This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of apps on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AppsWikipedia:WikiProject AppsTemplate:WikiProject Appsapps articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Latest comment: 4 hours ago6 comments4 people in discussion
It is a confidential investigation, to which only the judge involved has access [1]. In addition, the editor has removed the category for censorship in Brazil that one of those involved is already in. I would like this category to be included, as well as changing the title to the same one as the pt-br entry “Bloqueio do X no Brasil” (en: Blockade of X in Brazil), which is in fact what this is about. Paraguassuu (talk) 05:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Please indicate the multiple reliable and independent sources that refer to the mentioned court decision as an act of censorship. Otherwise, it is nothing more than obvious POV-pushing, which should be reverted for violating Wikipedia's neutrality policy in accordance with WP:CATPOV. Regarding the title change, I am not opposed to it in principle (considering that the article is still in its very early stages and its scope can be easily altered), but a request should be made following the relevant policy on this matter. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I wonder whether or not someone who said in this talk page that Musk is "bitching like a 13-year-old douchebag" is really concerned about our neutrality on this theme... In any case, there are sources that refer to the act as censorship, such as O Antagonista for instance (see this). It is considered a right-wing news website, but isn't it neutral to include sources of major newspapers on both sides of the political spectrum, or would it be WP:FALSEBALANCE? The more mainstream, left-wing-aligned sources at least attribute the words "censor" and "censorship" to Musk, as we should if we really want to provide a neutral approach to the subject. - Munmula (talk · contribs) 16:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
A personal opinion is not a violation of neutrality, and much has been said about the perceived immaturity of Musk's behavior. A opinion article from O Antagonista is far from enough to justify framing this event as censorship, especially given that its author is deeply involved in far right conspiracy theories. Musk failed to comply with basic brazilian laws, that was the reason behind the suspension of the platform. I am strongly against these suggestive use of 'see also' and categories. JoaquimCebuano (talk) 19:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
The Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet only provides for the deletion of the post itself, not the account. The investigation added to inquiry 4.874, which has also been the subject of controversy for five years, is used to support demands for censorship. The requirement that there be a legal representation is the only request based on an existing law. [1] Below I have added some editorials that mention censorship promoted by the court previously.
It should be remembered that not long ago, the same investigation was used to justify an arrest without evidence that lasted six months, without the lawyers having access to the case file. [2] The interview given to Folha de S. Paulo by Filipe Martins was later censored and criticized by Marco Aurélio, former minister of the Supreme Court. [3]
The same investigation was also used to accuse passengers on an airport of aggression against the “rule of law and Brazilian democracy” after a disagreement with Moraes' son at an airport in Rome. After having access to the images, an expert report was issued confirming that the images had been altered, according to Poder 360. [4]
I mean, there is no right conclusion here, since a new one is decided with each opinion and this changes the entire legal system of the country, as criticized in the article, the decision to freeze the accounts of Starlink, which has nothing to do with X Corp. Only distance from the facts will give us certainty about what is happening in Brazil now. Paraguassuu (talk) 20:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is no problem in saying that the Supreme Court has engaged in censorship, in many moments and by the hand of almost all the judges. To say that this decision is censorship, however, is a whole another level, unrelated 'precedents' cannot substantiate it, and the information you presented is almost totally unrelated with the suspension of twitter, besides that, some affirmations are doubtful. I can think of at least one thing that binds Starlink and X. JoaquimCebuano (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Why is this article titled "investigation into Elon Musk"? It appears to be an investigation into Twitter/X and their compliance with Brazilian law, rather than into Musk personally. AusLondonder (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
Brazilian investigation into Elon Musk → Blocking of Twitter in Brazil – The main subject of this article is the blocking of Twitter/X in Brazil, according to the court order issued by Justice Alexandre de Moraes on August 30. Even though the investigation into Elon Musk began in April 2024, it is the blocking of the website that received widespread coverage from international media. Most sources cited were written on the decision to block the website, which is also what most paragraphs in the article discuss.Therefore, the main topic of this article is the blocking of Twitter/X in Brazil, and should be titled as such per WP:PRECISION. Relevant information on the investigation into Musk that led to the blocking can be added to the background section. Since the Wikipedia article on X still calls it Twitter, the title for this article should do the same for consistency. Alex98 (talk) 02:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oppose "Ban", per article The order will remain in effect until the platform complies with the decisions of the Supreme Federal Court, pays accumulated fines totaling R$18.3 million, and appoints a representative in Brazil, a requirement grounded in Brazilian law. (That is, Twitter will be back once Musk stop bitching like a 13-year-old douchebag.) "Suspension" is the most appropriate word IMO; "ban" is completely inadequate. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oppose — The ambiguity over "Twitter" and "X"—which is the subject of a move request that appears to be slanted towards X—led to the current title, which I believe suffices. The block is not what is significant here, the prolonged conflict between de Moraes and Musk is. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)06:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Support — The arguments here seem convincing to me. The article is more about the block than about the investigation, and "block" or "blocking" make more sense than "ban". The article on the Portuguese Wikipedia is also "Block of Twitter in Brazil". As to Twitter's renaming to X, most people still refer to it as Twitter, and I think this discussion is more a site-wide issue that would imply renaming all articles with the platform's name in it, rather than a discussion about the title of one specific article. Munmula (talk · contribs) 16:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=icon}
