Talk:São Paulo/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about São Paulo. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Edit request 19 November 2010

{{editprotected}}

Nacional Atlético Clube to Nacional Atlético Clube (SP) Matthew_hk t c 09:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I can't find this link in the article? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

False accusations of vandalism

In September 24, Heitor C. Jorge reverted a few edits by IP 200.150.46.20, with a quite exclamative edit summary (Reverting vandalisms again!!!). A quick look at the diff shows no obvious vandalism though. It seems a mere edit war about pictures; the most important change seems to be the removal of a "Gallery" of pictures at the end of the article.

This (calling other people's edits "vandalism" for no good reason) is not allowed in Wikipedia. Can an admin please take a look at this, and (again) warn Mr. Jorge against this practice? Ninguém (talk) 11:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Tell yourself! You're a vandal, that's a fact. After all, removing valid content of an article (as it did in Brazil) would be classified as what? Heitor C. Jorge (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you guys should solve this issue in your talk pages...the subject São Paulo has little to do with it. By taking a look at Ninguém's talk page, I could see he's been involved in many edit issues, but that's still not close to being a vandal. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 18:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Please, this is so obvious. Ninguém is a vandal. Take a look at his talk page and historic editions. He rises problems and issues with everyone. He tries to prevent other Brazilians from posting in Brazil-related article, because he wants to own those article and manipulate their informations. I noticed that he has already ruined several Brazil-related articles that he deslikes. Take a look at Italian Brazilian, he recently tried to ruin the article, but he was prevented from doing that by other users. He is involved in problems and issues in at least 10 different articles of Wikipedia. Ninguém was not blocked yet because he is a friend of a Wikipedia administrator (named Hoary) who has been protecting him for several months and allowed him to keep with that terrible behaviour. If it was that friendship with administrator Hoary, who protects Ninguém, somebody would have blocked him a long time ago. Somebody need to block this trouble-maker as soon as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.62.218.27 (talk) 02:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

If that's the case, then Ninguém should be taken to the Administrators' noticeboard. Since I'm not familiar with the issue, somebody should check the topics listed just below "Are you in the right place?", to see if there isn't a better place to report his behaviour. If Hoary is truly protecting him, you should cite this user too. But really, complaining about Ninguém here helps very little. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 12:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

By performing a quick investigation, I could see Heitor C. Jorge also treats others harshly, maybe he should be cited too. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 12:21, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

As Heitor C. Jorge insists in this behaviour, I have reported him [1]. Ninguém (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request - nothing controversial

Hi Please locate the text "Monumento às Bandeiras (Portuguese for Monument to the Flag)" and change the English to "Monument to the flagS" (plural). Thanks and apologies for taking up your time with such a petty edit - I see that it is not the first time that this article has been locked, with the same people involved in edit warring. This is such a pity and a shame. --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The legend to the monument in question must also be changed from "Monumento Bandeirantes" to "Monumento às Bandeiras". Thanks --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 19:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I think this is a lame translation of the name of the monument (as if needed). "Bandeiras" can be literally translated as "flags". However, the sense of "bandeiras" in this case refers to the exploratory expeditions into the countryside carried out by "paulistanos" in the 16th/17th centuries. The monument celebrates those explorers (bandeirantes) and their expeditions (bandeiras), and not mere "flags". The literal translation is somewhat misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.91.245.64 (talk) 17:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

edit request tourism and recreation

in the article quote: "The city is known for its varied and sophisticated cuisine" This is an overstatement.

