Talk:Nicaragua

Poverty

According to the definition of the Western Hemisphere linked in the article, and the numbers, Nicaragua is by far _not_ the second poorest country in the western hemisphere. On what information is the information that it is so build? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.237.237 (talk) 06:45, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Tecnichally you're correct, because the Western Hemisphere also includes countries (such as Sierra Leone or Mauritania) poorer than Haiti and Nicaragua. But normally speak, the Western Hemisphere is only the Americas, and therefore Nicaragua is the second poorest in America (after Haiti). I'll change the word "Western Hemisphere" by "the Americas". I don't think that somebody has doubts about the rank of Nicaragua among the poorest countries in America, everybody knows that it's the second --SonCR (talk) 04:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Nicaraguan Imigrants

In th Nicaragua imigration section why isn't there any true intformation on there? There is well over half a million of Nicaraguans that live in costa rica and around 50,000 that live in El Salvador. All because these two countries have jobs something that Nicaragua doesn't have. plus many leave the extreme poverty in Nicaragua. Here is some articles that information needs to be on there any costa rican, salvadoran or central american person that comes across this article will ofcourse imediately know that it is very untrue.

http://www.facesofcostarica.com/economics/gonzalez.htm

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15218365

http://mondediplo.com/2007/01/12nicaragua

http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2007/12/03/nicaraguans_find_usa_in_booming_costa_rica/Isaiah's Mom (talk) 18:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont think you understand the point of the section. On articles about countries, under immigration, the major discussion is about people coming into the country. Take a look at other articles that have immigration sections and you will see that the same format is followed. Brusegadi (talk) 19:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Immigration refers to people entering a country. Emigration refers to people leaving a country. Plazak (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

No, i understand it may not belong in that specific section but for sure it has something to do with the countries economy. And may i ask why is El Salvador and Nicaragua the only two latin countries with a crime section? If the rest of them don't have it like honduras and guatemala where crime is slightly higher than that of El Salvador.Isaiah's Mom (talk) 01:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Because no one has written them. I know that Guatemala and El Salvador have very high crime rates (high enough that Saca ran on a 'Mano Dura' platform...) I dont know about Honduras, but you are probably right in that it has high crime rates. If someone adds a well-sourced piece I am sure that it will stay since it probably carries enough weight. Brusegadi (talk) 03:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The style in Wikipedia regarding emigrants is to cite it under a section/sub section of "diaspora".Microamigo (talk) 11:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

A freer economy

The section about Economy talks about Nicaragua being the "61st freest economy" and says the privatization of 350 enterprises reduced inflation "from 13,500% to 9,6%". These allegations are not neutral. The idea of a "free" economy is heavily loaded, and it doesn't say a lot about the subject. Compare the health systems in the USA and in Canada: it's "freer" in the USA, but it's "better" in Canada. For instance, the infant death rate is 4.63 in Canada and 6.37 in the US (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html). It's the same problem with the alleged relationship between privatizations and inflation. We need a verifiable reference to support this allegation. As far as I know, privatizations often cause prices to increase. Pierre Jaquet (talk) 11:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

That statement already has a source. [1] -- LaNicoya  •Talk•  15:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the US is arguably the worst enemy of Sandinistas (http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&code=nus&case=70&k=66&lang=en), which means the US Department of State is not a reliable reference. Pierre Jaquet (talk) 17:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Free means that it is less regulated and it is useful information. There is no good or bad attached to it. Concerning inflation and privatization, that does need a source and I will see if I can find one. I doubt they are related because the high inflation in Nicaragua was caused by excessive Cordoba printing during the 80s. It could be that the excessive printing was done to maintain these institutions but it probably was not. Brusegadi (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I was in two minds, but, after all, I think it's useful to answer your remark. Depending on your political opinion, there is much good or much bad attached to the word "free", and N.A.F.T.A. is an good example (see Noam CHOMSKY, Understanding Power, The New Press, NY, 2002, pp. 280-284). To put it bluntly, I think the Economy section is not neutral, and the Economía section in Spanish is better. Maybe it could be used as a model for the English version---but I do admit that this is a heavily loaded opinion. Pierre Jaquet (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Since the judgment of good or bad is left to the reader (depending on her political opinion, as you said), there is no problem about saying 'its a free economy.' The reader decides if this is good or bad. It would be different if we made that choice for her. Brusegadi (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

