User talk:Lecen/Archive 20

My amended statement at RfC
I've amended my statement at Requests for comment/DangerousPanda-EatsShootsAndLeaves to add additional detail and some links. I'm really under the gun at work and this RfC came up unexpectedly so I'm pressed for time to do proper strikethroughs, etc. Bbb23 had a good suggestion, that I notify anyone who's added an endorsement, so you can decide if you think you need to re-sign or remove your endorsement or make a different response. Msnicki (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

notice
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, NE Ent 15:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Medos e médos
Já agora, outra coisa: se alguém que fala ou entende português ver "medos" (pron. médos) de Rio dos Medos na WP inglesa traduzido por "dunes" vai achar que é erro, e vai querer mudar para "fears". Não caberia uma nota sobre a pronúncia e significado, não na WP inglesa. Alguma sugestão? Um abraço, Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 11:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

DangerousPanda arbitation request opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration and have not been listed as a party. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 3 December 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC). Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

Ajuda tradução
Olá, Lecen. Tudo bem contigo?

Eu estou traduzindo o artigo Pedro Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil para o português, e estou tendo dificuldade em traduzir o seguinte trecho: "Following the birth, Pedro II received official congratulations at a levee held later that day, which according to a contemporary was an event 'more splendid and better attended' than any since the Emperor was declared of age in 1840."

Você poderia me ajudar. Desde já agradeço. Berganus (talk) 04:49, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Berganus, a tradução seria a seguinte: "Após o nascimento, Pedro II recebeu congratulações oficiais numa recepção realizada mais tarde no mesmo dia, a qual de acordo com um contemporâneo foi um evento "mais esplêndido e com maior presença" do que qualquer outro desde que o imperador foi declarado maior de idade em 1840." Desejo boa sorte no seu empreendimento. Fico feliz em saber que há interesses na história do Brasil imperial na wikipédia em português. Um abraço, --Lecen (talk) 05:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Obrigado!!! Berganus (talk) 05:18, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

FYI
This book on the Revolta da Chibata has been published. It's Zachary Morgan's revised dissertation. I have a copy if you need me to look anything up. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk page.
Will you please discuss instead of revert? We want to nominate the picture as a Featured picture candidate. If you keep reverting it it will not going to work. The Google file is coming scanned directly from the museum, so it is 99% of the cases is the the best quality file and closest to how the picture actually looks like. Hafspajen (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Lecen, I have just redacted that comment of yours. I should not have to explain why. For clarity's sake: consider this an NPA warning, yes. Drmies (talk) 15:47, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Featured article review/Pedro I of Brazil/archive1
I'm sorry it's come to this, but we cannot actively mislead our audience by claiming conspiracy theories support changing historical documents to how we think they should be. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents
Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This is your final warning. If you continue hoaxing at this page, you will be blocked.  Nyttend (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * You modified this from the original upload, and lighting can easily vary from shot to shot. Do you want me to believe that Google's money has bought professional scanning that's of poorer color quality than a 476×640 image from a low end point-and-shoot camera?  Nyttend (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * DrKiernan, could you point it out to Nyttend the virtual tour so that he may see the painting himself? I'd appreciate that. --Lecen (talk) 13:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This image has been sourced from the Google Art scan: anything from any other source is irrelevant. Nyttend (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It's from Google itself. Click on the small picture of Pedro I at the bottom. You'll be redirected to where the painting is located. --Lecen (talk) 13:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Or see this and this. --Lecen (talk) 14:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents
Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Removing warning messages
It is your right to remove messages on your talk page, including waning messages and ANI notifications as you just did. However that doesn't resolve the problems raised in those messages. Nor is it something that is likely to reflect well on you if you continue with the same problematic behavior. If you continue in your current course I do not think it is going to end well for you. Just some friendly advice that you are free to accept or ignore as you choose. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Before coming here to educate me, you should have first asked my version of facts so that you could judge according to your conscience. --Lecen (talk) 01:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Asking for your version of events is one of the reasons for the post which included a link and invitation to the ANI discussion. That invitation is still open. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that. I'll need to gather evidence before I'm able to do that. Now I'm busying grading some student papers. I'll comment on the ANI thread tomorrow night. --Lecen (talk) 01:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for a child on the Main page, - don't remember any, -  precious  again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Question about pt.wp
Lecen, I've heard that the Portuguese Wikipedia has some kind of sub-admin position. Do you know if that position developed because they were having trouble finding enough admins to do the work, or was it some other reason? - Dank (push to talk) 14:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello from the team at Featured article review!


We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.

Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.

