User talk:Astynax/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Modern day Hensley

The modern day George Went Hensley just died. Apparently he was one of the most effective contemporary advocates of snake handling. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:42, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd speculate that, had Moses or Peter advocated snake handling and died of snakebite, their adherents would have much more seriously questioned continuing to follow. So, now it is "just their time to go" rather than reexamining the wrong-headed premise? I suppose that continuing down that road in spite of the evidence is the real "wondrous sign". Sad that nothing was learned from Hensley's death, or even the death of his father. Around here, we leave the snakes alone so that they can help with the rodent population. Article stubs are possible for Wolford and his dad, based on the news articles, but little beyond that until they are covered in more substantial references. • Astynax ^talk 17:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Translation request

hello,

I believe you are both fluent in English and Portuguese, so I thought you could help translating the two sections, Estile and Personagens, from [1]? Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 14:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I'll do the translation, but I must warn you that Wikipedia in Portuguese is often badly written and unreliable. Be careful. --Lecen (talk) 23:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Style

Dostoiévski needed money and was always hurried to finish his works, because of that he said he could not reach his full literary potential. Later, for knowing well what the following words meant, he said: "Poverty and misery both form the artist." Although the phrase sounds all-encompassing and generalized , Fiódor Dostoiévski used to deviate from the style of writers who described the circle of the family created in the tradition and in the "fine forms", and resulted in the family chaos that humilliated and insulted them. Essentially a writer of myths (and sometims dur to that compared to Herman Melville), he created a work with enormous vitality and with an almost hypnotic power, characterized by hectic and dramatic scenes, where the characters presented an scandalous behavior, and explosive ambience, involved in socratic [Socrates?] passioned dialogues, the search for God, for evil and the suffering of innocent people.

His romances occur in a short period of time (many for just a few days), which allow the author to escape the dominating characteristics of the realist prose: the physical degradation that occurs as time passes. His characters embodied spiritual valors that are, by definition, timeless.Other reccuring themes in his work are suicide, wounded pride, teh destruction of family valours, the spiritual rebirth through suffering, the rejection of the West and the assertion of Russian orthodoxism and czarism. Scholars like Mikhail Bakhtin have characterized the work of Dostoiévskias different of other writers; he seems more not to aspire an unique vision and goes beyond the description through different angles, characterizing it as a polyphonic romance. Dostoiévski created romances full of dramatic force in which the characters and the opposing point of views are made freely, in violent dynamic.

The space and time in Dostoiévski are sometime analysed as "discreet, where the unexpected not only is possible but also always happens". Through the minimization of the passing of time, where the facts suddenly appear, the instant wins the time and then relax, disappearing in the scenes. Certain authors compare time and space in Dostoiévski with film scenes: the constant use of the russian word vdrug (suddenly), which appears 560 times in the russion edition of Crime and Punishment, has the proposal of taking to the reader the impression of tension, of inequality and of nervousness, characteristic elements of the structure of the dostoievskian romance. Beyond the word vdrug in Crime and Punishment, the Dostoiévski literature utilizes numbers a lot, sometime using them with extreme precision: at two steps..., two roads to the right, as it also uses high and rounded numbers (100, 1000, 10000). It is believed that these elements are "mythopoeic": Crime and Punishment has seven parts (6 parts and one epilogue), being that, in the composition of the romance, it is divided in 7 chapters (each part), and the "fateful hour" is indicated as happening after the seven parts. In the dostoievskian literature, the process of evolution of mankind happens through repetition and occasions, and also through the use of memory and remembrance,, no matter how painful all these may sound for the character.

Fiódor Dostoiévski published countless short stories: The Peasant Marey, The Dream of a Ridiculous Man, Bobock and others, beyond novellas: A Nasty Story, A Gentle Creature and White Nights. he created two litrary magazines: Time (Vrêmia) and Epoch, also collaborating in the main Russian newspapers.

