Jump to content

Talk:Mexico

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 85.217.15.79 (talk) at 18:56, 14 March 2014 (→‎Spanish in Mexico: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Former featured article candidateMexico is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
June 4, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate


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)[reply]

Dubious citations

There are some dubious statements in the article that cite unlinked sources. There is simply a last name, a year and a number. No publication is listed, no link to the source. This gives the impression that a statement is reliably sourced when in fact there is no way to ascertain the credibility of the source or if it even exists.

For example, under the section "demographics", we see:

"The word "mestizo" is sometimes used with the meaning of a person with mixed indigenous and European blood. This usage does not conform to the Mexican social reality where a person of pure indigenous genetic heritage would be considered Mestizo either by rejecting his indigenous culture or by not speaking an indigenous language,[188] and a person with a very low percentage of indigenous genetic heritage would be considered fully indigenous either by speaking an indigenous language or by identifying with a particular indigenous cultural heritage.[189]"

The references in question simply state:

188. ^ Bartolomé (1996:2)

189. ^ Knight (1990:73)

Who are these people? What is the publication? It seems to me that the claim that whether a person would be considered mestizo or not is based more on language than genetic heritage is rather surprising and one I would like to see a credible reference that supports it, not simply two surnames with a what is presumably the publication date and page number of some unspecified journal. These are but two examples; the article is full of similarly ambiguous, worthless references. What's to stop someone from adding a section called "Monsters of Mexico", and writing:

"Mexico is home to several species of monsters. Of these, only Q is indigenous to Mexico[350]. Godzilla and Rodan immigrated from Japan in the 1950s[351], and King Kong arrived some time later from Africa.[352]"

350. ^ Johnson (1996:2)

351. ^ Davis (1990:73)

352. ^ Jones (1996:2)

Ambiguous and unverifiable citations should be corrected to adequately indicate what is being cited or else removed, along with the questionable article items they are intended to support. CannotFindAName (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The example you enquired about should be fixed now.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 15 March 2013

SORRY, I COULDN´T HELP BUT NOTICE THAT THERE IS A PART WHERE IT SAYS THAT MEXICO IS THE SECOND MOST UNEQUAL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT TRUE, MEXICO IS THE SECOND MOST UNEQUAL COUNTRY FROM THE 34 MEMBERS IN THE OECD. 148.228.120.73 (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I changed to it to indicate that it is the second most unequal country among the OECD countries.Ssbbplayer (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 2 August 2013

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]