Talk:Brazil–China relations

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 January 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Brazil Unassessed

	Brazil portal 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

China Stub‑class

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Brazil or China may be able to help!

Timeline

The 'Timeline' section has been tagged as 'Trivia' for some months.
The attempt to turn it into a table was malformed & put the See also, References & External links sections into part of the table.
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. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk(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 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.
No, it is not "vital" information, it is a verbatim regurgitation of diplomatic trivia, including all sorts of minor agreement and visits.
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."

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk(P) 15:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With reference to the new source, the information is either (i) not contained in this source or (ii) a WP:COPYVIO cut-and-paste of this source. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk(P) 17:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- (The current timeline in the article appears to be merely the unsourced material previously in the article, combined with a verbatim replication of the cited source's timeline. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk(P) 19:32, 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. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk(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]