Talk:Pernambuco

WIKI that not all of Pernambuco is on GMT -3, but the Special Municipality of Fernando da Noronha is on GMT -2. Right? Muhamedmesic 12:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone has vandalized several parts of this and other wikipedia entries about Brazil. Among many other things, references to the "Dutch" were replaced by references to the "Baiano." For examples, the Dutch West Indies Company became the Baiano West Islands Company. There are several other problems now along the article. I tried to fix them, but was not able to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariobrazil2 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

So, Vitória da Conquista was the capital of the Dutch colony in Brazil?! Most of the Agreste inhabitants are of Dutch descent?! The Dutch occupation left marks in the current Pernambuco accent?! And what on earth is an Ocean Jew?! Maybe the Baiano version was more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roboso (talk • contribs) 23:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. I FIND IT VERY, VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THE DUTCH LEFT MARKS ON THE PERNAMBUCO ACCENT, AND IF THEY DID, IT SURELY WOULD HAVE ONLY BEEN NEGLIGIBLE, AND OF VERY SHORT DURATION (60 YEARS OF DUTCH OCCUPATION IN PERNAMBUCO IS OF TOTALLY INSIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCE IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS). ALSO, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT MOST OF THE AGRESTE INHABITANTS ARE OF DUTCH DESCENT - THAT SIMPLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. BUT, OF PORTUGUESE, AFRICAN, AND TUPI DESCENT, ABSOLUTELY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.207.167 (talk) 21:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not know what an Ocean Jew is, but perhaps it refers to Jews that came over the ocean from Europe. Dutch were amicable to Jews, and several of these came to Brazil during the Dutch occupation. After the Portuguese reconquest, the Jews went to New Amsterdam in the US, afterwards named New York. Martins

The portuguese alternate to this website is more complete and should be translated to inslude as many, in not the same, topics.67.161.243.240 16:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} is only for protected pages. Cheers. --MZMcBride 03:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The intro certainly sounds like an advert for Pernambuco, with its great beaches and cultural life! These claims need refs... Benjamin 23:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree - the intro is fatally weak. It's supposed to be a concise summary (one or two sentences per section) of the article. Nothing can be mentioned here for the first time. It hardly matters, for example, which states border it.Sbalfour (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

• A mention of the indigenous people, the Xucuru. --Jerome Potts (talk) 07:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
• A mention of Capoeira. --Jerome Potts (talk) 07:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, the upside down r or rhotic r (e.g. present in American/US English) is not so common in Pernambuco(but in rural Sao Paulo yes!) , the r there is either aspirated (as in not pronounced) or the r used in Spanish before a consonant.Domsta333 (talk) 14:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

The History section is cut-and-pasted from other articles, and hardly makes sense. I'd be embarrassed. This needs a rewrite.Sbalfour (talk) 01:07, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

There is a discrepancy regarding the title of the „second oldest city in Brazil”. In this article is written: „In 1982 the city of Olinda, the second oldest city in Brazil, was declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO.” However, on the Wikipedia's List of cities in the Americas by year of foundation, as „Second Oldest City in Brazil” is mentioned „Cananéia” (1533).

Which is the right one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Micron rt (talk • contribs) 11:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pernambuco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070729101716/http://www.suape.pe.gov.br/MOV_ESTATISTICAS.ASP?tabela=5 to http://www.suape.pe.gov.br/mov_estatisticas.ASP?tabela=5

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Pernambuco. 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/20120222015816/http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/economia/ppm/2007/ppm2007.pdf to http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/economia/ppm/2007/ppm2007.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120222015929/http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/economia/pam/2002/pam2002.pdf to http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/economia/pam/2002/pam2002.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304001818/http://www.ibge.com.br/home/estatistica/economia/pibmunicipios/2003_2007/tab01.pdf to http://www.ibge.com.br/home/estatistica/economia/pibmunicipios/2003_2007/tab01.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pernambuco. 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/20091014095018/http://www.cbf.com.br/ranking/ranking_uf.pdf to http://www.cbf.com.br/ranking/ranking_uf.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:32, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new, feeling my way along. I have made a couple of starts first on the Pernambuco article in the History section, then thinking that I should really be working on the History of Pernambuco article, I switched my effort there. I posted a note on that talk page several days ago thinking that there was a team watching over it. Since I haven't heard any feedback, I thought I'd post here. I expect to be porceeding at a leisurely pace with editing the History of Pernambuco article at least up through 1654. I'd be pleased to get any guidance you might have to offer.P2dwight (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

This note is largely an equivilent of the note I have put on the talk page for History of Pernambuco page. I am not editing the section of the same name on this article as yet. Though I expect to get there someday. So here's the note.Having edited up thru the Portuguese arrival and precolonial section with no one making any comments on the talk page, I conclude that no one is currently following that talk page, at least not frequently. So it seems good to me to proceed to update the section on the Colonial Period:the Captaincy of Pernambuco. I note that the article on Captaincy of Pernambuco has some good material but only 3 references, so I feel free to treat from 1534 to 1630 as I see fit. I will put a note on the talk page for the main article for the Captaincy of Pernambuco. I have looked at the material that follows and expect that I will proceed later with the Dutch Period. Although since the Dutch Brazil article does have a lot of references, I may proceed somewhat differently, I'm not sure. Past the Dutch Period I consider what little expertise I have exhausted, so I do not intend to go forward, or at least not until I would have done some reading. I am also going to dink a bit with some of the comments. I consider some of them wholly wrong (e.g. the coffee comment) and some less than optimally placed in the article. I have also placed a note somewhat like this on the History of Pernambuco talk page. P2dwight (talk) 12:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)memo for record (since no one seems to be watching.) I have gotten far enough over on the History of Pernambuco article that I am beginning to wonde where to draw the line between history and those events to current to be treated in and English history books. Once I decide, or perhaps before, I will probably begin paring down the history section in this article.P2dwight (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I had imagined I was going to return here (this article is where I first started) after going off and editing the History of Pernambuco article and the Captaincy of Pernambuco article and shorten this History section considerably. I had completely forgotten that note about this section/article having omitted however many hundred years and needing to cover that. So I did take out a few things and sometimes put them in the other two articles. However, the history section is now longer than it wss when I started. I am still a newby at this editing of Wikipedia, so while I have noted little interest in Pernambuco over the last several months of editing, I am quite agreeable to guidance if anyone feels up to it.P2dwight (talk) 04:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Here's one fairly disturbing development: https://bitterwinter.org/brazil-law-introduced-in-pernambuco-would-forbid-altering-the-bible/

Thanks for reading. -- Apisite (talk) 02:40, 10 June 2023 (UTC)