Its a week I m Sao Paolo and I can testify this is one of the worse I ve experimented. Sure there are a lot of influences but nothing good comes out of there. Just some examples I ordered some meat well done (yes always well done because the hygiene in the conservation is questionable) but what I received was 3 pieces of steak which each piece had its own unique cuisson. A prosciutto pizza were the ham was some unidentifiable overcooked substance grated on top. My stomach has been destroyed in a week's time and each lunch is a stressful moment I visited a variety of restaurants at a price tag of 50 to 100 reais per person. I m sure that many can name 3 restaurants with excellent cuisine but this is far from being the average so please change this phrase it is erroneous and misleading —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.75.177.125 (talk) 07:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I live in or near São Paulo since I was born and I probably haven't been to more than 2% of the restaurants here, so how come somebody who's been here for just a week wants to judge the city's cuisine? Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 15:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Steak and ham pizza to evaluate "varied and sophisticated cuisine"?? Uhmmmmm.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.234.49.99 (talk) 04:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I disagree. The variety of restaurants in Sao Paulo is wider than even NY´s or Paris´. Some types of restaurants only exists in Brazil, while every type of international cuisine can be easily found in the city with many, many high quality restaurants. Considering this wide range of options, this is not an overstatement. The above statement by 17.75.177.125 is tottally biased and sure was written by someone who probably never visited the city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.183.22.239 (talk) 16:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Tenis v lobos.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tenis v lobos.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Bleaching of the Negro Race???

RE: "After the abolition of slavery in 1888, waves of immigrants from Portugal, Italy, Spain and other European countries emigrated to São Paulo in order to "bleach the race," as Luso-Brazilian authorities feared Brazil's black population would grow far more than other groups." This is very ambiguous and should be clarified and sourced. I have trouble believing that Europeans moved to Brazil in the 1880's because they wanted to make mulatto babies. Maybe the author is trying to say that the government provided incentives for Europeans to immigrate with this ulterior motive...however the sentence is not structured in a manner that lends itself to be interpreted this way. --Lacarids (talk) 03:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Rodoanel Mario Covas5.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rodoanel Mario Covas5.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Picture in section Science and Technology

The picture in the section Science and Technology is misleading. It is a photo from the Stock Exchange and as such has nothing to do with science or technology. Would be better suited in a section on finance. The caption says "Advanced Science and Technology" which sounds as a joke. 155.69.2.13 (talk) 12:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

"Luxury" section

Luxury section should be edited, as it looks like a large advertisement of brands and not a section of Wikipedia. This is not a Galerie Lafayette brochure. Jgsodre —Preceding undated comment added 20:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC).

File:Berrini Avenue.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Berrini Avenue.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

This article still sounds like a marketing device

Truth it's subtler than before. Complaints about it, made on this very talk page, date back to 2006 and still nothing has been done to adress this issue. My english is not good enough to write a decent, comprehensible article. Perhaps you people should refer to NYC page, which was good enough to be featured. I will limit myself to minor edits, but it shouldn't be enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.69.195.46 (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

In fact, this is happening to many articles about Brazil, and I'm beginning to think it's a result of elaborate trolling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.69.195.46 (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Problem is there are too many Brazilian editors trying to push POV and brag about everything. Some other editors will need to do a brutal copyedit and remove unsourced opinions. Probably not a troll raid. - M0rphzone (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

LGBT section

What is happening with this article? It used to mention the annual LGBT parade, which is one of the largest in the world, and it seems that it has been vandalized by some homophobe who simply deleted such section. Even though one is not from the LGBT community, this is a large event, which gathers more than 1,000,000 people annually. The article must include references about such event, thus. The "gay zone" section is also a mess, with POV comments about the city. Something must be done, seriously! Jgsodre (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I have restored section about the annual LGBT parade. I will add this article to my watchlist to prevent removal of content in the future.--В и к и T 10:01, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Statistics section CBD ??

