User talk:Cambalachero/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Name change

Change of name, eh? How come? Welcome again then. (Siglo 20 cambalache problemático y febril...). -- Alexf(talk) 17:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I wanted to unify accounts at last, and to get rid of using names of peoples or characters. That seemed like a good idea some years ago, I used nicknames of many characters, historic people or musicians at many web pages, but now I prefer something more "unfocused", even if still pointing my nationality. So I waited to a point where I did not had anything nominated anywhere and no other ongoing discussions, and changed it, this time to last. Besides, I'm tired that everytime I say something remotely related to the Malvinas, users react as if I was a POV warrior because of the username, without actually considering what I do or say. One time, I recategorized an article, and some user reverted me, and then reverted himself, restoring my edit... Cambalachero (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
I guess it makes sense. Not sense on having a name that could be controversial or be taken as POV pusher. In my case I have always used a real name as a brand. This was pointed to me by a marketing expert over 25 years ago. You can still find if you search hard enough and know what to look for, posts I made in boards and things I said online around 1988 or so, yes pre-Google but Google bought many databases over the course of the years and I can still find some of that material. -- Alexf(talk) 18:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Captain

all these redirect to this same page - Yes. Did you give any thought as to why that might be the case? Pdfpdf (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: José Domingo Molina Gómez

Nominations are rarely incorrect unless done disruptively; the article appeared questionable and discussions improve articles or weed them out; if kept, it definitely could use more sourced content. My earlier mistake was getting excited without calmly reading enough of the surrounding material. It was detailed enough to look real, and used an actual person's name who might have conceivably been participated in that alternate reality. I learn more participating in AfDs than clicking on 'Random article', procedurally and content-wise. Dru of Id (talk) 04:59, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Participate in White Latin American's AfD

Hi, congratulations with your new name. Please, participate in this discussion by adding your opinion and arguments why it should be kept, or why it should not. Gracias. --Pablozeta (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 01:26, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Mauricio Macri

I have added information that is true and verifiable regarding a situation that Mr. Macri's administration has been directly involved with. These are facts and should not be removed or tampered with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidglen77 (talkcontribs) 22:42, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


Your GA nomination of Mariano Moreno

The article Mariano Moreno you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Mariano Moreno for things which need to be addressed. Scampioen (talk) 17:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: File source problem with File:Bad weather Titanic in Virtual Sailor.png

I did tag my file as "Own work, Creative Commons Attribution 3.0" (I think that was it). I also noted that I used Fraps to take that as a screenshot. What did I miss? King Of Aviators (talk) 00:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Tagging

Thanks for tagging articles for the indigenous peoples of the Americas wikiproject. If you want to access them at the same time, I've been automatically assessing all ethnic group articles as having "mid" importance. I put in a request for a bot to autotag articles, but there's been no action on that front. Cheers, Uyvsdi (talk) 21:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Quack - The Duck Test Revisited

Hiya, there's some contention on the part of one user over the Platypus on WP:DUCK. After some edit warring: [1] He has taken it to the talk page. He really doesn't want that platypus there. =p Care to weigh in? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie Say Shalom! 07:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Been there, got the Wiki T-shirt

Please explain why you consider the valid topic of Bin Laden death merchandise to be "spam"? 86.172.225.184 (talk) 20:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The links I listed were not even to sites selling merchandise, but to reports of such. And I made my reasoning perfectly clear. Your reasoning, please? 86.172.225.184 (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Griselda Siciliani

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Griselda Siciliani at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK review

Thanks for the review. I've responded to your comment. — KV5Talk • 11:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Interim De Facto Argentina

Two interim millitary presidents (Lacoste, Saint-Jean) are missing from the list of heads of state of Argentina. Because you done the last edit and I don't know what exactly to write, can you put them please?--46.12.13.100 (talk) 20:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Really, why you don't answer to the guy?--178.128.75.48 (talk) 17:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Sorry but I don't believe that you simply didn't see this. I believe that you don't answer to us. I have to add that the third triumvirate is also missing!--178.128.75.48 (talk) 08:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes but it (The Third Triumvirate) is Present in the spanish version of the list, it is consisted by San Martín himself, Matías de Irigoyen (governor of Buenos Aires, no relation to Hipolito Yrigoyen) and Manuel de Sarratea of the First Triumvirate. Also, the list has already two interim presidents: J. M. Guido and R. Al. Lastiri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.128.75.48 (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I changed IP adress today!--46.12.45.67 (talk) 18:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Griselda Siciliani

Materialscientist (talk) 01:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Spanish American wars of independence

Hey, Cambalachero! That portal you created is pretty cool! Thanks. Nice to see a new group of people getting interested in the Latin American history pages here on (English-language) Wikipedia. I've been a bit busy con mis niñas (little ones are very demanding, but it's very enjoyable), but I might get inspired again!TriniMuñoz (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, but I must notice that, although it's beyond the red links state, it's still in development. You can add new entries if you want to help, but try to be selective, add events or biographies according to their state as articles (at least B rank) rather than with the real significance, and images of high resolution where we can say something in the caption about the image itself, rather than about what's depicted in it. I have the intention of nominating it as featured portal sometime in the future. Besides, I realize that my knowledge is mostly about the Argentine theater and nearby areas, if you can point dates or quotes from Mexico, central america or northen south america, that would help a lot. Cambalachero (talk) 22:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Historia de San Martín y de la emancipación sudamericana

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for The Cámpora

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Falkland Islands Article in Arbitration

Having briefly reviewed the article's discussion history, I've identified you as a potentially aggrieved editor whose contributions may have been negatively impacted by the actions of a group of editors who are alleged to be POV-pushing and engaging in WP:GAMES. I invite you to peruse the arbcom request and voice your opinion and experiences, at your leisure. The link is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#WP:NPOV_and_WP:GAMES_in_.22Falkland_Islands.22_and_related_articles

Thank you.Alex79818 (talk) 22:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Revolution of October 8, 1812

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Villa Gesell at DYK

Question for you on your nom of Villa Gesell-see T:DYK for details. Cheers, Khazar (talk) 06:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

White-winged Widowbird

Check the article and DYK now. BarkingMoon (talk) 21:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File mover

It was adopted as an official policy apparently. See the talk page. —James (TalkContribs)11:47am 01:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

talk in Commons

Hallo Cambalachero, you should not use your admin rights to protect a page where you are involved in an edit war commons:User talk:Cambalachero - if you think protection is required please ask other admins to do so. Please unprotect your page therefore.

On the edit war topic: I do think deletion request notifications should be archived properly - as every other content on you talk page except vandalism or talkback or stuff. Previous deletion notifications are a good help for others. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


The problem is that Ferbr1 is a troll that follows me across projects in order to harass my edits with pointless demands. He has nominated many images I uploaded in the past, wich were kept, but he cites them anyway pretending to state that I upload problematic images. Which is the basic reason why the prohibition of removals is not used here: placed incorrectly or spuriously, and then used as an alleged record of a user's misbehavior, is simply trolling.
The protection of my talk page is for just three days, just the basic time to see if he calms down and finds something else to do. In any case, the real conflict is about a certain image, the conflicting use of admin powers would have been if I protected it to avoid nomination, or if I closed the deletion request myself; I did not do either thing. In the case of the talk page WP:HUSH supports my case here. Cambalachero (talk) 02:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hallo again Cambalachero, thank you for your explanation. That changes the situation of course - I did not know because you you did not mention this at all in your revert or protection comment. It is okay for me then. Please reply here if you want to. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Please, you haven't evidenc of your afirmations. I'm not a "troll" or a "harass". If you no delet this defamations of me, I will present a report here. Thanks. Ferbr1 (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Evidence? I said that you follow me across projects to harass me, and that's exactly what you are doing here. You have not edited in months, and spring from out of nowhere to complain about things taking place somewhere else. I could easily point as well the deceptions in your links (such as saying that I did not provide the information required, when you actually deleted it at a point), but that would be beyond the point here.
Feel free to report whatever you want, but have a care: you are not in Spanish wikipedia here. There's considerable leeway there for chasing people around and making a big scene about every edit, but here, things are not the same. read WP:WIKIHOUNDING and WP:HUSH. Those are the policies of this project, the policies of the main project I work at, and the policies I consider when editing in Commons. Cambalachero (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Villa Gesell

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Renewed discussion?

Hello Cambalachero. As you previously participated in the discussion regarding Brazil, I am notifying you in hopes for a renewed discussion at Talk:Brazil. Elockid (Talk) 17:06, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Juan Larrea - check of a detail

Hi, can you confirm that this edit is correct? That is, that Larrea was exiled and had his properties confiscated, not just Alvear? Thanks --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:55, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, "he voted for the incorporation of deputies from other cities into the Junta, an attempt of Saavedra to reduce Moreno's influence within the Junta, although manifesting his rejection to the proposal" - does this mean that Larrea expressed his opposition to the proposal, but voted for it anyway? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The first question, yes, that info is about Larrea. And the second, yes, it may sound weird but that's what happened: Larrea said he was against the proposal, but voted for its approval. Reading between lines, it seems to me that he was extorted to vote for the proposal, so he did so but under protest. But there is no actual historical evidence of Saavedra extorting Larrea, so this explanation would be original research. I do not know either if the legislation of the time included a "vote under protest" clause, so using that term for the sake of clarity may become misleading. Cambalachero (talk) 00:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Perfect, thanks. I've re-worded the section on the Saavedra proposal to make it a little clearer. I think the copyedit is just about complete. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the help Cambalachero (talk) 01:34, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK

Thanks for reviewing the DYK Motor Transport and Traffic Unit. I have addressed the concerns you raised. Could you re-review it. Thanks. A friend called -- CrossTempleJay  → talk 23:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. A friend called-- CrossTempleJay  → talk 10:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

New section in WP Uruguay

Hi Cambalachero, You added a new section named "recognized content in WP Uruguay. Can you give me a hint about what its purpose is? Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 02:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

OK thanks, now it makes sense. And thanks for the historic article. Maybe it should offer a line of explanation as to why a "cry". This was my first question when I heard about the Grito de Asencio and I was told this indicates a battle cry and that there are more Gritos in neighbouring histories (Brazil?). I think this would add interest to the article. Hoverfish Talk 10:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Very enlightening the link to pronunciamiento. Thanks. Hoverfish Talk 15:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

More Larrea

"Larrea resigned his wages from his position as Junta member, and organized the resources for the upcoming war" ... I think this means the war against the royalists, but it might be worth clarifying it a little, because the immediately surrounding text doesn't mention that much. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 06:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Javier González Fraga

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cry of Asencio

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Secret Invasion

Hi. Just letting you know that someone bothered to actually answer your question. Matt Deres (talk) 22:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

May Revolution

The article is using a mix of Spanish and Anglicized names which might be confusing. I don't know if you noticed, but I only added the original, Spanish, name of those royals on the first time they are mentioned, so that readers will understand that the names used are anglicized forms. The type of references which I added are currently the best ones and are the ones used in FAs. They are far more simple and you don't need a lot of work when there are many passages using the same source, for example.

Anyway, I don't know what are you doing but it's quite obvious that you simply don't want to listen to an experienced editor. I was really trying to help and I even asked other editors to copy-edit your article to improve its prose. I had no need or obligation of doing any of that. I could have simply "opposed" as many others around do. But I wish you good luck. --Lecen (talk) 12:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I will consider this for the future, but not for now. I have been working, in the real world, at a project in the university (completely unrelated), and nominated this article when I ended it, thinking that I would have spare time if needed. The problem is that the teacher came with highly irrational complains and a pair of teammates betrayed me, so I'm in risk of having it failed and have to study that topic and make a new project all over again. It's not the same case than the FAC, but it seems very similar (replace all "minus" signs in page ranges with a code that generates a "dash", which looks exactly like the minus sign?), at least in my current state. So, I should better deal only with the real world issue and close this one, and avoid working with others for some time, or I may risk extrapolating over all of you the hatred I feel for that other issue.
I hope you will understand Cambalachero (talk) 13:42, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Fine by me. I would make a nother suggestion: find other editors interested in the subject. FAC is what we call in Brazil a "panelinha" (a closed or an exclusive group). There are a few editors who are always well treated by the delegates while others simply aren't. It's all about politics. Even if you have an article which is clearly up to FA standards, that doesn't mean that it will pass. You need people reviewing and supporting it. You can't simply invite others to support it because it will be considered canvassing (or cheating). This is why I believe you should search for a good copy editor (a good place to find one is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors). Nikkimaria also suggested TCO and Diannaa. I believe they can be easily found in the FAC pages. Once the prose is good and you've finished adding all sources. Ask for a peer review. Once it's done, you'll have at least three different editors (the one who copy edited, the other who made the peer review and the third one who reviewed the article in the GA nomination) to whom you could send an invitation to ask them to review the FAC nomination. Again, good luck. --Lecen (talk) 14:51, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


Damian Ciancio

Restored as per your request Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UltimateCSM1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UltimateCSM1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Puerta - Camaño

Te lo digo en español mejor. Vos decís que no son presidentes, pero yo no estoy poniendo lo contrario en el artículo, los pongo como jefes del Poder Ejecutivo que eran, así que vas a tener que elaborar un argumento antes de deshacerme otra vez.--190.196.49.76 (talk) 17:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Es lo que puse acá arriba, no tiene nada que ver eso con lo que estoy haciendo. Ahí se dice que no son presidentes y yo no estoy poniendo que lo sean. No sé para qué repetís lo mismo. --190.196.49.76 (talk) 19:26, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UltimateCSM1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UltimateCSM1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

re

In my last edition I've edit just one section, the others sections were removed probably due to a bug on Wikipedia software.--Luizdl (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mario Belgrano

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Mario Belgrano has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence that it meets the notability criteria for biographies

