Talk:Mexico

Communications

hi im living since always in mexico and yI will tell you that the biggest companies in telecomunications are :

1º telmex
2º unefon
3º Telefonica (movistar)

and right now other companies are getting on the business companies that began as cable companies as:

1º megacable (is more common than unefon) and is getting to be the first rival for telmex in mexico.
2ºtelecable (is being purchased by megacable little by little by sectors)
and more

well the point of this is to tell you that Axtel and Maxcom aren't players on comunication in mexico

Q: What did the Mexican firefighter name his two sons? A: Jose and Hose B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.226.225.68 (talk) 19:03, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 August 2013

187.233.237.30 (talk) 05:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Please change Capital

and largest city Mexico City

19°03′N 99°22′W to 19°28´N 99°08´W

because the first coordinates are wrong and nearest to the city of Cuernavaca.

 Done Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Meaning of Mexico

The article says the meaning is unknown, which is not true. It means "moon's belly button/el ombligo de la luna" and it comes from Nahuatl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.240.214.101 (talk) 12:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

That is a commonly given etymology indeed, however it is not generally believed by Nahuatl specialists, and there are many other proposed etymologies, some of which are more likely than the "navel of the moon". The problem with this etymology is that moon is metz-tli and a compound with "xik-tli" navel should be "metzxikko" and not mexihko. Given the lack of consensus on an etymology, the most responsible is to give the etymology as unknown.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit Request - Introduction

The last paragraph of the first section, the introductory one, is in my opinion not necessary at all.

This paragraph should be either removed or added in a subsection, for example Mexican Economy.

This is the paragraph: "According to Goldman Sachs, by 2050 Mexico is expected to become the world's fifth largest economy.[34] PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) estimated in January 2013 that by 2050 Mexico could be the world's seventh largest economy.[35]"

The main editors of Wikipedia (if any) should realize that multinational corporations, including and particularly banks and management consulting firms, but also lawyers and increasingly NGOs with great focus on lobbying and the so called advocacy organizations(chiefly political and economic influence), are interested in promoting their services and serve their interests, and one just has to read and see the "Economy" section of many countries in Wikipedia to realize how they have been changed over the last years clearly by interested parties. I believe there should be an awareness of this because it would be clearly in detriment of Wikipedia's mission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.4.134 (talk) 09:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Official Name of Mexico

This article used to correctly state in the intro that the official name of Mexico is Estados Unidos Mexicanos, in English United Mexican States. Now however it seems to suggest there are both two Spanish and also two English official names, the other name being in Spanish: Estados Unidos de México or in English United States of Mexico. Just to point out that no reliable citation supports the name Estados Unidos de México as a second official name, a single citation (the New York Times article) suggests "United States of Mexico" might be an alternate translation of of Estados Unidos Mexicanos (alongside the more usual "United Mexican States"). The one citation that does use the term Estados Unidos de México is an infographic, not a reliable source. And as shown in the other citations in the intro, both the Presidency of Mexico website and the CIA World Factbook describe the countries official name only as Estados Unidos Mexicanos, or United Mexican States in English.

Not sure why this alternate official name was added to the intro, especially the Spanish Estados Unidos de México, the intro should be reverted to how it was. Yes, the former President of Mexico did state he wanted to change the name because it was similar in style to the United States of America, not because it was identical in style.--90.199.141.189 (talk) 23:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Just to add the change to the intro was made on 5 September this year by AbelM7.--90.199.141.189 (talk) 23:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I reworded it as "and also referred to as the...", because "Estados Unidos de México" ("United States of Mexico") is not official as the sentence used to say ("officially the United Mexican States [...], and also the United States of Mexico"). Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Mexicans drive on the right?

I live in Mexico and I'm pretty sure we drive on the left.Watersoul99 (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)Watersoul99

Well, my experience is that in Mexico city, people drive all over the road. But the roads are marked for people to drive on the right hand side. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 22:55, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Foreign Politicians

Many country pages (e.g. Uruguay, Egypt, Poland, Bulgaria, Mexico, North Korea) have images of the same foreign politicians e.g. Obama, Bush, Medvedev, Hillary Clinton, Putin, John Kerry etc present. I'm proposing such images should be moved to relevant US- or Russia- relations pages. For example it is more suitable to have two images of John Kerry on a page about US-Egypt relations than on the Egypt page. B. Fairbairn (talk) 15:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

As best I know, there is no prohibition on images being used by multiple pages. For events like multilateral treaties (such as NAFTA), there are obvious reasons that multiple country pages would have pointers to these images. Unless you come up with a better rationale, these images probably do belong in this page. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 01:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Well put. Agreed. B. Fairbairn (talk) 12:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Population.

