curprev17:0517:05, 20 July 2013 179.218.130.203talk 19,594 bytes−313 The information in this section contained wrong dates and other information only repeated what had already been stated in the section "Patroness of Brazil" above regarding the declaration of the shrine as a minor basilica, etc.undoTags: nowiki addedVisual edit
curprev22:3122:31, 2 February 2012 LoveforMarytalkcontribs m18,394 bytes+24 Minor edit. Revised Controversy issues sorrounding the vandalism of the statue, which merited the Holy See Intervention and condemnation of Beato Ioannem Paulum Secundum., Papam.undo
curprev23:5523:55, 31 January 2012 LoveforMarytalkcontribs 18,366 bytes−180 Confirmed that the statue is not a variant, traditional portrayal of statue. Removed unsourced claims of patronage from Portugal. The PP. bull of Clement XIII gave patronage for all old Spanish Kingdoms, including Brazil.undo
curprev15:2115:21, 12 October 2009 68.175.44.30talk 9,790 bytes−1,740 none of this is talking about Our Lady of Aparecida -- if you can provide evidence that it is discussing Our Lady of Aparecida, as opposed to Marian devotions generally, then add it backundo
curprev15:1615:16, 12 October 2009 68.175.44.30talk 11,532 bytes+43 Roman Catholicism is a worldwide entity with no exclusively mandated language (other than Latin in some contexts) so the English and Portuguese titles can be co-equal in English language documentsundo