Thanks for your help! Maralia (talk) 19:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Re Doubt about move request
Lecen, it is not at all unusual for editors to initiate a move request even when it has previously failed. Ideally the new request will stand on merits and sources. I'll take a look at the RM this week to see if I can see what's going on. --Mike Cline (talk) 22:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

War of the Triple Alliance / Paraguayan War
I have proposed an alternative formulation, you may wish to comment. WCM email 20:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

RSN
WP:RSN may be of interest. WCM email 19:09, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Unpleasant as usual
Well, I tried to talk seriously with you, but it is impossible because your behaviour is anything but kind. Just keep in mind that I reported your actions only to try to reach a consensus with you (and also receiving feedback from the rest of editors, and -why not?- any helpful information) instead of re-reverting your actions, exposing myself to be blocked (it is not worth).

The thread was closed so fast so I could not reply to your arrogant terms (which are so distinctive from your part). Undoubtedly, you are one of the most unpleasant persons I have to deal with. The only "immature" user who can't keep a civil tone of discussion, ridicously blaming me for "threats" (so absurd statement!) are YOU. Instead of being concerned in FACs, you should try to learn good manners. Keep it in mind, guy.

Now you can blank this message if you want, "mature" guy. Good bye - Fma12 (talk) 23:45, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * :(. --Lecen (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Meu velho amigo
Lecen,

Como estas, meu velho amigo? Acho que tem sido anos nao temos falado. Pois - quase deixei de editar na wiki completamente, mas tou a voltar! Espero que estas bem e que podemos falar um pouco, como editores colegas e como amigos.

Abraco,

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 11:24, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

You have to check this out!
Lecen,

You have to check this out:

Google Cultural Institute: PEDRO D'ALCÂNTARA EMPEROR OF BRAZIL KING OF PORTUGAL

It's really quite cool.

Cheers, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 06:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Dúvida
É impressão minha ou você gostaria que o Brasil voltasse ao tempo do Império? Por favor, só me explique isso para saber se devo vomitar ou não... N and O  ta lk !|undefined   00:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Se for necessário para ter o prazer de te ver como bobo da corte? Com certeza! --Lecen (talk) 00:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Pedro Álvares Cabral - mention of age
Hi Lecen. Is it not possible to work around the "32-33", which looks slightly unsightly in the text? It already says right at the top that he was born in "1467 or 1468". For the portrait it could read "Pedro Álvares Cabral in 1500 in an early 20th-century painting" or "Pedro Álvares Cabral commanding the Second Portuguese India Armada in an early 20th-century painting" and here it is not realy necessary. If is should stay, should the hiphen not be repalced by a slash (32/33), more commonly used to indicate "either or"? What do you think? Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 11:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Rui, I stopped editing here. Please, feel free to do as you believe it's the best. --Lecen (talk) 12:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

FAC: Juan Manuel de Rosas
Hi Lecen. very happy to see you, as it means that you are still involved. I looked you up a month ago, and it appeared that you were hardly involved, so this is a welcome change. Anyway, the reason why I looked you up — and have been meaning to write ever since, but, never getting around to it — is this request that I received, which is custom-made for you - I cannot possibly imagine anyone else to tackle it. Let me know how you feel so I can reply to the editor that approached me. RE: Juan Manuel Rosas, I am loking at it as we speak and I will keep you posted. Best regards, Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Map of Empire of Brazil
Here is the map of Brazil in 1822: File:Brazil (1822).svg. The international boundaries according to the sources. --Shadowxfox (talk) 01:22, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but no. We had this same discussion here. This time this map had souces, true sources, almost all of the Brazilian Government (the atlas is from Ministério da Educação, the Treaty of Madrid and San Ildefonso are in commons, the maps of the Empire in 1822 is in commons too). If you want to create a new map with your point of view, do it, but this map remains as it is.--Shadowxfox (talk) 01:36, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'M SURE. --Shadowxfox (talk) 01:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * In any article of the Treaty of Badajoz an exact border is specified, only certain conditions are reversed. As they annulled the treaty of 1777, they returned to the borders of 1750 see the pages 26, 27, 30, 31 of the atlas. That does not mean that borders are current, as you want them to be.


 * And please, don't be arrogant, I know about history, I know that the historiography of the Portuguese and Spanish colonies are different. If you want to follow this sterile discussion, good for you, but don't expect I modify my map, I prefer to refer to the references.--Shadowxfox (talk) 02:28, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * For real ? Am I immature? Please moderate your words, unless you want to be reported with the bureaucrats.--Shadowxfox (talk) 02:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * This Civility is a policy.--Shadowxfox (talk) 02:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shadowxfox (talk) 05:12, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

