Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Colombia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Colombia (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Colombia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colombia related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.


Hi! I just wanted to let you guys know I just originated the Teresa Pizarro de Angulo article. Fix it as you deem needed.

Thank you and God bless you! Sincerely yours, Antonio Martino Martin

Article alerts[edit]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:58, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Architecture of Colombia[edit]

Hi, I've just updated the article on Architecture of Colombia, writing a brief introduction on the subject. I also deleted things which I thing to be innacurate, especially the paragraph dealing with the nineteenth century, and tried to lay out the main topics, which are to be found in any serious publication on the matter. Unfortunately, I do not live in Colombia at the moment and thus do not have bibliography in order to properly enhance the article. Any of you guys out there who might want to help expanding it, I strongly suggest you to have a look at the work of architect and historian Germán Tellez.

Assessment completed (nearly)[edit]

After a busy few weeks I have finally cleared the backlog of unassessed articles related to WikiProject Colombia. If you look at the assessment log under the "Things to do" section, you'll see there are only 23 unassessed articles left in it: three "timeline" articles relating to Bogotá, Cali and Cartagena, which I'm not sure are better classified as articles or lists; and 20 stub articles relating to neighbo(u)rhoods of Bogotá – I think most can be put up for deletion or merger into their respective localidades as they are unlikely to expand further, but Tisquesusa and other members of the project may want to have their say first. There is still work to do: I've found the most of the 860 players in Category:Colombian footballers are not tagged with the project, so I am slowly working my way through them (even though most are badly-written and out of date stubs that won't expand much further).