GDP and HDI

I changed the statistics of GDP and HDI. I put the actual statistics as of 2009 according to the FMI and the UN. --SonCR (talk) 22:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

ref 30

I dont think this: "History of Nicaragua: The Beginning of the End", American Nicaraguan School. Retrieved on 2007-08-04. is a good reference. It very likely fails to meet WP:RS. I will see if I can find something better. (Lets leave it for now) Brusegadi (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

European Union

Following passage can't be correct: 'U.S. support for this Nicaraguan insurgency continued in spite of the fact that impartial observers from international groupings such as the European Union, religious groups sent to monitor the election and observers from democratic nations such as Canada and the Republic of Ireland concluded that the Nicaraguan general elections of 1984 were completely free and fair. The Reagan administration disputed these results however, despite the fact that the government of the United States never had any observers in Nicaragua at the time.'

The EU cannot possibly have monitored the elections in 1984. The EU was created by the Maastricht Treaty in 1993. Did you mean European States or Council of Europe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.1.66 (talk) 12:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess they refer to what now is the EU. You are right, thought, it should be changed. Brusegadi (talk) 22:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Contras

I would like to point out that the section about Contras and Sandinistas is full of information about the United States and not what happend in Nicaragua, which brings up questions of relevancy and within that potential political bias. There is far more complex history involved from a Nicaraguan perspective in terms of how the Contras began, as noted in the article on Contras in Wikipedia. Political bias risk exists because the Sandinista-Contra is historically a controversial subject widely observed and percieved differently by both conservative and liberal parties worldwide. An overview of the Regan Administration's actions does not give an objective or fair observation of the conflict. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.212.27.12 (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Any suggestions and concrete examples of bias? Thanks, Brusegadi (talk) 03:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't have "a solution" but it certainly is an issue. Contra history, if you look at the short-term picture, is independent of the US but had the US not decided to get involved, it is extremely unlikely that it would have gone further than any other "I don't like the direction of government" group. Further, without the US involvement, there is a reasonable chance that what became a re-united FSLN against the Contras would have become three political parties. Now, I said "short-term" because if we include US intervention and support of the corrupt Somoza dynasty, we could see the creation of this US vs. Nicaragua situation much earlier in the 20th century.

Thus, what happened in Nicaragua after 1979 is the effect of what the US government did to move one group discontent with the direction of government into an externally-funded, politically-motivated way to exert control over the new government.

However, what the FSLN has morphed into has been a power-hungry machine. While they have thrown out the constitution of Nicargaua and assured thier future without opposition during the past few years, they have become at the same time a "thug-like" government reminicent of the days of Somoza. For years you never heard a good word uttered about Somoza until the FSLN took control again. Suddenly Somoza has started to look pretty good. The FSLN have been part of Hugo Chavez' money laundering scheme called Alba (Albanisa) that has made a very small group of individuals very, very wealthy. The Ortega family passed what took the Pella family 80 years to accumulate in wealth in only 1 year. The politics are similar to the situation in Chicago some 100 years ago...dirty!

So much was made by the anti-Reagan group about the US involvement in the 1980s in Nicaragua. Lets not forget that this involvement came after thousands of political refugees began arriving at the border of the US from Nicaragua asking for help, while fleeing oppression and starvation due to the Sandinistas refusal to feed anyone who wasnt part of thier party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.86.244.14 (talk) 06:28, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Nicafyl (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Nicaragua in the Dutch Empire

Hello everyone! There is a discussion at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map, because user Red4tribe has made a map of the Dutch Empire (Image:Dutch Empire 4.png) that includes parts of Nicaragua. Would you like to comment? Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

New Map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dutch_Empire_new.PNG (Red4tribe (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

Still OR, POV and unsourced (yours is not not a credible source). Please discuss stuff at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map. This was just a request for comment, not a discussion. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

http://www.colonialvoyage.com/
http://www.colonialvoyage.com/biblioDAfrica.html (credible source) (Red4tribe (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

Source?

