User talk:Estaurofila

Estaurofila

Leave your comments here!

Welcome!

Hello, Estaurofila, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Deporte

Hello Estaurofila, how are you. I'm sorry if i did wrong, i try not to revert much here because of my lack of knowledge of the language, but in this case, where do we go for the right etimology, taking into account that the Real academia de la lengua is the official institution of the grammar and lexicography of the Spanish language. I dont know if you mean that after the investigation they found out that the word derived from the Latin, or you mean that they just made it look it derived from the Latin skipping the real source, which in this case it would be the English word sport. I also dont understand what the relation of the Spanish word deporte with Spanglish is, as this is the nominal subject of the article and the sentence was explaining that this word is an spanicized word from the English sport, which in my opinion would be an interesting information, but deflected from the goal, as it reads in coatrack:The existence of a "hook" in a given article is not a good reason to "hang" irrelevant and biased material there. Would in this case and by that logic, the rule of thumb be, per example, to include the word library as Spanglish? Could be, i dont know. Anayway, i'll be more cautious next time as my intention is to help not to cause any trouble. Thanks for your comprehension and excuse my poor English. Rafax (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Continental Shelf Border Dispute

http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_cub_51_2009.htm

^I thought this dispute was settled in 2009, no? Cuba submitted a document detailing the boundaries of the continental shelf. The CIA Factbook also no longer list this as a dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.231.214.89 (talk) 06:24, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The CIA Factbook is not an accurate document. In many cases its information is too general and, in some others, is too biased (verbigratia: in the case of Cuba). The submission by Cuba follows the proceedings of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. After the Cuban submission of its claimed boundaries of the continental shelf, United States of America and Mexico presented theirs, which in some areas of the Gulf of Mexico overlaped those claimed by Cuba. Therefore the differences should be settled by way of a three party negotiation.--Estaurofila (talk) 19:01, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]