Some people might not agree with my assessment of importance, but we can argue about that later: at least the articles are now tagged and we have an idea of which are the priority ones to work on... we can discuss whether the importance should be raised or lowered for some articles. One thing that puzzles me is the original WikiProject rating for cities/towns/corregimientos, as stated here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Colombia/Assessment/how to assess WP:COL articles#Geography: (rate as top). With very, very few exceptions corregimientos will be extremely difficult to find any sources for, and 90% of towns/municipalities will remain stub articles with just basic information about climate and population, so I'm not sure why they were all allocated high or mid-importance. It seems bizarre to me that Inírida, a town of fewer than 20,000 people, has the same top-importance rating as Bogotá (and ranked above Buenaventura) simply because both are departmental capitals – it makes more sense to me to rank importance based on population, which would put the most obviously high-priority cities at the top: Bogotá, Medellín, Cali, Barranquilla, Cartagena, and maybe adding Cúcuta and Bucaramanga to the list. Obviously some smaller towns punch above their weight in terms of importance – Mompós, Villa de Leyva – but in general it seems to me a better way of classifying importance. Richard3120 (talk) 16:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the hard and unpleasant work, Richard. Indeed, I must say I don't agree with many categories, but that is not your fault, you are just using the "consensus" established before by others. IMHO an article should be assessed individually and relatively. A "stub" is a page that lists just the most basic facts and nothing more. So the many municipalities. As soon as there is something to read, some decent informative text, it is not a stub anymore. And it cannot be both ways; if an article with only an unfilled infobox is a "stub" then an article that lists much more cannot be also a stub.
On the relative side; I (in)tend to write articles as completely as possible, using original sources, not es:wiki, and for most of them there are no other sources to find with Google. So to call that a "start" (or even a "stub", like I am some kind of bot) is unfair. E.g. Taganga. I researched all of the available information, made it into a long and -I hope- interesting article, added 19 (!) new photos of my own to it and referenced it heavily. You called it a "start" -and I guess that is based on absolute criteria- which I think do have no relevance. An article of that length and content about let's say London, UK or New York City indeed would be a "start", because there is so much more to write. About a village of 5000 people it actually is much more than a start. It's not the amount of characters/bytes that count, but the amount of content relative to the available information/possible content. Same for the Muisca bitaeniata (a beetle where there was only 1 (!) specimen found, ever!), where I even read the old (1844) French text and compiled it into a short but complete article. If it is called a "stub" while at the same time a bot-generated infobox-only article is also a "stub", you can imagine I feel a bit offended.
But as long as the articles themselves (yet on the Talk page) are not spoiled with ugly tags that are useless anyway (any article on Wikipedia should be falling under "this article is a stub, you're invited to expand it", not just those deemed a stub, it's ok. The Talk page is a good place to organise those articles and categorise them to have a list of "to-do" work.
But as said, this is no criticism to you or your hard work, I know the autism of many of the mods and admins here who have "defined" those tight-ass "rules", "norms" and "guidelines". I just don't respect them, which is not to say that I don't respect your work, I do.
Yesterday I found quite some really really crappy articles and I deleted a lot of machine translation shite. I am a bit amazed they were allowed for so long on Wikipedia, while at the same time decent articles are labeled and tagged to death with ugly and often irrelevant templates. Sogamoso, Duitama, the Salt Cathedral of Zipaquirá etc. are pages that should have been much better already by now. Cheers, Tisquesusa (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Adding to this some more musings; I find it quite sad that most of the GA articles about Colombia are about Shakira and her records and other entertainment stuff. Some of the cities (e.g. Cúcuta) should be made GA at least, and other interesting stuff too. I realise this is my POV but I am far from the only one who likes to read about "encyclopedical" things and not so much about the huge entertainment industry that doesn't need Wikipedia anyway. The Colombia task force unfortunately seems very small, especially compared to other countries of similar size. For the Muisca it works in my favour because there's lot of white space to fill and I like to do that, but if you compare Colombia to other countries as a whole it's quite poor. Even with the "Ibero-American contest" there's not much on Colombia and what is there is not too relevant either. I hope we get more contributors like you and me who are taking up some work and time and effort. It's worth it, I guess. Tisquesusa (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
No offence taken :-) I just wanted to get *some* sort of rating onto each article as a starting point: you and other editors are quite welcome to uprate them to a "start" or "C-class" if you feel they pass the criteria. It was just that I had to make a quick decision and estimate for the class/importance for the articles... if I'd spent time assessing each one carefully against the assessment criteria I'd be here until 2017...
I don't want to be dismissive of the good work Magiciandude and Luisnh1210 have done on getting music articles to GA, but I understand what you are saying when you say the list of GA articles looks top heavy with Shakira records, but that's not their fault nobody is working on other aspects of Colombian culture. Like you I also feel very strongly that the main cities and various aspects of Colombian politics and politicians should be the focus of GA work – the five major cities are Wikipedia Level-4 vital articles, after all. I also looked at the Ibero-American contest but it seemed to be focused on creating translations of articles on the Spanish Wiki that didn't exist on other language Wikis, and most of the Colombian articles are already on the English Wiki in some form (although I'd love to expand the Jaime Garzón article sometime).
Regarding "really crappy articles"... there are a LOT of these on Wikipedia across all subjects, and unfortunately trying to salvage them or putting them up for deletion takes up a huge amount of time of many dedicated editors. I am involved with WikiProject Albums as well, and currently there are nearly 35,000 unassessed stub-class articles on that project... I can guarantee that the majority are for completely non-notable albums and consist of basically a track listing and little else. Erick (Magiciandude) and I have recently been trying to deal with a batch of editors who have been creating album and singles articles by not particularly notable Colombian pop stars, all badly written and poorly sourced and really not worthy of a place on Wikipedia. And then you get articles like V E N T U S which was created by the artist's manager and serves as nothing more than a promotional piece. Richard3120 (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

