User talk:Zeorymer/Archive 6

Hey

	Hey
	Just wanted to stop by and thank you for your contribution in Wikipedia, specially regarding Portugal and the Azores, subjects often underrepresented on this website . I'm quite impressed by your edits, and I strive to become an excellent editor like you in the future. Cheers Bracaro (talk) 14:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Factory House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Factory House''' ({{lang-pt|Feitória Inglês}}), also known as the ''British Association House'') is an 18th-century [[Palladian]] building located in the in the [[Norte Region|northern]] [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pelourinho de Bragança, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lusitanian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Águeda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beira Litoral. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Furnas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rams. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Zeorymer. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:32, 23 August 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 12:32, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Arouca, Portugal may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Serra da Freita ao Sul.<ref>Abel Botelho (1883)</ref>, and to the south is the ridge of Montemuro (the highest point in the municipality.<ref name="CMAmbiente">{{cite web |url=http://www.cm-arouca.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Arouca

I'me from Arouca and I live in Porto. In reality, the tre is that people from Arouca don't have any type of relation to Aveiro. In reality, the districts were extint, in Portugal (2013). So don't put the notion that Arouca belongs to the Disctrict of Aveiro. See, here, a clear link to official documents stating that the Distritos were extinct in Portugal: http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?nid=1990&tabela=leis

As mentioned before, the territory of Arouca does not fit in the territory of the district of Aveiro. The Civilian Governments of the districts were extinct and, in practice, the districts are extinct. You must refer only the metropolitan areas or communities-cities of belonging, in addition to the regions. Aveiro is a considerable distance from the village of Arouca, about 74 km by road. The arouquenses never expressed or express any sense of belonging or of affinity about Aveiro, which is a town of the 'Região do Centro', of 'Comunidade Intermunicipal da Região de Aveiro', of 'Sub-Região do Baixo Voga' and of 'Beira Litoral', that has very distinct identity of the elements of Arouca municipality, which is a municipality of the 'Região Norte (Portugal)', of 'Área Metropolitana do Porto', of 'Sub-Região de Entre-Douro-e-Vouga' and of 'Douro Litoral', whose capital is the city of Porto. Therefore, in this article, should not be made of any relationship descriptions of Arouca about Aveiro, since these relationships, in fact, in practice, in fact, do not exist and never existed. And the information referred to on the origin of cultures and who have configured Arouca and the arouquenses are outdated. Are part of the traditional Historiography, obsolete, wrong, mytical, not scientific, that existed in Portugal. The cultural matrix of Arouca is Phoenician/Punic and ancient Hebrew. Then, there is only one Roman influence as invading culture exogenous, but who never managed to impose on the local culture. The toponymy of Arouca is ALL Phoenician/Punic origin and ancient Hebrew. The latest investigations in serious, scientific, Portugal, demonstrate this fact. See, please, here: http://fernando-outroladodahistoria.blogspot.pt/

To the unknow editor who persists on reverting content: sign your posts. Second, provide valid sources and citations for your commentaries. Unreferenced blogs are not valid sources, unless supported by third-party citations. Next: even PT Wikipedia continues to provide ALL parishes and municipalities with their former district affiliations, whether they be locally acceptable or not. It seems obvious that you have attempted the same with little influence on the PT talkpages: there might be a reason for that. I advise you that attempting to tamper with that information is going to create more of a problem there, then it does with me. This is not a game of personal affinities. Also, you cited a document (above) that was falsely claimed as a clear link to the extinction of the district system, which it wasn't. Your arguments are appearing to be POV and not supported by credible resources. I suggest you provide literary references to support your claims. ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 11:58, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry. But you are ignorant on this subject. Any common citizen of Arouca or of the Porto metropolitan area know that Arouca has no socio-economic relations relevant with Aveiro. Is an elementary notion. The «real capital» of Arouca is Porto, as always, by identity reasons and by the fact that is near Arouca. In addition, the Portuguese Constitution provides the extinction of the districts, because they were created in a arbitrary way. In relation to the History of Arouca which you cite, is, simply, wrong: all notions and elements. Are the repetition of the serious errors of the obsolete studies of the ancient Portuguese universities, which were of very poor quality, because, in Portugal, only started to make scientific History in the eighties of the 20th century. And Calvary, in Arouca, is not a element of the christian heritage, but the roman-catholic heritage. I think you must be more precise and scientific in your therms.

