User talk:Lecen/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Former countries - Subprojects template

Hello Lecen. I noticed you removed the subprojects template I added to the Empire of Brazil. I was adding them to the WikiProject in order to facilitate easier navigation. I replaced it for the purposes of homogeneity across the WikiProject. Do you have any specific objections to the Template? If so, please let me know.--Xuxalliope (talk) 01:43, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't notice that. Unfortunately, I am unfamiliar with any secondary-level Header templates, so I decided to use a Navbox template for that purpose. I would strongly encourage you to allow it to remain at the top of the page, to be noticed easier by viewers. If you are still opposed to the template in this location, could you please redirect me to another template that you would deem appropriate for this purpose? Thanks again,--Xuxalliope (talk) 01:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I'll take your advice and remove them from the subproject pages. By the way, I am taking on the leadership of this WikiProject, and so I do value your input. Feel free to send me your thoughts, however contrary, whenever an issue such as this arises.--Xuxalliope (talk) 10:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Unacceptable

Lecen, this post is unacceptable and frankly disturbing. I would have blocked you for that already, but having seen some of your comments over the past few days I'm not sure I can be objective here, so I'm going to report it to ANI and see what action those there think is needed. Carcharoth (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

The thread is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unacceptable edit. Carcharoth (talk) 23:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012

You have been blocked from editing for a period of a week for displaying a battleground mentality. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Salvio Let's talk about it! 00:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lecen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'd like to be allowed to edit my user page only, so that I might add a "retired" banner. After what I saw today, I see no reason to be here anymore and I don't believe Wikipedia needs my contribution. Please tell Manning Bartlett that I appreciate his kind words and also that I had no intention of using words that sounded like legal threats. Sometimes the translation of Portuguese to English might cause misunderstanding. Alarbus, you're free to remove my comment. And remember: "First they came for..." Lecen (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This request seems to have resolved; per the discussion below. Kuru (talk) 02:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lecen, please take a breath. And then please ask me to remove the thread from my talk. Thanks, Alarbus (talk) 00:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

…once that is done the issue with Sandy Georgia will be examined fairly and impartially. Manning. Please just take one step back and then they can talk about /her/ battleground mentality. Alarbus (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, please don't retire, again. Thanks for leave to remove it from my talk and the clarification that no legal theat was ever intended. Alarbus (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

This is proposterous! Lecen has only contributed tons upon tons to wikipedia. Pardon my nosiness, as this does not concern me, but is this how an extremely useful contributer is treated on wikipedia? He has done nothing but add vital information to many articles. As I said this is not my business, but this is quite sad... Thank you, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 00:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Lecen, you are of course free to edit your user page while blocked. May I suggest you just take the week off, and allow the dust to settle. I shall also advise Sandy Georgia against doing anything that inflames the situation further. My original comments still stand about your infraction however, and we do need to get that dealt with before we can move on. Enjoy your break. Manning (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but I'm not able to edit my own user page. Could you fix it for me, please? Also, I won't lose my time trying to talk about her. How many times did she went to ANI? How many times did she fight with other editors? Did ever something happened to her? No. And won't be this time that it will. You wonder why Wikipedia is losing editors so fast? Take a look at SandyGeorgia's history log and you'll how many great FA editors have given up because of her. And do you know why I'm angry? Because I'm tired of people here being a bunch of xenophobics to foreigners like me. You have no idea the kind of things I had to endure here. They cna use sock puppets, they can canvass, they can accuse, they can lie, they can harass, they can insult, they can do whetever they want and nothing happens. While I was blocked for a week. For something that would never have happened if she had not gone after me. Did you see her last message at the ANI? Where she posted three diffs? None of them were about her. She lies and she is heading the FAC. And no one knows why the FAC is a mess and all that infighting is going on there. All I ask you is to allow me to edit my user page. That's all. --Lecen (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Lecen, I will remove your block for precisely one hour so that you may edit your user page. If you edit any page other than your user or user-talk pages, I shall reinstate immediately, otherwise I shall reinstate it at 02:28 UTC. Manning (talk) 01:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Lecen, please refrain from putting up a retired tag. Just sleep on it. Alarbus (talk) 01:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Lecen, you appear to have taken the action you requested the unblock for, so I am reinstating the block, as indicated. I shall monitor your talk page in the interim. Manning (talk) 02:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
pt:Justiniano José da Rocha would be a good place to mine for Justiniano José da Rocha. Sleep on it. Alarbus (talk) 02:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Go out and work out and try not to think about this stuff too much.TCO (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Just saw the mess on ANI, sorry about how things turned out. I enjoyed working with you while I had the chance, let me know if you ever come out of retirement and want a hand with anything. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I saw the mess just now as well. I hope you decide to come back... we need you. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I hope you reconsider your retirement. You've been a tremendously prolific editor who's made some fantastic contributions to Wikipedia. I know there are others who feel the same. Best, Ruby 2010/2013 20:27, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Glad to see this, although I didn't see it in time to take care of it. I'll restore the rest if you like… Best wishes, Alarbus (talk) 03:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back, and I am appalled at the unfair and heavy-handed treatment of you. You are a valued member of this community.– Lionel (talk) 02:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey. I fixed a typo out there; smiled at it though. Don't forget to fully restore your user page. I had some questions about a few articles, but am not recalling them ATM. Watcha thinkin' o' workin' on? Alarbus (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Brazilians 000.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Brazilians 000.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Potential superpowers