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

War of the Pacific Discussion

Cambalachero,

Hello! I see you have made some recent edits to the War of the Pacific article. We are currently having a discussion in the article's talk page, and it would really help if interested editors such as yourself provided your input. Best of wishes.--MarshalN20 | Talk 19:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the discussion is quite lengthy, but the topics and positions are simple.
The current topic of discussion: Did Bolivia declare war on Chile on March 1st?
I'll start by saying that my position is in favor of Bolivia not declaring war on March 1st.
Second, I'll mention the dates are extremely important in this discussion.
Why do I think Bolivia did not declare war on March 1st? I have provided several sources from historians which contest the Chilean view. Of course, I am not denying the Chilean view. There are plenty of sources from both sides regarding March 1. That's why it's a controversy.
The problem: The other user, Keysanger, wants to dismiss this controversy. To him, "Bolivia declared war first", and that's all there is to it for him. I disagree with him because this subject deserves a better explanation. The dates are extremely important, and writing "Bolivia declared war" is not helping anyone other than his POV.
My position:
  • I would like to include all the different points of view, thereby creating the true NPOV.
  • March 1 is the date when Hilarion Daza, Bolivia's president, made his decree.
  • According to my sources, Chile understood the March 1 decree as a declaration of war.
  • Most of the historical debate focuses on the March 1 decree.
  • Some historians (minority view; only 2 or 3) claim Bolivia declared war on the March 14th.
  • Some historians (minority as well; only 2) claim Bolivia declared war on the March 18th; however, according to both Jorge Basadre and the diary of Lavalle (primary source, but it's good as long as it's taken word-for-word), March 18 is the date when the March 1st decree was made public in Chile.
We are not discussing any other topic at this point.
I hope I've been as neutral as possible in this summary of the discussion. My position is firmly in favor of including the NPOV (including all views on the matter), and against Keysanger's position of simply writing "Bolivia declared war first". Obviously, I hope you agree with me, but it's OK if you don't...I would appreciate your comments/suggestions either way. I honestly only want to improve the article. Best of wishes.--MarshalN20 | Talk 20:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

My proposal:

Daza's decree is a controversial subject in the history of the conflict. Chile interpreted the decree as a declaration of war,[1][2] a decision whose legitimacy has faced considerable debate in the historical community. Those in favor of Chile's interpretation, including Erick Goldstein and Hans-Joachim König, explain that decree was a war declaration retaliating Chile's invasion of Bolivian territory.[3][4] This group suggests that Bolivia's declaration of war tried to prevent Chile from receiving further military equipment, and, according to Jorge Basadre, also tried to prevent Peru's diplomatic mediation from succeeding.[5] Those against Chile's interpretation, including Tommaso Caivano and William F. Sater, explain that the decree was nothing more than a security measure given Chile's military invasion.[6][7][8] This group suggests that Chile, in need of a justification for its occupation of Bolivia,[9] purposely distorted Daza's decree.[10][11] Nonetheless, some historians provide different perspectives as to when Bolivia possibly declared war. According to Bruce Farcau, Bolivia's legislature authorized a formal declaration of war on February 27. Farcau, along with Bruce St. John and Martin Sicker, claim that Bolivia then declared war on March 14.[12][13][14] According to William Sater and Robert Scheina, Bolivia's declaration of war took place on March 18,[15][16] but José Antonio de Lavalle (Peruvian senior diplomat and envoy to Chile) writes in his diary that March 18 is the date when Daza's March 1 decree was made public in Chile;[17] a story corroborated by historian Jorge Basadre.[18]

What do you think?--MarshalN20 | Talk 20:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Alejo

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Bandera

Hola, ¿podrías solucionar el siguiente asunto de Commons?: hace algunos años alguien subió esta bandera y basándose en un sitio que tenía información equivocada la llamó Flag of Entre Rios (1820-1821) como si fuera la bandera de Francisco Ramírez, lo que generó que se difunda por las wikis así. Yo he corregido hace algún tiempo su uso como si fuera la bandera de la República de Entre Ríos en las diversas wikis, pero sigue llamándose el archivo (1820-1821). Lo que te pido es que lo renombres a File:Flag of Entre Rios (1833-1853).svg. Saludos y gracias.--Nerêo (talk) 11:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Peninsular War media

Category:Peninsular War media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Dirty War media

Category:Dirty War media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Uruguayan Civil War media

Category:Uruguayan Civil War media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

May Revolution (Brownson)