Characters

Dostoiévski was probably very influeced by folklore traditions. Some of them believed that the waters of rivers, seas and lakes represented the limit between the world of the living and the world of the dead. Geographically, beyond the Nev river, in Russia, other aquatic environments coexist, and because of that the city of Saint Petersburg became fabulous and diabolic, which influenced the Russian popular culture and literature, along with Fiódor. Another reason for the beginning of hte "myth of Petersburg" was the death, during the building of the city, of hundreds of thousands of people, that became buried in its foundations, due to impossibility of removing so many bodies. The myth of Petersburg had been developed, in literature, by Pushkin, in the Bronze Horseman, and Gogol, in Nievski Avenue. Later after Dostoiévski, it [the myth] was worked on by other writers such as Andrei Biéli, Aleksandr Blok, Anna Akhmatova and Joseph Brodski. Due to the influence that it suffered fro mthis culture - where the man is between life and death -, the characters in Fiodór's literature are constantly exposed to compelx occasions, bordering the limits of reason and logic, and the limits of what the human being can accomplish in the face of universal problems; however, in general, the characters of Fiódor may be classified in different categories: humble and modest christians (Prince Mishkin, Sonia Marmeládova, Aliosha Karamazov), self-destructive and nihilists (Svidrigáilov, Smerdiakov, Stavroguin, Maslobóiev), cynicals and libertines (Fiódor Karamazov, Prince Valkorskii), rebel intelectuals (Rodion Românovitch Raskólnikov, Ivan Karamazov), while dictated by ideas and not social or biological demands.

Thanks for your translation! Also thank you for your warning, but I think this article is very well cited to reliable sources, so I think there are no huges issues. Regarding the text, I will think about it as some information are unrelated to Dostoyevsky. I never heard about that myth in St.Petersburg ;). Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 07:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, if possible, could you translate the third paragraph of Estilo? Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 08:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I was going to translate the thrid and fourth paragraph. I had just taken a break. All done here, although you should really becareful about using it as source. Perhaps someone else who knows more about Fyodor Dostoyevsky should be of greater help. Good luck! --Lecen (talk) 11:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Most of the content uses reliable references, and I will try to find better sources for the less reliable ones (such as Encyclopedia Britannica). Thanks for your fast translation! :) --GoP_T^C_N 14:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:08, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

What about another FAC?

Hey, Astynax, how are you? I'm working right now on Manuel Marques de Sousa, Count of Porto Alegre. If you're in the mood, please take a look at the article once you find some free time. Cheers, --Lecen (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lecen! I'm going to be busy the next 2-3 days, but I will look at it then. • Astynax ^talk 06:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes Lecen, you need to hurry and write another featured article soon, I've caught up to you at WP:WBFAN :) Don't worry, Astynax, you've got a safe lead on us :) Mark Arsten (talk) 02:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

If there is a competition to get the most stars, then that is a discouraging list (LOL)—I'll never get anywhere near the top. I'm still in the thick of an off-Wiki project, but should be able to start doing more this week. At least I am back home, where I can connect more regularly. • Astynax ^talk 07:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

It's quite amazing really, to get to the top (if Cas and Wehwalt retired) one would have to write a FA a month for five years or so. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Mark! I wasn't aware of that list. It let me depressed once I saw YellowMonkey's name in it. I remember that guy. There are many users like him who stop working on this place because it's a hell to deal with other people. But yeah, we'll try to add a few FACs this year. Astynax, please let me know if you see something weird on the text of Count of Porto Alegre's article as you copyedit. I might write something that any Brazilian may easily understand (such as a brief mention to a fact), but that someone who lacks knowledge in Brazilian history might find confusing. Also, I made the "bold" move of changing the main picture in Teresa Cristina of the Two Sicilies (I hope you won't mind). It's of higher quality then the previous one, and it was taken around the same time as the main picture in her husband's article, which I fought it would be a good idea to match. Could youwrite a proper alternative text? --Lecen (talk) 12:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I have adjusted the alt text, and I like the new picture. It should be easy for either of you to pass my ranking on that list, as the process itself is discouraging and bizzare enough that I'm no longer motivated to try to make major improvements on my own. An encyclopedia that is editable by everyone is a great concept, but at some point standard editorial oversight is both positive and more productive. In the world of paper publishing, I've never experienced anything approaching the unnecessary and misdirected bickering that passes for article "quality promotion". The process isn't anything like an editorial board, but more akin to a frustrating free-for-all, followed by a closed decision that may or may not reflect the consensus and which does little to enlighten writers as to what was right/wrong with the article. I've given up following the process itself, and I will require a major burst of energy (unlikely at my age) to tackle improving the short list of articles I once hoped to see advanced. • Astynax ^talk 17:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm done with "War of the Ragamuffins". I want to finish the article as soon as possible. Let's see if the FAC will be a nightmare as usual. --Lecen (talk) 13:09, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I have a good news. My English copy of Neill Macaulay's biography of Pedro I has arrived. Now we'll be able to continue working on the emperor's article, which I hope might be a FA by september 7 (190 years of Brazil's independence). --Lecen (talk) 13:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