Hello. Brazil has again been proposed for deletion from the article Potential superpowers. I would appreciate your input at the article's talk page. Limongi (talk) 00:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you are absolutely right. It is unbeliveable how closed-minded some people can be. Why don't they dispute the EU as a superpower? Not only is it in decline (ie. Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal) but it is not even a country. Unfortunately, I feel that we will always face this kind of prejudice, at least until we get there - which we will. After all, even with our ups and downs, through periods of dictatorship and political instability, we have managed to overcome and transform our country into the 6th largest economy. It's just a matter of time. Thanks again for your help, and all your hard work here in Wikipedia - especially to the Empire articles! :) Limongi (talk) 13:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Pedro Álvares Cabral image

You had no justification to alter the image of Pedro Álvares Cabral. Since the one i have posted is widely the most recognized engraving of Pedro Álvares Cabral.

Categorization of Brazilian history-related articles

Hello Lecen! I am working in the organization of Category:History of Brazil and I would like to know if you can help on Category:Monarchic history of Brazil. Since you are an expert on the field, your help would be greatly appreciated. I found Category:Brazilian monarchy a bit confusing. I was about to making changes, but I thought it best to consult you first. I was thinking in a structure like this:

  • Brazilian monarchy
    • Brazilian monarchists
    • Brazilian monarchs
      • Kings of Brazil
      • Emperors of Brazil
        • Pedro I of Brazil
        • Pedro II of Brazil
    • Brazilian nobility
      • Brazilian royalty
        • Brazilian Imperial Family

But I don't know were to fit categories such as Category:Regents of Brazil. Hope you can help. Kind regards; Felipe Menegaz 18:19, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I also don't believe many people look into the categories, but their organization is essential for the maintenance of WikiProject Brazil, which I am working to reactivate (See here). I've created a Category:Imperial history of Brazil, but then I thought it would be better to use Category:Monarchic history of Brazil, which includes the period of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves, and constrasts with the other political regimes (See Category:History of Brazil by period).
I also think it's important to group articles related, for example, to Pedro II of Brazil, since there are many articles under the same scope. It's also interesting to distinguish Kings and Emperors in the categories. Well, I would like to ask you to organize Category:Monarchic history of Brazil. Could you do it? I understand it is something boring and complicated, but I need to do it on all Category:History of Brazil, and your help would be of great value. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 19:24, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Is there any way we can connect in real time? Do you have Skype, Gmail or Facebook accounts? Felipe Menegaz 19:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! But while waiting for a response, I've created an IRC Channel #wikiprojecbrazil. I think it is better for our use, with no privacy matters. If you can connect now, I will be waiting for you. Cheers; Felipe Menegaz 21:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cambalachero (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

talkbalk

Hello, Lecen. You have new messages at Dondegroovily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

kinda back

Sorry I been gone for a while I have been very busy with school right now. But I'm Actually on vacation right now but when I get back I can help the task force more. I should be back in a couple days. Spongie555 (talk) 03:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Lecen. You have new messages at Jsfouche's talk page.
Message added 23:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

jsfouche ☽☾Talk 23:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter

Best wishes for the Holiday. Jack Merridew 00:27, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

In Germany, we still celebrate, see top of my talk. Good to know you, like your questions, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Lecen. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Felipe Menegaz 01:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

re: archives.

