Talk:Bahia

message: This page is generally good and helpful, but I did find the history to be somewhat misleading, even if well written.  Perhaps it was almost too convincing at first and I am glad that I have since found competing information on wikipedia, but also at the library and elsewhere on the internet.
Currently a paragraph under the sub-header "History" reads:
"...After several battles, mostly in Pirajá, the province was finally able to expel the Portuguese on July 2nd 1823, known as Bahia Independence Day, a great popular celebration. In the state there is an ongoing discussion about the exact moment of Brazilian independence, because for almost all "baianos," it really happened in Bahia with the battles, and not on September 7, when the Emperor, Pedro I, declared independence."
I am not sure how the first sentence is supported and makes itself evident, other than by simple statement or seemingly popular belief. The second paragrhaph seems to allude to some questions and pursue a more veracious standpoint, but perhaps it is not nearly as forthecoming as it should be.  And that is the real point. In other words, this paragraph is probably way too simple in its details to discuss the wheight and truth of the matter that is Brazilian constitutional history and national formation.
I suggest either editing the paragraph and/ or cross-referencing another wikipedia page (topic) for clarity and intellectual justice.  And I strongly suggest that all readers take note of the discussions on this page and others.  It seems more relevant than some wikipedia topics we read that are not as seemingly complex.  Therefore...
See Wikipedia topic "Empire of Brazil" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Brazil
See Wikipedia topic "Brazilian War of Independence" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_War_of_Independence
READ THE DISCUSSIONS and also NOTE that the "The neutrality of this article is disputed" on the second topic in the above.
I also suggest reading Brazil: The Forging of a Nation, 1798-1852 by Roderick J. Barman (Stanford University Press, 1988)
I may be able to point out other issues, but this is the most glaring right now.
I appreciate the participation by everyone.  Thanks.
DjZ 08:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention to history and ongoing debate 

message: There is a song in The Three Caballeros that is about Bahia. Is it worth mentioning on this page?Mrobinson587 06:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worth Mentioning the Disney filem Los Tres Caballeros/ The Three Caballeros song? 

message: Anybody want to add a section for climate/weather?
64.81.167.175 (talk) 09:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate? 

message: It is not archaic Portuguese but Spanish.--83.35.181.1 (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bahía means bay in Spanish 

message: The lead paragraph says that Bahia is "located in the northeastern part of the country", and the infobox includes this map. Why is that called "northeastern" Brazil? "Eastern" it certainly is, but how "north"? It looks to me like it's roughly equidistant from the northern and southern boundaries of the country, but there's a lot more area to the north than to the south. Simply "eastern" seems much more appropriate to me. If "northeastern" reflects how Brazilians think of Bahia because of the way the population is distributed in the country, rather than because of its geographic location, then the article needs to note that. To call that "northeastern" Brazil is simply an error in the purely geographic and most universally understood meaning of the word.
This is a sufficiently glaring error that I'm going to change the text to say "eastern", and if calling it "northeastern" is important enough for the change to upset anyone, maybe they will explain why here before they revert it.—Jim10701 (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Olá, eu sou brasileiro e irei escrever em português, pois não sou suficientemente fluente em inglês para assim escrever (Peço desculpas adiantadas por isso). O seu questionamento é compreensível, porém não há sentido em mudar um termo aceito no Brazil e mundialmente, como o termo nordeste o é. A resposta para a sua duvida é simples: Como você pode notar o Brazil é menos uniforme geograficamente do que os Estados Unidos e, portanto sua divisão regional não é totalmente relacionável ao que é feito com o mapa dos Estados Unidos ou noutros países anglófonos ou do mundo todo. Outro exemplo que eu posso lhe citar é o fato de parte do nosso "Norte" estar mais para um noroeste e seguindo sua lógica, a única divisão correta seria a de "Sul" e "Centro-Oeste" ou o Brazil deveria ser dividido em apenas duas regiões (Norte-Sul, Leste-Oeste ou Oriente-Ocidente). Obs: Essa resposta não foi apenas dirigida ao usuário "Jim10701", mas a todos que tiverem essa duvida. Agradeço a atenção. 189.36.234.145 (talk) 17:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

text: Brazilian chiming in! I know this topic is old, but I feel I should give an explanation to why is Bahia on the Northeast region: the current regionalization of Brazil is being observed since 1970, before that specific arrangement, Bahia (and Sergipe) were usually grouped with Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo and Rio de Janeiro, the regions group the states according to physical and socioeconomic aspects. Bastewasket (talk) 02:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  northeastern? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The section headings History and Universo Paralello are on the right. Can anything be done so that they're on the left like the others? Mcljlm (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Mcljlm can you give us some more details about your set-up (ex. mobile or desktop, browser, etc.)? They all appear on the left for me. --Nsophiay (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm looking at the page on my desktop. Now I see Universo Paralello on the left but History isn't. Mcljlm (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm also on desktop and I don't see that in any browser (unless you're talking about the fact that an image is blocking the heading from being entirely on the left?). Otherwise you might want to try clearing your cache and reloading. --Nsophiay (talk) 00:28, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The image blocking the heading from being entirely on the left is exactly what I'm referring to . Looking at some of the previous versions it appears that at one time Economy wasn't on the left but it is now. Mcljlm (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be fixed now (I put some of the images into a gallery). --Nsophiay (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, much better. Mcljlm (talk) 10:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section heading locations 

message: @Moxy I added the gallery of images yesterday to clean up the page a bit because it's so overloaded with images and that's affecting how headings and paragraphs are displayed (see above discussion). The images that are now in the gallery used to all be on the right-side of the Regions section, which resulted in the Koppen climate map being pushed down to History. Hence why I grouped them together and moved them to the bottom of the Geography section. I also moved the pie chart to the left because otherwise there's an unseemly gap between the Largest cities subheading and the list of cities.
I am still a fairly new Wikipedian, so maybe this was not the best solution. Do you have any suggestions (especially on the Largest cities gap issue)? Just remove some images? --Nsophiay (talk) 16:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page formatting with images