Would CBD be an acronym for

  Confederação Brasileira de Desportos (Brazilian Sport Confederation), predecessor of the Brazilian Football Confederation, the national governing body for soccer in Brazil

?? My best guess from searching wikipedia

G. Robert Shiplett 23:09, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Premature mayoral inauguration?

Was surprised to see Fernando Haddad listed as the current mayor and his mandate listed as "(2012-2016)". Was he inaugurated a year before and nobody told us? (REDACTED Zelani (talk) 12:27, 16 December 2012 (UTC)) Changed it back to the incumbent mayor until the mayor-elect effectively takes office on January 1. Zelani (talk) 13:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Good work correcting it. Be careful when referring to other editors, though, even if IP. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 14:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Rename to "São Paulo (City)"

It's annoying to have to read the article to know if its about the state or the city. --Hugo Spinelli (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Possible high speed train

"Although poorly maintained by heavy rail services"

What does this mean? I mean - you should write directly in the article exactly what the trouble is! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.20.209 (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Rede Globo.

Rede globo's home is in Rio de Janeiro! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.192.183.241 (talk) 03:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Number spelling

I’m not a native English speaker but familiar enough with the language to regard spellings like “100 thousand” as odd—the article should use “100,000” or “hundred thousand”. Alas, there are many occurrences of what seems quite weird spelling, like “53 thousand” as well. Since I’m not a regular Wikipedia editor, what’s preferred?—j9t (talk) 21:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

article clean-up

Thanks a lot for anyone who helped clean the article. It seems a lot better now that all "trivia" and POV information was removed. It is more balanced now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.63.225.194 (talk) 13:14, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Navigational hatnote needed for navigation

Higienópolis redirects here. Higienópolis (disambiguation) lists the other ambiguous entries for "Higienópolis". Readers reaching here through the redirect but seeking one of the other topics need the navigational hatnote. Gabriel Lopes Guasti, leave it here, or request that the disambiguation page be moved to the base name. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:06, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually, Higienópolis should be redirected to Consolação (district of São Paulo) or to the disambiguation page, shouldn't it? Victão Lopes ^Fala! 14:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

It should not be redirected to the dab page (see WP:MALPLACED). I have no problem with retargeting it elsewhere though, if that makes more sense. -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:06, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, if nobody opposes, I'll do it in a few days. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 19:35, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I just don't get it why Higienópolis should be on the top of the article. It's just a neighborhood in the district of Consolação. It should be redirect with this page or the page talking about the downtown of the city. It's the same as if "Upper East Side" had been at the top of NYC Wikipedia article. So, I would be pleased if the word Higienópolis be redirect to the Consolação article. It will feel MUCH more right that way. -- Gabriel Lopes Guasti (talk) 15:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I already suggested that Higienópolis be redirected to Consolação district, and so far editors seem to be in favor. I'll just wait a few days before doing it so that users against it have time to explain themselves. In the mean time, pleas refrain from removing the hatnote until the matter is settled. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 17:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I just changed the redirect since nobody opposed. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 06:40, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

?:::Gabriel, you removed the hatnote again before I did the change at the redirect. Do not perform contested edits if the dispute is still not settled. People could assume you are editing in bad faith. Cheers, Victão Lopes ^Fala! 06:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Utility source and management

Water problems? http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2014/12/03/alarm-bells-toll-for-human-civilization-as-worlds-12th-largest-mega-city-to-run-out-of-water-in-just-60-days/ Electrical source? only mentioned in article as problem under discussion. Gas? Telephone? Lacking this info does lend credibility to the complaint mentioned several times in the talk pages as the wiki article being sourced from the tourist/marketing bureau. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.50.151.151 (talk) 16:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Timeline of São Paulo

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Land area

I'd like to know how to edit the infobox. The land area of the metropolitan area doesn't correspond with the Greater São Paulo page's stats on the land area of the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo; on the city page it's listed as being, I believe, the entire area of Brazil. I found the proper number for the Metropolitan Region but when I began editing, I found this: |area_metro_km2 = 8051,000 |area_macrometro_km2 = 23061,900 which doesn't correspond to this, I don't think- not directly anyway: 8,051,000 km2 (3,109,000 sq mi) So what would happen if I removed the number labeled "area_metro_km2" and left the bottom one unchanged? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.228.163.30 (talk) 23:27, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Portuguese pronunciation

