Talk:Portuguese Wikipedia

message: I'm pretty sure "clivation" is not an English word. Perhaps "fork" or "branch" is better here? --ESP 19:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you are correct. --Jonik 16:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "clivation"? 

message: References to prove the notability of this topic can be found at this search at Google News Portugal. -- Eastmain (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: These searches are a bit more focused. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add some references 

message: Since today proposed deletion is available. It works on basically the same grounds of wiki.en and a article must be proded for four days before being deleted. The name is :pt:Wikipedia:Eliminação semirrápida. Lechatjaune (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion 

message: In portuguese we use other namespace that we call Anexo. They can be list of something, tables, timelines... that complete an article. They can't exist without an main article. For example, the article Timeline of New Zealand history in portuguese wikipedia it would be an annex (Anexo). I'm not really fluent in English so if you I wrote here and I hope someone introduce this information in the article. Thanks. - Sarilho1 (talk) 15:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Namespace 

message: User JBRibeiro1 eliminated a sentence in the text which states that personal conflicts between users are particularly frequent in pt:WP. I reverted this edit, because I know by years of personal experience that the statement is exact. I have been contributing to en:WP, pt:WP, de:WP, fr:WP, and es:WP, and pt:WP is the only version where I have found that personal conflicts, often of a deplorably low level, are frequent. Thus I am myself a source for the statement, and many other users of pt:WP, if asked, would serve as sources. In fact, on this kind of statement, the testimony of users is the only possible source (unless somebody spends a substantial portion of his time screening the talk pages of pt:WP.....) --Aflis (talk) 16:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: , I'll call mediation because "your testimony" is original research unless you publish it and get it peer reviewed. Note that it's not the same as to say you're wrong. For example, "my testimony" (and I'm there for almost four years) is different than yours. It's not Wikipedia that will solve this. Please, state your sources or remove the challenged statement. José Luiz  talk 21:33, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: ; Editors involved in this dispute
# – filing party
#
#
; Articles affected by this dispute
#
; Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
* Talk:Portuguese Wikipedia#Sources
==== Issues to be mediated ====
; Primary issues (added by the filing party)
#Bold statement unsourced.
#"Sources" clearly (and admittedly) WP:OR.
; Additional issues (added by other parties)
*Additional issue 1
*Additional issue 2
==== Parties' agreement to mediation ====
#Agree. José Luiz  talk 02:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portuguese Wikipedia 

message: #Agree. José Luiz  talk 02:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parties' agreement to mediation 

message: *
 
* Solved here. José Luiz  talk 01:56, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Decision of the Mediation Committee

message: In November 2020, the Portuguese Wikipedia was the subject of an article at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2020-11-01/News and notes. — Sagotreespirit (talk) 19:11, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia Signpost]]