Talk:Peru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peru Portal

This article is supported by the Peru WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Peru is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Geography article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Peru, or visit the project page for more details.

A	This article has been rated as A-Class on its quality.

[edit] Slimming

This page is starting to grow over 49kbs, so I'm curious if anyone else would like to help slim down this page. Much of what is on this page, is already on another page that is dedicated to the specific topics. So it's my thought that we should summarize the sections with main pages already existing, maybe even create new pages that go indepth for the sections that don't have one yet... This would slim down the page, and allow more detailed information to be organized better. Anyone else concur? Pvt Mahoney 22:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean-up

I cleaned up the talk page to help organize it better, so that people would better understand what is trying to be portrayed b DRINK INCA KOLA!!!!!!!!!!! bit and makes them better understood. If anyone has any issue with my revision, please contact me on my talk page and I will gladly explain things more. Good day all! Pvt Mahoney 23:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peru Project

Join the Peru Project!

Visit also the Peru Portal

Aidanb 14:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] National language(s) of Peru

This page states only Spanish is official, but Quechua, Aymara and others are recognized as local languages in areas they are used. Demographics of Peru page states there are two official languages - spanish and quechua. Which page is correct?2.135.200.67 00:28, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Peruvian constitution recognizes Quechua as an official language, so official publications and documents could be written, at least in theory, in both languages

It is my understanding that Quechua and much less Aymara are only spoken by a minority of Peruvians (this depending on the region of the country). In Peru's biggest cities such as Lima, Trujillo, and Arequipa, Quechua and Aymara are spoken on a very low scale. Some Universities in these cities do offer classes of these indigenous languages for those interested in learning them for educational and cultural purposes. There are also, of course, native speakers of Quechua and Aymara and their heavily accented Spanish makes this very evident in the largest cities. Thus it is proper to state that Quechua, Aymara and "other" languages (or dialects for that matter) are spoken as "local" languages in areas of more native or non-mestizo populations of Peru. --Dynamax 18:21, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Article 48 of the constitution reads: Official languages are Spanish and, in the areas where they predominate, Quechua, Aymara and other aborigenal languages, according to law. QVanillaQ 02:06, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Improvement Drive

South America is currently nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. You can support the article with your vote.--Fenice 12:14, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Great Information

This page hs given me so much information for my current project in my spanish class. I am the extremly lucky one to get peru to be my country to research. Anyone know anything about peru? Please tell me!! thanks! runnerfast11 18:00, 2006 January 18 (UTC)

You'd be amazed at what you'd find here just by clicking links.Pvt Mahoney 19:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Perú in W:ES

Check up the organization of es:Perú --Huhsunqu 18:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Growing in 2005

Somebody wrote, the Economist has seen Peru as the country with 6th biggest economy growing in 2005. I Strongly doubt this, as I can already name you at least 2 in southamerica only, which had a higher rise: Argentina and Venezuela between 8% - 9,5%. Thats not to count any ASIAN country like China and India, which never fall under 8% growth every year(and there are more with high growth) Therefore please show the exact source, where this is stated in "The economist". Thanks--194.203.215.254 10:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

just an example, eventhough its from 2004, I put it in here for comparison purposes. With theoretical growth of 6,67% in 2004, a country would have be ranked 39th in 04. [1] --194.203.215.254 10:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I actually would not be suprised if it was in sixth place because Latin America and Asia are both growing at an extremly fast pace (much faster than other regions in the world) but on the other hand only a small handful of Asian countries are expanding rapidly. Vivaperucarajo 04:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

definitely much more countries expand faster than 6,67%...I do not say that 6,67 is little, but there are far more countries growing more than this, please verify this link, on second page >>>>>>[2]<<<<<< 194.203.215.254 14:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] World War II

Anyone got any evidence or references for the claim in the history section that the Peruvians destroyed 2 German warships in 1943 and 1944? The claim of a "battleship" is highly unlikely, unless it's a miss-translation. Folks at 137 18:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Despite searching and advertising for help, I've found no evidence for the claims. They should be removed asap. Folks at 137 19:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, also the reference to the U-boat sinking should be removed - cannot find any evidence for this either. Why is this article under full protection ? Bwithh 21:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed. Folks at 137 13:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

I can't sort throgh it all. The article needs to be closely checked to separate the good from the bad.Dlohcierekim 19:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eric Walker

Anon took him out after I put him back. Don't know if he belongs.Dlohcierekim 19:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

68.254.180.161 what's up. What are you trying to say and what are you trying to protest with yours vandalisms? Teemu Ruskeepää 18:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what happened, but the page doesn't look good--Granpire Viking Man 14:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colca Canyon?

