![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
That removes some urgency Elinruby ( talk) 01:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the template {{
current}} at the top of the article from {{current|date=January 2023|2= attack}}
to {{current|date=January 2023|2=recent attack}}
, because the point of the template is it being recent, not it being an attack.
91.129.98.21 (
talk)
04:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove this sentence from the introduction:
Congress will convene in an emergency meeting to vote on the decision, as the legislature was not in session
and add this one to replace it:
Because Congress was not in session, it will convene in an emergency meeting to vote on the decision.
Someone unfamiliar with Brazil could interpret "Congress" and "the legislature" to be two separate bodies, and saying "Congress" twice would be redundant. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove this line:
Right-wing political activist and former Trump administration Counselor to the President, Steve Bannon praised
and add this one to replace it:
American right-wing political activist and former Trump administration Counselor to the President, Steve Bannon, praised
Since he worked with the Trump administration and doesn't have a Portuguese-sounding name, one can guess that he's an American, but it would help to add "American" to be sure. Also, a comma is missing after his name. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this phrase:
who on 16 October 2022 published a video encouraging a truckers' general strike by truckers before the second round of elections.
Please remove one of the two "truckers" as redundant; either "a truckers' general strike" or "a general strike by truckers" is perfectly understandable. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this sentence:
Left-wing figures and groups in Europe, such as the former Prime Minister of Greece Alexis Tsipras and former Leader of the British Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn expressed solidarity with Lula.
Please add a comma after "Corbyn", since his name ends a distinct clause that doesn't include "expressed". 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
In the "Events" section's 6th paragraph change "an journalist" to "a journalist", because 'an' should only be used when preceding a word with a vowel at the beginning. 213.175.126.121 ( talk) 09:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Right. I will do that. Elinruby ( talk) 10:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Mathglot: Haven't looked.at history yet Elinruby ( talk) 21:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Why isn't January 6 United States Capitol attack listed under the See Also section? It is stated in the article that this attack was inspired by those events, so I think it should be listed under See Also as a similar attack on another nation's capitol. 174.113.161.1 ( talk) 02:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
That's Renan Calheiros, isn't it? Moscow Mule ( talk) 04:26, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Given the nature of what this is, I think it might be worth making this semi-protected Genabab ( talk) 19:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. The consensus is that "protests" is not an adequate term for the event, closed early per WP:SNOW. ( non-admin closure) MaterialWorks (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → 2023 Brasilia protests – 2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress does not make sense, as other buildings have been stormed. I propose 2023 Brasilia protests/riots or 2023 invasion/storming of Praça dos Três Poderes. - PanNostraticism2 ( talk) 20:12, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Can we hold off on doing any more page moves until we get a handle on events?
I am somewhat in favor of a different name that.doesn't require the reader.to recognize the name of the presidential palace, fwiw. But I would like to do a copy edit and see if anything needs updating, and this is difficult when the article is a moving target. Elinruby ( talk) 21:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
be a good person to ping. If you don't know how to do that, no worries, just go into edit mode and look at the syntax just below here. Elinruby ( talk) 17:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
To the person who took off my what and linked to this: thank you as that was an improvement. However what does this mean exactly? I smell weasel. Is this the equivalent of sending the National Guard into DC on Jan 6,.for example? Interfering in sovereignty is...pretty.euphemistic. That said, I don't currently have a better idea, but this bit of text needs improvement. Elinruby ( talk) 22:40, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
If it is correct, yes it would. But what I really want to know is what he did after he issued it.Sent in the military? What does the constitution say about that? Elinruby ( talk) 00:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Surely this order exists on some government website as a press release? we can't use Scribd because it is self-published. Elinruby ( talk) 00:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ UmChad: maybe your Portuguese can help here. Elinruby ( talk) 00:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough. "@UmChad" is how it comes out but to make it work you have to type "@ UmChad:. Do you see an icon on your menu that has a number on it? Elinruby ( talk) 23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes. That is why I am back here, to tell you I got the message. Something in your browser or app will change to notify you when I @ UmChad: Elinruby ( talk) 00:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Anyway, do that when you have a question and I will try to help Elinruby ( talk) 00:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The Pro-Bolsonaro people do not seem to be monarchists, but rather for some reason (likely an accident) they have put up the monarchist flag. UmChad ( talk) 22:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Clarifying: Bolsonaro supporters did this? Not an error of a wikipedia editor? If the former, not sure, might be a form irridentism? Nostalgia for empire? If a wikipedia editor, I suggest a reality check Elinruby ( talk) 23:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Protestors were seen with the flag of the Empire of Brazil.[28]", which doesn't mention their true motives at all (whatever they might be) and which is currently cited to a New York Times source. LightNightLights ( talk) 23:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Paolo Simonoes or a name like that is helpful. @ Mathglot: is he still around, do you know? @ UmChad: I can read Portuguese a little but not fluently or easily. Right now I am doing a critical read of the text and haven't seen either the Empire flag or any sign of Nazis. I will start looking at sources as we go. Since it:s all over CNN I am guessing that there are sources in English, and these would be preferred if they are available. (you weren't unclear really, I am just surprised. We're talking about the Bourbon Empire?) Elinruby ( talk) 23:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
I did a lot of work on Operation Car Wash and Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff and many associated articles. I you speak Portuguese I will happily leave the translation to you; Portuguese gives me a headache. I thought you were looking for language help. I found the following list on the OCW talk page: @ Elinruby, Bageense, PauloMSimoes, American In Brazil, Vandergay, Lindenfall, and Jose Mathew: were interested in Brazil articles at the time. Somebody is saying the flag is cited to the New York Times, which means I believe it. Using Discord or Twitter is strongly discouraged --.althougj not *always* wrong. Rule of thumb, use a news source instead, or another secondary source. I don't have an opinion on whether Bolsonaro is a Nazi. Has he exterminated.any ethnic minorities? I think for now any such concept should be carefully cited.Does that help? Elinruby ( talk) 23:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
As far as the Empire flag, is this even important enough to spend time here talking about? Wikipedia has the principle of WP:DUE WEIGHT (and also WP:RECENTISM, and WP:NOTNEWS) to take into consideration. I mean, is this something appearing all the time, in dozens of places, and constantly being reported by the media over and over? (Like, say, the 'Z' symbol that accompanied the Russian military in Ukraine, and that was reported endless numbers of times, but which nevertheless rates only two *very* brief mentions at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which I think is about the right amount of coverage.) Put another way: how important is the flag to this topic? Even if it was important, if there isn't enough WP:INDEPENDENT coverage by WP:SECONDARY sources, then we can't cover it.
