Talk:Minas Gerais

Brazil: Geography / Government and laws Top‑importance

	Brazil portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Geography of Brazil task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Government and Laws of Brazil task force (assessed as Top-importance).

The meaning of "Gerais"

AFAIK, the word "Gerais" used to mean "state-owned" or "related to the State" in ancient portuguese. Thus the parliament of some kingdoms were called "Estados Gerais" (in which "estados" mean social classes, like clergy, military and commons). Therefore, "Minas Gerais" would mean the "Mines of the Realm". This is the explanation I was taught both at school (I am Brazilian and AM from Minas Gerais) and the college (I got a degree on History). Sadly, I have no link ready to prove my point, so I just comment here.jggouvea (talk) 15:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minas is a male Greek name whose origins are found in the Greek language, since it derives from the Greek word “mini” which means moon, therefore Minas is the one who is bright in the darkness.

Minas was not used in the ancient years and became more popular during the Byzantine Years.

Strabo (64BC-24AD) mentions Gerais in 230 "Strabo Geographica." 444. "πλατος ανωμαλος κατα δε το πλεον οσον πεντηκοντα και εκατον σταδων. Το μεν ουν Κηναιον εςι κατα Θερμοπυλας και εξω Θερμοπυλας και εξω Θερμοπυλοι επ ολιγον. Γεραιςος και Πεταλια προς Σουνιον. Γινεται ουν αντιπορωμος τη τε Αττικη και Βιωτια, και Λοκριδι και τους Μαλιευσι....." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.101.137 (talk) 02:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed

Hello,so,i have been looking at here and i have noticed that both the flag (coloration of the red in the triangle noticeably un-accurate.) and coat of arms(completely wrong,for whatever reason the oldest & #1 file was almost 100% correct while all others where outright plain wrong.) here arent exactly very accurate....someone,please correct ?Should we just use the images there until someone can make a higher resolution one?what do you all think ?Also,if someone can please find/make a suitable warning at the front of the article to draw more attention to the subject,please do so!(Ok,so i have placed the most suitable warning i could find,if you can find a better one please feel free to place it there instead,but anyways i think a blatantly wrong coat of arms/flag is enough to adress that.)

Thanks.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.59.186.56 (talk) 19:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding this article, 200.20.117.66. It's great to see another user interested in Brazilian history!

I encourage you to get a user name and look forward to working with you on articles pertaining to Brazil.

172

I added a bit about emigration from Minas Gerais to the US, particularly Eastern Massachusetts (Boston) at the end of the economy section. It strikes me as quite important - tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of people from Minas have moved to the Boston area, and are the dominant illegal immigrant population

Merger of data from Minas dos Matos Gerais

On 8 January 2006, User:Big Adamsky suggested that that the information from the article Minas dos Matos Gerais be merged into Minas Gerais. Given the size of the current article and its potential for growth, I think that it would be better to merge the material from Minas dos Matos Gerais and the data from the History section of Minas Gerais into a new artcile History of Minas Gerais, leaving just a summary of the history in the main article. What do you all think? Signed: Bejnar 18:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronouciation

Does the standart pronounciation of Minas Gerais really is ˌminɐzʒeˈɾajs? I was born in Belo Horizonte and my pronounciation is more like ˌminɐʒeˈɾajs, I've tested with my mother and other friends and the result was the same. Does a non mineiro Brazilian pronouce it otherwise? Bruno Gripp 22:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have lived in BH for most of my life, and also in Divinópolis, and I don't remember hearing anyone drop the /z/. Macgreco 01:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

The name Minas Gerais comes from a more complex context than the translation "General Mines" tries to capture, in disregard to the two large geographical spaces which conformed the state in its history: the region of the mines (Minas), and the region of the Gerais (or "Campos Gerais", which means something close to "General Fields"). These corresponded to the areas of Sertão which were farther and hard to access (with an economy based on farming and agriculture) from the mining spots (whose economic space was urban from its origin). The confusion comes from the fact that the term "Gerais" is taken as an adjective to "Minas", although it refers to the region called Gerais (as a noun). A further complication is that this is not a well defined area on the map of the state, but rather a designation to these parts outside the mining spots, more related to the geography of Sertão, and more isolated from the state's nucleus. Guimarães Rosa's literature is highly situated in the Gerais, and they serve as an example of a space which is widespread (hence the term General) across the state (although more concentrated in its north) rather than neatly delimited and identifiable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.59.178.159 (talk) 19:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an extended version of the paragraph above to the article, in the History section. I've sent it to a couple of experts on the history of MG to improve it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.164.255.201 (talk) 03:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Insignia: Flag and Coat of Arms

I have reinstated on the page the insignia most accurately reflecting the presentation on the government website ([http://www.mg.gov.br/governomg/portal/m/governomg/conheca-minas/5661-nossos-simbolos/5146/5044 Governo do Estado de Minas Gerais => Nossos símbolos). Oalexander-En (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bhcity2.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bhcity2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Itamar Franco

Former president Itamar Franco wasn't born in Minas Gerais, but in a ship in the Atlantic Ocean, near Bahia. I'm not sure we can say he was born in Bahia, as I don't know if the sea can be consider part of the state's territory, but there is no doubt he wasn't born in Minas (it is a landlock state!) and must be excluded from the list of famous people born here. Anyway, instead of just removing him from the article, I explained his situation, as he is almost allways recognized as a "mineiro". 189.119.69.197 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Differing national ranking of Belo Horizonte's urban agglomeration

I noticed a discrepancy between the lead sections of the articles on Belo Horizonte and Minas Gerais. I have extracted two statements from each of those articles (slightly modified for a more direct comparison):

From the Belo Horizonte article: Belo Horizonte is the sixth most populous city in the country. However the city's metropolitan area is [the] home of 5.15 million inhabitants excluding the Metropolitan Attach or the Expanded Metropolitan Area which adds more than 650,000 people, making it the third most populous urban agglomeration in Brazil.
From the Minas Gerais article: Belo Horizonte is the sixth largest urban agglomeration in Brazil. Its metropolitan area is the third largest in Brazil.