Nicaragua's tropical east coast is very different from the rest of the country. The climate is predominantly tropical, with high temperature and high humidity. Around the area's principal city of Bluefields, English is widely spoken along with the official Spanish and the population more closely resembles that found in many typical Caribbean ports than the rest of Nicaragua. A great variety of birds can be observed including eagles, turkeys, toucans, parakeets and macaws. Animal life in the area includes different species of monkeys, ant-eaters, white-tailed deer and tapirs.

Is there any chance that whoever posted this would have the source?? Or is it on the site and I just missed it?? Thanks --Chica Loca (talk) 16:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nicaragua has regions?

There is a claim HERE that Nicaragua has regions. Can anyone verify or negate this? Thank you. Rarelibra (talk) 20:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this is true, never heard of it nor read it in any official site or document. I don't think Nicaraguans are aware of the supposedly use from this Regions. Maybe this are not politicar or administrative divisions, but rather sound to me as Geological divisions or Disaster security divisions.

Lordofsolrac

Yes Nicaragua has two Autonomous Regions. The RAAN (Region Autonoma del Atlantico Norte, in english Autonomous Region of the Northern Atlantic) and the RAAS (Region Autonoma del Atlantico Sur, in englixh Autonomous Region of the Southern Atlantic) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.54.165 (talk) 21:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Nicaraguans do have loosely defined regions El Norte o Region Central refers to the coffee growing highlands comprised of Departments Matagalpa, Esteli, Jinotega, Madriz, Nueva Segovia and others. La Costa Atlantica refers to RAAN and RAAS. Occidente is used to refer to Leon and Chinandega. Those do not cover all the departments but are widely used in the news and common conversation. They are not oficial political or clearly defined. I do not have a source, except personal experience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.30.130.99 (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Bogus link supporting Allegations that Somoza assasinated by the Argentinian Revolutionary Workers Party

The link which is supposed to substantiate this claim 1. does not cite any sources and 2. Only mentions that "Somoza is assassinated in Paraguay". Thank you for addressing this false source.08:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the Name

Has anyone run into a source for this, which is on the Dutch wiki page for Nicaragua: "De naam van het land is afkomstig van Nicarao, de leider van de inheemse stam die rond het Meer van Nicaragua woonde." (The name of the country originated from "Nicarao", the leader of the native tribe which lived around the Lake of Nicaragua). If there's a source for this, it should also go on the English page, as while many possibilities are mentioned, the name of a tribal leader isn't one of them, currently. 217.166.94.1 (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Someone has added this: http://www.indianerwww.de/indian/staemme_mittelamerika.htm though I'm still looking to see where they got this info from (can't read German well enough to find their sources, if they listed them). Apparently there's a Spanish version somewhere? If it gets posted I can look for the sources. If this is a valid theory, I'm surprised it's not in the English version.

• edit, there's a PDF in the es.wikipedia, seems pretty good... might add as source. 217.166.94.1 (talk) 15:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

- there's more info here: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Spanish_1/Chapter_9_(Recreation_&_Lifestyle), but it's not referenced, unfortunately. Holdspa (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I sponsor a child in Nicaragua through Compassion International. This is from the information packet I received on the country.

Nicaragua is a word from the Nahualt, an Aztec language. It was used to describe the land occupied by the isthmus between the Pacific Ocean and Nicaragua Lake. It was taken from Chief Nicarao, who ruled the lands during the late 1400s and early 1500s.

