Not sure if it is the good place for that, please don't kill me >.< I think we should merge this page with Amazon rainforest. That's basically the same thing, except the Brazilian rainforest's page is only about the Brazilian Amazon. Don't think we should have two pages for these ones. LadyJunky 08:06, February 1, 2016 (UTC)
Asked to weigh in here, and I'd say I agree. If the two are actually the same rainforest, and Wikipedia lists them both as the same, then just cover it all in the one article. But keep this entry as a redirect. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:18, February 2, 2016 (UTC)
I agree, too. Mnonai (talk) 03:39, February 2, 2016 (UTC)
I can understand the distinction (the Amazon rainforest spans nine countries, and "Brazilian rainforest" would note we're talking specifically about the portion of the Amazon that lies within Brazilian borders; kind of like Wikipedia has an article on the small intestine and another on the jejunum -- I've been studying Anatomy so please bear with my frankly odd comparisons). But it's such an adiaphoron that I'd only vote with a weak keep. -- Seth Cooperowl post! 03:47, February 2, 2016 (UTC)
More opinions please? LadyJunky 15:50, February 8, 2016 (UTC)
I stand for merging. As a Brazilian myself, I can say there is no such distinction between Amazon rainforest and Brazilian rainforest in a broad sense. Most of the Amazon rainforest is located on Brazilian territory. Also, both pages are quite small and pretty much contain the same information, which is not only redundant, but would fit better in a single page. Mnonai (talk) 01:06, March 8, 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.