The 2024 Legal Defense Fundraiser has ended early due to the Board's decision to settle the suit. Donations will go towards the creation of a legal defense fund. Discussion on the matter can be found at the RationalMedia Foundation noticeboard. Thank you for your generous support.

Information icon.svg Campaigning is open for the RationalWiki 2024 Board of Trustees election.

Talk:Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 4 July 2024. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Grew what?[edit]

"He transformed Brazil from a debtor to a creditor, and rapidly grew the country's." -- Grew the country's what? Economy, presumably? Indy (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm talking about the economy.--BluePink (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Not ready for mainspace[edit]

This "article", if it can be elevated to such heights, is pathetically vapid. Devoid of critical analysis of Lula's policies, (which, fun fact, I have a book on), it instead relies on childish jabs and vapid moralism, which denigrates its supposed credibility. Move the damned thing back to draftspace. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 18:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Christopher (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I already tried sending it to draftspace for those issues, but someone apparently decided it was mainspace worthy. Plutocow (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
That was @Dropix, the article's creator, although he did it incorrectly (copy/paste) so the page's history indicates it was me. Christopher (talk) 18:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Sorry if I sounded accusative, I could tell that Dropix was the one responsible (note to Dropix: at least try to improve the article or say why the critics are wrong if you want to move it to mainspace again). Plutocow (talk) 19:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
i agree. this article needs a lot more work (and more sources) before it's ready for mainspace. i'll add more content myself once i make the time to sit down and do some research. in the mean time, kudos to those who are currently working on improving this draft. The G (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I'll work on this draft when I have time, probably around February. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
The bulk of the article is well written and well sourced. It concerns a basic description of the subject, the most notable parts of his biography, etc. The only problem here seems to be with the contentious/biased statements about Lula. I've seen smaller stubs in mainspace without question. - Dropix (talk)

why were the opening quotes removed?[edit]

i don't think you should remove the opening quotes [1] [2] just because you don't like them. i mean, the sources are valid. (folha, for instance, has long been noted for its political independence (mota & capelato, 1981 [3]) unlike, say, gazetaWikipedia. it's basically the brazilian equivalent of the new york times.) at least clarify the context of the quotes, but don't delete them unless you have a good reason to do so. The G (talk) 20:16, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@G Man The top quote was removed due to the way it framed the remarks in question, which going through the article cited contextualizes them as anti-privatization. If you wanted to add the remarks in question back to the article, I would advise a paragraph or subsection, not a quote, due to issues with framing in the latter format. The second quote, based on some brief digging, seems to have some kind of feud with Lula, though I'm not 100% so far, hence it was commented out, not removed entirely. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
got it. thanks for the explanation. i like the idea of adding a paragraph or subsection. i saw that the draft previously made the claim that lula made a lot of controversial statements [4]. i think this deserves its own section. eventually, we can make one addressing these claims, even if the sole purpose is to clarify or debunk them. i mean, the article on biden has a on his gaffes, after all. The G (talk) 20:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
We could have a separate section for quotes, just like we have one on Bolsonaro's page. - Dropix (talk) 05:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)