Talk:Patriota

Requested move 27 September 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved to "Patriota" per consensus. — usernamekiran (talk)  20:26, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

National Ecologic Party → Patriot (Brazil) – name changed 201.68.234.72 (talk) 00:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943  (talk) 02:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). TonyBallioni (talk) 03:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment. If it is moved then it should be to Patriota. Translation is pointless and unnecessary in this case. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes. To either Patriot (Brazil) or Patriota. The National Ecologic Party is no more. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 19:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Until we have evidence that the new name is in common use, we stick to the old name. See wp:official names for some of the reasons for this. Andrewa (talk) 01:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Move to Patriota. The English translations don't exist in the literature, so we should use the new Portuguese name. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pro-PATRI bias
Sentences like "... Rede Globo, which often promotes homosexualism and transgenderism in its program." have a clear homophobic tint, and it's obvious that much of the article has been crafted by PATRI sympathizers who are unable to stay neutral in their wording. — Μαρκος Δ  13:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have removed the second paragraph in that section altogether. It's completely unsourced, slanted and frankly has little relevance to the party itself. It just reads like an opinion piece on what the author perceives as causes for Bolsonaro's rise in popularity. Much of the article is unsourced, but at least the Ideology section seems to correspond with the party's stated positions. NoMoreHeroes (talk) 01:58, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I know ,the brazilian page of the article has also been victim of pro bolsonaro vandalism. Gregorius deretius (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Massive sockpuppetry by SacredGeometry333
Pages about brazilian politics in english wikipedia have been falling victim of one of the largest cases of sockpuppetry in the history of wikipedia. The now perma-Banned User:SacredGeometry333 created hundreds to even thousands of sockpuppet accounts to disrupt and vandalize wikipedia with clear political goals,as according to some evaluations made by administrators,he is a right-wing militant.

We encourage ,based on the principles of impartiality and transparency,user to track down suspected sockpuppets of this account and report it to the administrators.

Sockpuppetry is unacceptable in the wikipedia and should not be tolerated at any cost. Araukan (talk) 16:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Sources in ideology-section
The ideology-section in the infobox is quite lacking in sources, could somebody perhaps try to find some sources or citations to back the various ideologies with? Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 13:05, 27 December 2018 (UTC)