Hi Cambalachero. Your last two edits of May Revolution seem to have inserted a reference to Brownson but removed him from the Bibliography. Am I overlooking something? --Stfg (talk) 08:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I removed both, the footnote and the book. When I wrote the article I used the other Spanish sources, and then I sought to replace some cases with other sources in English, when I found them. I guess this was a mistake, as many times the English sources say things in a more general way, without the specific level of detail, and then I thought "they talk about this issue" and cite. To remove the template from the top, I'm checking back all the references I added that way, to make sure they actually cite what they are citing; otherwise, I will restore the Spanish sources I used in the first place. The book by Archer, on the other hand, does cite what it cites, so it stays. Cambalachero (talk) 12:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Ah, silly me! I misread the diff. Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 14:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Paraguayan ministers

Hello. Saw you on the WP Paraguay talkpage and thought I'd reach out. I've been creating pages for Paraguayan Ministers, but I can only find limited information. Are you interested in expanding the pages? See Rafael Filizzola for example. Ideally, I'll do the same for every minister in South America. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 04:09, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Cambalachero. You have new messages at WT:MIL.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Dank (push to talk) 19:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

May Revolution ("defeated")

Hello Cambalachero. I've been watching in admiration as you've been working on May Revolution. Just one thing to take up with you: right at the end of May Revolution#International causes, it still says "The Supreme Central Junta was eventually defeated and replaced by a Council of Regency based in Cadiz", whereas the lead section says "The Supreme Junta retreated to Cadiz and dissolved itself, being replaced by the Council of Regency of Spain and the Indies". These really are contradictory, because to be defeated is to lose some kind of conflict with someone else. If a body dissolves itself, it hasn't been defeated. Did you perhaps mean disbanded? Or was there some kind of conflict that hasn't been described? Best, --Stfg (talk) 09:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I just saw what you've done. Yes, it's clear now. --Stfg (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

Symbol support vote.svg Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Juan Larrea a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.

In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Re: DYK nomination of Sleeper Sullivan

Thanks for the review. I have fixed the problem. - PM800 (talk) 23:01, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Cristina Fernández de Kirchner

Category:Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 18:34, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Hi Cambalachero, thank you for your input in the AfD of the Battle of Sauce (1816). I have proposed a multiple merge of all battles of the Luso-Brazilian invasion to the main article. I would appreciate your input there as well, because although the battle articles appear to be too small and beyond hope of any significant expension, IMO the invasion article would benefit a lot from the merge. Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 13:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Expulsion of Montoneros from Plaza de Mayo

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Expulsion of Montoneros from Plaza de Mayo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Expulsion of Montoneros from Plaza de Mayo

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Argentine Civil War media

Category:Argentine Civil War media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 09:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Argentine War of Independence media

Category:Argentine War of Independence media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 09:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Spanish American wars of independence media

Category:Spanish American wars of independence media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 09:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bases y puntos de partida para la organización política de la República Argentina

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Bases y puntos de partida para la organización política de la República Argentina has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The article name is not in english. and this is not Wikibook.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ansuman (talk) 19:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nom for Argentina in World War II

Hi Cambalachero, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Argentina in World War II and I have an issue with referencing. Could you see my comments at the nomination page and reply there after addressing them? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Argentina in World War II

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

May Revolution FAC?

Hello Cambalachero. Are you thinking of putting May Revolution up for FAC soon? I feel that it's more than ready, and that it might benefit more from doing it than from waiting any longer. Best regards, --Stfg (talk) 10:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

May revolution: National causes

Hello again. Just wanted to point out that this diff not only clarifies, it also reverses the meaning. The previous version was saying that Spain couldn't accommodate what was coming from the colonies; the new version says it couldn't the supplies the colonies would need. Or are both these things true?

(P.S. please reply here, not on my page. Thanks.)
Regards, --Stfg (talk) 21:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the correct meaning is the current one. I guess that some user who came when I requested a copyedit misunderstood the original content and changed it to the opposite. If the Americas do not produce certain things, only Spain is allowed to provide it, but Spain does not have enough to provide and send most of it to other places, then shortages are more than likely, they are unavoidable. On the other hand, if Spain was unable to receive the things provided by the viceroyalty, that would not produce shortages. In fact, the only thing that the American colonies produced and Spain retrieved to Europe in significant numbers, was gold. And you know those folks from centuries ago, they never had enough gold, so filling it all in Spain would never be a problem. Cambalachero (talk) 21:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

NPPbarnstar.jpg

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello Cambalachero/Archive 2! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 12:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Your GA nomination of Juan José Castelli

The article Juan José Castelli you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Juan José Castelli for things which need to be addressed. – Quadell (talk) 13:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

...and the nomination has passed. Well done! – Quadell (talk) 16:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Horacio González

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Horacio González. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:PD-AR-Anonymous and Category:PD-AR-Photo