I am not addressing the unnecessary complexity (or poor grammar) of the first of those two, but I would suggest simplification. I am concerned here with the factual discrepancy between the rank as 3rd and the rank as 6th largest urban agglomeration in Brazil.

Both articles make the same point: When comparing city populations, the City of Belo Horizonte is the sixth largest in Brazil, but in a comparison based on populations of the larger metropolitan areas, "Greater Belo Horizonte"[1] is the third largest in Brazil. They also agree on the national ranking of both figures, so I will assume that those rankings are correct. But they differ in their stated national rank for the urban agglomeration. Alternatively, this can be viewed as a difference in the meaning of the term urban agglomeration as used by each article. This isn't Wikipedia's or even my biggest issue currently, but in noting the discrepancy, I was less trusting of other data from these articles. I am not familiar with the specific term urban agglomeration in any precise sense, but it sounds like it should have a definition sufficient to preclude the wide uncertainty between 3rd and 6th largest in Brazil.

I do not speak Portuguese, have never been to Brazil, and my only personal familiarity with anything about Brazil starts and ends with the fourteen World Cups held during my lifetime (soon to be fifteen, explaining my sudden interest in this city). So I cannot gauge the Brazilian popularity or familiarity with the term urban agglomeration (for example the likelihood it would be restored by other editors if removal). Without that knowledge, I don't know if case (d) below (drop the term completely from both articles) is suitable and appropriate. If the term is to be retained, then I ask those more competent and qualified than me (that is everybody) if there is a sufficiently precise definition of the term urban agglomeration as it is used in Brazil by reliable sources, which would lead to one of the four cases enumerated below.

(a) An urban agglomeration is similar in scope (population size) to a metropolitan area, which would make Belo Horizonte the nation's third largest, and necessitating a corresponding change in the lead of the Minas Gerais article.
(b) An urban agglomeration is more nearly representative of just the municipal city at its core in population terms, making this one the sixth largest in Brazil, and necessitating a corresponding change in the lead of the Belo Horizonte article.
(c) An urban agglomeration is representative of neither the larger metropolitan area of case (a), nor the smaller municipal city of case (b). If the term is to be retained, then the size of this and several other large urban agglomerations in Brazil would need to be separately determined, and ranked accordingly. Alternatively the term could be removed, as described for case (d) below. Either way, the lead of both articles will need to be modified.
(d) An urban agglomeration is not sufficiently well defined, the term or its definition is insufficiently common, or continued use of the term in either articles is undesirable. In these circumstances, urban agglomeration will be removed, and both articles will require modification, stating that the metropolitan area of Greater Belo Horizonte[1] is the third largest such area in the country, but that the municipal city of Belo Horizonte that it contains is the sixth city in Brazil. in the nation.

Notes

[1] I do not know if Greater Belo Horizonte is a term in common use, and if so, whether it applies to the precise metropolitan area that is ranked third largest in Brazil.

[2] I came to these pages to verify Belo Horizonte's time zone (in preparation for remote TV viewing on 24 June 2014). I didn't see it mentioned in either article, whereas other cities in Brazil do show their time zone in their infobox.

With thanks from ChrisJBenson (talk) 15:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

climate

There is nothing here (nor at Itajuba, a city in the province) about climate! 64.53.191.77 (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know what the solution to that is don`t you. ;-) Bagunceiro (talk) 23:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Minas Gerais. 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/20070927011924/http://www.museu-emigrantes.org/Minas-Minho.pdf to http://www.museu-emigrantes.org/Minas-Minho.pdf

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} 10:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Minas Gerais. 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, 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) 09:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Minas Gerais. 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, 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) 20:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An indefinite article

Should there be an indefinite article in "with [a] high degree of Amerindian admixture"?--Adûnâi (talk) 01:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Niche reality show celebrity used as an example of an accent

I have been flagged for disruptive editing for my recent edit to this page, but I just wanted to clarify that I sincerely thought the example was inappropriate. The person mentioned is a character on a niche reality show in America (90 Day Fiance), not a known celebrity. I didn't believe the example provided any value to the article. The wiki links provided were also irrelevant, so I removed them.

If anyone agrees that my editing was disruptive, I'm open to feedback. Thanks.

Diff of my "disruptive" editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.8.225.33 (talk) 18:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the removal. The individual does not have a Wikipedia entry, despite Michepman linking the name in a way to make it appear that they do, having used a false edit summary to restore the disputed content. As noted by the IP editor above, there is nothing "prominent" about this individual that would call for their inclusion as representative of an accent from Minas Gerais. The inclusion of the name as a particularly notable example is disputed and not supported by reliable sources, so it should not be restored without consensus.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I now agree that this reference should not be included in the article. Michepman (talk) 20:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]