That is wonderful! • Astynax ^talk 06:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm done with "War and widowhood" (in Pedro I of Brazil). Once you have soem free time, could you take a look in it? P.S.: If possible, keep the quotation "reacted with his customary energy: he passed a flurry of orders, fired reputed grafters and incompetents, fraternized with the troops, and generally shook up military and civilian administration." There is another one just before, you may changed it if you want to. --Lecen (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I finished "Second marriage" at last. --Lecen (talk) 15:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Could you add alternative text to the other pictures in the article? After that, could you look at the "Issue" section? P.S.: I'm done with "Endless crises" section. P.S..2: I made a small addition to "Independence or Death" section: "Pedro was a simple man, both in habits and when dealing with others. Except in solemn occasions when he worn court dress, his daily outfit consisted solely of white cotton trousers and a stripped cotton brimmed straw hat on his head.[73][74] "On his rides through the city he would stop often to chat with people of all classes and hear their complaints." --Lecen (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I should be able to address those later today or tonight. • Astynax ^talk 15:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Astynax. I appreciate that. I asked Mark Arsten to review all the other sections you have already looked, so don't be surprised if you see him making a few corrections here and there. --Lecen (talk) 16:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm done with notes A and B. All that is left is "C". Once I'm finished with it I'll be back to the main text. --Lecen (talk) 02:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I made a small change to the text of "Empire of Brazil" which I believe it's closer to what happened back then.[2] If you believe that the wording could be improved, please do so. --Lecen (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The changes were fine, although I tried to make one sentence a bit easier to read. • Astynax ^talk 18:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

"Note C" is finished. --Lecen (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Done with "abdication" and with three paragraphs in the lead. I'll add the fourth and last paragraph once I finish the remaining sections. --Lecen (talk) 02:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure about hte following passage: "A few months later, Pedro I crushed the short-lived Confederation of the Equator, a failed attempt by provinces of the Brazilian northeast to secede." I don't like the "by provinces". Those provinces did not attempt to secede, a few revolutionaries did. In Pernambuco they only held the capital, and in Ceará they held a few towns in the south. It was unlike the American Civil War where U.S. states did secede: their institutions, their governments, their legislatures, most of the population, etc... everything and almost everyone took part in the movement. Of course there were many Americans from the south who remained loyal to their country, but they were the minority. Anyway, could you change it? --Lecen (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I've changed it to: "A few months later, Pedro I crushed the short-lived Confederation of the Equator, a failed secession attempt by provincial rebels in Brazil'a northeast." • Astynax ^talk 23:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Done with "War of restoration". I can hardly believe it: all that is left are two sections and one paragraph of the lead! --Lecen (talk) 22:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Finished "death". --Lecen (talk) 15:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I should have time to look through it later today or this evening. • Astynax ^talk 17:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I have good news: the article is finished. All you have to do is to fix whatever is still wrong in the lead's fourth paragraph, as well as in "death" and "legacy" sections. Once you're done with them we'll be able to nominate the article. P.S.: I also added two images of his signatures in official documents in "honors"'s section. If you don't mind, could you open the FAC nomination? I want to avoid some people in there from seeing my name. --Lecen (talk) 22:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll try and work through the new edits tonight and nominate sometime Friday p.m. in case I make some mistakes. • Astynax ^talk 01:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I just noticed: there is no mention in "Legacy" (except for a picture's caption) to where his remains were placed. Could you inform that they were interred in the Monument to the Independence of Brazil in São Paulo city? P.S.: I also added[3] two files with Pedro II's signatures to his article. Could you add an appropriate alternative text on both? --Lecen (talk) 09:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the note at the top. I had connection problems last night before I could finish my last edit and was unable remove it. I'll also add the text about the final burial site and do some quick checking before nominating on Saturday evening. • Astynax ^talk 16:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Count of Porto Alegre