I understand your view of photos as out of copyright under law. Why treating them as not "anonymous work"? Even I presume: photo is included as "work", isn't it? Creation and publication are NOT the same thing either. In fact, some unpublished creations should be out of copyright after 120 years of creation in the United States if anonymous or pseudoanonymous or "work made for hire". Why does "anonymous" count as an author under Argentina law? --Gh87 (talk) 23:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Adanlaserpente.jpg: Is this image free or copyrighted? It had been published on the .gov.ar website @cceder, and I have recently read its terms and conditions in English. What do you think? If copyrighted, then I must do the speedy deletion tag myself: no need to help as I have become skilled to figure out copyrights and templates. --Gh87 (talk) 03:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The source of File:Antonio Cunill Cabanellas.jpg is the museum; File:Alumni1909.PNG is published on the copyrighted website. Are both free or non-free? --Gh87 (talk) 14:07, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Horacio González

I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Horacio González--The image greatly improves the article.However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the reference in the article do not follow Wikipedia guidelines. There is a tutorial on formatting citations at Wikipedia:Referencing.Jipinghe (talk) 18:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: DYK

Thanks for your review: I have replied at Template:Did you know nominations/Old House of Keys. Harrias talk 17:39, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

And again! Harrias talk 18:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Your Good Article nomination of Spanish American wars of independence

I am reviewing the nomination, and have already made some revisions/edits, especially to the lead. The article is very well-done, and I don't foresee turning it down. DCItalk 18:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar! Very kind! TriniMuñoz (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Yatasto relay

Materialscientist (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:History of Argentina stubsCategory:Argentine history stubs

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. SeveroTC 17:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sancti Spiritu (Argentina)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Economic history of Argentina