Another angle: there is WP:NO DEADLINE, so we could just wait a few weeks for the dust to settle, and see what happens. If nobody is using the flag, or talking about it in the media, then it was just a flash in the pan, and doesn't rate mentioning it in the article. On the other hand, if it starts appearing everywhere, or this one appearance gets continuing coverage for a few weeks, then it gains in WEIGHT, and could justify adding it. In any case, I see nothing to lose by just being patient, and taking another look a little while later. Mathglot ( talk) 02:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Nod, thanks for explaining that. I think there was dispute about whether it should go in the infobox, is my understanding of it. I personally have never heard of this, but I haven't really been editing Brazil for a year or two Elinruby ( talk) 06:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: The explanation for use the
Brazilian Imperial Flag by Bolsonaro supporters may be understand in
this BBC article. As per article (apologies for automatic translation):
“ | In the view of historians, the use of the imperial flag by supporters of President Jair Bolsonaro is the result of political appropriation and reflects an idealized past, in which society supposedly worked.
In a live in February this year, for example, former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ernesto Araújo appeared sitting in front of the flag of Brazil Empire while participating in a masterclass promoted by the Terça Livre channel, by Bolsonarist blogger Allan dos Santos. "The valorization of these symbols of the past is idealized, it mobilizes groups that attributed a golden age to the empire of Pedro II. It takes a lot of effort to see in the slavery and agrarian Brazil of the 19th century a fair nation free of corruption", wrote historians Adriano Comissoli and Hugo Araújo, from the Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM) in an article on the Medium platform. "This search for ancient symbols is an attempt to build legitimacy. The imperial flag, for example, tries to associate itself with independence and the emergence of Brazil as a nation. They seem to forget that the flag bears symbols linked almost exclusively to the emperor", added. But this idolatry of monarchical regimes is not exclusive to far-right movements in Brazil. In Europe, King Victor Emanuel II, in Italy; Duke Carlos Martel, in France; and the noble Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, known as ' El Cid' in Spain, are some of the personalities venerated by these groups. In Brazil, Dom Pedro II came to be worshiped as a symbol of righteousness and anti-corruption. |
” |
PauloMSimoes ( talk) 20:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
the politician is a member of the imperial family?Bolsonaro? Elinruby ( talk) 21:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Oh... no. I referred to this article of "O Globo", which UmChad cited above. I think he misunderstood that:
“ | Federal deputy Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança (PL-SP) was re-elected federal deputy, with just over 79,210 votes — 39,000 less than in the last election. The parliamentarian arrived at the National Congress supporting Bolsonarism in 2018. Descendant of the former imperial family, he is known as "prince". | ” |
-- PauloMSimoes ( talk) 00:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Something is wrong with the sentence since this was added. Surely voter intimidation preceded and police brutality followed? See sources. Elinruby ( talk) 23:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
It's up in the section about the trucker protests Elinruby ( talk) 23:39, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Not dealing with content yet. Look at the sources and let me know. Elinruby ( talk) 00:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Link to Elon Musk's tweet: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1612230045493248001 UmChad ( talk) 23:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Find a news story about this if you want to use Macron. I am against giving Elon Musk any oxygen, personally. His tweets are also arguably self-published. Elinruby ( talk) 23:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
well. We did one at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and we were sorry. 'Fill up space" is a pretty good description of what happened. If somebody really wants to have one then Macron should be included. Pretty sure somebody will eventually delete Elon Musk, but I personally have bigger fish to fry than to argue about him if you really want to include him. Help us out on that question I just pinged you on first though, please, if you would. Elinruby ( talk) 00:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ UmChad: I just processed that you said that you just started today, on pt.wikipedia ;) I am sorry. You must think I am really bossy, lol. To be completely clear, you do not have to do what I say. But if you want to work on this article, I will help you do that. I do not want to be the closest thing we have to a Portuguese speaker. Alternately, you could post at some articles on pt.wikipedia that we need help over here. If you want to help here, ask me a question about en.wikipedia. or answer one of the ones I am putting on the talk page, let's leave it at that, ok? If you want to go eat dinner first, that's fine too, but I was serious when I said that your help is welcome. Have you found those pings I sent you? Elinruby ( talk) 01:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Sure, thank you for letting me know. For what it is worth, I usually tell new editors that I meet on contentious articles that it is best to start with one that people aren't arguing over. History of São Paulo when I was there a while back. Or Operation Car Wash probably needs an update. If you want, of course. Elinruby ( talk) 22:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source? Elinruby ( talk) 00:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Could also use confirmation for Métropole, see question above about emergency order Elinruby ( talk) 01:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thanks for that info. We cite them a couple of times in this article is all. Just asking, good to know. Elinruby ( talk) 06:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, this usn:t ok, will delete it myself. Does anyone at pt.wikipedia have a picture that they took themselves? Elinruby ( talk) 01:25, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Just because you can something doesn't mean you should. Are they your work? Where did you get them and under what license? I don't think I am getting across that copyright is important. Also, despite the video on social media, the Supreme Court said that the copy of the original Constitution was *not* stolen, despite the video you are using as a source for the theft. I have asked someone else to look into the licenses of the images in this article. If it comes back as verified, well good. But I am skeptical, no offense. Elinruby ( talk) 06:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I saw that but it's pretty unusual and I personally would have waited until the license had been verified. That said, if you guys think you have the rights to use the images/video here, fine, perhaps you are right. I doubt that, but it's possible. Supposing you are right, it will still be self-published, which is another issue. But you do you; I just think you're mistaken, but you seem determined, so. I asked someone to come take a look and if possible expedite the review of the licenses. Meanwhile I have other stuff to do but I have pointed out the possible copyright and RS issues, and you think I am mistaken. Fine then. Happy trails. Elinruby ( talk) 10:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't really know much about licenses and copyright, but if it infringes any rules, go ahead and delete it. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
That may be a literal translation of what the government is saying. But see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. It sounds like they declared military law. Don't help them whitewash it (although I kind of think they probably had to). But "government intervention" could be an increase in the minimum wage. Completely meaningless in this context. Elinruby ( talk) 01:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
"military law" is more like our "estado de defesa" and "estado de sítio".
Perhaps a better translation is "federal takeover over public security in the federal district" or "direct federal rule over public security" or "suspension of the federal district autonomy on public security". Gjvnq ( talk) 04:31, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Ok, good you speak Portuguese? The first one sounds best in English, except it would be "takeover of". I was mainly objecting to the euphemism, but that is good to know. While you are here, tiro de guerra is getting automatically translated as war shots. After a bit of digging it looks like it's something along the lines of the ROTC, a military training group for young adults? Do I have that right? Elinruby ( talk) 06:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Lula decrees * in Brazil's Federal District
.
Mathglot (
talk)
10:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Does this mean " crowds gathered" ? "Concentrating" is not quite the right word in this context Elinruby ( talk) 02:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
somebody didn't like that I split that long paragraph up. I think the whitespace is needed and all the links make the lede difficult to read. Please see WP: BRD. You are.supposed to state.your objection now ;) I am now working further down in the article, and.not.terribly fussed, but please do explain what you don't like about whitespace. I might agree with you ;) Elinruby ( talk) 02:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I believe the infobox is too crowded. I propose either reducing its size or removing the section regarding "parties to the civil conflicts" like on the page January 6 United States Capitol attack. The article and the initial paragraph address the "sides" to this event already. Plus most of the inclusions of agencies, even if they were there, are neither sourced in the infobox or the greater article. Plus I do not think the relevance of their inclusion is significant. - PanNostraticism2 ( talk) 12:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
(Note: I propose a compromise could be that instead of listing all agencies in the infobox, just refer to them as "law enforcement". The agencies could be listed in a section of the article instead to reduce the crowdedness of the infobox). — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanNostraticism2 ( talk • contribs) 12:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Jair Bolsonaro has not made allegations of electoral fraud and, unlike Trump – who appears to be rampant in this article – allowed for a peaceful transition of power. This article is extremely flawed and reactionary. Sir Jack Hopkins ( talk) 13:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
For years, Mr. Bolsonaro had asserted, without any proof, that Brazil’s election systems were rife with fraud and that the nation’s elites were conspiring to remove him from power". If you have sources that support your claims about Bolsonaro, please give them here. LightNightLights ( talk) 13:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yesterday did not look very peaceful to me. Elinruby ( talk) 13:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
It was me who added that motivation sentence and I carefully looked at the source before doing so (I didn't add the "false" part, that was added by someone else but I don't oppose it). There's nothing flawed and reactionary about it. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 15:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Not true. He has undoubtedly 'made allegations of electoral fraud' [3] and not just once. He was already claiming voting machines are unreliable and his opponents would try to steal the elections long before the actual elections. In fact, he said the 2018 Brazilian general election was stolen even though he won. Bolsonaro tried to invalidate votes recorded by certain machines and to convince the Armed Forces to take action (hours before his first post-election speech in which he did not directly comment the results). Kiwi Rex ( talk) 00:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ SnoopyBird: the phone is for you, bud Elinruby ( talk) 22:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Lula decreta intervenção federal no DF.webm is way shorter than the one which is currently on the article and only show Lula's speech. Inter-rede ( talk) 16:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Who made the video? Elinruby ( talk) 17:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Huh. There are three others like that that somebody uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (against my advice) that the admins over there want to talk to someone about. I repeat: all these videos you guys are using in the article look like copyright violations. Did TV Brasil say you could use it on Wikipedia? In any event, if that is an edit request, my answer is no way. Not touching it and you shouldn't use it either until/unless @ Diannaa: says the CC license is good. Elinruby ( talk) 22:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I just put in the images that i could find in wikimedia commons and the portuguese wiki, in the case that they are not properly licensed, its not my fault. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for that answer Diannaa. @ SnoopyBird: this is highly relevant to the argument you are making over at the deletion review discussion. Elinruby ( talk) 03:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Currently, there is conflicting information in the infobox and prose about how many people were arrested. Part of this is due to out-of-date information in the prose but another part of this is that the sources of the counts themselves (the Brazilian Ministry of Justice, the governor of Federal District/Brasilia, the Brazilian police) contradict each other. I might've missed some, but among the counts mentioned by sources are 300 ( The Guardian), 400 ( The New York Times, Washington Post), 1,200 ( Associated Press via CTVNews.ca), and 1,500 ( AFP via France 24). For the conflicting counts, which ones do we mention? LightNightLights ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Well, those are all reliable sources. A rewording of what you wrote above would probably fly if you referenced it. Maybe you could look at timestamps also. I suspect that some are more recent than others and that might be the problem Elinruby ( talk) 22:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
All information being published in Republic Federativa of Brazil´s sites is calling acts as "terrorist attacks" - plain simple. The videos clearly show people breaking into government buildings, smashing windows, smashing tables and chairs, destroying works of art, burning buildings, stealing computers, stealing weapons and ammunition, defecating and urinating inside the Presidential Palace, the Supreme Court of Justice and the National Congress. And all the people calling for a legitimately elected government to be overthrown by guns. The name of this is terrorist attack. Period. Tim.smith.237 ( talk) 18:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
While I concur, this is likely to be debated for a while on Wikipedia (exactly like the debate over 1/6/21 in the US) due to the inherent position behind terms like terrorist and insurrection. Mainstream English media will have to use those descriptors before Wikipedia can use them, likely different for the Br-Pt Wikipedia. TheStarOfTheNorth006 ( talk) 19:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I agree on invasion. On "terrorists" too< for that matter. Ukraine calls the Russian Army terrorists, and while I can understand why they feel that way, we.do not. Elinruby ( talk) 22:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Like i said on many cases, we should not use loaded language here, Ukraine calls Russia a terrorist state, so should we put that in Russia's article here? its simple, local media tends to use more loaded terms when talking about something that happened there. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The right expression is indeed "terrorist attack", as several media outlets, and organizations, have used it, such as UNI Global Union and the Government of the United Kingdom. Didimilk ( talk) 23:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I suggest you use whatever en-wikipedia is using in the article about the January 6 rioters. It would be hard to claim that this was not a riot, for example. I do understand your feelings, but ask yourself this. Do you want to get this article written, or do you want to spend the next couple of weeks explaining your feelings on the drama boards? Elinruby ( talk) 23:15, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress be
renamed and moved to
January 8 Brasilia attack.
result: Move logs:
source title ·
target title
This is template {{
subst:Requested move/end}} |
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → January 8 Brasilia attack – The title is consistent with January 6 United States Capitol attack and the word attack is much more common than the current title. Interstellarity ( talk) 18:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
if the RfM that is still open is the one where everyone agreed that "demonstration" was the wrong word and so was invasion, I suggest getting an admin to close it for you. Elinruby ( talk) 22:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to 2023 Brazilian Congress attack. The current consensus is that the word "invasion" is not appropriate for the event, and that "attack" is better fit for describing it. Since there is no consensus as to what term should be used to describe the buildings stormed, "Brazilian Congress" will not be changed. See also: WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE. The article is move-protected, so I've brought up a request at WP:RM/TR. ( non-admin closure) MaterialWorks (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → 2023 invasion of the Praça dos Três Poderes – The invasion happened on all three buildings of Praça dos Três Poderes and not just the National Congress, so 2023 invasion of Praça dos Três Poderes would be a better name. Many Brazilian sources also call it an invasion and say Praça dos Três Poderes was invaded [4], [5], [6] The Portuguese Wikipedia article also uses a similar name to one I suggest [7]. It was certainly an unauthorised invasion of property regardless of whether everyone was violent or not, and it was coordinated, so the title would be appropriate and more in line with local language sources. Also I don't think Anglicised names should be used, native names should be preferred. You won't call Los Angeles "City of Angels" in formal titles. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 02:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Close the discussion: As the person who opened this move proposal, I'll like to get it closed as I think the word "attack" might find more traction than "invasion" and this isn't going in my proposal's favour. I request a non-involved user to please do it.
Roman Reigns Fanboy (
talk)
04:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Note to closer: because of the wording of the request, and the alternate proposals or move destinations favored by some commenters, please take care to evaluate the entire description, as some voters who bold Support and others who bold Oppose are actually in agreement with each other. For example, the "support" !vote of 15:55, 11 Jan., and the "oppose" !vote of 00:53, 12 Jan. are both in favor of the same outcome. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 01:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: If in foreign language reliable sources the event is known as "invasion of the Praça dos Três Poderes" but not in English, then said name can be included in the first sentence of the article as an alternative name. Per MOS:LEADLANG, "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses." Thinker78 (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
That removes some urgency Elinruby ( talk) 01:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the template {{
current}} at the top of the article from {{current|date=January 2023|2= attack}}
to {{current|date=January 2023|2=recent attack}}
, because the point of the template is it being recent, not it being an attack.