It's all wrong, and the chosen Vorbis file is even wronger. And I'm tired of fixing similar issues in other articles, because my edits always are reverted either by some stupid robot or by some non-Brazilian smart-ass. 177.148.131.224 (talk) 09:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on São Paulo. 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:

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: 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:02, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on São Paulo. 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:

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on São Paulo. 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/20070315092348/http://www.metro.sp.gov.br:80/informacao/mapa/mapadebolsosite2007.pdf to http://www.metro.sp.gov.br/informacao/mapa/mapadebolsosite2007.pdf

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 24 external links on São Paulo. 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:

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on São Paulo. 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:

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on São Paulo. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://revistalingua.uol.com.br/textos.asp?codigo%3D12097
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bmfbovespa.com.br/English/NewExchange.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stm.sp.gov.br/noticias/nt-2817.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.memorialdoimigrante.org.br/historico/index.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.memorialdoimigrante.org.br/ahc/index.htm

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 16 September 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. Consensus is that the city is the primary topic of the term. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

São Paulo → São Paulo (city) – Renaming the city article would help readers distinguish between the city and São Paulo (state) The state (which includes the city) has 44 million inhabitants while the urban city only has 12 making it arguably more primary. International readers unfamiliar with Brazilian geography may find the names confusing. This discussion came up during a CFD discussion here on whether to rename this article's categories, Category:São Paulo (city). RevelationDirect (talk) 23:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose The city is better known than the state. PatGallacher (talk) 23:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose – the city is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and is known internationally more than its counterpart state. CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 00:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Question How do we know it is the primary topic outside of WP:NWFCTM? We can't do a side-by-side comparison of traffic to the articles because one is disambiguated and one isn't. A Google search for "São Paulo city" has 7 million hits (link) while "São Paulo state" has 32 million (link). (I added "&pws=0" to those search strings that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC recommends.) RevelationDirect (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Support This is not about a popularity contest. It's about assisting navigation and hopefully directing people to the right place. Does it matter that a few extra characters are added if this aim is achieved? Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:51, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Support. Comparable to New York City and New York State, each of which / both are known as "New York" and could have main title headers New York (city) and New York (state), but, after various changes, have been accepted in Wikipedia under headers New York City and New York. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 04:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose, per PRIMARYTOPIC. Supporters above didn't even try to contest it, but instead they add personal opinions and false equivalences. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. The city article averages 3,333 views a day, with the state averaging 549. That's a big enough difference, big enough that it can't be discounted by misclicks. Nohomersryan (talk) 01:58, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

No, an article on the state gets 549 views per day and an ambiguously named one that could be about the city or the state gets 3,333 a day. People landing on the city page may not have realized which "São Paulo" they're looking for. (This doesn't rule out that the city might be more searched than the state either, but comparing a page with and without parentheticals is always a foregone conclusion.) RevelationDirect (talk) 09:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The city of São Paulo is more widely known than the state of São Paulo, especially to foreigners. Also, I think the lede and the "About" notice in the beginning of the article make it pretty clear for readers that there is a state and a city, much like New York. κατάστασ η 02:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. The city is easily the primary topic here. Say "São Paulo" to pretty much anyone and they will think of the city (which is, let's remember, one of the largest in the world). I suspect most wouldn't even know there was also a state by that name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Support just as how New York isn't about a city known internationally more than its state. SSTflyer 12:11, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
- New York State is very well-known to the English-speaking world. São Paulo State nowhere near so much. New York City is often called that. São Paulo (city) is not. The primary topic here by any definition of the term is clearly the city. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose The city is by far more well known and popular on Wikipedia than the state or anything in the disambiguation page. Spilia4 (talk) 06:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't think that anybody doubts tha the city is well known. But that's not the issue here. This is not about a popularity contest. It's about assisting navigation. Adding a few words to the name does not diminish the status of the article in any way; changing the anme could actually assist many in getting to the entity that they really want. So in the name change proposed, there are no losers and only winners. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