I have no idea how to verify this. Any help would be appreciated.--Donethatmovedon (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Please Specify

In the section that details the civil war of the mid-ninteenth century the article goes onto describe clashes between liberal and conservative ideas. This terminology is too broad. Are we talking about economic liberalism? Social conservatism? Liberal and conservative movements have meant different things at different points in history. All these terms do is label the two sides of a certain issue. What issue are we talking about? Lets be more specific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.194.97.224 (talk) 06:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

 but where is nicaragua located???? -HML  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.137.65 (talk) 20:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 

The clashes were between The Liberal Party and the Conservative Party. They adhered to the classic European Liberalism and Conservatism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.30.130.99 (talk) 18:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Lead is very long

Some work should be done to make the lead shorter.Parkwells (talk) 14:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

voseo

Hi. Voseo is not a dialect - is is the use of a form of address, like in older English "you" and "thou". In some countries - as in English, the one form completely took over. This phenomenon is happening in a number of laguages, but very significant in the Spanish variants spoken in the Americas. The same can be said for Portuguese in Brazil. In this article the author mixed up the use of this form of address with a dialect. It is not about a dialect. I am sorting out the article. For further reading, please go to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_Spanish#Voseo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Nicaragua

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voseo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguan_Spanish

Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Howdy there, prior to engaging in an edit war, please view the grammar subsection of Spanish dialects and varieties. The grammar subsection suggests a counterargument to your statements. For the record, I am an author of all the pages you have listed (but not the one I am asking you to consult with). I believe it is dialectal since the conjugations are different. (see voseo article for comparisons). I'm not sure how significant voce and its conjugations are in Brazil, but feel free to include them in your argument. Thanks! Mbhskid520 (talk) 05:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

You are the one engaging in edit wars, summarilly undoing hard work and then claiming that there were grammar errors. It is CORRECT to refer to voseo as A dialectical marker - BUT it is NOT a dialect. The page you refer me to clearly explains how the use of tu, vos, usted etc has evolved, which, being fluent in Spanish, Portuguese, French, German and Afrikaans, I fully understand, as this phenomenon is present in all of these language - and that is what it is: a phenomenon, a Register (sociolinguistics) marker, not a dialect. Further, nowhere in the whole Wikipedia or elsewhere does it say that Nicaragua is the epicenter of voseo. Where do you get that from? Where does it say that the Nicaraguan use of voseo has influenced the language in Argentina and elsewhere? And you you trying to use the Spanish Royal Acadamy to whitewash over your claims. Where does the Academy say that voseo is a dialect? What does voseo have to do with what word people use for suitcase in Spanish? So, please, if you disagree, don't merely revert, BUT point out what you believe is wrong and/ or improve on it. But whatever you do, don't call it a dialect! Dialects are named after their specific raison d'etre, such as region (for argumnent's sake, the Nicaraguan southern dialect ) or any other distinguishing feature. I suggest you read up about registers (Register (sociolinguistics)). Now I suggest we leave this alone and allow others to sort it out. Peace Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The fact that you are quite emphatic with your statements makes me strongly disagree with your argument. There is no need for caps, as they show your aggression. Wikipedia editors should not be hostile under any circumstances to other editors. I suggest you have a check on your etiquette prior to addressing concerns and issues on this article. For if this is how you edit, I am afraid you are not collaborating in a constructive sort of tone.

To address your arguments:

I question severely your comprehension of the article. Please use the find feature on your browser and type the word "dialect" on the wikipedia article I forwarded to you. You are correct in that it is a phenomenon, but you fail to note that the conjugations are, for lack of better words, different from "standard" Spanish. The same occurs in Italy. Italy has about 220 or so dialects that are extremely similar to the Italian language, but they retain their own vocabulary, conjugations, etc. I am sure you know this, as I do. Being fluent in Spanish, French, Italian and Romanian, I can also agree with you that other places/regions have faced such a phenomenon and have still been able to be mutually intelligible. I do not counter the claim, but rather put it into perspective for a region as large as Latin America and a region that tends to be overlooked as Central America.

To address your concerns on an epicenter, look at File:CAspanish Voseo Analysis.png

Here is where rational thinking and analysis play a role:

A. Nicaragua is the darkest country on the map, consistent with the RAE's publication. Check

B. Nicaragua had a civil war in which many of its citizens left to neighboring countries in the region. Check

C. Since people move and logically take their culture with them, it is logical to assume that such a phenomenon comes from this country.

