![]() |
ARCHIVES | |||||||||||||||||||
2007 | Dec | |||||||||||||||||||
2008 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||||||||
2009 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||||||||
2010 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||||||||
2011 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||||||||
2012 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May |
Hi RafaAzevedo
About your revert on Brazilian Real. Yes I do recognize that in its origin, the name was due it was being issued by the King. But the article it's not just about the original currency, but also about the current currency of Brazil. And the meaning of "real" was used, not only the "royal"meaning, and it had relevancy. The Brazilian real substituted the URV - Unidade Real de valor. That means "real value unity", not "royal value unity". When the BRL came to be the new currency of Brazil, the name "Real" not only had historical reasons, but it implied that this new currency has a "real" value, as opposed to the old one, the "cruzeiro real", whose value was destroyed by inflation - BTW, cruzeiro real also had "real" on it's name, and you can't argue that this cruzeiro was issued by the King :). So, yes, the second meaning of the word "real" is relevant. But you can't agree with me, then I propose a compromise: the translation is removed altogether, sinse it's a name, and it can be argued that translating names is not necessary. cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.122.48 ( talk) 14:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I have noticed your alteration to the estimated date of birth of Eric Bloodaxe, and have written a comment about it on the Eric Bloodaxe discussion page. You may like to read my comment. Do you have any clear information on the question? JamesBWatson ( talk) 17:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)