I'm not really sure how it's spelled and I don't have any real info on the subject, but I spent a large portion of my mission trip to Peru in Colca Canyon, yet I've seen no information on it in this article. Any idea why this would be? They seem important enough to me. Useless Fodder 08:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National motto

Peru has no national motto. Fuerte y Feliz por la Unión was only used on coins issued during the Independence War. That doesn't make it the national motto. So don't restore it (or any whatsoever) unless you have concrete proof that it is so. --Victor12 15:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It was used later than during the independence wars, but I can find no proof that it has been used since the 1910s, so I'm removing it. Pruneau^talk 20:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research

This page is flooded with it. I am putting this page on my watchlist, which I should have done a long time ago, to stop IPs from adding OR and POV commentary.--Jersey Devil 23:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, and the English is awkward and unidiomatic (I believe that English isn't the first language of the main contributor(s)). Needs work. Kemet 17:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Economy

The tone has been proud, thankful and narstistic. It has completely ignored all other modes, school of thoughts, lifestyles and economy models. It has been downright selfish tone, which expects everybody to bow to the liberal markets and when being critical, only tobe ignorant of the essential and obvious superiority of liberal market theories.

This is a good example of the attitude of neoliberalists and elite capitalists, who are simply engulfing the entire planet, all the indigenous cultures and all the national economies into their global markest. They are doing this outside and regardless of all national and transnational parliaments and while they create their own global power structure, they are not forced to justify their power in any way, but just to expect from every political and individual observer a humble and a non-resistant assimilation of the capitalist theory!

The text needs to be more self-critical, to acknowledge socialist, social democratic and center economic theories and to be comparative between different theories and ideas.

I have downsized this egoism and tried to modify the text to a more realistic and objective level. Please discuss about my modifications here if you think it needs to be reverted, and before you revert it! Teemu Ruskeepää 10:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think your edits need to be reverted after seeing them they seem to just take away a few weasel words. But for future reference I do have some suggestions:

1) Do not make edit summaries such as the following: no one reduces poverty in neoliberalism. This is fact. However capitalists do always and constantly make decisions about the environment for their markets[3]; Hippocritical apologies to make a capitalist's political image look more acceptable [4]; growth has more than one meaning! Also, growth is not good but only a deliberate market liberal action by capitalists [5]. These are, quite frankly, blatently hostile and not in the style of Wikipedia. They expose your POV, making you look like you are pushing it in this article instead of trying to dePOV it.

2) After you finish making large edits to articles, please do not come onto the talk page and make further, hostile, comments such as "which expects everybody to bow to the liberal markets" or "This is a good example of the attitude of neoliberalists and elite capitalists, who are simply engulfing the entire planet, all the indigenous cultures and all the national economies into their global markest". No one comes to Wikipedia to hear your opinion about liberalization of markets.--Jersey Devil 15:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your heavy critisism.

I have designed them to do that, expose my POV. I'm trying to influence people who think otherwise. I don't believe I'm hostile but rather polemic. It's a good way of awaking people's real POV's about this.