D. Other countries in the region use tu much more frequently than vos, as indicated by the RAE on this map.

In pairing the facts and the statistical possibilities, it seems quite logical to conclude that this voseo movement in Central America seems to have some sort of connection with Nicaragua. Can it be the region's epicenter or origin point? I would have to say quite possibly yes given the statistical and logical conclusions.

As per your argument of Argentina, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from. The countries are too remote to make a connection, thus your argument seems to be built on unsolid ground. Never once was that mentioned, on the contrary, similarities were pointed out. As such, the word valija which is attributed to the word valigia in Italian. Argentina has had a large wave of immigration from Italy. Perhaps this is the case with Nicaragua, who knows? I am reverting your edits at the present moment due to the fact that your links for lingusitics is great, but I have grave difficultly in understanding why you have pointed this out since I see a lack of reason to include it. However, I will agree with you in the sense that more research should be done. This tends to be a topic that is overlooked.Mbhskid520 (talk) 00:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Voseo turning into an edit war

Hi. User Mbhskid520 keeps reversing an edit of mine that I went to extra trouble to substantiate, claiming that there were grammar errors (he could have simply fixed any, if there were), while in effect what he wants to do is push a personal theory of his that the Nicaraguan diaspora has influenced the Spanish spoken not only in adjoining countries, but even as far as Argentina. You can read about this on his talkpage. The postulation is that the speech form of a address voseo is spreading out from Nicaragua. He further refers to voseo as a "dialect", which is not. I did four years of Linguistics at university. It is quite apparent that the user does not understand the voseo/ tuteo concept, as can be inferred from this statement that he makes on his talk page: "Salvadorians use the word equipaje and malleta, wheras Nicaraguans use the word valija. Valija is also used in the Rio de Plata region in South America; while equipaje and malleta are both common words used in tuteo speech" - i.e., he is using the usage of different words for suitcase and linking each to either the voseo or tuteo forms of address. He is also citing the Spanish Royal Academy, but the links he provides say absolutely nothing to sustain his claims. Please see the notes I left on the voseo talkpage. For further reading, please go to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_Spanish#Voseo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Nicaragua

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voseo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguan_Spanish

Two related issues, possibly (NPOV issues): 1. The article Nicaraguan Diaspora makes claims about Nicaraguan immigrants in the US that are not supported by articles of reference, eg, Florida (Cubans, Puerto Ricans and Dominicans) and California. 2. Some IP on October 6 at 22:23 went and changed the racial make-up of the country, dropping mestizo from 69% to 50% and pushing up white from 17% to 41%, without leaving any edit comments. Oddly enough this IP has edited other articles to add mentions of Nicaragua (one unsubstantiated, the other falsely attributed a claim to a source that merely mentions a possibility) and he also happens to be from the New York area as is Mbhskid520, according to the WP IP tracking tool. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 09:46, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, this made me laugh since you seemed to have taken my words out of context in order to "validate" your argument. As per the diaspora, please see my previous arguments concerning that. As you can see on my talkpage, I said nothing of that Spanish influencing Argentina. Again, out of context. Please read through the text carefully. The countries and their respective Spanish was compared, not one being the parent of the other.

As for your implied accusations of me editing a page with an IP address, I believe we have grown out of elementary school to be dealing with such nonsense and finger-pointing.

Once more, you cite articles I have helped write. Thus, if you believe I am incorrect, why do you cite the Central American Spanish webpage, the Languages of Nicaragua page, voseo, Nicaraguan Spanish and T-V distiction? Mbhskid520 (talk) 01:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Pedro Joaquin Chamorro

According to the article, top echelons of the Somoza regime were involved in Chamorro's assassination. However, most sources, even anti-Somoza sources ("Nicaragua: Revolution in the Family" by Shirley Christian; "Somoza" by Bernard Diederich; and "Blood of Brothers" by Stephen Kinzer), admit that it was never conclusively proven that Somoza was involved. (Note: I am not saying Somoza wasn't involved, only that it was never proven.) As Christian herself has written, Chamorro's death was the last thing Somoza wanted. Firstly, because Somoza knew that killing Chamorro would turn the latter into a martyr and unite his opponents against him. Secondly, because Chamorro and La Prensa were useful to Somoza as "proof" that Nicaragua was supposedly a free country with a free press. HOWEVER: Each of these sources state that one of the most likely culprits was the dictator's son, Tacho.