Hi Cambalachero! I have made some changes to the article Economic history of Argentina recently. Seeing that you're an active member of the Argentine WikiProject and you have contributed to many good articles, I would be grateful for your opinion on the current state of the article. Is it missing anything obvious? Do you think it's up for a GA nomination? Thank you!!--Frère Jacques (talk) 02:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I have implemented most of the improvements you have suggested. However I had problems finding sources for two of them. Aside from that, where do you think more work is needed? Thank you again for your help!--Frère Jacques (talk) 03:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ERP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ Tommaso Caivano, "Historia de la guerra de América entre Chile, Perú y Bolivia", pages 61-62 ([2]): "[Daza's decree], as can be clearly read within it, does not do anything more than dictate a few measures relative to true the state of war in which Bolivia and Chile found themselves after the invasion of [Bolivian territory] by [Chile], and, like it textually and carefully states, "while this state of war imposed by Chile upon Bolivia", was interpreted by Chile in an extremely original manner."
  2. ^ Atilio Sivirichi, "Historia del Perú" (1932), page 193: "[Daza's decree] was skilfully interpreted by the Chilean government as a declaration of war and as a justification for its occupation of the [Bolivian coast]."
  3. ^ "Wars and Peace Treaties, 1816-1991", By Erik Goldstein, page 182: As result of this action Bolivia declared war on Chile (1.March)
  4. ^ "Kleine Geschichte Lateinamerikas", by Hans-Joachim König, Philipp Reclam, Stuttgart, 2009, ISBN 978-3-315-017062-5, page 479: Chilenische Einheiten besetzten die bolivianischen Hafenstadt Antofagasta, in der nur 5% der Bevölkerung bolivianisch waren. Daraufhin erklärte Bolivian am 1. März 1879 den Krieg an.
  5. ^ Jorge Basadre, "Historia de la Republica, La guerra con Chile",
    Pero las pasiones excitadas no se enfriaron. El dí­a 18 de marzo se abrió un nuevo perí­odo de la misión Lavalle. Ese dí­a fue recibido en Santiago, desde Tacna por correo y desde Caldera por telégrafo el decreto expedido por el Presidente Daza y notificado al cuerpo diplomático el 14 de marzo estableciendo el casus belli con Chile con todos sus efectos y consecuencias, junto con otros decretos de ruptura de relaciones mientras durara la guerra y de expulsión y confiscación de bienes chilenos en Bolivia. Esto ocurrió a pesar de que Quiones y Doria Medina acordaron el 5 de marzo las bases para la mediación peruana. La versión chilena fue que Bolivia quiso impedir que Chile se armara. En realidad, Daza buscó la forma de malograr la misión Lavalle. Una vez más la legación peruana en La Paz había fallado porque, según el tratado secreto, un acto de esta especie debía haberse hecho previo acuerdo de las partes. Al no estar declarada la guerra entre Chile y Bolivia, Chile no podía pedir al Perú que se mantuviera neutral. Porque la había declarado Bolivia, la exigencia chilena de neutralidad peruana era inevitable. La declaración boliviana de guerra era (dice el historiador chileno Bulnes) un palo atravesado en las ruedas del carro empujado por Lavalle. La situación que se habí­a ido agravando mes a mes y semana a semana, se complicaba ahora día a dí­a, hora a hora, minuto a minuto. El Perú se veí­a envuelto con rapidez creciente en un conflicto tremendo, sin tiempo casi para presentar la acción conciliatoria propia y sin haber buscado una acción análoga de Argentina, Estados Unidos o las potencias europeas
  6. ^ Tommaso Caivano, "Historia de la guerra de América entre Chile, Perú y Bolivia", pages 61-62 ([3]): "[Daza's decree], as can be clearly read within it, does not do anything more than dictate a few measures relative to true the state of war in which Bolivia and Chile found themselves after the invasion of [Bolivian territory] by [Chile], and, like it textually and carefully states, "while this state of war imposed by Chile upon Bolivia", was interpreted by Chile in an extremely original manner."
  7. ^ Valentín Abecia Baldivieso, "The History of Bolivia in International Relations. Vol 2.," page 73: "But in reality no such declaration of war took place. The decree (Hilarión Daza's decree) to which this characteristic [of declaring war] is attributed only alludes that "Chile has indeed invaded the national territory", stipulating that "all commerce and communication with the Republic of Chile is cut for the duration of the war that [Chile] has promoted upon Bolivia." He later states that Chileans should vacate the country given deadlines in cases of emergency and taking action on property belonging to them. Therefore, it is not correct to attribute that Decree the characteristics of a declaration of war, because under the international law of the time, it was not. The steps taken were for security because Chile had taken Antofagasta. On April 3 the declaration of war by the Chilean Congress was approved, and by the 5th it became known throughout the press."
  8. ^ William F. Sater, "Andean Tragedy", page 28: "Two weeks after the Chilean occupation of Antofagasta, he declared that Chile had imposed "a state of war" on Bolivia. Apparently this decree did not constitute a formal declaration of belligerence, which he announced on 18 March."
  9. ^ Ramiro Prudencio Lizon (Historian and Diplomat) [4]: "In order for Chile to be able to advance further north an official war declaration was necessary. And it wasn't this country but rather Bolivia the one who sent an internal decree which was afterwards interpreted as a true declaration of war. [...] Obviously, Daza had no interest in declaring war, because he knew that Bolivia was not in conditions to affront a campaign against a country much superior in belligerent resources and which counted with a powerful navy."
  10. ^ Mariano Felipe Paz Soldán, "Narracion Historica de la Guerra de Chile contra el Peru y Bolivia". On Page 80 he presents the Bolivian March 1st declaration and explains its nature (at no point describing it as a declaration of war). On Page 86 makes first mention of a declaration of war, this coming from Chile to both Peru and Bolivia. Text from Page 86 ([5]): "War having been declared by Chile, it needed to justify its conduct upon the neutral nations and, at a loss of good reasons founded in law and corroborated by deeds, opted for falsity, presenting a series of situations under a distortion of reality, and others completely false. [Chile] said among other things that Peru did not gesture Bolivia in time to lead it towards a good path and procede with fewer recklesness and violence in its determinations."
