Talk:Ecuador

Waves of vandalism

Why is Ecuador being vandalized like this? Does anyone know? 68.17.237.177 (talk) 23:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

No idea. The protection template needs to last longer. Digirami (talk) 07:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, I just had to change the ethnicity percentages. White people are only a very small minority in Ecuador, and someone keeps changing it by making whites a higher percentage. It's silly. Someone must be getting a laugh out this. Jonie 15 August 2009 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.101.144 (talk)

Please add Jaime Valencia to the list of artist on the main page

Jaime Valencia is a well known painter - indigenous movement. He should be added to the main page as a indigenous movement painter. He has won numerous national awards for his artwork and even sculpted the facade of the Casa de Cultura.

Thank you for your consideration.

-Banchis13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Banchis13 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Poverty in Ecuador

The population under poverty line 38%, not 50 (half) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.158.106.35 (talk) 12:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Ronnie Nader reference on Ecuador

Copying discussion from User_talk:Blupper92

• Please avoid editing the Ecuador article before reading the reasons for deletion of Ronnie Nader. It was already decided that Ronnie Nader is a non-notable subject according to Wikipedia standards. If you still wish to include a reference to it on the Ecuador article, do please show how it is relevant enough to deserve a reference, you could start by addressing the criticisim at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ronnie_Nader. Thanks. --Hilbert137 (talk) 05:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
  • That does not cite any deletion in the article where he is mentioned. Perhaps his name should be deleted, however, the paragraph you intend on deleting now is not, nor is yet resolved. -Preceding unsigned comment added by Blupper92
    • What do you mean by "That does not cite any deletion in the article where he is mentioned"? It was ALREADY DECIDED that the subject Ronnie Nader is NOT notable. If you want to include a reference to it in the Ecuador article, please DO show how it is notable, for example by addressing the criticism at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ronnie_Nader. Thanks. --Hilbert137 (talk) 05:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I think Blupper92's point is that just because it was decided that Nader was not notable enough to justify a separate article, it doesn't mean he can't be mentioned in an article. I am not siding one way or the other on the entry in this article, but I do agree that the deletion discussion cited above is distinct from the issue of the relevance of the disputed material here. For instance, somebody famous has an article, which includes details of his early life, including his parents. His parents may not be notable enough to justify a separate article on each, but that doesn't mean they can't be mentioned in their son's article. Perhaps the material in dispute in this article should be eliminated (due to relevance, verifiability, sources, etc). But that needs to be a distinct analysis. --anietor (talk) 05:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, my whole point was that if the subject is going to be referenced in the Science and technology section it should be first shown that Ronnie Nader has anything to do with any of those subjects. Since there is no reason to believe the guy is neither an astronaut nor a scientist (see the relevant discussion ), I dont see how the subject is relevant to the Science and Technology section. The same goes for the "Ecuadorian Civilian Space agency" reference. Then there's the "World Record" mention, which I also think is irrelevant for the Science/Technology section. All of this should be discussed of course. Thanks. --Hilbert137 (talk) 06:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Fellow contributor User:Hilbert137 implies on deleting a paragraph that is not about Ronnie Nader, which i have neither justified, nor supported. The paragraph the section signals is Ecuadorian Civilian Space Agency not Ronnie Nader.

Copying discussion from User_talk:Anietor

I think Blupper92's point is that just because it was decided that Nader was not notable enough to justify a separate article, it doesn't mean he can't be mentioned in an article.

You should not place a comment thinking for me, that disvalidates the neutrality of an argument, especially when it clearly doesn't claim my argument.--Blupper92 (talk) 06:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying, Hilbert. I now see that the disputed content is broader in scope than just the reference to Nader. I agree that we should probably scrutinize the reliability of the other information, including the Ecuadorian Civilian Space Agency (which has its own wikipedia article). Information on this organization seems rather thin. --anietor (talk) 16:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ethnic Groups in Ecuador

According to the CIA profile, whites only account for 7% of the population NOT 16%. I have changed it, I hope it stays that way. - Rocco, 5:30 30 June 09.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/EC.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.102.185 (talk) 05:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I have been to Ecuador and I have first hand experience that white people are rather hard to find, it is either indigenous or mestizos. I have changed the percentages as well, given the CIA link is a legitimate source and current. Jimbi 15 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.101.144 (talk)

As Rocco says, the World Factbook gives

mestizo (mixed Amerindian and white) 65%, Amerindian 25%, Spanish and others 7%, black 3%

and those are the values I'm reverting it to. (Yes, it was changed again.) Anyone wanting different figures needs to provide a reference. -- Thinking of England (talk) 01:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It appears to me that Ecuadorians don't like to be associated with indegenous or mestizos, somewhat ironic considering they make up 90% of the population (65% Mestizos and 25% Indigenous), so how does the 16% of whites come into it?. Give it up 'cholos', 90% whether you like it or not. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ec.html 60.234.105.112 (talk) 23:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Question about 1960s Social Unrest

The main article says that the 1960s were a time of military intervention. Maybe this could be explained a little bit better. Were there wildcat strikes that required military intervention so buildings were kept secure? I am guessing that import/export problems reared their ugly head at a time like this. Was the military called upon to prevent dockworkers from causing problems with boats? Were railroads being sabotaged? What was the name of the general that authorized the intervention? 216.99.201.76 (talk) 07:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)