as the discoverer of Brazil. Cabral conducted the first substantial exploration of the northeast coast of South America and claimed it for Portugal. He was appointed to head an expedition to India in 1500, following Vasco da Gama's newly opened route around Africa. His fleet of 13 ships sailed far into the western Atlantic Ocean, perhaps intentionally, where he made landfall on what he initially assumed to be a large island. As the new land was within the Portuguese sphere according to the Treaty of Tordesillas, Cabral claimed it for the Portuguese Crown. He explored the coast, realizing that the large land mass was likely a continent, and dispatched a ship to notify King Manuel I of the new territory. The continent was South America, and the land he had claimed for Portugal later came to be known as Brazil. Cabral was later passed over, possibly as a result of a quarrel with Manuel I, when a new fleet was assembled to establish a more robust presence in India. Having lost favor with the King, he retired to a private life of which few records survive. His accomplishments slipped into obscurity for more than 300 years. Historians have long argued whether Cabral was Brazil's discoverer, and whether the discovery was accidental or intentional. Nevertheless, although he was overshadowed by contemporary explorers, Cabral today is regarded as a major figure of the Age of Discovery. (more...)