Therefore, I propose to amend the section to say that "While the identity and motivation of Chamorror's murderer remain unknown, Somoza or his allies were widely believed [insert references here] to have had a hand in the murder." Josh (talk) 03:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreement on Voseo

Hi Mbhskid520. Ok, let's agree that we are complicating the issue, which actually quite simple. Let me start of by apologising for the caps, they were not meant to indicate any shouting, but rather to highlight. I do a lot of editing, but seldom use anything other than simple text, as that is all that is normally required. So, I could have used bold, but I'd have had to look up how to do it. As for the IP issue, unfortunately I learned that here at the Wikipedia people fight dirty and collect evidence for when others come and try to resolve. Sorry about that, there was no call for that.

From my side, I was correcting calling voseo a dialect, which you agree it is not. Then I removed reference to "the epicenter of voseo". Perhaps we can find a reliable source on the possible impact that the Nicaraguan use of voseo is having among communities where significant communities of members of the Nicaraguan diaspora have taken root. I can give a parallel - In Portugal, there is today a large Brazilian community, especially in the big cities. In common speech, Brazilians use você (with its verb conjugation), whereas the Portuguese use tu (with its verb conjugation). It is quite common to see Portuguese people use the você form when addressing Brazilians, even though in Portugal você is equivalent to usted. They switch between the two forms - and the conjugations - depending on whether they are speaking to fellow Portuguese or to Brazilians. I, an Angolan living in South Africa, do it at home speakig to my Brazilian wife. What I am getting at, it that it is possible that host communities that normally do not use as much voseo as the Nicaraguans, might be using voseo when speaking to Nicaraguans. Does that make sense? That might then be perceived as a shift towards a greater use of voseo. In Portugal, one could easily say that the Portuguese are now using more você if one heard them in public. I just came back from there, where I spent two months on holiday, and therefore right in the middle of Brazilians as many of them work in the tourism business, restaurants, bars, cafes. Back in the offices or at home, they switch, just like swuitching register. In fact, it becomes a register issue, as in fact Portuguese will spice up the conversation with Brazilians by peppering it with the colourful Brazilian slang.

Anyway, I have no doubt that we can solve this without resorting to revert, undo. I am certanly open to it. Un abrazo, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

For the time being, I guess your edits should remain here. Sorry for not responding. I still have midterms out here!

Regards, Mbhskid520 (talk) 22:02, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Lead is too long

The lead is too long. It needs to be shorter and more concise, which means some material has to go back into the sections below; not everything is important. Sources for material for the article in the English Wikipedia need to be in English or available in English, per WIKI guidelinesParkwells (talk) 19:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC).

I agree. The lead reads very much as if it has been written by the Ministry of Tourism as an inducement to attract tourists and international business investment. The lead section needs to be brought into conformity with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section). Examples that should be emulated include Australia, Belarus, Belgium, Cameroon, Canada, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Peru, and Turkey. All of these are featured articles, and not one of these has a lead section exceeding four paragraphs. DiverDave (talk) 03:45, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation

This article ought to include the British English pronunciation of "Nica-RAG-yua". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.32.58 (talk) 07:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Reference improvement

I have begun improving the references in this article. This will involve both expansion and reformatting of existing sources, and replacing questionable sources with reliable sources. I believe refs #1-#18 are acceptable at this point, but much arduous work lies beyond that. DiverDave (talk) 05:01, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Grana gF.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Grana gF.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

File:ToucanNica.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:ToucanNica.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

File:ChamorroRetouched.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:ChamorroRetouched.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)