Hi Lecen. I tried to remove and replace, but red links came back too. My guess is that it's a cache thing with the Cluebot III. If the redlinks don't go away in day or so, we'll see if we can find someone to help. I might know a couple people familiar with the auto archive stuff. — Ched :  ?  22:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The links were in a Cluebot III index page, I have removed them. --Mirokado (talk) 02:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I was about to reply on your talk page when I noticed your request to do it here. Well, I am very, very happy to see that you found a way to deal with the problem. I really appreciate your aid, even more since I didn't ask directly and you still were kind enough to do it by your own. Thank you very much, Mirokado. --Lecen (talk) 03:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Edições

O que ando fazendo? Aprendendo história do Brasil. :) Suas edições são valiosas, continue. Grenzer22 (talk) 12:51, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Obrigado pelo convite. Já me inscrevi na task force.Grenzer22 (talk) 22:37, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

List of generals of the Empire of Brazil

Lecen, I have a link that may be helpful: Almanaque 1838 (p. 31)

Are you adding to the list only generals raised during the empire? Dom Joao VI appointed a few generals, both in the colonial time and the United Kingdom, although they were in theory Portuguese officers some were alive after independence and living in Brazil. Cheers, Paulista01 (talk) 21:48, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

So you are alive! I though I would have to survive in this nightmarish place alone. Well, I wanted to add all general officers who were recognized as such by the Empire of Brazil. I though the 2-volume book "Os generais do exército brasileiro de 1822 a 1889" had them all, but it clearly doesn't. Although 90% are people I never head before (I believe I never heard about half the marshals of the army there!) there are a few are not listed. Three examples are Antônio Sampaio (nowadays patrono of the Brazilian army infantry), Mallet (patrono of the artillery) and the Viscount of Pelotas (who was marshal of the army and led the troop that killed Solano López). I was hoping to bring it to FA-level (or FL-level, to be more precise). --Lecen (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Excellent Lecen, FA-level will be great. It is also the first time I read about many of them. I have more sources that may be helpful. I have a list of the navy, I have to see if I have one for the army. After 1824 all officers of the armed forces and ordinances were required to swear allegiance to the Imperial Constitution, Dom Pedro I and the Braganza dynasty, many of them born in main land Portugal. I will be on the road in the next few days, I will try to find it when I return. Cheers, Paulista01 (talk) 15:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Brazil, again

Well, I think that ten editors are enough to start. If we had to discuss all the topics with lots of editors, it would had lots of conflicts and would take too long... Also, Carioca did not sign, but he will certainly help. We can do it. Cheers; Felipe Menegaz 23:44, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lecen! Have you created a Skype account? If not, you can download it here and follow the steps. I'm looking forward to a direct communication. Best regards; Felipe Menegaz 23:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I'm not talking about audio conversations but a service of instant messages, because it would facilitate the discussion between the many editors. Felipe Menegaz 21:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Alternatively, you could also set up an IRC chatroom if you want anonymity. :-) (just adding food for thought) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I wonder if one day Wikipedians will invite me to parties with lots and lots of hot women... regardless, I shall not lose my hope! Felipe, I sent you an e-mail, you'll be able to find my skype account. Regards. P.S.: Good to see you, Ed! --Lecen (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Answering your doubt

Yes, I'm Brazilian (sim, sou brasileiro). Cordialmente, Joao Xavier (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, generally I link articles from other Wikipedias in which I collaborate (mostly in Ido, Occitan, and Galician; less frequently in Portuguese, Spanish, and Catalan) to articles here in English Wikipedia. I generally seek informations here to write short biographies of actors/actress, musicians, singers, writers, and others, in these three languages. When I finish an article or at least a stub in one of these languages, I link this article here. And also, when I find a vandalism here, I try to revert or eliminate it. Best regards, Joao Xavier (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: A Brazilian here? Good news at last

Yes, I'm Brazilian. I'm a rather amateur Wiki editor, to be honest. I didn't even know if I was supposed to answer your here or in my talk page. I've added it to my watchlist and I hope I can add some information regarding themes I'm more familiar with. --Smcf92 (talk) 00:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

House of Braganza

Hello Lecen. I am back from my trip. I will be working on some articles this week, including the article of the House of Braganza. I have collected some sources, including a decree signed by Dom Pedro I referring to the dragon, according to him, the symbol of his house. I also found a vast amount of sources, I will add it to the article. Cheers, Paulista01 (talk) 16:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Sources

Hi Lecen, do you think there are enough sources out there to do a decent expansion of the Lead Masks Case? I'm not finding a whole lot in terms of good sources on google books or scholar in English, though there are a few old news reports on google news. Do you know if there's much written about it by reliable sources in the lusophone media? Mark Arsten (talk) 18:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I never heard about it until now. There are two or three books in Portuguese that can be found at Google books. Give me a day and I'll read them and I'll expand the article and add more sources, ok? Good to see you again, Mark. --Lecen (talk) 18:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Good to see you too, thanks, that would be great. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Bugle interview

