Talk:Uruguay

Eastern Republic of Uruguay

And where is the Western Republic of Uruguay? No, "oriental de" has no other meaning than "east of", therefore "República Oriental del Uruguay" means nothing else but "Rupublic East of the Uruguay". Everything else is simply bullshit. --93.232.205.59 (talk) 17:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Good point, August. I was about to make it myself, but you were quicker..by several months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JGC1010 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Find below the text of an email from the Embassy of Uruguay in the United Kingdom:

We acknowledge receipt of your communication dated 18 January 2011, by which you ask for the “official” English translation of the full name “República Oriental del Uruguay”.

I am afraid to inform you there is no such thing. Some English speaking organizations refer to it as the “Oriental Republic of Uruguay”, while it is rendered by others (for example The United Nations) as the “Eastern Republic of Uruguay”.

As Uruguayans are not ethnically Orientals and, if you refer to Uruguay as Eastern you always have to give another :::geographical point of reference, (in this case it would be the Republic East of the Uruguay River), most of our Embassies :::in countries where English is first language have embossed in all their stationery “Embassy of Uruguay”.

In many cases, as I am sure you are well aware of, full names of countries cannot have a literal translation into other :::languages, no matter if these languages are the five official ones of the United Nations (Chinese, English, French,, :::Russian and Spanish). Take France, for example; the official full name in French is “La Republique Francaise” but in :::English, even at the UN, it is always referred to as “France” and not “The French Republic”.

Yours sincerely,'

Thus, officially in English they use only Republic of Uruguay, but if the name has to be translated in full into English the government of Uruguay clearly has a preference of Republic East of the Uruguay. Cripipper (talk) 10:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, the citation from the Encyclopedia Britannica is incorrect and misleading: it states that the official name is República Oriental del Uruguay, what follows in English is a translation. The translation is not the official name. There is no official translation. Cripipper (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

It's not that I don't trust you, Cripipper, but I think WP:V requires more than this. Can you post the e-mail (redact anything that would tend to reveal your own identity, if you wish, and I would encourage you to do so) in its entirety with full headers? --Nlu (talk) 15:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

just to give my two cents, the spanish name refers to the historic origin of the country, as a spanish colony. The "Oriental strip" was the name of the zone what today is Uruguay and the south east of brazil. The reason was that, from the standpoint of Paraguay (the center of the colonization process at the time) this region was in fact the far east. Since that time this region has been known as that: oriental. My point is, that when naming the country, uruguayans couln't just call it "Oriental province", so they added the uruguay reference. So the correct translation, using common sense, historic precedent, and not an obscure mail, would be Oriental Republic of THE Uruguay (since the name is "DEL uruguay" and not "de Uruguay") or in the worst case Oriental Republic of Uruguay. "Republic East of the Uruguay" would be translated back to spanish as "Republica al este (u oriente) del Uruguay". Complete nonsense —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.236.42.78 (talk) 05:15, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit

Hi

A couple of things came to light:

Administrative divisions:

• "intendente municipal who is elected for five years" - what is this? is it a "capital city" of the departmento, or a person who is incharge?

I have got as far as Demographics, it has taken a while and I need to go off for the night and will continue tomorrow. Chaosdruid (talk) 04:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The "oriente" is the east of the divide while the west was classified the "accidente" by the spainards. A good reference is Julio Herrera. I am attending the Universidad Catolica and would be happy in four day when my classes start to clarify with a link. In the mean time, sorry for the lack of a citation. Ryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.134.6.98 (talk) 04:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Plagiarism and cut & paste copying

Hi

Unfortunately I have discovered a significant amount of plagiarism, most notable cut-and-paste copying from [1] into the first paragraph of the education section. I hope that there is not any more. I will do some random reference checks and see if I can find any in a little while. This may not be endemic but it would certainly result in a failure at GA level.

Moreover, from my point of view, I hope I do not find I have wasted a lot of time copyediting an article that is not written by Wiki editors!

Chaosdruid (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

And there's more:

• Economics - [2] (ref [30] in the article) is copied into many parts of the text.
• After the Guerra Grande there was a sharp rise in the number of immigrants, primarily from Italy and Spain. By 1879 the total population of the country was over 438,000. The economy saw a steep upswing, above all in livestock raising and exports. Montevideo became a major economic centre of the region and an entrepôt for goods from Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay."

All from [3]

Well I randomly checked 3 and found three. A sorry state if that was to continue. I am a little disheartened by this.

Chaosdruid (talk) 22:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

It has been pointed out to me that those three I chose are from US documents which should be ok to use, just bad luck I chose them then lol

There is also the matter that US docs are for non-commercial use and so material used in them may not be covered for use on wiki. Specifically material on the first I found, a US document, has material from UNESCO amongst other, who do not allow their material for commercial usage and may be copyvio when used here. Chaosdruid (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Cut-pasting from US government public domain sources is not a copyvio, but is also not very professional. However, the article also has huge amounts of cut-pasted text from non-PD sources (such as Britannica), and these are copyright violations. These really need to be fixed as soon as possible. Please see Talk:Uruguay/GA2 for the list. Nanobear (talk) 14:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

Toolbox
dashboard disambig links external links See WP:DEADREF for dead URLs

This review is transcluded from Talk:Uruguay/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nanobear (talk) 13:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

A generally well-written and comprehensive article, but there are serious copyright violations, dead links, malformed references and substantial usage of an unreliable source. (See below).

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   No problems here. A well-written article, although personally I'm seriously concerned about the sometimes massive cut-pasting from US government public domain sources. I don't know if that's grounds for failing GA nomination (probably not), but it does not make this article seem very professional. It should not be too difficult to rewrite the material so that it's not a direct cut-paste.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Several uncited passages, unverifiable references (dead links), and heavy use of one unreliable source (see below).

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Otherwise the article is very comprehensive, but lacks any general information about the education system.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   No problems here.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No problems here.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   A nice-looking article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Please see list of specific problems below. Please renominate after these problems have been fixed and every single copyright violation has been removed.

Specific problems:

References

• ref 3 is a blog and therefore not reliable [4]
• ref 8 (Background Note: Uruguay) does not link to where it should be. The correct URL is [5].
• ref 66 is a dead link [6]
• ref 57, 71, 95, etc. is a self-published website and therefore not reliable [7]
• ref 101 is malformed
• refs 15, 17, 18 are bare refs

Politics:

• Paragaph beginning with "Uruguay adopted its current constitution in 1967..." - none of this information can be found in the given source. In fact, the source has next to no info about Uruguay.
• Paragraph beginning with "For most of Uruguay's history the Partido Colorado has been..." - source is a dead link, so verification is not possible
• "The legislative power is constituted by the General Assembly..." - the text is taken word-for-word from [8], which, as far as I can see, is not a public domain source. Therefore this is a copyright violation.

Administrative divisions:

• The text is taken word-for-word from [9], which, as far as I can see, is not a public domain source. Therefore this is a copyright violation.

Climate:

• "Frost is almost unknown along the coast. Both summer and winter weather may vary from day to day with the passing of storm fronts; a hot northerly wind may occasionally be followed by a cold wind (pampero) from the Argentine Pampas." - is taken word-for-word from Britannica
• "Uruguay has neither a decidedly dry nor a rainy season." - same here

Agriculture:

• "In 2010 Uruguay's export-oriented agricultural sector contributed to 9.3% of the GDP and employed a similar share of the workforce" - "similar share" is not exact enough. Agriculture's share of GDP is 9.3% and share of labor force is 13%.

Transport:

• "The Administración de Ferrocarriles del Estado is the autonomous agency in charge of rail transport" - information is not found in the cited source last paragraph has no inline cite

Telecommunications:

• This is an uncited chapter

Demographics:

• I think the "health facts" list is misformed. It should be a normal list with no indentation. Also there should be more explanation (just "health facts:" seems too laconic)

Cuisine:

• Three sentences starting from "Beef is fundamental to Uruguayan cuisine, and the country is one of the world’s top consumers of red meat per capita." - are taken word-for-word from britannica - a copyright violation.
• Paragraph beginning with "Other Uruguayan dishes include..." has no reference

Sport:

• "Football is the most popular Sport in Uruguay." - this is not found in the following ref. Although it may be common knowledge, a source should be easy to find.

Education:

• the chapter does not have any information about Uruguay's education system. I think this is basic information every country article should have. It should be easy to insert a summary of Education in Uruguay here. Nanobear (talk) 14:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Demographics of Uruguay

It seems that there is not an absolute rigor in the demographic description of Uruguay. Many Portuguese surnames are included erroneously in Spanish descent.

"Soza" from Sousa, "Magallanes" from Magalhães, Abreu, Pereira, Saraiva, among others, are only and original Portuguese surnames, despite the People who have them are (or not) of multiple descent, and most surnames similar to the two Iberian countries like Rodriguez (Rodrigues), Silva or Santos for example, were in past, and still we think they are, more numerous between the Portuguese or portuguese descent around the world that between the Spanish, if we compare the surnames of Portugal with those of Spain.

This fusion of multiple ancestries gives Uruguay a very interesting identity. And about this reference to the also Portuguese or lusitanic face of Uruguay, is just to remind that the accuracy is also important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuzoGraal (talk • contribs) 20:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

And this of course even if the majority of Uruguay are still of Spanish and of Italian descent, amongst many other Ethnicities. Only to put that the Portuguese blood and descent in the People of Uruguay can be much more numerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuzoGraal (talk • contribs) 20:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)