91.129.98.21 (
talk)
04:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove this sentence from the introduction:
Congress will convene in an emergency meeting to vote on the decision, as the legislature was not in session
and add this one to replace it:
Because Congress was not in session, it will convene in an emergency meeting to vote on the decision.
Someone unfamiliar with Brazil could interpret "Congress" and "the legislature" to be two separate bodies, and saying "Congress" twice would be redundant. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove this line:
Right-wing political activist and former Trump administration Counselor to the President, Steve Bannon praised
and add this one to replace it:
American right-wing political activist and former Trump administration Counselor to the President, Steve Bannon, praised
Since he worked with the Trump administration and doesn't have a Portuguese-sounding name, one can guess that he's an American, but it would help to add "American" to be sure. Also, a comma is missing after his name. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this phrase:
who on 16 October 2022 published a video encouraging a truckers' general strike by truckers before the second round of elections.
Please remove one of the two "truckers" as redundant; either "a truckers' general strike" or "a general strike by truckers" is perfectly understandable. 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2023 Praça dos Três Poderes attack has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this sentence:
Left-wing figures and groups in Europe, such as the former Prime Minister of Greece Alexis Tsipras and former Leader of the British Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn expressed solidarity with Lula.
Please add a comma after "Corbyn", since his name ends a distinct clause that doesn't include "expressed". 120.21.65.18 ( talk) 09:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
In the "Events" section's 6th paragraph change "an journalist" to "a journalist", because 'an' should only be used when preceding a word with a vowel at the beginning. 213.175.126.121 ( talk) 09:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Right. I will do that. Elinruby ( talk) 10:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Mathglot: Haven't looked.at history yet Elinruby ( talk) 21:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Why isn't January 6 United States Capitol attack listed under the See Also section? It is stated in the article that this attack was inspired by those events, so I think it should be listed under See Also as a similar attack on another nation's capitol. 174.113.161.1 ( talk) 02:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
That's Renan Calheiros, isn't it? Moscow Mule ( talk) 04:26, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Given the nature of what this is, I think it might be worth making this semi-protected Genabab ( talk) 19:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. The consensus is that "protests" is not an adequate term for the event, closed early per WP:SNOW. ( non-admin closure) MaterialWorks (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → 2023 Brasilia protests – 2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress does not make sense, as other buildings have been stormed. I propose 2023 Brasilia protests/riots or 2023 invasion/storming of Praça dos Três Poderes. - PanNostraticism2 ( talk) 20:12, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Can we hold off on doing any more page moves until we get a handle on events?
I am somewhat in favor of a different name that.doesn't require the reader.to recognize the name of the presidential palace, fwiw. But I would like to do a copy edit and see if anything needs updating, and this is difficult when the article is a moving target. Elinruby ( talk) 21:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
be a good person to ping. If you don't know how to do that, no worries, just go into edit mode and look at the syntax just below here. Elinruby ( talk) 17:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
To the person who took off my what and linked to this: thank you as that was an improvement. However what does this mean exactly? I smell weasel. Is this the equivalent of sending the National Guard into DC on Jan 6,.for example? Interfering in sovereignty is...pretty.euphemistic. That said, I don't currently have a better idea, but this bit of text needs improvement. Elinruby ( talk) 22:40, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
If it is correct, yes it would. But what I really want to know is what he did after he issued it.Sent in the military? What does the constitution say about that? Elinruby ( talk) 00:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Surely this order exists on some government website as a press release? we can't use Scribd because it is self-published. Elinruby ( talk) 00:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ UmChad: maybe your Portuguese can help here. Elinruby ( talk) 00:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough. "@UmChad" is how it comes out but to make it work you have to type "@ UmChad:. Do you see an icon on your menu that has a number on it? Elinruby ( talk) 23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes. That is why I am back here, to tell you I got the message. Something in your browser or app will change to notify you when I @ UmChad: Elinruby ( talk) 00:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Anyway, do that when you have a question and I will try to help Elinruby ( talk) 00:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The Pro-Bolsonaro people do not seem to be monarchists, but rather for some reason (likely an accident) they have put up the monarchist flag. UmChad ( talk) 22:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Clarifying: Bolsonaro supporters did this? Not an error of a wikipedia editor? If the former, not sure, might be a form irridentism? Nostalgia for empire? If a wikipedia editor, I suggest a reality check Elinruby ( talk) 23:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Protestors were seen with the flag of the Empire of Brazil.[28]", which doesn't mention their true motives at all (whatever they might be) and which is currently cited to a New York Times source. LightNightLights ( talk) 23:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Paolo Simonoes or a name like that is helpful. @ Mathglot: is he still around, do you know? @ UmChad: I can read Portuguese a little but not fluently or easily. Right now I am doing a critical read of the text and haven't seen either the Empire flag or any sign of Nazis. I will start looking at sources as we go. Since it:s all over CNN I am guessing that there are sources in English, and these would be preferred if they are available. (you weren't unclear really, I am just surprised. We're talking about the Bourbon Empire?) Elinruby ( talk) 23:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
I did a lot of work on Operation Car Wash and Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff and many associated articles. I you speak Portuguese I will happily leave the translation to you; Portuguese gives me a headache. I thought you were looking for language help. I found the following list on the OCW talk page: @ Elinruby, Bageense, PauloMSimoes, American In Brazil, Vandergay, Lindenfall, and Jose Mathew: were interested in Brazil articles at the time. Somebody is saying the flag is cited to the New York Times, which means I believe it. Using Discord or Twitter is strongly discouraged --.althougj not *always* wrong. Rule of thumb, use a news source instead, or another secondary source. I don't have an opinion on whether Bolsonaro is a Nazi. Has he exterminated.any ethnic minorities? I think for now any such concept should be carefully cited.Does that help? Elinruby ( talk) 23:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
As far as the Empire flag, is this even important enough to spend time here talking about? Wikipedia has the principle of WP:DUE WEIGHT (and also WP:RECENTISM, and WP:NOTNEWS) to take into consideration. I mean, is this something appearing all the time, in dozens of places, and constantly being reported by the media over and over? (Like, say, the 'Z' symbol that accompanied the Russian military in Ukraine, and that was reported endless numbers of times, but which nevertheless rates only two *very* brief mentions at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which I think is about the right amount of coverage.) Put another way: how important is the flag to this topic? Even if it was important, if there isn't enough WP:INDEPENDENT coverage by WP:SECONDARY sources, then we can't cover it.