Mexico's pop. isn't of 113 million people, but of 120 million people according to the most recent census. The census made and published on 2010 marks the pop. of 112 million approx. but according to a census made over the last months, and stated by an official spokesperson, it has increased. The next link, which is supported by Google demonstrates my opinion:

http://www.google.com.mx/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp_pop_totl&hl=es&dl=es&idim=country:MEX:

--189.143.247.230 (talk) 02:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Spanish in Mexico

The language section has this: The country has the largest Spanish-speaking population in the world with almost a third of all Spanish native speakers.
That latter part must not be true. Spanish language has 410 million speakers as first language. A third of that is 136.6 million, while population of Mexixo is just 118.4 million. Mexican Spanish has 105 million, which is 25.6 percent of total Spanish and includes some speakers in the US also. Even if it is cited, that does necessarily mean it is true. 85.217.15.79 (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello 85, you are mostly correct. However, partly to keep ourselves from going nutty trying to research everything in the world personally, wikipedia runs on verifiable info, research that has already been published elsewhere (see WP:V and WP:TRUTH). So what can we do? To make the sentence proper, we would need some kind of cite which gives a more-truthful picture.

  As written, though, I note that the sentence merely claims "almost a third" of all native Spanish speakers. That WP:WEASEL word 'almost' could be stretched pretty far, right? Furthermore, see WP:REALTIME, the sentence doesn't say *when* Mexico allegedly had "almost a third" of the worldwide first-lang population... perhaps the data was from 2000, or something? Whereas the 410M figure that you mention (where did that come from by the way?) might be a more recent 2013 estimate, or something like that. I suggest we rewrite the sentence, to say something like "As of 2xxx, Mexico had the largest Spanish-speaking population (native or as an additional language) of any country in the world.[1] According to $author, as of 2xxx the number of Spanish-as-a-first-language speakers in Mexico was estimated to be 34.56%(insert correct precise figure from source) of the total native-Spanish-speaking population worldwide.[2]" To do that, though, we need some refs to back us up.

  We have an article on Ethnologue which links to their info, and I believe the CIA World Factbook also gives information like this. Can you find refs for [1] and [2], maybe? We want to avoid WP:SYNTH and WP:OR, so we need some researcher saying pretty explicitly these sorts of things. Hope this helps, thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:57, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

"wikipedia runs on verifiable info, research that has already been published elsewhere"

True, but the info must also make sense. If population sources say 25.6 percent of Spanish speakers speak Mexican Spanish, I'd say that definitely is not "almost a third". And, by the way the percent is not original research: I took the figures from respective wikipedia articles (and assumed they were sourced, as they should be) and only counted from there.
85.217.15.79 (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE in Mexico#Metropolitan_areas

We give a bullet-list of all the gory details, about the revised-in-2004 definition of a metropolitan area, but we don't list the cities?!? That seems backwards to me.  :-)   Suggest we move the list of rules to the dedicated article Metropolitan areas of Mexico (they are already replicated there from a quick glance), and simply summarize here that the definition changed in 2004, plus a wikilink. Then, we should list the major metropolises, something like this:

There are 56 defined metro areas of Mexico, using the revised 2004 definition. The largest populace was 20.1M in Greater Mexico City (centered around the capital region's Federal District plus parts of the State of Mexico and Hidalgo), making it one of the ten largest metropolises in the world. Other large metros are 4.4M in Greater Guadalajara (Jalisco), 4.1M in Greater Monterrey (Nuevo León), and 2.7M in Greater Puebla (Puebla and Tlaxcala but excluding the city of Tlaxcala, Tlaxcala itself).

As of the 2010 census data, about half a dozen other metros in Mexico had exceeded one million residents: Greater Toluca (State of Mexico), Greater Tijuana (Baja California), Greater León (Guanajuato), Greater Juárez (Chihuahua), Greater Torreón (Coahuila and Durango), Greater Querétaro (Querétaro), and Greater San Luis Potosí (San Luis Potosí).

The figures (and much of the prose) are pulled straight from the Metropolitan areas of Mexico and List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population articles. Anybody have objections to this rewrite of the subsection? Also, if anybody knows a ref which gives the percent of the population of Mexico that is urban (as opposed to rural), that would help. CIA might have that factoid, perhaps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:57, 15 March 2014 (UTC)