Talk:Recife

Hi, I think there're to much neighborhoods in the Main Neighborhoods section, may be would be a good thing to check it out if all neighborhoods are important, by fact, I think each one have an importance, but I believe that one may have more importance than others... ah, other thing, what about put the images in the Wikicommons and link it here? It would be greater, and we could indeed put stuff like videos, music and others... and be careful about the licensing, of course. --Henriquevicente 21:06, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)Henriquevicente

The picture captioned "Fireworks in Saint John's Festival" is wrong and is that of the Indian festival Diwali/Deepavali... I saw it in the article about Diwali/Deepavali... You can just rename it "Deepavali Celebrations in Brazil"... Are there Indians (the ones from India) in Brazil by the way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.14.57.235 (talk) 14:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

The crime statistics added to this page make substantial claims concerning the level of violence in Recife. This claim must be supported by a citation to a reputable source. It would greatly add to the value of the article if such a citation is added. Bpiereck 00:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

While Recife is a violent city, it is not "known nation-wide for being the most dangerous major city in the country". While it does have very high rates for certain crimes, it does not enjoy the title of crime capital of Brazil as it is currently claimed. Mario brazil 10:36, 12 April 2007 (EST)

It is known nationwide as the second most violent capital. Vitória is the first. Frontier towns in Mato Grosso, Pará and Acre are top of the list for all cities. Macgreco 15:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Folha de São Paulo. Macgreco 15:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I like excellent people, like handsome Clovis. Kisses to your Brazilian Military from the Madonna of the Lady of the Americas. Lily Susan of the United States of America.

The crime statistics section is poorly written and has severe grammatical errors. "Racism is an unbailable crime" is a phrase used that is nonsensical, nor is it specific to Recife. The rates of whites and blacks who "died in the city" is stated so the reader makes the assumption that those are murder statistics. Mal7798 (talk) 11:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

A link to [1] might be useful (it shows statistics for the entire state, but it is possible to search by city).189.81.153.222 (talk) 13:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

The long digression on sexual offences against children is not really meaningful, since it is not at all specific to Recife.--134.60.67.134 (talk) 10:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

A friend of mine went there on a vacation...don't let the nice pics in this article fool you. He's been all over the world and he said this place was so scary he and his wife went home on the third day because they were afraid to leave the hotel. Look at google earth street view before going to this place and make your own judgement. It makes Colombia look like Utah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.158.56.56 (talk) 04:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why is there a section on sugar cane on the "Recife" article? Recife itself doesn't have any sugar cane fields, for one there's no place (it would be worth noting somewhere that it is one of the smallest municipalities, in area, in Brazil). And as the section title says that should be in the "Pernambuco" article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notconnectedtome (talk • contribs) 14:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

@ 2C0F:F5C0:43A:3404:4D58:AA6F:177A:A836 (talk) 20:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please, someone with good knowledge of the city of Recife should change this initial part of the article to make it look like a real encyclopedic entry:

"Recife promises four days of a lot of excitement on several stages specially built around the city, to attract partygoers of all tastes and tendencies. The Carnival lovers who stay in Recife for the party will get to know all the rhythms of Pernambuco: “mangue beat”, string orchestras, “coco de roda”, “frevo” and “maracatu” – among them the Maracatu Nação Pernambuco, the Estrela Brilhante, and the Maracatu Rural Leão Pernambuco. Besides the central stage in Downtown Recife, there are other areas of popular concentration all over the Metropolitan Region where anybody can have fun in the most democratic festivity of the world."

This definitely looks like a touristic propaganda, with hyperbolis, unverified claims, etc. It can't be accepted in an encyclopedia like Wikipedia. It would be much better if this section just mentioned that Recife is nationally famous for its traditional Carnival, which is very varied in forms and traditions, and that it is a very diversified cities in Brazil as for musical styles. Simple as that, without propaganda, please. 201.9.229.81 (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Gone! --Geniac (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

In some sections of the article, the most mundane terms (like "time" or "girl") are linked to their respective Wikipedia pages. Is that really necessary? -- 92.230.18.131 (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree. I have taken the liberty to start removing some of the links as part of a general cleanup of the article.