  11. ^ Atilio Sivirichi, "Historia del Perú" (1932), page 193: "[Daza's decree] was skilfully interpreted by the Chilean government as a declaration of war and as a justification for its occupation of the [Bolivian coast]."
  12. ^ "The Ten Cents War", Bruce W. Farcau, Praeger Publishers, 2000, page 42: News of the landings reached La Paz whithin few days, but, for reason never quite made clear, Daza withheld any proclamations for another week, allegedlly to avoid putting a damper on the Carnival celebrations then underway, but on 27 February, the Bolivian legislature issued the authorization for a declaration of war, although the formal declaration would not be forthcomming until 14 March. Further, on Page 43 B.W. Farcau states: Lavalle departed Lima on 22 February, well before the Bolivian declaration of war, but nothing irreversible was to occur for some time... and inpage 44 he continues: ...Word have now reached Santiago of the Bolivian declaration of war, and,
  13. ^ "The geopolitics of security in the Americas: hemispheric denial from Monroe ..." by Martin Sicker here: and Bolivia declared war on 14 March 1879
  14. ^ "The Bolivia-Chile-Peru dispute in the Atacama Desert" by Ronald Bruce St. John, Clive H. Schofield here: "Once Bolivia declared war on March 14 1879
  15. ^ William F. Sater, "Andean Tragedy", page 28: "Two weeks after the Chilean occupation of Antofagasta, he declared that Chile had imposed "a state of war" on Bolivia. Apparently this decree did not constitute a formal declaration of belligerence, which he announced on 18 March."
  16. ^ "Latin America's Wars: The age of the caudillo, 1791-1899" By Robert L. Scheina, page 376: On March 18 Bolivia declared war and confiscated all Chilean property in Bolivia and under the terms of a secret treaty ..."
  17. ^ José Antonio Lavalle, "Mi mision en Chile en 1879", Edición, prólogo y notas por Félix Denegri Luna , Lima, Peru, 1979, Instituto de Estudios Histórico-Marítimos del Perú. (José Antonio Lavalle was the Peruvian envoy to Chile to mediate during the crisis and Félix Denegri Luna was a well known Peruvian historian [6]) In the Prolog to the book of the Peruvian envoy to Chile to "mediate" during the crisis, Félix Denegri Luna explains in aprox. 65 pages the situation of the three countries. He wrote in:
    page XLIII El 1° de marzo Bolivia entró en guerra con Chile
    page LVIII La declaración esta fechada en La Paz el 1° de Marzo.
    page LXII Lavalle se indignó cuando se enteró que Daza había declarado la guerra a Chile. La noticia llegada a Santiago dos semanas después ...
    The text of envoy Lavalle is a primary source, but allow me a transgression of this important rule of Wikipedia only in order to get a vivid view of the situation at that time. Lavalle says in page 84:
    En la mañana del 18 recibí una carta verbal* del señor ministro Fierro [Chilean Minister for Foreign Affairs] pidiéndome que le viese a las 12 del día siguiente, para tener una conferencia relativa al objeto de mi mision, y pocos momentos después llegó a mis manos un suplemento del "Diario Oficial", en el que se anunciaba que el ministro de relaciones exteriores había recibido desde Tacna, por medio de correos, y desde Caldera por el telegráfo, el decreto expedido por el presidente de Bolivia en 1° del mes de marzo, que seguía, en el cual establecíase por parte de esa nación el "casus belli" con Chile, con todos sus efectos y consequencias
  18. ^ Jorge Basadre, "Historia de la Republica, La guerra con Chile",
    Pero las pasiones excitadas no se enfriaron. El dí­a 18 de marzo se abrió un nuevo perí­odo de la misión Lavalle. Ese dí­a fue recibido en Santiago, desde Tacna por correo y desde Caldera por telégrafo el decreto expedido por el Presidente Daza y notificado al cuerpo diplomático el 14 de marzo estableciendo el casus belli con Chile con todos sus efectos y consecuencias, junto con otros decretos de ruptura de relaciones mientras durara la guerra y de expulsión y confiscación de bienes chilenos en Bolivia. Esto ocurrió a pesar de que Quiones y Doria Medina acordaron el 5 de marzo las bases para la mediación peruana. La versión chilena fue que Bolivia quiso impedir que Chile se armara. En realidad, Daza buscó la forma de malograr la misión Lavalle. Una vez más la legación peruana en La Paz había fallado porque, según el tratado secreto, un acto de esta especie debía haberse hecho previo acuerdo de las partes. Al no estar declarada la guerra entre Chile y Bolivia, Chile no podía pedir al Perú que se mantuviera neutral. Porque la había declarado Bolivia, la exigencia chilena de neutralidad peruana era inevitable. La declaración boliviana de guerra era (dice el historiador chileno Bulnes) un palo atravesado en las ruedas del carro empujado por Lavalle. La situación que se habí­a ido agravando mes a mes y semana a semana, se complicaba ahora día a dí­a, hora a hora, minuto a minuto. El Perú se veí­a envuelto con rapidez creciente en un conflicto tremendo, sin tiempo casi para presentar la acción conciliatoria propia y sin haber buscado una acción análoga de Argentina, Estados Unidos o las potencias europeas
    Tranlation by Keysanger:
    ...on 18 March was the begin of a new phase in Lavalle's mission. This day was received in Santiago from Tacna by post and from Caldera by telegram Daza's decree that notified on 14 March all diplomats about the casus belli against Chile with all efects and consequences, together with other decrees of rupture of relations as long as the war lasted and of expulsion of Chileans and confiscation of his goods. The Chilean version saw that Bolivia ['s declaration of war] aimed to impede the purchase of weapons to Chile. In reality, Daza intended to eliminate Lavalle's mission. Once again the Peruvian legation in La Paz [Bolivia] failed because in accordance with the treaty such act [declaration of war] should have been done in agreement between both [Peru and Bolivia]. As long as no state of war between Chile and Bolivia existed , Chile couldn't require neutrality from Peru. Since Bolivia declared the war on Chile, the Chilean request of Peruvian neutrality was inevitable. The Bolivian declaration of war on Chile was (as stated by Chilean historian Bulnes) a traverse fault through the wheel of Lavalle's handkart. The situation worsened month to month ...