Would you mind finishing Manuel Marques de Sousa, Count of Porto Alegre? We stopped around the middle. --Lecen (talk) 03:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I saw that you were finishing the sections. I have some work on a book that I need to finish tomorrow and will try to go over Count of Porto Alegre this weekend. • Astynax ^talk 07:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco

This is a note to let the main editors of José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 16, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 16, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco (1819–1880) was a politician, monarchist, diplomat, teacher and journalist of the Empire of Brazil. In 1871, Rio Branco became the President of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister) for the first time. He would become the Council's longest-serving president, and his cabinet the second longest, in Brazilian history. His government was marked by a time of economic prosperity and the enactment of several necessary reforms—though they proved to be seriously flawed. The most important of these initiatives was the Law of Free Birth, which granted freeborn status to children born to slave women. Having become one of the main leaders of the Conservative Party, the passage of this law increased Rio Branco's popularity. However, his government was plagued by a long crisis with the Catholic Church that had resulted from the expulsion of Freemasons from its lay brotherhoods. After more than four years heading the Cabinet, Rio Branco resigned in 1875. Following a long vacation in Europe, his health swiftly declined and he was diagnosed with oral cancer. Rio Branco died in 1880 and was widely mourned throughout the country. He is regarded by most historians as one of Brazil's greatest statesmen. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Astynax, I made this request. I you oppose it, let me know and I'll remove it at once. --Lecen (talk) 01:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no objection and we can see what Raul says. I think that there will be enough time space between Paranhos and the week of Independence that both can be TFA's. Pedro I will need to be suggested for a TFA immediately upon passing FA, in either case. • Astynax ^talk 03:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Jerusalem during the Crusader period

You wanted it kept. Where are you now?. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I will try to look over it within the next few days. RL projects often interrupt my participation. • Astynax ^talk 07:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Manuel Marques de Sousa, Count of Porto Alegre

Well, I have good news: I'm practically done with Manuel Marques de Sousa, Count of Porto Alegre. Once you've copyedited the article, I'll open a peer review. Since I hardly believe it will get many reviewers in the FAC, perhaps with a peer review we may find more editors. --Lecen (talk) 21:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I will go through the article tonight and tomorrow. I think a peer review will be a good idea after. • Astynax ^talk 16:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I made a mistake back there. In the "Invasion of Paraguayan territory" section I wrote "It did improve matters Porto Alegre and Tamandaré's behavior toward their Brazilian colleague who commanded the 1st corps..." You corrected to "The situation improved when Porto Alegre and Tamandaré found common ground in their distaste for the Brazilian commander of the 1st corps..." The problem is that I was supposed to have added a "not": "It did not improve matters Porto Alegre and Tamandaré's behavior..." Obvioulsy their behavior caused discord and was not good. Also, I'd like to warn you that the last paragraph of "Siege of Uruguaiana" came from "Invasion of Paraguayan territory". You should check it too later. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 11:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I intend to go over the entire article and the lead section later today. • Astynax ^talk 15:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

That's actually a footnote. I added the missing text. --Lecen (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Very good. Thanks. • Astynax ^talk 08:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Pedro I's FAC