...but the map remains as it is. Suck it.--Shadowxfox (talk) 14:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Both of you...
...cut it out.  Tide  rolls  17:12, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Area of Empire of Brazil
Here is the source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Brazil http://www.historiadobrasil.net/brasil_colonial/expansao_territorial.htm http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/geociencias/geografia/default_evolucao.shtm Today, Brazil has 8,515,767 km². The Empire of Brazil in his last year (1889) has the same size and borders of today except by the actual state of Acre, acquired bt the republic in 1902. So, without Acre's area, according to historical documents, the Empire of Brazil has 8,363,186 km². User:Arthur Brum (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations on the promotion of Juan Manuel de Rosas to featured article status! —BarrelProof (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * thank you very much! --Lecen (talk) 03:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Sugestões de leitura
Lecen, eu consegui o livro "A War Betwixt Englishmen Brazil Against Argentina on the River Plate 1825-1830", do historiador militar britânico Brian Vale. É o melhor estudo, o mais detalhado, sobre a parte naval da guerra da Cisplatina. Essa última frase dele resume tudo: "David (the weaker side) always has a better press than Goliath, and the political rivalries of the time have obscured - even distorted - the Imperial Navy's achievements. Few have tried to put the record straight". Se tiver interesse, acho que vai aprender muito sobre esse capítulo da história do Império do Brasil. Acho que tem uma tradução em espanhol. Eu comprei a em inglês, no Amazon. Não há tradução em português, infelizmente.

Quanto à guerra contra o Rosas, recomendo os seguintes livros: o estudo de John Lynch sobre a vida do Rosas (tenho o livro em inglês); esse aqui, que você pode fazer o download: http://www.ihgb.org.br/rihgb.php?s=20 Revista do Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro, 	1915, Tomo LXXVIII, Parte I, "Guerra do Rosas", relato contemporâneo do militar alemão Carl Eduard Sieber (é um relato de um soldado que tomou parte; se você descontar o viés dele de mercenário alemão, vai aprender muita coisa); e esse aqui do Sarmiento (levando em conta o nacionalismo dele, etc, mas dá para ler muitas coisas na entrelinhas: https://archive.org/details/campanaenelejerc00sarm Campanha do exército aliado da América do Sul, Domingo Sarmiento.

Saudações e tudo de bom!Grenzer22 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Você pode baixar também as Efemérides do Barão do Rio Branco (uma verdadeira enciclopédia, quanto à história do Brasil, inclusive quanto ao Império do Brasil, e todas as batalhas), nesse link: http://www.funag.gov.br/biblioteca/dmdocuments/VI_EFEMERIDES-BRASILEIRAS-CORRIGIDO.pdf . Ele cita muita gente e é obra capital para quem tem interesse na história do país.Grenzer22 (talk) 22:22, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Prezado Grenzer22, é bom saber que você ainda está por aqui. Eu já conheço as obras que me sugeriu. A de Lynch, usei para escrever Juan Manuel de Rosas, que agora é um Featured Article. O livro de memórias de Eduard Siber e do Sarmiento usei num trabalho da faculdade há uns dois anos atrás. Não posso usá-los num artigo da Wikipedia, por se tratarem de fontes primárias. Quanto ao livro de Brian Vale, posso afirmar que é bem interessante. A guerra tem sido negligenciada por historiadores. Aliás, todas, com exceção da Guerra do Paraguai. O sr. Vale é muito agradável, troquei alguns e-mails com ele há um ano e meio. Ele me contou que os documentos pessoais do John Pascoe Grenfell estão todos disponíveis num arquivo na Inglaterra. Mas duvido que algum historiador se interesse em olhá-los. O que me falta atualmente é tempo, infelizmente. Não escrevo um artigo aqui faz muito tempo. Primeiro, por desgosto ao ver a incapacidade de membros desta enciclopédia de reconhecerem pilantras mal-intencionados, e de agir contra eles. Segundo, como já mencionei, por não ter tempo livre. Não suma! Grande abraço, --Lecen (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Fantástico Lecen! Eu procurei o e-mail do Brian Vale e não consegui! Muito legal isso. Também achei muito fera você ter lido a obra do Lynch e conhecer as obras citadas. Hoje, com a internet, e os sebos como estante virtual, eu montei uma biblioteca de obras muito raras. Ótimo saber que existam pessoas como você. Por favor, não deixe de contribuir. Abraços.Grenzer22 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Qual o seu e-mail?
Eu ia pedir o e-mail dele. Muito obrigado.Grenzer22 (talk) 14:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Eu não sei como te mandar um e-mail. É possível fazer isso na sua página? Grenzer22 (talk) 14:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No canto esquerdo da tela, na barra de ferramentas, você verá "send an e-mail to this user". --Lecen (talk) 17:39, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

É que eu não tenho e-mail registrado aqui, então não tem jeito de te enviar.Grenzer22 (talk) 20:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Então registre um e-Mail ou crie uma conta "grenzer22@gmail" para poder falar com as pessoas da Wikipédia. --Lecen (talk) 20:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Eu preferia não criar uma conta aqui. Pode enviar a mensagem para esse e-mail? Valeu! Obrigado.Grenzer22 (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Conversa: Enviar e-mail
Você enviou uma mensagem para a minha página de discussão na Wikipédia em português pedindo para conversar, mas eu não registrei meu e-mail na Wikipédia. Vou enviar por aqui mesmo: viniciusoliveira231094@gmail.com --Vinícius Oliveira (talk) 05:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)