A good example of what I've been saying above is: 1 - Battle of Pasca (4434 bytes), 2 - José Domingo Duquesne (5443 bytes), 3 - Taganga (25,229 bytes), 4 - Arcabuco (2391 bytes). 1 is labeled "stub", yet when you search on Google for "Batalla de Pasca" there is nothing more to find than already linked. There is some aftermath information but that is written in the article about Saguamanchica already and I don't want to unnecessarily duplicate that. There is only 1 "primary" source (De Piedrahita) who wrote 3 pages about it in 1688/1676, more than 200 years (!) later. 2 is labeled "start", while about Duquesne the relative content is less than about the Battle. There is more to write and find in older chronicles for sure as this fellow was living in the late 18th and early 19th century and church records tend to be very complete and thorough. 3 is almost 5 times the absolute size of 2, but is labeled in the same category, while about Taganga there is not 20 k bytes more to write (while for Duquesne there is) if you don't want to end up in tourist guide talk, as is well done on the linked Wikivoyage and Wikitravel pages. 4 is labeled "stub" and indeed that is a stub; only the most basic information is there (yet still not well written; the provinces are part of the larger departments, not the other way around as is written in all the "bot-generated" or bot-generated municipalities). But how can the Battle of Pasca and Arcabuco be in the same category? Arcabuco has no references while the Battle has all the references that are there to find online? IMHO the "stub" category should be reserved for "Arcabuco"-like "articles". Or Techo (Bogotá) etc. Anything that has some information more than just an infobox and the most basic of content should be labeled "start". And any article that lists multiple points as Taganga does should be in a higher category than "start". Also, if the number of bytes is the defining factor, it's possible to trick that using a full infobox with just a lot of empty fields, still not producing more interesting content but may make labeling of "start" instead of "stub" possible... Tisquesusa (talk) 17:56, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Sure Richard, I understand your position, no worries about that and the "consensus" type of defining as well. I have 13 years of wiki experience... ;-) just not here.
And of course, not downgrading any of the Shakira work, after all it's about the interests of the writers. If they like those records and write enthusiastically about them, I would be the last person to discourage them.
But on the pretty important cities and sites (Zipaquirá) I don't agree. There is a lot of activity in the history of those articles with small edits, but nobody really read the texts as they are obviously crappy machine translations, clear for an en-2 or even en-1 speaker... To go into it and rewrite it is a lot of dirty and unpleasant work, but then rather remove the parts than keep it on the article, I'd say.
Promo I found also with the Sandra Bessudo article, that listed she has 5000 dives, which is nice and admirable but not notable for an encyclopedia. Capitalisation of words that shouldn't, very promo language how great she is and all of that. Of course it's much more rewarding to write new articles and improve older ones into GAs and so, but those kind of cases are numerous enough to have some work done too. There was not even a "this is promo talk, please improve this article" tag placed and it seems those tage are not working anyway as I found articles with tags of 8 years ago ("no refs" and others), untouched through time... Then a tag doesn't serve its purpose. This is all more part of the general review process than of a WikiProject I think, but maybe we can wake up some earlier contributors to help with this work? Tisquesusa (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Re: Sandra Bessudo. Until the editor Johnsonienses added WikiProject tags on 22 April, just over a month ago, the only WikiProject tag attached to the article was one for WikiProject Biography. So as far as WikiProject Colombia (and other projects) were concerned, we had no idea of the existence of this article until a month ago. This highlights what I was saying about it being important to tag the article with any relevant WikiProject, even if it means I get the class/importance ratings wrong: at least it then notifies members of the relevant WikiProjects that the article exists, and they can get to work improving it or re-rating it. Which is why I thought the admin was a place to start: knowing what's part of the project, we can then see what needs to be worked on. Richard3120 (talk) 18:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

What to do with Nem-Catacoa Festival?[edit]

This 'article' was added in 2011 by "Colombiannews", an obvious promo stunt to boost the ticket sales for the later cancelled event. It was a once-in-a-lifetime edition held in 2010 with some old 90s rock bands. I think it's not notable (anymore), also because the link to the website and reference is dead. I've cleaned it up a bit, but in essence there's not much left and it won't be happening soon I guess. And if it does, an admin can retrieve the old page? What do you think? Tisquesusa (talk) 09:03, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know about "old 90s rock bands" – the majority of artists on that line-up are still very much active. That aside, I think if we can't get hold of any sources, it should probably be deleted... whether sources can be found will probably be the defining issue as to whether it's kept or not. I'm in the process of tidying up the article on Estéreo Picnic, which is the one Colombian article currently in draftspace: it was started but abandoned by a now non-active editor in 2013, but as Colombia's main music festival I think it's certainly worth keeping and there are reliable sources available to reference the article. In the case of this festival though, I'm not so sure. Richard3120 (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Edit: I think we can safely say that this festival will not take place again in the future... Estéreo Picnic is now firmly established as the major festival for rock/alternative music in Bogotá, and with the Colombian version of Lollapalooza debuting in town this September, there's simply no room for a new name festival to try and start up in the capital. Richard3120 (talk) 15:05, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Security issues in Colombia#Requested move 14 June 2016, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks,  What's in your palette? Paine  12:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)