The article says : "Brazil homes no pyramids and Machu Picchu is found solely in Peru, with the Aztec and Inca mostly in Colombia, the Maya mostly in Peru. Not to mention that they died out several hundred years ago".
can't tell if it's sarcasm or just plainly wrong.
Edited by Enciclopedista
The page states that Actually, "da Costa" is not that uncommon. It's a real Portuguese/Brazilian surname. Its Spanish equivalent would be "de la Cuesta." Which is about as incorrect as the point it is trying to make. Firstly, 'da Costa' isn't a Portuguese surname (lit. 'of the coast'), though I don't know about Brasil; secondly, 'de la Cuesta' is neither a Spanish surname nor Spanish for 'of the coast' - it literally means absolutely nothing in Spanish, but 'de la' means 'of the' and 'cuesta' means 'incline'. More correctly it would be 'del Cuesta', in English 'of incline'. The Spanish for 'of the coast' is 'del Costa', and it still isn't a Spanish surname. Thus, I am correcting in part and removing in part this bullet point.
Edited by lakingsif OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!
I don't get the reference to The Book Of The New Sun. I'm not familiar with that, but all the entry says is that it is set in post-apocalyptic Argentina, with a little of Where the Hell Is Springfield? in regards to the location of the city of Nessus. So, what does it have to do with wrong or stereptypical representations of Brazil in media?
Max payne 3 section is writen like its comeing out it already is and want t orewrite but i dont know how
Removed:
Whenever I've seen Brazil in media, it's always in a densely populated favela.