Jump to content

Talk:Brazil–China relations: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
JanHop (talk | contribs)
Line 7: Line 7:


{{reqmapin|Brazil|China}}
{{reqmapin|Brazil|China}}

== Source ==

Interested in Sino-Brazilian relations? Jiang Shiuxue has written an excellent article on the historical relations of China with Brazil and vice versa available at http://blog.china.com.cn/jiangshixue/art/915285.html [[User:JanHop|JanHop]] ([[User talk:JanHop|talk]]) 14:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)




== Timeline ==
== Timeline ==

Revision as of 14:30, 17 May 2011

Source

Interested in Sino-Brazilian relations? Jiang Shiuxue has written an excellent article on the historical relations of China with Brazil and vice versa available at http://blog.china.com.cn/jiangshixue/art/915285.html JanHop (talk) 14:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Timeline

  1. The 'Timeline' section has been tagged as 'Trivia' for some months.
  2. The attempt to turn it into a table was malformed & put the See also, References & External links sections into part of the table.
  3. I did not initially see the reference due to the botched table, but anyway neither it, nor the pdf document it links to appear to support this information.

I have therefore removed this section. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 14:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

dear Hrafn, historical diplomatic activities are vital to understand contemporary relations. The source diverts towards the site of the Brazilian government, in the PDF, at the bottom, is this table, i took the effort to put it into wikipedia, because it is vital information! From the government! This must be accepted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JanHop (talkcontribs) 14:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


  1. No, neither the initial URL nor the linked pdf contains this information. The PDF contains the following headings: BASIC DATA, ECONOMY, ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT, POLITICAL SYSTEM. No information on diplomatic relations at all, let alone with China, let alone a timeline.
  2. No, it is not "vital" information, it is a verbatim regurgitation of diplomatic trivia, including all sorts of minor agreement and visits.
  3. The publication you are claiming contains it is explicitly a "Press" release, so covered by WP:QS and thus WP:ABOUTSELF -- meaning that "the article is [can]not based primarily on such sources."

HrafnTalkStalk(P) 15:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Developments on Brazil-China relations

Nice to see the page growing due to constructive contributions by many!

I re-incorporated the timeline of diplomacy, because I'm convinced by the crucial information provided in the timeline. And the source could not be more current and authentic!JanHop (talk) 13:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your 'reincorporation' is in violation of WP:COPYVIO being a copy-and-paste of the cited source. Please cease and desist. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To Hrafn. I will paraphrase the information in the timeline, could you please contribute in stead of making anoying remarks? I'm open for discussion but stop being autoritarian, I don't think you contribute in a constructive way.JanHop (talk) 13:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To JanHop: I might stop being "autoritarian" [sic] if you stopped violating core policies without having to be told over and over. You were told that this was WP:COPYVIO back on 17:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC) HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Name

I propose to change the name of the article, for the full name of Brazil is Federative Republic of Brazil, and by stateing one short name and one full name in the title of the document, inequality might be assumed. Proposed title: Brazil - China relations. And refference to the full names of both countries in the introduction. JanHop (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]