189.81.153.222 (talk) 12:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

The page says "a large supply of laboror peanut butter and significant private investments turned Recife into Brazil's second largest medical center, ...." That has got to be a Google-translate-ism, but I have no clue how to correct it. -- Charlie (Colorado) (talk) 15:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

When I click the link "Porto Digital" (in the section "Information technology industry"), I am redirected to the article "Recife Antigo"...

I think this is an error :)

Can you correct that?

All the best.

Hatchikim (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oi,

In the "Notable people" section, the internal link "Otto" points to "a kind of" disambiguation page...

Can you precise which Otto is the good one?

Thanks,

Hatchikim (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I deleted this section, to compare the Index between countries and neighbourhoods is a misrespresentation of what the HDI is for. secondly, it implies that eg a neighbourhood is better than a whole country etc. this is POV. LibStar (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

The article has an "additional citations needed" tag, but surely 66 references is enough? I would remove it myself but I don't know if an admin has to check if first or anything. Drawley (talk) 18:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

an admin does not need to check but the tag is acceptable. There are still are many uncited statements. Every fact (unless so obvious) must be cited. Having 66 or 200 references is irrelevant. LibStar (talk) 08:17, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've read through the whole (long, maybe too long) History section, and can't answer the most elementary questions: 1) what year was the city founded? (the sidebar says March 12, 1537, the day Olinda's charter was granted, but not necessarily the day Recife was founded) 2) where, exactly was it founded (Recife metropolitan area encloses it, but Recife is huge, the hamlet was small); 3) what was the purpose of its founding (no, it was not as a port for Olinda - it was founded before exports from Olinda were important); 4) who founded it (I know it was the Portuguese - which man? 5) where did the name Recife come from?

Some of these questions have definite answers, and others may not. Editors might start by obtaining and reading (translating as necessary) the charter 'TRASLADO DO FORAL DE OLINDA - CARTA DE DOAÇÃO DE 12 DE MARÇO DE 1537'. Sbalfour (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

The entire History section consists of cut-and-pasted text from the web. I'd say some of it is flagrant copyvio. Some parts may qualify as "fair use" quoting, but cut-and-paste operations into wikipedia are dubious. Several "sources" are travel websites, one is an airline ticketing website. The whole section is one way or another, "Joe Blow's Website says...". I can't identify any of the sources as published material, either peer reviewed or with editorial oversight. There are veracity issues in addition to copyvio. Even if some parts are true, where did they come from? This section needs a rewrite.Sbalfour (talk) 04:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I've removed the portions (most, in fact) of the History section, which were direct cut-and-paste copyright violations, and the dubious website references supporting it, from which the text came (unfortunately, we're not allowed to cut-and-paste even from dubious websites). The little that remains hardly makes sense, but at least it wasn't copied.Sbalfour (talk) 15:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 15:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Recife. 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/20080724184616/http://www.recife.pe.gov.br/2007/07/03/mat_144821.php to http://www.recife.pe.gov.br/2007/07/03/mat_144821.php

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} 19:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Recife. 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/20070927022308/http://www.pe-az.com.br/saude/polo_medico_recife.htm to http://www.pe-az.com.br/saude/polo_medico_recife.htm
• 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-Mayor-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
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Temperatura-Maxima-Absoluta-NCB_1961-1990.xls
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.inmet.gov.br/webcdp/climatologia/normais/imagens/normais/planilhas/Temperatura-Minima-Absoluta-NCB_1961-1990.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140320210705/http://www.recife.pe.gov.br/pr/secplanejamento/inforec/bairros.php to http://www.recife.pe.gov.br/pr/secplanejamento/inforec/bairros.php

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) 07:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

As per discussion. Regardless of ideological orientation, Paulo Freire is an undeniably notorious personality. In my editions, I restricted myself to restoring and giving due emphasis to scientists born in the city of Recife, and to inserting in the article the Co-Cathedral of Recife. Juniorpetjua (talk) 06:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Notable people" sections are incompatible with Wikipedia. It violates a lot of principles like WP:NOR, WP:FORUM, WP:PROMO, WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Furthermore, for the last year you have been editing this page (acting as a Single Purpose Account) solely to replace this promotional section.2804:F04:906B:5A00:63D0:D2D0:69C4:1FDC (talk) 11:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC)Reply