Jump to content

Talk:Brasil para Todos

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was eliminated fom Portuguese Wikipedia for questionable reasons

[edit]

Several atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers are accusing Catholic administrators for the elimination of Brazil Para Todos Portuguese page. The argument showed by the admins was of being "irrelevant".

As a Brazilian defender of laicité and freedom of belief, I ask for the help of someone with higher rank in Wikipedia hierarchy to solve that issue which seems so much to have been an arbitrary act from religious admins who didn't like the idea of separation of State and religion. Robfbms (talk) 02:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brasil para Todos. 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: 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) 12:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]