Since the other thread was already huge, I opened a new one here. I amde the following addition: [4] Please correct or improve if necessary. --Lecen (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Dank said "I'm not sure which of those words "a convention" is the object of; if this is saying that prohibiting Brazil's slave trade was a gift to England, that doesn't sound right". I wouldn't say a gift, but Great Britan had been pushing for the abolition of Atlantic slave trade since the time of João VI. Since th abolition came as a result of Great Britain's pressure, and not because of internal pressure, so yes, it was kind of a gift in the end. --Lecen (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I have made a slight change to the sentence that I hope will make it clearer to Dank and other readers that both a treaty was signed and a convention was signed with Britain. In both agreements, Brazil gave up something valuable that Britain wanted. I have made changes based on Dank's suggestions, and intend to respond on the review page this evening. • Astynax ^talk 22:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm really, really against moving part of one section to other. Now it looks odd mentioning out of nowhere again his trip to Rio Grande do Sul and out of context. We are not supposed to do every single thing a reviewer says and if he opposes the nomination because of one single thing we didn't do, then let it be. --Lecen (talk) 22:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I am posting a comment on the review page. I moved it because it seemed to be out of context and when the "Second Marriage" section begins, the readers are taken back to the point before Maria Leopoldina had died, which is confusing if there is no explanation. I have no objection to moving it back, but somehow the "Second marriage" section needs to be clearer that the sequence of events does not continue from the last sentences of the previous section. Perhaps you could put the sentences back and just start the first sentence of the "Second marriage" section with something like: "Even prior to Maria Leopoldina's death, Domitila had taken advantage..." I do think the second sentence about the rumors would read better if worked into the "Second marriage" section to help explain Domitila's unpopularity and the effect on Pedro I's reputation. • Astynax ^talk 23:09, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at this and tell me what do you think. --Lecen (talk) 23:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That works better for me. An alternative to "Between Portugal and Brazil" might be something like "Luso-Brazilian entanglements" or "Involvement in Portuguese affairs" if you want to avoid the phrase. • Astynax ^talk 08:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps "Portuguese-Brazilian entanglements"? The word "Luso" is not used in the article and I wonder if the average reader will know that it represents Portugal. --Lecen (talk) 10:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

You're going to laugh. Nikkimaria is now asking for the pages of the books from where I scanned the paintings. She never asked that before. --Lecen (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I was ill today and could not sit at the computer for more than a few minutes. Hopefully that will go away by tomorrow. I'm glad you and DrK gave a response. Giving the page number is beside the point for Public Domain images. If you were using a picture of the Mona Lisa, it doesn't matter from where it came. • Astynax ^talk 06:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Is this correct? Can it be "Although in his right," or does it has to be "Although in his right to do so,"? --Lecen (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I think "within his right" works better than "in his right". It is not necessary to add "to do so". I changed "in" to "within" already and also changed "right" to "prerogative" (exercise of a right vested in the office) which seemed to fit better. • Astynax ^talk 07:23, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I proposed it for TFA on next 7 September. See here. Could you take a look and correct any mistake in the text box? --Lecen (talk) 00:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Your text looks good! • Astynax ^talk 02:20, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Coming as requested, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy work! • Astynax ^talk 08:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I amde one small addition to Pedro I's article. See here. Could you fix it or improve it if necessary? --Lecen (talk) 13:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It looks good, and DrKiernan corrected the small error. • Astynax ^talk 17:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

List of monarchs of Brazil

I was thinking about taking a look at List of monarchs of Brazil and bringing it to FL level. What do you think of it? --Lecen (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it is a good list. It looks as if it will need references and copyright checks for the pictures. The other FL monarchy lists are using sortable tables, so maybe it would be good for me or someone to change it over to be sortable by name and reign dates. • Astynax ^talk 22:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

i'm going to work on that. I removed all Portuguese monarchs before 1815 to make it more simple. Anything before that should be on the list of Portuguese monarchs since Brazil was from 1500 until 1815 merely a colony, a province of Portugal. It became a full state in 1815. --Lecen (talk) 02:25, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Cout of Porto Alegre

As I feared, the Count of Porto Alegre was met wih no interest and his peer review was archived with no reviewers at all. Regardless of that, I started the FAC. The link is here. Let's have faith on this one. --Lecen (talk) 11:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will hope for the best. • Astynax ^talk 18:42, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heather Wilde, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Imperfect Lady (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Porto Alegre