No, that's not necessarily the case, see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this issue. You could legitimately argue that the city is not the primary topic, but you seem to be questioning the whole concept of having primary topics on Wikipedia. For what it's worth, I think that the city should be the primary meaning of "New York" as well. PatGallacher (talk) 14:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not arguing that this article is not the primary topic. This city probably is the primary topic. So if there happened to be a São Paulo in Ireland, the city is Brazil would of course get to "own" the name. But that's not what at issue here. It's the fact that there are multiple administrative entites that use some or all of the name "São Paulo" in roughly the same geographic area. So then the proper course of action is to decide how best to disambiguate the multiple entities. My preference would be for "São Paulo" to be a disambiguation page with the city and the other administrative entites taking on the name with an administrative disambiguating phrase in parentheses. "São Paulo" Brazil still gets to "own" the name - it just has a few extra helpful letters. Does this sound sensible? 16:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

No, it doesn't sound sensible, it sounds to me as if you are questioning the whole concept of "primary topic" on Wikipedia. PatGallacher (talk) 17:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Primary topic is a useful concept. But that's not the same thing as saying that the entity which is the primary topic ought, in every case, to "own" the name without any disambiguators. There is no reason why an article that is acknowledged to be the primary topic should not have a slightly different name such as Cork (city) as opposed to Cork the disambiguation page. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:36, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

There is no reason why an article that is acknowledged to be the primary topic should not have a slightly different name. Of course there is: the guideline says so. Your argument appears to be in conflict with the guideline. The way to change the guideline is to propose that it be changed, not to encourage it to be circumvented in select cases. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose. Clear case of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Some users' comments above seem to more of an objection to that guideline than a disagreement that the city is the primary topic. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. The city is clearly the primary topic, as it is an interntationally recognized global city. The state is no doubt important within Brazil, but worldwide the city is more sought after, and page views bear that out. — Amakuru (talk) 08:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. There seems no serious dispute that the city is the primary topic. This is in most ways a similar question to that of New York City versus New York State, except in that discussion there is the extra issue of obtaining a strong enough consensus to overturn a long-established name. Here there is no such problem. Andrewa (talk) 11:43, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on São Paulo. 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/20131010004859/http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html to http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080617115727/http://www.unicamp.br/unicamp/canal_aberto/clipping/junho2005/clipping050617_correiopop.html to http://www.unicamp.br/unicamp/canal_aberto/clipping/junho2005/clipping050617_correiopop.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Temperatura-Media-Compensada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Temperatura-Maxima_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Temperatura-Minima_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Precipitacao-Acumulada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Numero-Dias-Precipitacao-Maior-ou-Igual-1mm_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Insolacao-Total_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Umidade-Relativa-Mensal-Media-Compensada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131031202617/http://www.cm-lisboa.pt/municipio/relacoes-internacionais to http://www.cm-lisboa.pt/municipio/relacoes-internacionais

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: 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) 17:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Languages: no link to Portuguese-language article on São Paulo (city)

Dear editors,

The Languages section does not display a link to the Portuguese-language article on the city of São Paulo although one exists - "São Paulo (cidade)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank Duurvoort (talk • contribs) 15:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

