Talk:Riograndense Republic

Bad boys
Some racist brazilians bad boys are transforming this article in a trash. That is the brazilian way of life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.136.21.130 (talk) 10:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Do not think all brazilian are the same just because the acts of some stupid brazilian people. Stupid people are everywhere, including ones who think everyone is alike based on a few. BTW, that's a kind of prejudice or, can i say, racism. If you don't have anything article-related to discuss, beat it. The discussion page is not for your grumble. 189.25.31.35 (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

189.25.31.35 (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Modern separatist movement
The modern separatist movement has nothing to do with the one during the War of Tatters. Besides, there are active separatist movements other than the Pampas Republic. So, shouldn't Pampas Republic be put into a different article? LipeFontoura 02:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The "Movement for the Independence of the Pampas" official website proclaims, as its first clause, the "Unconditional restoration of the independence and political autonomy of the Riograndense Republic". The Riograndense Republic was created during the War of Tatters. Therefore a direct connection exists.Thgink (talk) 16:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've moved the section to Talk:Riograndense Republic/"Modern Separatist Movement" - until we decide which bits (if any) should be in this article, and whether it can contribute to an article on Brazilian separatist movements in general. -  Toon  05  18:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Capital
the link to the capital (Piratini) just goes right back to the top of the same article. Was this intended? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcduggan (talk • contribs) 23:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Maps
This map is totally wrong. If no one disagree I will deleted it.Jack Bufalo Head (talk) 23:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Limited recognition
Since it was recognized by two of the Great Powers of the era, the UK and France, wouldn't it be best described not as an "Unrecognized state" but rather a "state with limited recognition"? 2600:1004:B101:FA43:0:17:9080:1D01 (talk) 14:01, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * What reliable source says so?Ttocserp 16:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)