Talk:Atlantic Europe

Portugal Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal 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.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

Europe Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

May 2022[edit]

Sources 16 and 17 under the Genetics section do not seem to support the claims being made. Someone else should review for a second opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinopt (talk • contribs) 20:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Updating[edit]

I've updated the article in general, adding more info, references, sections, etc. After all I'm a geographer and this is supposed to be my "area of expertise", hehe ;) (Swamp Greetings, 10/Sept/08) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamp Greetings (talk • contribs)

July 2010[edit]

The original article was very good. The initial geographical approach is interesting, and I actually studied this with Prof O'Flanagan from UCC (cited as a source). Having some experience on the administrative and political aspects, I wished to include information on how the stakeholders (mostly regions) percieve this area today, what type of issues are to be addressed and what perspectives have been opened. Recent decisions on european policy have made this a real subject of public interest. My sources are all official and public. (Ronan Thomas (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I'm sure you're right - I did some work on the Atlantic Arc concept myself in the 1980s. However, you need to familiarise yourself with some of the basic rudiments of editing Wikipedia, some of which are set out in the welcome message on your talk page. It appears to me that much of the text you have inserted is a straight copy and paste from other sites. That is not allowed - it is a clear copyright violation and therefore must be removed. What you need to do is to use the sources, and summarise them in your own words, in a style which is appropriate for an encyclopedia. You should also find out how to include references. So, I suggest that before you return to editing this page, you read articles like the ones linked from here. I'm happy to help, but not to the extent of taking you through every step in the process. In the longer term, by the way, I think there's a case for a separate article on the Atlantic Arc, linked from this more general one - but at present I've got no alternative other than to remove the text you've added. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Atlantic Europe. 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, 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 21:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]