Talk:Cisplatine War

message: oth Brazil and Argentina and Uruguay lost, mind you. User:Ejrrjs  says What? 20:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening heading 

message: The article says "[...] and decided to join a confederation with Argentina." That isn't really precise, as the Banda Oriental -Uruguay- was already considered part of Argentina, being part of the United Provinces of the River Plate: by that time there was no notion of Uruguay as an independent country but as part of a confederation of provinces that had Argentina as an informal name, officialized when the Banda Uruguay had already been separated.
The congress that met in La Florida in 1825 only reaffirmed for legal and symbolic purposes that the Banda Oriental was part of the Provincias Unidas, but no one except Brazil would have questioned that before the war; being against Rosas wasn't a reason for not being part of the Provincias Unidas, as many provinces were governed by Unitarian caudillos opposed to him. If Uruguay is now an independent country, and with this I'm not questioning its independence, it is thanks to British commercial interests, and when Argentines say that "Uruguay es una provincia argentina" it's not -on most cases- because of some sort of nazism or  expansionism, but because of recognizing in some way the Banda Oriental as one more of the provinces that, by their own will, form the Argentine Nation. --200.85.112.116 00:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You've already shown you know more about this than me (I mean it, not sarcastic), so why don't you integrate the above into the article? I only thought an article was needed, if only as a stub mentioning the historical setting. I basically learned about this through Pergolini's show and after writing the article for Carmen de Patagones... --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confederation with Argentina 

message: Same as in the Portuguese language wikipedia, Carlos Frederico Lecor was missing as one of the Brazilian leaders in the conflict. He was Commander in Chief of the "Army of the South" both in the begining of the conflict (11.Mar.1826 to 26.Nov.1826) and at the end (22.Jan.1828 till after the end of the war). Despite most critics picturing him as an undecisive leader, he was in fact the commanding general and knew how to mobilize the gaúchos of Rio Grande do Sul, who were very happy with his appointment in 1828. Jorge6207 (talk) 10:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carlos Frederico Lecor 

message: The term "Argentine-Brazilian War" has a large number of reliable sources that use it. Please see , with 2,490 results. Most sources tend to attach the date of the conflict next to the name, and others simply use the term "First" prior to the war's name (which is what I have also done in the article). This name is also much closer to the Spanish name of "Guerra del Brasil" (Brazilian War). Lastly, the term "Guerra del Cisplatina" is an invented Spanish term, and should not be used in the article. All the best.--MarshalN20 | Talk 15:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See above Talk:Cisplatine War#Requested move (2012), where a proposal to move the article to Argentine-Brazilian War was not successful. It seems likely that, if opinions remain the same as in April, the editors here would also oppose First Argentine-Brazilian War as a title. Though that title already exists as a redirect to this one. EdJohnston (talk) 17:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a move request. No reason exists as to why this widely known title for the conflict should be removed from the article.--MarshalN20 | Talk 17:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I take it this is your response to a recent edit by Lecen, where he removed that wording from the article. EdJohnston (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.--MarshalN20 | Talk 18:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing is the name of the article, which by definition can be only 1. Another thing is the name or names that the topic of the article may be known about, which can be two or more (as in this case). Besides, the article should point both the name/s used in English, and the name/s used in the countries involved if their language is not English (in this case, Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay); the name/s in English may or may not be direct translations of those other names. Cambalachero (talk) 18:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Argentine-Brazilian War 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cisplatine War. 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/20111203205317/http://www.uruguayeduca.edu.uy/Portal.Base/Web/verContenido.aspx?ID=201417 to http://www.uruguayeduca.edu.uy/Portal.Base/Web/verContenido.aspx?ID=201417
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110813051915/http://www.mayo-ireland.ie/MotM.htm to http://www.mayo-ireland.ie/motm.htm
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) 05:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified