User talk:Pablo-flores/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

About the Armenian genocide article

I appologize for the answer you recieved in the talk page, consider that the answer you recieved comes from an ultra-nationalist Turk that is there to creat only troubles. The situation will, I hope, change in future and I will be taking dispositions to make that change and I will be needing communitee support for that, if you are interested I will tell you more when times come. Regards. Fad (ix) 19:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

$1,000 millions

Hi Pablo,

Although I will not change the article, please note your message on terminology is incorrect and outdated. While the term "thousand million" may be correct in the Spanish language and on Spanish Wikipedia, that is not the case for modern English syntax and hence not for English Wikipedia pages either.

Perhaps several decades ago "billions" was ambiguous in some countries, but this is no longer the case. I cite not only sources from the US and the UK (ie. universal across the BBC, the FT & The Economist), but several other newspapers and websites from other English speaking areas such as Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, South Africa and India (www.ians.in). Furthermore, the English language websites of other news organizations such as the AFP in France, Reuters, the Islamic Republic News Service, Deutsche Welle, Xinhuanet, and Pravda all use the term "billions".

Please also note that the European Union's official website uses the term "billions" in place of the antiquated "thousand-million", as do the websites of the United Nations even FIFA!

Lastly, I just checked the website of Argentina's Embassy in the UK, and their press reports (in English) also use the term "billions".

As a native English speaker (who has never lived in the US), using the term "thousand million" is incorrect and thus reads badly. I fear that if you insist on keeping your articles with the obsolescent term "thousand-millions" you will continue to keep having native English speakers editing this term. As the article is in English, I would recommend you present the numbers in "billions" which is consistent with modern English across the English speaking community.

Steve H.

>Hi, I'm a participant of WikiProject Argentina. Please don't change "thousand millions" to >"billions" in articles, as you did in Néstor Kirchner. Most of our articles have been written >using that format or standardized like that. "Billion" is used only in the U.S. and more recently >in the UK; for the rest of the world the word is ambiguous, while "thousand million" is not. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 13:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Cellulose plant conflict between Argentina and Uruguay

Hello. I note that you reverted my category edit on this article. I am trying to rationalise Category:Pollution and associated subcats which is why I created Category:Pollution by country. This is attempt to make it easier to navigate through the categories. Category:Pollution by country is linked to Category:Water pollution. Alan Liefting 22:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not understand your comment

In your last reversion of my correction to whatever you had writen before you included a comment saying "you need to discuss this things" or something like that. What do I need to discuss and with whom? I was mostly taking away adjectives and qualifications that are included in the text and represent POVs. I am trying to make the article less obviously partisan by only taking away qualifications like "historical" or any of the many adjectives that were included in the text and were unwarranted. I still think the article is partisan but at least not that obvious. I do not understand who do I have to discuss this with. Is there some sort of authority ruling over this particular page? Sorry for the tone, but I find the whole process of just reverting what I write truly authoritarian. If you want to discuss any point, OK but just reverting my stuff and telling me I have to seek some sort of acceptance from someone (who?) is not what I expect from people contributing to an open source media. Best, 16:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)Deriva

(This has been dealt with at Talk:Néstor Kirchner. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 21:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC))

HOW DARE YOU

HOW DARE YOU DELETE THE ECC PAGE. PEOPLE DIED FOR ECC! YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED! —This unsigned comment was added by ECCFOLIFE22 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 3 April 2006.

For Nestor Kirchner article

I want that the Spanish version of Néstor Kirchner to translate to English then it will post to English version of Néstor Kirchner.--Joseph Solis 01:52 UTC

Why have you blocked me?

I have over 1000 edits to my name, none of which have been accused of being vandalism before. Can you please get rid of this block? Vizjim 21:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry, I see that you've barred the AOL IP address. Can you please edit the talk page at Linda Hogan as I was halfway through a requested move? It just needs { { move|Linda Hogan (TV) } } added there. Cheers Vizjim 21:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

It's all fixed now, I hope -- though I retitled in a slightly different and I hope more helpful way. -- Hoary 03:00, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Portal

I invite you to participate on the manainance of the Portal:Argentina, and hope you wish to help.

Argentino 13:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

195.93.21.5

How many poeople share this IP address? Its very confusing. I never did anything bad to wikipedia, i dont konw why im getting accused -- 195.93.21.5 17:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Not replying over there for obvious reasons... Read the notice on top of the talk page. I suggest you ask AOL why it has such a ridiculous way of assigning IPs. Try getting a registered username; you don't need to give your real name or email. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 18:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Argentine demographics

Hi, sorry for bothering. I was trying to fix a couple of things on Argentine demographics when a user (Al-Andalus) reverted all my contributions. As an Argentine and member of the WikiProject Argentina, can you please take a look at Talk:Demographics of Argentina and help me to improve the page? If you can't, thanks for your time anyway! Goodbye. —This We'll Defend (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Ultimate EAW

I noticed that you deleted Ultimate EAW after it's AfD, yet it's Talk page was not deleted. Does the talk page remain or was it supposed to be deleted?--SirNuke 00:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Protection

Hey, I protected Argentina and Demographics of Argentina. I don't know exactly what's going on but the edit war is now a little aggravating. I see that you're participating and I know that you'll be able to help everybody get a consensus.

Let me know how I can help, or if you want me to unprotect.

Sebastian Kessel Talk 20:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Cool Pablo, I'll keep an eye on what's going on for a few days... Sometimes this discussions can get very tiring...

Sebastian Kessel Talk 21:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

I said he and some sockpuppets, not he and his sockpuppets. I firmly believe that two of those are sockpuppets, though I never accused him of being either the puppet or puppetmaster. You will also notice that it was user Telex (one of many users helping to restore what kept being reverted to outdated editions) who stated in his edition fix that it was sockpuppets working in cooperation with each other to delete all the corroborated information from the article, thus wiping the article clean of any mention of the past or present indigenous population, and all other information. So I take some offence at the fact that you insinuate that I have been anything but civil to the users in question, considering the circumstances.

Please see their history of contributions for insight as to what they've been up to. You'll realise that other users have had to rever even project pages that they've been blanking, including here at WP:3RR (whose report was baseless in the first place). They've been going around making "third", "fourth" and "last" baseless and empty warnings to block users, while not being admins and thus misrepresenting themselves. Just see my talk page for examples, and see the history of their talk pages (the unreverted versions) to see my pleads with the users in question. Al-Andalus 20:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC).

Vandalism

Iv'e just posted this to Mariano, but i've seen you are "online" so i copied for you too:
I've finded out that this IP (170.211.210.120) has 3 edits. Every edit is vandalism, including vandalism over our flag. I write you because when I was 10, like every argentinian from Argentina, have promised, among other things, to "love her, obey her and protect her". Can you block it, or admins can block users only? Thanks,--Argentino (talk/cont.) 20:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: Si, ya se q tal vez no te gusten los motivos...

Sourcing articles - guidelines?

I see that you added the following to Primero River "This article or section does not cite its references or sources. You can help Wikipedia by introducing appropriate citations." Please indicate what is the meaning of the request. I do not see why anything in the article should be sourced unless there is a request for "citation needed" to resolve a dispute (I did add a link to the 2006 M&M issue). Please advise. Saludos.

OK. The article was not translated from Spanish, I wrote it after a visit to Cordoba, and it would be very difficult for me now to try and re-assemble all the sources. Also: my writing is not necessarily less authoritative than the sources scattered around the Internet that some articles refer to. Please see my recent edits to Talk:Demographics of Argentina to see an obvious example. I do not see why all articles should be sourced; specific items do need references, but it would be a stretch to ask anybody to provide a reference on the location of the Bombonera. Saludos again, elpincha 15:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Learning Spanish link

Dear Pablo,

I'm new to Wikipedia, so please excuse me if I don't follow the right procedures. I saw on the Spanish_language page that there is a page of Babylon-Idiomas, offering Spanish courses abroad. As Linguaschools does offers this services as well (even better), I placed a link to www.linguaschools.com on the section were Babylon have their link. The link was deleted. What is the procedure to get the link there. In other words, what did Babylon Idiomas what we should have done?

With kind regards,

Martin

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.238.64.155 (talk • contribs) 05:51, 12 May 2006.

Spanish phonetics vs phonemics

Would you please demonstrate to me in some published source where it describes the Spanish vowels as being phonetically not [a], [e], [i], [o], [u]? Every single academic paper I've seen that utilises IPA as its phonetic transcription uses them, and not ε or ɔ (although most linguistic studies tend to avoid phonetic transcription, or use the Hispanic Linguistics system. See this chart from the University of Iowa on IPA<->HL [1], this document on phonetic transcription from the Red Española de Investigación y Desarrollo [2] and this, from Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona [3], the latter sourced at the linguistics department at the Universitat de Lleida.

The fact that I left /b/ as [β̞], or /ch/ as [tʃ] should have made it quite clear I was not confusing phonetic (always written in []) and phonemic (always in //). Please document a reputable source that describes the Spanish vowel system in IPA as you have, or accept [a], [e], [i], [o], [u] as the standard IPA phonetic transcription of the same vowels. It should be noted as well that my socio-linguistics professor has never once corrected the phonetic transcriptions in my research on the basis of incorrect vowel labeling, yet she hails from roughly the same region as you do...Matthew Stuckwisch 06:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've made the last change. However, I did notice three things two of which might require some discussion on the Spanish page but figure I'll ask your POV first. Anyways, the one that doesn't really require discussion is that in IPA, if you mark a syllable as being accented with [ˈ], then you don't have to mark the syllable break, eg, /está/ → [esˈta]. [es.ˈta] isn't technically wrong, but just redundant, since [ˈ] can only appear between syllables.... That actually might not even be a comment for you since I didn't check for sure who was throwing it in. Anyways, the one requiring comments is our transcription of the Don Quijote passage. We break each word individually, even though probably only a child would read it broken as it is in the IPA. I feel we should properly mark synalephas or other features, eg ‹va a hacer› → /vaːθer/, since those would exist in reading for most people. Lastly, either on that page or the Spanish phonetics page (or a different one entirely), we should discuss the Hispanic Linguistics system of phonetic transcription (see Fonética y Fonología Españolas by uh...someone who I don't have time to look up their name) lol, and I'm curious as to your opinion on how we should organise it (hopefully not a discussion on the language page since it's already too long)

Vanity

This looks like a vanity page to me. --200.45.6.74 15:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Users are allowed to write about themselves on their own talk pages. See "When vanity is allowed" on vanity page.--CRGreathouse 19:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I'm positive that this anonymous user is the same as 200.45.6.125 (talk · contribs). S/he uses many IPs and now appears to be rather angry because I've taken upon myself the burden of blocking them all whenever s/he vandalizes. Given this history, maliciously altering my user page would warrant an immediate block, but I'm feeling nice today. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 21:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

False Edit Summaries

This user, User:Striver, on a regular basis adds false edit summaries claiming "vandalism" when there is no vandalism. I have yet to see any admin even give him a warning of a block for these edit summaries and to be quite honest the fact that this user is allowed to break with established Wikipedia policy without so much as a warning from an admin really discourages me from participating in this project. Can one of you admins please at least warn him of a block for this kind of action? I posted the incident of false edit summaries by this user some time ago on AN/I but it was ignored. I came to you specifically because 1) I've never talked to you and 2) you are not involved in the dispute, to act as some kind of a mediator. There are several other admins involved in this dispute with this user (User:MONGO, User:Tom harrison, User:Will Beback, to a lesser degree User:Stifle, and possibly a few others) which I didn't ask to warn this user because obviously their actions would look biased.

Here is a list of the most recent false edit summary of "vandalism" or otherwise hostile edit summaries that this user has created with the first one being the most recent one. He also has many others which I didn't list where he says "omitting info" or "removing info", as you can see from the first one he considers another editor removing his contributions to be "vandalism" so those to can be considered false edit summaries:

  • dont remove info, removing info is vandalism [4]
  • nonsense [5] (after removing a prod tag)
  • rv bad faith removal of info, meaning "rv vandalism" [6]
  • Dont. [7]
  • rv bad faith removal of info, meaning "rv vandalism" [8]
  • rv, dont delete info. [9]
  • rv blatant bad-faith vandalism [10]
  • rv lie [11]
  • rv vandal [12]
  • rv vandalism [13]
  • rv vandalism [14]


This is from February when he violated WP:POINT by putting afd tags on articles because someone put an afd tag on one of his articles, again he wasn't so much as consulted by an administrator let alone given a block.

wtf, why not including this as well:

Lets vote on all of them, why only the Muslim lists? --Striver 04:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC) (For quote see AFD for Muslim Athletes)

When the contibutors to these pages saw what he was doing they went to take off the afd tags that he put up to make a point and he reverted it and again put Rv Vandalism on the edit history.

Sure they are [15]....do you see how this can get on one's nerves. This same thing happened in earlier verisons of the article with another user who did not want to have another revert war with this user and let this user have his way. It is not fair that users are able to own articles in this manner.

The links dont claim anything, they are just links. Removing them on claims that they are NOT relevant is American pov pushing. [16]--Jersey Devil 09:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

These attacks are getting out of hand. What is this? 6 houres and no afd? C'mon, JD, wake up! --Striver 23:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Talk:InfoWars--Jersey Devil 05:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Another hostile edit summary after an IP user removed a statement about the 4.5 out of 5 star ranking that the author recieved from amazon users (which in my opinion also doesn't belong in the article):

The Amazon rating sentence provided no useful information about Griffin's work, and cloaks the author's subjective value judgements (e.g. that Griffin's work is "objective") by imputing it to "readers IP User

rv pov edit. Your arguement is your pov, the data is objective Striver [17]--Jersey Devil 21:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

More edit warring and I think that it is fair to say that the last edit summary was hostile. If Tom Harrison were to give this user a block for edit warring and repeated incivility in edit summaries he would be attacked by a group of "9/11 truth" wikipedians as being a "fascist" admin and thus coerced from doing what he is suppose to do. This isn't fair to the rest of us that try hard to abide by Wikipedia policy, any other user would have been blocked for this long ago.:

  • Original addition [18]
  • Prison planet opinions are representative for the entire 9/11 movement [19]
  • Dont remove critique. [20]--Jersey Devil 00:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Lingüística

Hola, Pablo. Como sé que te copa la fonética, y no es exactamente "mi" área de la lingüística, quería hacerte un par de consultas acerca de algunos temas que me surgieron al intentar comenzar a reescribir es:Ortografía del español. Sé también que ahí hay temas que deberían ir mejor en es:Fonología del español, pero dudo de que ese artículo se escriba rápidamente y en todo caso quisiera dejar éste lo más completo posible.

Los fenómenos de lenición de las consonantes plosivas en posición medial están bien documentados en las sonoras; me cuesta más encontrar referencias a la lenición de las sordas, que hacen que por ejemplo [k] frente a otra plosiva no se libere completamente, y "acto" se pronuncie ['ak?to], no ['akto]. Capaz vos tenés alguna idea de material para verificar mis impresiones.

Otro tema que realmente me gustaría tratar son las vocales del rioplatense, pero ahí me temo que estamos bastante faltos de fuentes; vi tu discusión con Guifa al respecto. Me interesaba, entre otras cosas, la nasalización general de las vocales en el "dialecto de Barrio Norte" (donde "gordo" se lee ['ɰõɾ.ðõ], y "re-bien" ['re'βjã]), pero ignoro por completo si hay alguien que se haya dedicado a estudiarlo.

Te estaría agradecido si te cabe echar una mano. Un saludo, Taragüí @ 09:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:217.98.20.20 ==—

but the right word is "depreciation" not "devaluation"! devaluation is when the exchange rate is set and it changes only by CB's will, depreciation is when exchange rate changes in floating exchange rate by means of market

Issue solved, term corrected in a few places: depreciation is more common than devaluation in this sense. Thanks for the correction. (This is just to mark the discussion as closed.) —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

argentina

I have a question

Could you give me the exact internet pages where you got the information to make your image of the national debt in Argentina and are there also internet pages that give information about the national debt in 1990-1993?

Please reply to stijnhoogwout [at] hotmail [dot] com

Greetings,

Stijn Hoogwout

Emocionado en Alemania!

Hola Pablo, es una tarde lluviosa y gris aquí en Stuttgart, en el suroeste alemán. Un poquito melancólico y buscando datos sobre mi ciudad natal encuentro las fotos que hiciste de ella. Qué lindas! Algunas cargadas con un significado especial para mi, como las que tomaste de la Estación Barrio Vila. Y las fotos del centro, con sus hermosas mansiones!. La intención de estas pocas líneas es simplemente felicitarte y agradecerte por haberte tomado el trabajo e invertido tu tiempo en mostrar al mundo a través de Wilkipedia a mi querida Rosario. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.212.137.223 (talk • contribs) 12:39, 26 May 2006.

Did you wrote this?

(deleted content found in the following link:) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:200.43.201.152&diff=cur --200.43.201.152 01:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

As to your question in my talk page, yes, I wrote the text above. But you already knew that. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 02:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Use of blocks to gain an advantage in a content dispute is strictly prohibited. --200.82.18.171 12:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
And trying to game the system is dishonest. You are a vandal, and the evidence showing that is overwhelming; if it weren't, I wouldn't have resorted to blocking your multiple IPs on the spot. Stop acting like a vandal and you won't be blocked anymore. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 13:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Show me the evidence of your charges. --200.82.18.171 13:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

For the record, 200.82.18.171 (talk · contribs) has tacitly accepted that he's using multiple IPs (he uses one IPA to complain about the block of another one) and he's dumped the same trash on the talk page of Vsmith (talk · contribs), asking him to ban me. I won't reply to this harassment anymore, though I'm keeping this for everyone to see. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Advise on Dodging the 3RR Wikipedia Policy

I agree. If you need a revert anywhere, never hesitate to ask me to take a look. I dont promise ill revert, but ill take a good look. btw, take a look at this --Striver 00:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC) [21]

C'mon now, this is enough. What other users are able to get away with this type of stuff. It isn't fair to the rest of us.--Jersey Devil 04:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I just thought that they might be interpreted as personal attacks. I'm just tired of the fact that any other user would have been given several blocks long ago and think that it is extremely unfair to other users who work hard to keep a clean record here. Anyway, I'll stop adding content here regarding that particular issue. Thanks.--Jersey Devil 22:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Regarding the "this could evolve into an RFC" comment, it already has, it happened a year ago before I ever contacted the user. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Striver he also launched an RFC against me some time ago Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil.--Jersey Devil 22:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Joakim Ziegler's edits

I think you're mistaken, I've added no nonsense or vandalism to the Nestor Kirchner page, however, I did recently revert some nonsense/vandalism. Maybe you should recheck the edit log. JZ 21:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hm, looks like I screwed up, I was actually trying to revert that comment, but it looks like someone had already fixed it before me, and then I actually managed to revert to the wrong revision. That's stupid of me, sorry. And no, I don't generally vandalize, as you can see from my contributions. JZ 22:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Página de Cha Cha Cha

Excelentes las modificaciones que le hiciste al artículo. Felicitaciones y gracias! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bananabruno (talk • contribs) 11:06, 8 June 2006.

Category sorting in Category:Informal settlements

Actually, I was following the guideline in Wikipedia:Categorization which states: "Using the asterisks or a space after the pipe is the customary way to categorize an article in a category with the same name, indicating that the article is the main topic article for that specific category."

Each one of those articles is the term used in a certain area to describe the topic of Category:Informal settlements. All the other articles in that category are about specific "informal settlements", rather than the actual topic of "informal settlements". 70.231.130.212 23:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:Placebox-begin

Hi Pablo,

I was looking at some of the pages that have the template and something seems weird. I am using Firefox 1.0.6 and looking at Template talk:Placebox-begin I see that there is no border in the right side of the box. I am not very familiar with tables and such. Would you be able to look at it? Thanks. Gadig 15:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Anon-IP vandal

I have blocked User:200.43.201.182 after a string of vandalism, and pasted in the same warning you have placed on other, similar IP's talk pages. I blocked the IP in question for 24 hours, however if you feel that the block should be for longer (being more familiar with the situation than I), then do feel free to unblock and reblock at your discretion. Cheers. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 00:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I have detected a few of these as well and blocked so that they will all expire at the same time as your block. Let me know if you want any kind of documentation or anything; this could be a case for a range-block but I fear we may be blocking an entire Latin American country piece by piece... (ESkog)(Talk) 15:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pablo-flores/Archive_4&oldid=1190095317"