Talk:Portugal

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Ciip333cartieR (talk) 10:00, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

you complete lost mind, replika my consicous console frame with same keybord and text 1:1 reality patch, jal to mam chapt, mam se zlobit, mam to přehlidnout; nebo se mam nasrat?  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Mia-SF (talk) 11:36, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

As there is a difference of opinion on whether Portugal is in "southwestern Europe" or "Southwestern Europe", there is a discussion at talk:Central Europe#Capitalising informal region names to which editors of this article may wish to contribute. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Jumping in here. Please feel free to reach out if you disagree with any of my edits. I’ll be working to remove superfluous information and to clean up and consolidate the content.

@JMF, Mia-SF, GumballNine1Nine, Mathglot, and A1Cafel:

Coffeeurbanite (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Note: Doing an initial pass. More cleanup will be needed, as there’s far too much historical detail, but I don’t want to remove large sections right away.Coffeeurbanite (talk) 17:37, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there @Coffeeurbanite. I am sorry, but some of your recent edits to this page are bordering vandalism. Every country page has a small intro at the start and an Etymology content. It's one thing to trim, it's other to delete full content. If some users want to trim fine, but use other country pages as an example, like the Germany one. Tuesp1985 (talk) 20:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

This is not vandalism. Coffeeurbanite has been editing this page following my request for cleanup after the advices given in the peer review, and as the user stated, the editing process is not yet finished, see Template:Done/See also for more info. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:40, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there @GumballNine1Nine, his edit on the summary and Etymology was too extreme. Like I said in my earlier reply, it's one thing to trim and cleanup, it's one thing to delete whole sections of the page. I know the process isn't finished, but the page cannot have this huge deletes in information all at once. What kind of country page examples are you following? The Germany page, like I said, is a featured page. It's a good example of how country pages should be. Cheers Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry @GumballNine1Nine, but I don't understand what type of trim or cleaning you're planning for this page. I want to be constructive here, I honestly do, but I don't see what your goal is. Not sure if you want my help, but if you want, I'm open to listen. Cheers Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Since this is an ongoing process, any changes to the article should be discussed here first, and as Coffeeurbanite has already stated, if you don't agree then discuss your reasons with the user before doing any reversions, at least while the cleanup is being done. Also after doing my share of edits throughout this page I've seen enough reasons why a cleanup was warranted, see WP:CLEAN, this page's history and the peer review why. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 02:02, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more that any major edits should be discussed here first. That's why I put up again the summary and Etymology content, because I didn't saw any discussion about deleting them both all together.Tuesp1985 (talk) 02:08, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Since it's Coffeeurbanite doing the cleanup, I think the best thing to do right now is to wait until they return so they can have a say on that GumballNine1Nine (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I’ve removed the lengthiness tag, but feel free to restore it if you disagree. I made substantial edits, though some areas could still use cleanup, which I’ll help with.Coffeeurbanite (talk) 02:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

The Etymology section was not removed; it was moved to the end of the page. The edits may appear extensive because a significant amount of superfluous information was present. My intent is not to damage the article, but to streamline it and improve readability. Much of the removed material is already covered in other articles that are linked on the page. A country article does not need to serve as a catch-all, as more detailed topics are better handled in their respective linked pages. Per your request, I will review the Germany article.Coffeeurbanite (talk) 16:40, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

@Tuesp1985 per the Germany article, I will move the Etymology section back up. Coffeeurbanite (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

The Germany article is a featured wiki page. I think it's a very good model of what a country page should be. Also, the summary has to be more extensive. The previous one could be trimmed, but it needs to have a very quick history review and say which kind of organizations is part of and etc, etc. Again, follow the Germany page layout. Cheers Tuesp1985 (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Noted. I’m still working through the page and will follow up as needed.Coffeeurbanite (talk) 17:36, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

OK. The core framework is in place, with most of the extraneous material removed. I didn’t remove all of it, but the remaining content could benefit from further trimming and some rewriting to improve clarity (but attempts should be made to not increase content). I’ll step in periodically to help with that. I’ll also add a small amount of material back into the lead. Coffeeurbanite (talk) 02:00, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I've placed some more info in the lead as it's the section most widely read by both users and non-users, it can be temporary or not if you agree with the changes,I thought it would be a good idea to provide this lead in the meantime, specially for the people who don't use wikipedia on a regular basis. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 07:21, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I think it looks really good. Nice work! Coffeeurbanite (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Also I think that Provinces of Portugal section should be merged with the Districts and regions into a new section in Government and politics named, for instance, Subdivisions, I also think that Transportation and Energy should be in the Economy section, per precedent set by many country pages, for instance, Australia, Phillippines, Bulgaria (indirectly), also it makes sense since infrastructure is deeply related with the economy not something that's unrelated like culture or ethymology for instance. Finally, in my opinion it would make sense to replace the LGBT rights section with the more general topic of Human rights since there's already a page about this GumballNine1Nine (talk) 07:59, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree with all of the above, possibly with the exception of the LBBT portion, though I don’t have strong feelings about it. That said, I do think it’s a term people are likely to scan the page for to see whether it’s addressed in any way. Thank you. I’ll jump in to help.Coffeeurbanite (talk) 16:36, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Should Mirandese remain on the infobox?

^NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 20:42, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

I like it! I don't think any Portuguese would oppose. Petnog (talk) 23:07, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree that Mirandese should remain in the infobox, or at least be included via a footnote as suggested by Tuesp1985. While it is true that Portuguese is the sole national official language under Article 11 of the Constitution, Law no. 7/99 grants Mirandese an official status of "recognition" and "protection" that is distinct from a mere minority dialect.

The "Spain model" is a strong compromise here. In the Spain article infobox, regional languages like Basque, Catalan, and Galician are included because they hold co-official status in their respective territories, even if they aren't the primary language of the entire State. Since Mirandese is legally recognized by the Assembly of the Republic for the Miranda do Douro region, its inclusion provides a more accurate representation of the Republic’s linguistic heritage and legal framework. Furthermore, as MdMV noted, maintaining the status quo respects previous consensus on this page. ~2026-96555-3 (talk) 11:06, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Mirandese is not official language of Portugal. It is dead language co-officially used in small town municipality. The official language of the Portuguese Republic is Portuguese (paragraph 3 of article 11 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic). Also officially recognized and protected are: Mirandese, in the municipality of Miranda do Douro (Law no. 7/99, of January 29, 1999), Portuguese Sign Language (Article 74, paragraph 2, subparagraph h), of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic – 1997 revision) and Barranquenho, in the municipality of Barrancos (Law no. 97/2021, of December 30, 2021). Mirandese is not used outside of two municipalities. Same as recognized langauges in UK. Not used in infobox. --ThecentreCZ (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Maybe adding a note to Portuguese official name, like in the Spain page?Tuesp1985 (talk) 19:00, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

But, why should only official languages be on the table? That’s not what many countries’ pages do. Mirandese is the historical language of the Tierra de Miranda, and currently spoken in 2 municipalities of Portugal, it is not dead. If a language needs to be strictly official in the country to be shown in its infobox, we’ve got a lot of clean up to do. MdMV or Emdy idk (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

After a bit of digging, it seems that it’s not as common as I remembered, rather each page has its own standards for which languages to include and which to not, and it makes sense, given language laws aren’t the same everywhere

I think keeping mirandese is harmless, and this discussion was already had before and we settled on mirandese MdMV or Emdy idk (talk) 20:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I also think it should stay. But I reiterate that I'm open for a Spain page solution. Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:55, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

No, it is not harmless. Some countries have about 20 recognized languages. So only official is used in infobox. ThecentreCZ (talk) 02:05, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I disagree that Mirandese is a "dead language." It has native speakers and is legally recognized in Portugal. I support the suggestion to keep it or use a footnote like the Spain article. ~2026-96555-3 (talk) 12:06, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Let’s leave it at Portuguese ~2026-10282-49 (talk) 03:42, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@GumballNine1Nine, @H3nrique Bregie, @Petnog, @MdMV or Emdy idk, @ThecentreCZ, @Chipmunkdavis, @Z1720 Hi there guys. A recent edit by GumballNine1Nine raised a question about the area of Portugal. In the recent edit, the previous number of 92,225 km2 was substituted to 156,597 km2, as territorial waters are counted. However, these numbers seem misleading and most government pages, national, EU, UN, you name it, don't have this number, so, I propose we discuss if we should maintain this new number or return to the old one. I personally think we should return to the 92,225 km2. Tuesp1985 (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

The old number makes the most sense. That doesn't mean that the 156,597 number shouldn't be in the Geography section, but I don't think it makes sense to include territorial waters into the numbers. H3nrique Bregie (talk) 01:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

List of countries and dependencies by area takes into account both the land and water areas when calculating the total area. The values for Portugal in that article don't have references to back them up, unlike here. Which one is the most reliable should be clear to everyone. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Just to point out the fact that every source that was added are from the Portuguese government. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:03, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Not challenging the source, but I would add that other Portuguese government sources don't have that number: https://portaldiplomatico.mne.gov.pt/sobre-portugal

I think the old number should be returned to the table, and like @H3nrique Bregie suggested, the new number could be pointed out, separately, in the Geography section.Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Disagree. You'd be putting that figure under Total area in the infobox which is misleading, plus United States takes into account that distinction (honestly I don't see any other country article with more oversight than the US) my version of the article avoids any of this. (Not even mentioning the fact that it's just the correct one) GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:15, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

My sources come from government agencies that are dedicated to geography (one of those even comes from the most recent administrative map of Portugal from days ago). Frankly, given the quality of the sources I fail to see why this even merits having this discussion in the first place... GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:20, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Again, I'm not disputing the source. The issue is that no other government agencies, besides the one dedicated to geography, have updated those numbers. Not the Foreign Office, nor INE, Eurostat and so on. And we need to reach a consensus on the number because it doesn't make sense the English wiki page having one number and all the other pages having another. We need also to know if this new area approved by the government (I gather it was recently approved, right?) will indeed be recognized/updated by other worldwide agencies.Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the land area the proof of aproval is stated in the first paragraphs in Portuguese here, which proves the value of 92,225 instead of 92,230 that was in this article before my edits (it's stated several laws which are more recent than the Foreign Office's website that you cited above). On the fact that water area should be taken into account on the country total area, the official website of the Government Journal explains the reasons for that can be found here (in Portuguese) (The constitution says that the territorial sea and internal waters also belong to the Portuguese territory). And the values for the water area correspond to the sum of the areas of the internal water and territorial sea, the full explanation for each set of values can be found here. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Searching official sources, the number given for the area of Portugal varies, but mostly is between 92,000 to 92,400 Teixant (talk) 20:48, 23 February 2026 (UTC)