Hey Lecen. Hope this message finds you well. The Bugle is going to start a semi-regular series called the "Article writers' guide", and the fist subject is biographical articles. Would you mind adding your views to the questions here, and adding any questions you feel are necessary? Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Precious

Brazilian mothers
Thank you for your profound coverage of Brazilian topics, culture and especially people, such as the Mother of the Brazilians, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Teresa Cristina of the Two Sicilies

fyi ;) Br'er Rabbit (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Lecen! Of course I do not mind. I am, however, curious as to why the article should not comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section (the page title should be the subject of the first sentence). Doesn't it make more sense to make the article, as well as other articles about Brazilian royalty, consistent with articles about royalty in general rather than treating them differently? See, for example, a fellow featured article, Alexandra of Denmark. The articles about consorts generally start with their "full name" (Name of State) per MoS, while those about monarchs don't because it would create redundancy such as: "Pedro II of Brazil was Emperor of Brazil". Same for the infobox. I fail to see why the article about Theresa Christina should stand out from articles about other consorts, including her own predecessor, Amélie of Leuchtenberg, as well as queen consorts of Portugal.

I have also been unable to find a source that refers to Gaston as emperor. Surtsicna (talk) 11:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

In Brazil, following Portuguese tradition, a male consort would receive the title of King (in Portugal) or Emperor (in Brazil) once a child had been born from the marriage to the reigning queen or empress. This is why we had Dom Pedro III of Portugal and Fernando II of Portugal. Under Chapter IV ("Of the succession of the Empire"), article 120 says: "The marriage of the heiress presumptive of the crown shal be done under the will of the Emperor; if there is no Emperor at the time, when dealing with this marriage, it will not be allowed to occur without the approval of the General Assembly [the Parliament]. Her husband will not take part in the government, and will only be called Emperor after he has a son or daughter with the Empress." This is what the letter of the Constitution said. However, the monarchy fell in 1889, before Isabel became Empress. Nonetheless, monarchists treated him as the Emperor after Pedro II's death. Here is a letter written by João Alfredo, who as prime minister abolished slavery in Brazl in 1888, and became a leading monarchist after 1889: "Madam, I have the honor of bringing to Y. I. M. [Isabel], to the Emperor [Gaston] and to the Princes my wishes that the projected marriage of D. Pedro [eldest son of Isabel] give him the happiness preferred by his big heart ..." Source: Santos, Armando Alexandre dos. A legitimidade monárquica no Brasil. São Paulo: Artpress, 1988, p.168. Since it is a custom in Wikipedia to treat pretenders under their titles had they been monarchs, I'm merely following it (although I personally disagree: if a country isn't a monarchy anymore no one can regard himself as prince/emperor/king). --Lecen (talk) 11:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I see. I am still puzzled, though, why you don't follow another Wikipedia custom - having the page title should as the subject of the first sentence and the consort's "maiden name" as the name in the infobox. Surtsicna (talk) 12:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
No, that is not one user's personal preference. It is a part of the manual of style. I have cited examples of articles that were not written, significantly edited or edited at all by DrKiernan - Amélie is just one of them. It would not look like a surname just like it doesn't look like a surname in the present title of the article. Surtsicna (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Funny how you immediately thought I was following you without even considering the possibility that the article was on my watchlist because I had edited it before. That says a lot about you. The discussion was over long time ago, as you have presented no arguments whatsoever. Surtsicna (talk) 13:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Glad you had the title handy. The absence was also causing punctuation/spacing quirks:
  • Zerbini, Eugenia (June 2007). "A imperatriz invisível" (in Portuguese). Revista de História da Biblioteca Nacional...
  • Zerbini, Eugenia (June 2007). (in Portuguese)Revista de História da Biblioteca Nacional...
And she's up ;) Br'er Rabbit (talk) 00:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

King Don

The phrase is not important enough for me to argue about this. You are correct that it can be used (and is used) in English for both Spanish and Ibero-Italian monarchs, and DrKiernan is correct that it is not universal (though that is not the word he used). I don't see how that this is important to the article, whether it is kept or deleted. There is nothing like an appearance on the Wikipedia front page to get editors, both the good and the vandals, throwing up changes that they otherwise never would consider making. • Astynax talk 21:53, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lecen/Archive_12&oldid=1139571361"