Talk:Carioca

Value of photo illustration
A reader using the photo illustration to better understand what a Carioca is might logically conclude that they are street vendors or people who congregate at outdoor stalls for some reason. If there is nothing distinctive about Cariocas other than the fact that they are human beings who are from or currently live in Rio de Janeiro, having a photo of a few random Rio residents on a generic sidewalk that could be anywhere in the world brings no clarity, and more likely introduces confusion. An optimal photo would contain an image that could only be possible in Rio de Janeiro (some kind of civic parade, a crowd shot at a Rio landmark--something with both many people and a symbol of the city itself), that would be less likely to dilute the meaning of the article. Better to have no illustration at all than one that serves only to distract the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.131.196.213 (talk) 18:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Language section
This section has very scant support, even from Brazilian sources. A notable exception is Apagamento do R Final no Dialeto Carioca: um Estudo em Tempo Aparente e em Tempo Real - DELTA (in Portuguese). —Preceding unsigned comment added by AVM (talk • contribs) March 4, 2009 Also renamed title from 'Carioca "Dialect"' to agree with the actual section title.


 * The "Language" section is still unsourced. Moreover, it has been tagged as needing expansion for two years, since which time it only grew by a few words. Instead, we could merge this together with related articles - see discussion at Talk:Brazilian Portuguese. &mdash; Sebastian 18:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Slang words from Rio de Janeiro
This last sentence from the 'Dialect' section is pathetic: just two words (caraca and maneiro) from a universe of thousands! No wonder the section bears the 'Expand-section' tag!

The whole article needs a thorough revamping. It completely misses the central point: cariocas are the natives or inhabitants of Rio de Janeiro. --AVM (talk) 18:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Obliquous?
Does this word actually exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.208.50 (talk) 10:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Turistic?
Does this word actually exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.87.42.110 (talk) 10:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

This article sucks
It is unsourced, biased, everything an encyclopedia article shouldn't be. I'm prepared to tear it up if no one else will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.87.42.110 (talk) 10:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carioca. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203010719/http://www.coracoralina.ueg.br/visao_academica/revista/2010_novembro/rev10_2010_dialetos.pdf to http://www.coracoralina.ueg.br/visao_academica/revista/2010_novembro/rev10_2010_dialetos.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)