Talk:Xingu River

Rivers High‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brazil: Geography Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Geography of Brazil task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Talk[edit]

Didn't you mix meters and kilometers ?? The distances and sizes you indicate all seem weird ...

Ummm. The article uses imperial measurements, not SI ones. Some translation is apparently in order. :-) --Anders Törlind

Feel free. I'll keep splitting up the ludicrously big Amazon article. --Pinkunicorn

I noticed. It sure needs doing, thanx for taking the time! --Anders Törlind

There was a reference removed on this subject (Xingu River) but there was no explanation given as to why it was removed. There really isn't a lot of information on this topic and to remove a viable citation is in my opinion an abuse of editing power.-- Gordon Marsden

I think I spotted the problem. Whoever deleted the article "Brazilian Indians: What FUNAI Won't Tell You" evidently did not read the article he/she deleted. The article actually gives a good account of the Xingu River and contemporary issues on Indigenous issues on tributaries of the Xingu River but the Xingu is not mentioned in the title of the article. If I remember correctly, there is a show on the History Channel named "I Shouldn't Be Alive" that did an episode on the events described in this article. Before deleting material editors really should take the time to examine what they are removing!-- Gordon Marsden

Plagiarism[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=0PgtAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA784&lpg=PA784&dq=itamaraca+cataract&source=bl&ots=KDZrvAZ9Mz&sig=01XrdlC77tvCzgYGh3Hh6xnE7EY&hl=en&ei=hiVSTajYNcPAgQe4gcWKCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=itamaraca%20cataract&f=false

Deleted content was taken from here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nem1yan (talk • contribs) 13:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, which is in the public domain and widely used verbatim in Wikipedia articles, for what it is worth. Pfly (talk) 20:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether the removed text was acceptable for use or not, but here's the page about it: Wikipedia:1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Pfly (talk) 00:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Either way if anyone wants to use it then it does still need to be cited, as with any other article that quotes it directly. -Nem1yan (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality[edit]

The article has a problem with neutrality when it comes to the writer's style and the word choices of the writer. A more balanced view needs to be done with the comments about the native americans and the dam project perhaps needing to be separate sections within the article but with a more balanced view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackknight28 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I cut some excess about the dam the other day but didn't get to look much at the rest.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that fixes it, left all of the info but NPOV'ed it. 64.64.161.72 (talk) 13:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Xingu River. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110106172656/http://rainforestfoundationuk.org/files/Belo%20Monte%20Factsheet.pdf to http://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/files/Belo%20Monte%20Factsheet.pdf

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) 23:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]