Astynax, I answered to most of Sturmvogel 66's comments on his talk page.[5] So, don't worry about doing it all over again. --Lecen (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I did capitalize "Gloved Centaur" as I think it is OK, and I linked the first mention of "Conservative Party" to the short article that we used in the Empire of Brazil. I agree that no one is likely to create an article on the Empire's Liberal Party. • Astynax ^talk 21:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Another one! I really liked the reviews. All of them did a great job and I'm happy to see that we had a smooth process. I'm taking a little break for a couple of weeks but I hope I can continue working later. If you still have interest, let me know. Thanks a lot, friend. --Lecen (talk) 10:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

That is great. I agree that everyone tried to be constructive. Congratulations, and I look forward to your return. • Astynax ^talk 13:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to join MILHIST

Hello Astynax! Thank you for your contributions.

If you would be interested in joining a group of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history, please take a look at the Military history WikiProject—we would be delighted to have you! If you like what you see, please sign your name here, and a project coordinator will soon be along with a formal welcome. Regards, Anotherclown (talk) 23:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I currently have limited time to spend here, but I will keep the invitation in mind when I have more flexibility. • Astynax ^talk 07:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Marquis of Olinda

Astynax, would you mind taking a look at "birth and education" section in Pedro de Araújo Lima, Marquis of Olinda? --Lecen (talk) 02:10, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I have made some slight changes. Feel free to change anything back if I made a mistake. • Astynax ^talk 07:02, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Could you improve Joaquim José Inácio, Viscount of Inhaúma? --Lecen (talk) 13:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I will try to look at it this weekend. • Astynax ^talk 18:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The correct year is 1824 (16 January 1824), not 1825. I have no idea why I made that mistake. Thanks for seeing it! --Lecen (talk) 09:57, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. I intend to work on "Loss of Cisplatina" later tonight. • Astynax ^talk 10:16, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I found this video that shows the translation of the Pedro II's remains from the church in Portugal to the Brazilian dreadnought São Paulo. I had seen photos, but never a video. It's only 6 minutes long. Enjoy. P.S.: Weird to see Portugal, then already a republic, with so much pomp in honor of the emperor. --Lecen (talk) 00:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me about this video! It is amazing that it survived, and it is very good quality. Amazing! • Astynax ^talk 07:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I moved a little foward. You may check "Further uprisings"! --Lecen (talk) 15:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm done with "restoration of order" section. --Lecen (talk) 13:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will look when I get back home tonight. • Astynax ^talk 17:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

TFAR

I suggested Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil for TFA on her birthday, 1 December. The blurb is a bit long, please trim, and there's another pending nomination for the day, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I have trimmed several hundred characters from the paragraph. • Astynax ^talk 02:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The Princess

to appear --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for seeing the nomination through, as well as for the notification! • Astynax ^talk 18:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil

This is a note to let the main editors of Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 1, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 1, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil (1831–1853) was the daughter of Dom Pedro I, founder of Brazil's independence and its first emperor, and Amélie of Leuchtenberg. The only child from her father's second marriage, Maria Amélia was born in France following Pedro I's 1831 abdication in favor of his son Dom Pedro II. Before Maria Amélia was a month old, Pedro I left for Portugal to restore its crown to his eldest daughter Dona Maria II. He defeated his brother Miguel I (who had usurped Maria II's throne), only to die a few months later of tuberculosis. Maria Amélia's mother took her to Portugal, where she lived most of her life without ever visiting Brazil. Brazil's government refused to recognize Maria Amélia as a member of its Imperial House because she was born abroad. When her half-brother Pedro II was declared of age in 1840, he intervened to restore her position. Maria Amélia was engaged to Archduke Maximilian of Austria in 1852, but marriage plans were thwarted when she contracted tuberculosis and was taken to the island of Madeira to recover. Her health deteriorated, and she died on 4 February 1853. Her body was interred in Portugal's royal Braganza Pantheon; almost 130 years later, her remains were moved to Brazil. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)