Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
::I mean, the difference is in when you click on the picture. You can notice a great deal more of details on the google file. Brushwork, cracks in the surface and such. ] (]) 01:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
::I mean, the difference is in when you click on the picture. You can notice a great deal more of details on the google file. Brushwork, cracks in the surface and such. ] (]) 01:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
::*And the colour looks like a man who has an ], loooks rather OK. He looks tanned. ] (]) 01:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
::*And the colour looks like a man who has an ], loooks rather OK. He looks tanned. ] (]) 01:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
:::He was white, you ignorant racist. Read the article before coming here with your disgusting stereotypes on latins. --] (]) 01:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
== Lead image ==
== Lead image ==
Revision as of 01:31, 15 January 2015
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal
Find correct name
The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere.
The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).
This article is part of WikiProject Uruguay, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Uruguayan history. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.UruguayWikipedia:WikiProject UruguayTemplate:WikiProject UruguayUruguay
It doesn't add anything to the biography of Pedro I. The "external links" section has a purpose. It's not a mere collection of random links loosely related to the subject. --Lecen (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Why not? It's pretty notable and it's a recent news on him. It's as notable as the exhumation of Richard III which happen around the same time. It adds another point to his life. His cause of death, his crushed rib cage which may have precipated his death, the fact he was buried as a Portuguese soldier, and his actual appearance which agrees portrait and royal flattery which by itself is not always the best. Also that his second wife was mummified and that his first wife had no broken bones disproving any rumors that he had kick her during a fight causing her death.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 16:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
1) It isn't news that he was buried dressed as a Portuguese general. All biographies of Pedro I mention that. He requested to be buried as a Portuguese general, and to the people be allowed to take part in the funereal procession. I have no idea why newspapers were "surprised" by that. He was no longer a Brazilian Emperor nor a Portuguese king, but merely a Portuguese general fighting on behalf of Maria II.
2) Actual appearance? The only thing I read about it was that he was arounf 1.66 and 1.73m tall, which placed him as above average height (as can be seen on this Misplaced Pages article), but shorter to modern standards, as anyone back then.
3) A mummified Amélia should be mentioned in her own article.
Books and writing can only tell someone so much. An exhumation gives an archaeological point of view on the subject. I was thinking the exhumation deserves more coverage in line with Timur#Exhumation. I don't think you believe it necessary so this message to any future editors who may want to add such a section.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
The exhumation was carried on by request of a student for her master's study. I hope to see it published so that we may use it here. I dislike using websites, even more when we are talking about news websites, because they usually give poor coverage. Which is the case of Pedro I's exhumation. --Lecen (talk) 20:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Not sure though generally on Misplaced Pages that isn't needed and I don't see why news article aren't reliable sources. I am pretty sure information on Richard III's exhumation was probably added to Misplaced Pages with use of news sources before academic journals were published on the discovery. Since Lecen has been inactive for a while I thought another editors might be interested in adding information on the exhumation of Pedro and his wives in their respective articles.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 10:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Image width
The image width in the infobox was set to 200px in November 2011, but this was before the main image was updated recently. I have removed the constraint in favor of the default, but I don't mind if the old image width is retained. DrKiernan (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
In addition, I believe it relies on what each user sets in their Preferences and/or skin. If you haven't changed it there or don't login, the default is used. With all the small and huge screens being used today, it probably makes more sense today not to specify a size, other than for icon-sized images or for thumbnails. • Astynax18:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
File change.
This is a higher resolution file, that I added. The current is 1,714 × 2,135 pixels - the new is 3,213 × 4,001 pixels, exactly the same file, but is from the Google art project and much more detailed, and of superior quality. Hafspajen (talk) 00:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
We want to nominate the picture as a Featured picture candidate. If you keep reverting it it will not going to work. The Google file is coming scanned directly from the museum, so it is 99% of the cases is the the best quality file and closest to how the picture actually looks like. Have you seen the picture personally at the museum yourself? Hafspajen (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I mean, the difference is in when you click on the picture. You can notice a great deal more of details on the google file. Brushwork, cracks in the surface and such. Hafspajen (talk) 01:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
He was white, you ignorant racist. Read the article before coming here with your disgusting stereotypes on latins. --Lecen (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Now, the thing is, this painting is not a completely naturalistic interpretation, and no adjustment will make it so. 1835... hmm. That'll be the early romantic era... so, yeah, bright, vivid oversaturated colours were one of the artistic choices being played with at the time. So I'd say there's no reason to doubt the Google Art Project's colours.
We are, in the end, an encyclopedia. Do I like the artwork? Eh... it's alright. Rather over-vivid for my tastes. But tastes don't matter: we can't mislead he viewer by changing it to suit our tastes, without reason to think it's wrong. Adam Cuerden01:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