Another angle: there is WP:NO DEADLINE, so we could just wait a few weeks for the dust to settle, and see what happens. If nobody is using the flag, or talking about it in the media, then it was just a flash in the pan, and doesn't rate mentioning it in the article. On the other hand, if it starts appearing everywhere, or this one appearance gets continuing coverage for a few weeks, then it gains in WEIGHT, and could justify adding it. In any case, I see nothing to lose by just being patient, and taking another look a little while later. Mathglot ( talk) 02:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Nod, thanks for explaining that. I think there was dispute about whether it should go in the infobox, is my understanding of it. I personally have never heard of this, but I haven't really been editing Brazil for a year or two Elinruby ( talk) 06:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: The explanation for use the
Brazilian Imperial Flag by Bolsonaro supporters may be understand in
this BBC article. As per article (apologies for automatic translation):
“ | In the view of historians, the use of the imperial flag by supporters of President Jair Bolsonaro is the result of political appropriation and reflects an idealized past, in which society supposedly worked.
In a live in February this year, for example, former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ernesto Araújo appeared sitting in front of the flag of Brazil Empire while participating in a masterclass promoted by the Terça Livre channel, by Bolsonarist blogger Allan dos Santos. "The valorization of these symbols of the past is idealized, it mobilizes groups that attributed a golden age to the empire of Pedro II. It takes a lot of effort to see in the slavery and agrarian Brazil of the 19th century a fair nation free of corruption", wrote historians Adriano Comissoli and Hugo Araújo, from the Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM) in an article on the Medium platform. "This search for ancient symbols is an attempt to build legitimacy. The imperial flag, for example, tries to associate itself with independence and the emergence of Brazil as a nation. They seem to forget that the flag bears symbols linked almost exclusively to the emperor", added. But this idolatry of monarchical regimes is not exclusive to far-right movements in Brazil. In Europe, King Victor Emanuel II, in Italy; Duke Carlos Martel, in France; and the noble Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, known as ' El Cid' in Spain, are some of the personalities venerated by these groups. In Brazil, Dom Pedro II came to be worshiped as a symbol of righteousness and anti-corruption. |
” |
PauloMSimoes ( talk) 20:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
the politician is a member of the imperial family?Bolsonaro? Elinruby ( talk) 21:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Oh... no. I referred to this article of "O Globo", which UmChad cited above. I think he misunderstood that:
“ | Federal deputy Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança (PL-SP) was re-elected federal deputy, with just over 79,210 votes — 39,000 less than in the last election. The parliamentarian arrived at the National Congress supporting Bolsonarism in 2018. Descendant of the former imperial family, he is known as "prince". | ” |
-- PauloMSimoes ( talk) 00:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Something is wrong with the sentence since this was added. Surely voter intimidation preceded and police brutality followed? See sources. Elinruby ( talk) 23:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
It's up in the section about the trucker protests Elinruby ( talk) 23:39, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Not dealing with content yet. Look at the sources and let me know. Elinruby ( talk) 00:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Link to Elon Musk's tweet: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1612230045493248001 UmChad ( talk) 23:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Find a news story about this if you want to use Macron. I am against giving Elon Musk any oxygen, personally. His tweets are also arguably self-published. Elinruby ( talk) 23:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
well. We did one at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and we were sorry. 'Fill up space" is a pretty good description of what happened. If somebody really wants to have one then Macron should be included. Pretty sure somebody will eventually delete Elon Musk, but I personally have bigger fish to fry than to argue about him if you really want to include him. Help us out on that question I just pinged you on first though, please, if you would. Elinruby ( talk) 00:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ UmChad: I just processed that you said that you just started today, on pt.wikipedia ;) I am sorry. You must think I am really bossy, lol. To be completely clear, you do not have to do what I say. But if you want to work on this article, I will help you do that. I do not want to be the closest thing we have to a Portuguese speaker. Alternately, you could post at some articles on pt.wikipedia that we need help over here. If you want to help here, ask me a question about en.wikipedia. or answer one of the ones I am putting on the talk page, let's leave it at that, ok? If you want to go eat dinner first, that's fine too, but I was serious when I said that your help is welcome. Have you found those pings I sent you? Elinruby ( talk) 01:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Sure, thank you for letting me know. For what it is worth, I usually tell new editors that I meet on contentious articles that it is best to start with one that people aren't arguing over. History of São Paulo when I was there a while back. Or Operation Car Wash probably needs an update. If you want, of course. Elinruby ( talk) 22:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source? Elinruby ( talk) 00:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Could also use confirmation for Métropole, see question above about emergency order Elinruby ( talk) 01:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thanks for that info. We cite them a couple of times in this article is all. Just asking, good to know. Elinruby ( talk) 06:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, this usn:t ok, will delete it myself. Does anyone at pt.wikipedia have a picture that they took themselves? Elinruby ( talk) 01:25, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Just because you can something doesn't mean you should. Are they your work? Where did you get them and under what license? I don't think I am getting across that copyright is important. Also, despite the video on social media, the Supreme Court said that the copy of the original Constitution was *not* stolen, despite the video you are using as a source for the theft. I have asked someone else to look into the licenses of the images in this article. If it comes back as verified, well good. But I am skeptical, no offense. Elinruby ( talk) 06:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I saw that but it's pretty unusual and I personally would have waited until the license had been verified. That said, if you guys think you have the rights to use the images/video here, fine, perhaps you are right. I doubt that, but it's possible. Supposing you are right, it will still be self-published, which is another issue. But you do you; I just think you're mistaken, but you seem determined, so. I asked someone to come take a look and if possible expedite the review of the licenses. Meanwhile I have other stuff to do but I have pointed out the possible copyright and RS issues, and you think I am mistaken. Fine then. Happy trails. Elinruby ( talk) 10:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't really know much about licenses and copyright, but if it infringes any rules, go ahead and delete it. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
That may be a literal translation of what the government is saying. But see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. It sounds like they declared military law. Don't help them whitewash it (although I kind of think they probably had to). But "government intervention" could be an increase in the minimum wage. Completely meaningless in this context. Elinruby ( talk) 01:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
"military law" is more like our "estado de defesa" and "estado de sítio".
Perhaps a better translation is "federal takeover over public security in the federal district" or "direct federal rule over public security" or "suspension of the federal district autonomy on public security". Gjvnq ( talk) 04:31, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Ok, good you speak Portuguese? The first one sounds best in English, except it would be "takeover of". I was mainly objecting to the euphemism, but that is good to know. While you are here, tiro de guerra is getting automatically translated as war shots. After a bit of digging it looks like it's something along the lines of the ROTC, a military training group for young adults? Do I have that right? Elinruby ( talk) 06:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Lula decrees * in Brazil's Federal District
.
Mathglot (
talk)
10:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Does this mean " crowds gathered" ? "Concentrating" is not quite the right word in this context Elinruby ( talk) 02:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
somebody didn't like that I split that long paragraph up. I think the whitespace is needed and all the links make the lede difficult to read. Please see WP: BRD. You are.supposed to state.your objection now ;) I am now working further down in the article, and.not.terribly fussed, but please do explain what you don't like about whitespace. I might agree with you ;) Elinruby ( talk) 02:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I believe the infobox is too crowded. I propose either reducing its size or removing the section regarding "parties to the civil conflicts" like on the page January 6 United States Capitol attack. The article and the initial paragraph address the "sides" to this event already. Plus most of the inclusions of agencies, even if they were there, are neither sourced in the infobox or the greater article. Plus I do not think the relevance of their inclusion is significant. - PanNostraticism2 ( talk) 12:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
(Note: I propose a compromise could be that instead of listing all agencies in the infobox, just refer to them as "law enforcement". The agencies could be listed in a section of the article instead to reduce the crowdedness of the infobox). — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanNostraticism2 ( talk • contribs) 12:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Jair Bolsonaro has not made allegations of electoral fraud and, unlike Trump – who appears to be rampant in this article – allowed for a peaceful transition of power. This article is extremely flawed and reactionary. Sir Jack Hopkins ( talk) 13:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
For years, Mr. Bolsonaro had asserted, without any proof, that Brazil’s election systems were rife with fraud and that the nation’s elites were conspiring to remove him from power". If you have sources that support your claims about Bolsonaro, please give them here. LightNightLights ( talk) 13:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Yesterday did not look very peaceful to me. Elinruby ( talk) 13:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
It was me who added that motivation sentence and I carefully looked at the source before doing so (I didn't add the "false" part, that was added by someone else but I don't oppose it). There's nothing flawed and reactionary about it. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 15:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Not true. He has undoubtedly 'made allegations of electoral fraud' [3] and not just once. He was already claiming voting machines are unreliable and his opponents would try to steal the elections long before the actual elections. In fact, he said the 2018 Brazilian general election was stolen even though he won. Bolsonaro tried to invalidate votes recorded by certain machines and to convince the Armed Forces to take action (hours before his first post-election speech in which he did not directly comment the results). Kiwi Rex ( talk) 00:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
@ SnoopyBird: the phone is for you, bud Elinruby ( talk) 22:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Lula decreta intervenção federal no DF.webm is way shorter than the one which is currently on the article and only show Lula's speech. Inter-rede ( talk) 16:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Who made the video? Elinruby ( talk) 17:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Huh. There are three others like that that somebody uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (against my advice) that the admins over there want to talk to someone about. I repeat: all these videos you guys are using in the article look like copyright violations. Did TV Brasil say you could use it on Wikipedia? In any event, if that is an edit request, my answer is no way. Not touching it and you shouldn't use it either until/unless @ Diannaa: says the CC license is good. Elinruby ( talk) 22:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I just put in the images that i could find in wikimedia commons and the portuguese wiki, in the case that they are not properly licensed, its not my fault. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for that answer Diannaa. @ SnoopyBird: this is highly relevant to the argument you are making over at the deletion review discussion. Elinruby ( talk) 03:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Currently, there is conflicting information in the infobox and prose about how many people were arrested. Part of this is due to out-of-date information in the prose but another part of this is that the sources of the counts themselves (the Brazilian Ministry of Justice, the governor of Federal District/Brasilia, the Brazilian police) contradict each other. I might've missed some, but among the counts mentioned by sources are 300 ( The Guardian), 400 ( The New York Times, Washington Post), 1,200 ( Associated Press via CTVNews.ca), and 1,500 ( AFP via France 24). For the conflicting counts, which ones do we mention? LightNightLights ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Well, those are all reliable sources. A rewording of what you wrote above would probably fly if you referenced it. Maybe you could look at timestamps also. I suspect that some are more recent than others and that might be the problem Elinruby ( talk) 22:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
All information being published in Republic Federativa of Brazil´s sites is calling acts as "terrorist attacks" - plain simple. The videos clearly show people breaking into government buildings, smashing windows, smashing tables and chairs, destroying works of art, burning buildings, stealing computers, stealing weapons and ammunition, defecating and urinating inside the Presidential Palace, the Supreme Court of Justice and the National Congress. And all the people calling for a legitimately elected government to be overthrown by guns. The name of this is terrorist attack. Period. Tim.smith.237 ( talk) 18:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
While I concur, this is likely to be debated for a while on Wikipedia (exactly like the debate over 1/6/21 in the US) due to the inherent position behind terms like terrorist and insurrection. Mainstream English media will have to use those descriptors before Wikipedia can use them, likely different for the Br-Pt Wikipedia. TheStarOfTheNorth006 ( talk) 19:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I agree on invasion. On "terrorists" too< for that matter. Ukraine calls the Russian Army terrorists, and while I can understand why they feel that way, we.do not. Elinruby ( talk) 22:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Like i said on many cases, we should not use loaded language here, Ukraine calls Russia a terrorist state, so should we put that in Russia's article here? its simple, local media tends to use more loaded terms when talking about something that happened there. SnoopyBird ( talk) 22:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The right expression is indeed "terrorist attack", as several media outlets, and organizations, have used it, such as UNI Global Union and the Government of the United Kingdom. Didimilk ( talk) 23:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I suggest you use whatever en-wikipedia is using in the article about the January 6 rioters. It would be hard to claim that this was not a riot, for example. I do understand your feelings, but ask yourself this. Do you want to get this article written, or do you want to spend the next couple of weeks explaining your feelings on the drama boards? Elinruby ( talk) 23:15, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress be
renamed and moved to
January 8 Brasilia attack.
result: Move logs:
source title ·
target title
This is template {{
subst:Requested move/end}} |
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → January 8 Brasilia attack – The title is consistent with January 6 United States Capitol attack and the word attack is much more common than the current title. Interstellarity ( talk) 18:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
if the RfM that is still open is the one where everyone agreed that "demonstration" was the wrong word and so was invasion, I suggest getting an admin to close it for you. Elinruby ( talk) 22:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to 2023 Brazilian Congress attack. The current consensus is that the word "invasion" is not appropriate for the event, and that "attack" is better fit for describing it. Since there is no consensus as to what term should be used to describe the buildings stormed, "Brazilian Congress" will not be changed. See also: WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE. The article is move-protected, so I've brought up a request at WP:RM/TR. ( non-admin closure) MaterialWorks (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
2023 invasion of the Brazilian Congress → 2023 invasion of the Praça dos Três Poderes – The invasion happened on all three buildings of Praça dos Três Poderes and not just the National Congress, so 2023 invasion of Praça dos Três Poderes would be a better name. Many Brazilian sources also call it an invasion and say Praça dos Três Poderes was invaded [4], [5], [6] The Portuguese Wikipedia article also uses a similar name to one I suggest [7]. It was certainly an unauthorised invasion of property regardless of whether everyone was violent or not, and it was coordinated, so the title would be appropriate and more in line with local language sources. Also I don't think Anglicised names should be used, native names should be preferred. You won't call Los Angeles "City of Angels" in formal titles. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 02:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Close the discussion: As the person who opened this move proposal, I'll like to get it closed as I think the word "attack" might find more traction than "invasion" and this isn't going in my proposal's favour. I request a non-involved user to please do it.
Roman Reigns Fanboy (
talk)
04:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Note to closer: because of the wording of the request, and the alternate proposals or move destinations favored by some commenters, please take care to evaluate the entire description, as some voters who bold Support and others who bold Oppose are actually in agreement with each other. For example, the "support" !vote of 15:55, 11 Jan., and the "oppose" !vote of 00:53, 12 Jan. are both in favor of the same outcome. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 01:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: If in foreign language reliable sources the event is known as "invasion of the Praça dos Três Poderes" but not in English, then said name can be included in the first sentence of the article as an alternative name. Per MOS:LEADLANG, "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses." Thinker78 (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)