It is there, but at the bottom. The list is partially out of alphabetical order for some reason. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 18:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on São Paulo. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.prefeitura.sp.gov.br/portal/a_cidade/historia/index.php?p=4827
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Temperatura-Media-Compensada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Temperatura-Maxima_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Temperatura-Minima_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Precipitacao-Acumulada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Numero-Dias-Precipitacao-Mayor-ou-Igual-1mm_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Insolacao-Total_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/norMays/imagens/norMays/planilhas/Umidade-Relativa-Mensal-Media-Compensada_NCB_1961-1990.xls
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090830072536/http://www.etni-cidade.net/bolivianos_saude.htm to http://www.etni-cidade.net/bolivianos_saude.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100713153107/http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral%2Csp-sera-6-cidade-mais-rica-do-mundo-ate-2025-diz-ranking%2C463359%2C0.htm to http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral%2Csp-sera-6-cidade-mais-rica-do-mundo-ate-2025-diz-ranking%2C463359%2C0.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150610211226/http://en.dataviva.info/apps/builder/tree_map/secex/4sp090607/all/all/hs/?controls=true&year=2014&size=export_val&depth=hs_6&color=color to http://en.dataviva.info/apps/builder/tree_map/secex/4sp090607/all/all/hs/?controls=true&year=2014&size=export_val&depth=hs_6&color=color
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080623002947/http://www.radiobras.gov.br/especiais/saopaulo450/sp450_mat10_2004.htm to http://www.radiobras.gov.br/especiais/saopaulo450/sp450_mat10_2004.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604005151/http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/06/12/afx3810988.html to http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/sr/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100424220014/http://www.bmfbovespa.com.br/en-us/home.aspx?idioma=en-us to http://www.bmfbovespa.com.br/en-us/home.aspx?idioma=en-us

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) 16:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on São Paulo. 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) 11:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Why isn't Brazil's total population listed?

On the front page, Brazil's total population should be listed. It isn't. Why not?

The total population is listed for all other wikipedia entries of countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.18.221.43 (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

be free to add but with reliable sources!cheers.--AlfaRocket (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on São Paulo. 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) 05:49, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on São Paulo. 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) 04:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Disparity in climate data

The record low in the text is −3.2 °C, while the record low in the climate box is a comparatively milder −1.8. So which one is it, and how accurate is each source? The former data for the colder low is from 1918, while the box goes as far back as 1961. This seems to me like evidence of climate change. 2001:8003:A8E0:A300:CCC:120E:C31E:B66D (talk) 04:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

section needs more references

I removed all citations in the "History" section that were cited to http://sasopaulo.blogspot.com/2013/07/history.html. Firstly, this is completely unreliable because there's no authorship and it doesn't cite any sources itself. Further investigation reveals that this blog post is a copy of the History section from this article as it appeared on 12 July 2013 (the date of the post), thus making it a circular reference. Please add citations to reliable sources instead. —howcheng {chat} 03:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

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

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

Relief Map of Brazil.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:46, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Number of helicopters?

On one part of the article is says there are 3500 helicopters in Marte field, but then the helicopters secion says just "420"... So which is it? --95.92.225.94 (talk) 17:02, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Change montage image

I'd like to propose changing the image of the city skyline in the Montage which presents itself as the cover of the article. It is difficult to understand what it is all about in the displayed size. It is difficult to distinguish buildings, dark and with few lights, and weird under a purple sky. It would be more appropriate to have an image that would better accommodate the buildings and be enough to pass on the notion of an alpha city. Ottoman Editor (talk) 04:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Image of Paulista Avenue

@Cristiano Tomás: Hi, Cristiano. What does it means? How can an outdated image (2008) that shows half a dozen buildings and a small stretch of the avenue be better than an aerial image that shows a complete panorama of the avenue in 2018? In addition, the photograph was added by an editor banned by systematic abuse of multiple accounts. Can you give me a plausible explanation? Regards. Chronus (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

No daylight saving in Brazil

Brazil has scrapped daylight saving time and now stays on standard time year round. Lachlb (talk) 22:53, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

This English in this article needs a clean-up.

I'm sorry, but the English just doesn't sound right at various points.

No native English speaker would say " the Greater São Paulo", but simply "Greater São Paulo". A similar comment about "the São Paulo Macrometropolis" - the original article this phrase cites even calls it simply "São Paulo macrometropolis" (no capital letter on the last word). What is "tissue heterogeneity" in relation to urban fabrics? I've never seen this phrase used outside of biology, and certainly not in relation to city architecture.

" fixed telephony network" -> landline phone network

etc, etc, etc.

