Template talk:Portuguese overseas empire

message: don't you guys think this template is too big? __earth (Talk) 18:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to make the template show only on clicking the show button...but something seems to be wrong. It now shows only when you click twice! Could somebody fix that? --  thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK 10:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Template size) 

message: Mumbai and Salsette Island are same.. could be merged.. please check both and ammend template...Chirag 20:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mumbai and Salsette are same... 

message: The t/p currently has the end of Portuguese control in E. Timor as 1975 (the date Indonesia invaded) instead of 2002 (the date of independence). Which is correct? - Thanks, Hoshie 03:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe 1999 as East Timor was de jure Portuguese from 1975 to 1999, although the note must say it was invaded by Indonesia in that period. From 1999 to 2002 it was of the United Nations, not Portugal, I think.Câmara 17:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Was it really de jure Portuguese?  De facto control has to turn into de jure control at some point in time (and would generally be considered to be retroactive to the point of first control by Indonesia).  I can't imagine that East Timor was considered to be de jure part of Portugal in, say, 1994, even if the United Nations considered its nominal status to be that of a "non-self-governing territory under Portuguese administration." (quote is from the East Timor article, but is there a source to back it up?) And if the UN did not continue to pass resolutions to the effect that it should be returned, then there should be no real basis in international law that it continued to be a part of Portugal.  Lexicon (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it was like you said "non self-governing territory under Portuguese administration", and Portugal nor any country I know have recognized Indonesian occupation, but I can't exactly say how it was.Câmara 08:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: De facto and de jure status don't necessarily match. The United States and several other countries (including my own: Denmark) never recognized the Soviet Union's annexation of the Baltic states, and in the Danish case, this lack of recognition included a refusal to conduct official meetings on Baltic soil or the posting of consular missions there. A more famous example is Cyprus: All nations save Turkey don't recognize the TRNC but consider the territory part of the Republic of Cyprus. Valentinian T / C 08:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  End of E. Timor? 

message: This template was linked in many articles, including former Portuguese Empire islands and areas. This is totally incorrect because the title of the template says: Portuguese Empire. It gives a false impression to common readers, whom are the readers of why we are editing in Wikipedia, that the article they are reading at is currently belonging to the Portuguese Empire. I suggest to rename the template, although I prefer to link those little stubby islands with a link to Portuguese Empire in the See Also section. For the record, I am not against the template. The template layout is interesting although it is a bit too big to fill half space of a small article. Only that the inclusion of this template makes a factual error that we should avoid. — Indon (reply) — 08:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In glancing through the various lists, it seems that very few of them are still in the empire (Azores and Madeira were the only ones I found). I notice both  and  divide into sections for former and current colonies, while  uses small caps to designate those that are still in the empire. They don't really give an indication in the title that the states may have been former territories. Would you suggest a title like "Current and former Portuguese Empire"? (It's clear enough if one actually looks at the contents, and can see that the dates of nearly all territories were relatively short.) Whatever is chosen, it would probably be best to make it apply to all of these former/current colonies the same, of whatever empire. Rigadoun  (talk) 15:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, yes there are dates for readers to look the template in detail, but at a glance (esp. when the template is  in collapsed state) it looks like the article currently belongs to the empire. Particularly for a small size articles which the template then fills half of the article's space. I'd argue to not to use this template for former colonies, as then one island might have a lot of Empire templates from the Portuguese, the Dutch, the British and even more if there are ancient empire templates in the future. It is more appropriate to use only wikilink in the See Also section. This is also the same case for  not being included in Ceylon, Mauritius, etc. (although editors of some former Dutch colony's articles do not argue to include this template), but the template is used in more appropriate articles: Dutch India, Dutch East Indies, Netherlands New Guinea and even there's a specialized article about Taiwan under the Dutch (not yet included). I'm sure it is also the case for the other  and  that you mentioned above. However, if the template editors insist to include all islands and areas, then the title surely needs to be changed to avoid factual errors. — Indon (reply) — 07:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect template 

message: i think some factories and forts are missing in the template.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.198.59 (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: more to add

message: I've removed Madagascar from this list. The Portuguese were an insignificant player in the island's history and including Madagascar here is misleading.
*1496–1550 dates are impossible, as the first European did not set foot on the island until 1500.
*The Portuguese built a trading post/fortress on the coast, which does not constitute colonizing the island or making it part of their empire. Several other European countries did the same (especially France) but none of these was long-lived and none managed to capture land and rule local communities until the French military incursion in 1895 that forced the collapse of the Merina monarchy.
Let's please discuss this before adding it back in. Cheers, Lemurbaby (talk) 06:08, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Madagascar