Jump to content

Talk:Chamber of Deputies (Brazil)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chamber of Deputies (Brazil). 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 15:24, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chamber of Deputies (Brazil). 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:55, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Majority

[edit]

Is there a reason why on this page, and the various pages for state legislative assemblies, that the infoboxes and various sections never show the parties of the majority grouped (as that of the opposition)? We are usually given the name and party of the various factional leaders, but other than that, it's left to readers to guess which parties are the majority group and which are the minority and opposition groups. Can someone please make it a practice to clarify this when you come across various articles on the states of Brazil and their current political composition. Criticalthinker (talk) 07:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see this updated, but can it now be explained by the Liberals and Progressistas are bolded in the "Present composition" section? When something is bolded or italicized in a chart, it is protocol somewhere above or below the chart to note why. Criticalthinker (talk) 10:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, can someone put some more sourcing and explanation into the "Partisan blocs composition" subsection? There's an explanation for reach bloc, but it needs more fleshing out. For instance, why is there not currently a "majority" listed, and, didn't the opposition parties win the most seats last year? How do the minority differ from the opposition? Criticalthinker (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now you all are making changes about a Lira Bloc and an anti-Lira bloc when there is a section in the article ("Present composition") with the regular descriptions of majority, government, opposition and minority. Really, what is going on with how this article is structured? None of this makes sense and it's inconsistent.--Criticalthinker (talk) 07:03, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do "majority" and "minority" categories not have numbers in the chart included in the article? Is it not known? If this is no longer - or if it was never - a formal organizational concept of the body, it simply needs to be removed. Otherwise, it simply confuses things. Criticalthinker (talk) 11:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Explain why the website for the chamber lists different blocs than the wikipedia article.
https://www.camara.leg.br/deputados/bancada-atual Criticalthinker (talk) 06:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone interested in explaining any of this? Even the Portuguese article isn't clear on these blocs and groupings and how government/opposition relates to majority-minority. Criticalthinker (talk) 11:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Capped representation source

[edit]

Under the Structure section, it says that no federative units can have fewer than 8 reps, and no more than 70. Is there an article from Brazil’s constitution, or an amendment that says this?

I’m not saying it’s wrong, I just want there to be a source in case anything changes. 98.216.67.148 (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chamber_of_Deputies_(Brazil)&oldid=1219715160"