This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days

A news item involving Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 12 May 2016.

This   level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Economics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Socialism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles Brazil: Government and laws High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Government and Laws of Brazil task force (assessed as High-importance). This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on 28 June 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Archives

Index 1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I have not read up on these events yet but what you wrote reflects my current understanding of the decision today. Elinruby ( talk) 05:06, 10 June 2017 (UTC) reply

I just did a copy edit of the article and would like to use this opportunity to appeal to one of you fine people, who is fluent in Portuguese and English (preferably a native speaker of both), to give this piece a makeover. – BroVic ( talk) 17:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC) reply

There's a very small section named "Public opinion survey and economics". You would think that such a subheader would include a public opinion survey of, you know, Dilma Roussef's Impeachment, not Temer's government. What's up with that? Why is this included here and not in the numerous articles concerning Temer and/or his mandate? Surely there are many surveys about the public's perception of Dilma's Impeachment that can be included there, rather than this attempt at adding barely-relatedd anti-news to the article. I'll make changes to that section if no one objects. YuriNikolai ( talk) 13:42, 19 December 2019 (UTC) reply

@ YuriNikolai: I agreed. The text is out of scope in section "After impeachment". It couldn't be transferred to the section "Public Opinion" ?-- PauloMSimoes ( talk) 02:32, 21 December 2019 (UTC) reply

 Done. Mathglot ( talk) 08:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC) reply

This article was tagged for neutrality in 2016, yet I do not see an active conversation here about it. This needs to be discussed, or the tag is eligible for removal ( WP:DETAG). ☆ Bri ( talk) 18:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC) reply

The one who tagged it should be the one to explain why it was tagged. -- SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 20:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Yes, they are the one who started the conversation in Archive 2 but it ceased years ago now. ☆ Bri ( talk) 20:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Can we just ping them and ask them to address their concerns?-- SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 23:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Bri Should we remove the tag, since the one who tagged it didn't address the problem? Template:POV states that: "The editor who adds the tag should discuss concerns on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies. In the absence of such a discussion, or where it remains unclear what the NPOV violation is, the tag may be removed by any editor".-- SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 20:32, 18 October 2020 (UTC) reply

I just removed it. If someone has an issue they should discuss here. ☆ Bri ( talk) 21:55, 18 October 2020 (UTC) reply