It reads like the original Portuguese article has been shoved through Google translate, without any subsequent revision.

Come on, people, this is a highly visible article about Latin America's largest city. Surely it's worth putting in some time on the editing to get it to sound right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimskea (talk • contribs) 14:43, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

"São Paulo (cidade)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect São Paulo (cidade). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Daß Wölf 14:20, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Greater São Paulo at night (cropped).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Most populous city in the southern hemisphere?

In the first alinea there is stated that Sao Paulo is the most populous city in the southern hemisphere. It is rather doubtful to talk about Sao Paulo being the most populous city in the southern hemisphere. Another city, Jakarta, Indonesia, has a population of 10 million in the city proper, though the urban area extends beyond its borders (Tangerang, Bekasi and Depok city) already mounting up to far above the 11 million-mark. For the metropolitan area, including the densely populated regencies around Tangerang, Bekasi and the Bogor regency (and city), the number is higher than 30 million, easily outnumbering the Sao Paulo metropolitan area. --OPolkruikenz (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Actually this article is about the city, not its metropolitan region. The proper city population is about 12 million, and even if we are talking about the "urban area", the official (de jure) territorial delimitation of its metropolitan region has 21 million, but the Expanded Metropolitan Complex of São Paulo (the "urban area") also surpassed the number of 30 million.--Luizdl ^Talk 03:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately the population and area data in the box at top right are incoherent, as some of the figures have the wrong number of digits, and they confuse commas which should be used for thousands with dots which should be reserved for decimal points. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.79.94 (talk) 18:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

The first paragraph needs to be deleted (entirely) and needs not only a way less

Full of:

1) Meaningless comparsions: biggest GDP? Wonderful. As every article about cities and countries, why this is just in the right box? Same about every quantification and comparsion (of course, comparsion of what is convenient to compare). 2) For one maybe very naive, it could easily "social inequality". It makes sense, because the "best of every other ṕoint in Brazil" just disappear when you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.213.202.68 (talk) 07:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

"Hyperbolicism".

The first ~30 lines of this article only (with no contextual fragments) in a not little disgraceful way* does not have a single word for an informational - enciclopedic - format. And how such inept lines were made, hyperpolical constructions in every phrase, well,

I wonder how changing the entire beginning - starting with removal of low sophismatic useless lines - would be not a sane measure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.235.94.32 (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Center of São Paulo at night, seen from Edifício Mirante do Vale, 2015-12-09.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:15, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Bassano Vaccarini

Xx236 (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Estadio morumbi.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Estadio morumbi.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Mexico City Competition

Mexico City is of similar size to Sao Paulo, and city.population.de lists Mexico City as having the larger population in the Urban agglomerations section, so I would recommend putting Sao Paulo as the largest or second-largest city in the Americas depending on the definition of the city in order to account for this although to be fair city.population.de does put Guangzhou as the largest city in the world instead of only stating that Sao Paulo is the largest city in the Americas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Daihong Ly (talk • contribs) 01:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Self-Contradiction

This article states that Sao Paulo is the 4th largest city proper, but if you sort the "List of Largest Cities" article, which is linked for that statement,by population of city proper than you get that Sao Paulo is the 14th largest city proper in the world beneath Chongqing, Shanghai, Beijing, Delhi, Chengdu, Istanbul, Karachi, Guangzhou, Tianjin, Tokyo, Moscow, Shenzhen, and Mumbai. Can someone can explain this conflict to me? Was there a typo that put the rank as 4 instead of 14 in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.22.221 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC) Who knows--216.249.57.2 (talk) 00:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

The key of sao paulo.

Who owns the key now after senna died? 2A00:23C8:940C:6901:857C:4306:A3A4:9350 (talk) 08:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

"List of Sao Paulo´s sister towns" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect List of Sao Paulo´s sister towns and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 13#List of Sao Paulo´s sister towns until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 23:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)