And you too don't know who you're talking to. I'm a academic researcher for about 22 years, in Portugal. I even made my master's thesis about Arouca. I'm familiar with the field. I did not write anything on the portuguese Wikipedia: was another person. But I copy some of the right assertions about Arouca, because the position in the portuguese Wikipedia is correct: Arouca has nothing to do with Aveiro. The native elements of Arouca do not fall in the native elements of Aveiro. The districts were created in arbitrary mode. Porto has always been the «real capital» of arouquenses. This is a elementar notion that all people know in Arouca. In relation to Roman Catholicism, you manifest too enough ignorance on the subject. Sorry for my sincerity. Roman Catholicism is a fusion of natural religions, popular, pré catholic, with some elements of the values of Jesus of Nazareth (few). The Roman Empire appropriated these cults and rituals, popular symbols, giving to him some elements of the so-called «jewish-christian» tradition, that is a imprecise notion. But the faith of the people is the popular faith, with a forced Christian elements (few). So, sorry but you ignore Arouca. This is my conclusion.

And the present position of the portuguese Wikipedia about Arouca is the clear and scientific true: "Aveiro is a considerable distance from the village of Arouca, about 74 km by road. The arouquenses never expressed or express any sense of belonging or of affinity about Aveiro, which is a town of the 'Região do Centro', of 'Comunidade Intermunicipal da Região de Aveiro', of 'Sub-Região do Baixo Voga' and of 'Beira Litoral', that has very distinct identity of the elements of Arouca municipality, which is a municipality of the 'Região Norte (Portugal)', of 'Área Metropolitana do Porto', of 'Sub-Região de Entre-Douro-e-Vouga' and of 'Douro Litoral', whose capital is the city of Porto. Therefore, in this article, should not be made of any relationship descriptions of Arouca about Aveiro, since these relationships, in fact, in practice, in fact, do not exist and never existed." This is the clear scientific true. I think you must visit Arouca and ask to the people from Arouca where is there «real capital». The answer is one: PORTO.

Well, that sounded quite nationalist. Please refrain from continuing this debate here. Any further debate will exist on THAT talkpage. ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I did not write anything on Wikipedia pt. I just copied, from there, some notions about Arouca. Of course, the scientific truth about a phenomenon is objective. Doesn't change. Therefore, when it expresses the scientific truth about a specific phenomenon, persons repeats this truth, in a regular way. Even it has been studied by another person. Science is not opinion. The scientific, sociological studies, shows the ancient and modern connection of Arouca to Porto, which is the real capital of Arouca. See, for example, the sociological study of Professor António Teixeira Fernandes https://sites.google.com/site/estrategiascriativas/editora/autores/antonio-teixeira-fernandes and his sociological team of the University of Porto, one of the most important social portuguese scientists and Professor of the University of Porto, that is the best portuguese university, where he shows, in a scientific way, the deep socio-economic relation of Arouca to Porto and the week and few relation to the district of Aveiro. In the page 63 of the study Memória e Identidade em Comunidade Autárquica (Memory and Identity in a Municipal Community), Instituto de Sociologia (Institute of Sociology)/ Câmara Municipal de Arouca, 2002. http://isociologia.pt/App_Files/Documents/teixeirafernandes09_110907043802.pdf So, I repeat: Can you see?!!! The only element in common between Arouca and Aveiro is only the fact that belong to the same district, that is not a relevant administrative region in the present, in Portugal. The region, the sub-region, the ancient province are different. I repeat: Aveiro is a city of the 'Região do Centro', of 'Comunidade Intermunicipal da Região de Aveiro', of 'Sub-Região do Baixo Voga' and of 'Beira Litoral', that has very distinct identity of the elements of Arouca municipality, which is a municipality of the 'Região Norte (Portugal)', of 'Área Metropolitana do Porto', of 'Sub-Região de Entre-Douro-e-Vouga' and of 'Douro Litoral', whose capital is the city of PORTO. See this recent sociological study, that is impartial, objective, scientific. Is not like the mytical and wrong elements of old and mytical portuguese Historiografy that you put in this article about Arouca that are wrong and obsolete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.83.4.167 (talk) 18:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

See, please: http://www.amp.pt/gca/index.php?id=121 And most of all: Arouca belongs to the Metropolitan Area of Porto. More than anything. At present, in Portugal, the living and functional administrative regions are the metropolitan areas (Lisbon and Porto) and the inter-municipal communities. Aveiro belongs to the "Intermunicipal Community of Aveiro" and not to the Metropolitan Area of Porto. If Aveiro were in the same territory identity of Arouca, was also in the Metropolitan Area of Porto. Conclusion: the districts in Portugal, at present, have no relevance or administrative functions. The Government of Portugal extinguished Civil Government, forever. Like you could read in Wikipedia pt: "Dando continuidade à reorganização administrativa, na actualidade, verifica-se o forte aumento de importância das Áreas Metropolitanas e Comunidades Intermunicipais em detrimento dos distritos. De acordo com a lei nº 45/2008 de 27 de Agosto, das áreas metropolitanas, criadas em 2003, só subsistiram as chamadas clássicas: a Área Metropolitana do Porto e a Área Metropolitana de Lisboa, sendo as restantes reorganizadas em Comunidades Intermunicipais. A razão óbvia para esta situação, para além de razões de associação económica e administrativa, tem a ver com o facto das populações não se identificarem com o distrito a que foram sujeitos, como acontece, a título de exemplo paradigmático, com os municípios de Espinho, Santa Maria da Feira, São João da Madeira, Oliveira de Azeméis, Vale de Cambra e Arouca, municípios da Área Metropolitana do Porto, que, apesar de pertencerem ao Distrito de Aveiro, sempre tiveram uma forte ligação socio-económica ao espaço urbano do Porto, para além da proximidade territorial à cidade do Porto e do seu enquadramento identitário nos municípios do Distrito do Porto, factos que se acentuaram na contemporaneidade. Com a lei 75/2013 de 12 de Setembro, dando continuidade à reorganização administrativa e à restruturação de competências na organização do território, os distritos foram relegados para um plano secundário, com o protagonismo administrativo das Áreas Metropolitanas e das Comunidades Intermunicipais." http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distrito_do_Porto — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.83.4.167 (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Let me make this clear: until the CAOP states otherwise, Arouca will continue to be classified in the "district" of Aveiro. Wikipedia is not about "emotional" allegiance, of which you identify. The Arouquense may be aligned with Porto, it may be part of the Intermunicipal community of Porto, but it has been ceded to the district of CAOP: unscientific as it might seem. If the CAOP no longer has those divisions indicated, then they will change. The only reference about the territorial integrity and structure that is valid is the Carta Administrativa Oficial de Portugal. If it states that Arouca is/was part of the district of Aveiro, then don't quote sentimental attachments, because they do not change how the government of Portugal treats/treated that territory. ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 23:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh...and one more point, I find it ironic that you "copied content" from the debate in PT Wikipedia to justify your points, and included in those quotes the reference to "ignorance" made by that author. Either you are the same author, or the range of communication is VERY identical, almost verbatim. ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 23:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Listen, please, to conclude this subject: I'me portuguese and I live in Portugal. I know very well all the North portuguese region. Don't existe any "Intermunicipal community of Porto". Only 'Metropolitan Area of Porto", where Arouca belongs. Is not about any "emotional" allegiance. See the last scientific sociological study, that is not emotional, of Professor António Teixeira Fernandes https://sites.google.com/site/estrategiascriativas/editora/autores/antonio-teixeira-fernandes and his sociological team of the University of Porto, one of the most important social portuguese scientists and Professor of the University of Porto, that is the best portuguese university, where he shows, in a scientific way, the deep socio-economic relation of Arouca to Porto and the week and few relation to the district of Aveiro. In the page 63 of the study Memória e Identidade em Comunidade Autárquica (Memory and Identity in a Municipal Community), Instituto de Sociologia (Institute of Sociology)/ Câmara Municipal de Arouca, 2002. http://isociologia.pt/App_Files/Documents/teixeirafernandes09_110907043802.pdf So, I repeat AGAIN: Can you see?!!! The only element in common between Arouca and Aveiro is only the fact that belong to the same district, that is not a relevant administrative region in the present, in Portugal. The region, the sub-region, the ancient province are different. I repeat: Aveiro is a city of the 'Região do Centro', of 'Comunidade Intermunicipal da Região de Aveiro', of 'Sub-Região do Baixo Voga' and of 'Beira Litoral', that has very distinct identity of the elements of Arouca municipality, which is a municipality of the 'Região Norte (Portugal)', of 'Área Metropolitana do Porto', of 'Sub-Região de Entre-Douro-e-Vouga' and of 'Douro Litoral', whose capital is the city of PORTO. See this recent sociological study, that is impartial, objective, scientific. And I'm not the author of the article of pt Wipedia. If it was me, I said it was. I will not debate, again, this issue. Best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.81.192.88 (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ilha dos Amores

added links pointing to SIC, TVI, Carlos Martins and Balla

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dollabarat may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• seaweed found in deeper areas. In shallower depths, less than {{convert|50|m|ft}} from the surface) there are populations of ''[[Laminaria]]'' (large colonies of chestnut seaweeds). The Department

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Fort of Santa Catarina (Portimão)

Hi, this is about the History section of Fort of Santa Catarina (Portimão). In the third paragraph is the word "determent" which is listed on Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/D. I am trying to work out what is intended. I think you meant to put "detriment" but I thought I would confirm that with you before I do the edit. Please let me know.I have this page on my watchlist. Jodosma (talk) 08:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SATA Air Açores Flight SP530M, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ATP. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Page moves

Hello. I noticed you have moved the titles for Magic Mountain and Lost City. Do you have any proof those are the WP:COMMONNAME? According to a quick Google search those hydrothermal fields are more commonly known as Magic Mountain and Lost City. Volcanoguy 13:40, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Azores Geopark

added links pointing to Horta, Flores Island and Sete Cidades

Hydrothermal vents and seamounts of the Azores

added a link pointing to Serreta

Sete Cidades Massif

added a link pointing to Sete Cidades

Topo Volcanic Complex

added a link pointing to Topo

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)