I believe it's better to give a strong reason for a strong modification, especially when my modifications represent my POVs, which are quite radical in comparison to the common view. Also, exactly because Wikipedia is not for POVs, I have revealed my full POV in the discussion page, not in the article. I believe I have a right to represent my POV in making Wikipedia, whilst making my edits true to all sides but critical to the opposite point of view. I think that my reasons in the discussion will affect the writer so that he believe his POVs are wrong. You should know that it is possible to give a point of view indirectly and via the tone, emphasis and other nyances. This is what the writer had done and this is what my POV's in the discussion page challenge. It is not wrong or unusual to have POVs in Wikipedia, as long as they are in the discussion page, and as long as people can conduct themselves in respect to other peoples' POVs. After all, if we do not have the facts, we have to construct them the same way all facts are first created: through debate. We either can't avoid our point of views when we think of the society. What I'm saying is that I'm not changing the article according to my POVs but to make the text neutral from the writers POVs. One more thing, my POV is that it is not correct to discuss and to describe the economy in market economy terms. It doesn't acknowledge other systems, such as socialism. Many people might first object to this, as I have emphasized it in the text! =) Teemu Ruskeepää 17:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update needed in Economy section

there's a line obviosly outdated about a free trade agreement being negotiated with Chile and Singapore: "Peru is negotiating a Free Trade Agreement with Chile, Mexico, Singapore and India which may be finished between March and April 2006." does anyone know what happened to those negotiations?

Not sure what happened to those negotiations, it might be more clear if it said "Peru is negotiating Free Trade Agreements" because it isnt a single agreement...to my knowledge they are still on the table, but much has been put on hold with the flurry over the US-PERU FTA. ALso there is another error that says that Peru is the second country in S. America to have signed an FTA...Chile was the first, Columbia signed one with the US- that has yet to be ratified by the respecitve congress' in February of 2006, and Peru was the third to sign in May of 2006.

[edit] Administrative Divisions

I'm in the process of getting the administrative division section up to date. the image i used is a little out of date, as Callao was not part of the last map. b_cubed 16:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Modern Politics

I encourage users to review my recent changes to this section. On a number of occassions, it has been edited to reflect a Pro-Fujimori stance. User:Bdean1963 10:50 21 August

On the other hand, it seems that we have a POV pusher here. I'm reverting once again your actions. Messhermit 15:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Just to show to some people that may be unaware of what happened, I'm posting the only approach that I attempted with you. You ignored and now you are playing the victim: Messhermit 15:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello there. Your recent editions on Peru don't meet the criteria of what a NPOV article are supposed to have. The article in question is suppose to give a quick review of the history of the country, with facts and no speculations.

In Peru, there has never been such discussion or open approach to the "race" issue (ignoring, of course, the last Presidential Elections in which they were use only for political purposes). Thus, your comments (and the use of words) that involve "indigenism" are out of place.
The use of the words "Crisis of the Peruvian State" are your personal opinion. It is true that Peru has faced difficult times, but the state itself has not reach that category. Restrain yourself from using that term here in Wikipedia.
What you claimed to be NPOV is the work of an international organization that has its own agenda and is clearly biased against former President Fujimori. The issue is currently being investigated by Chilean Courts, and Wikipedia is not a political forum to expose your claims nor a place where a person can be declared "guilty" with no fair trail.

Please avoid reverting the article. It does not add anything important and only promotes hate and political bias. Thanks. Messhermit 21:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

By this, I have exposed and expresed my doubts regarding the "neutrality" of this user. Thanks. Messhermit 15:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, nor really want to get involved in what is going on here but I saw this following edit summary by Bdean:

repeated response to vandalism and efforts to disseminate misinformation; prior Amnesty International cite deleted by user indicating refusal to follow Wiki guidelines [6]

Vandalism has a very specific meaning in Wikipedia, and your dispute with Messhermit is a content dispute not an issue of reverting vandalism. For future purposes please be more careful about the language you use. Thank you.--Jersey Devil 21:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martires de la Pacificacion

A Spanish-language article about Peru, "Martires de la Pacificacion", appears at User:TruthbringerToronto/Peru. I would be grateful if someone could review the information in the article and add a paraphrase of any relevant material in it to the Peru article. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I read it, and I believe that the only problem with that article is that it is mostly composed of political propaganda: That is, the APRA and how Garcia's first government attempted to solve the problem with Sendero. Since the APRA is now the ruling party of Peru, you can expect much more of this on the net. Messhermit 15:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manjar Blanco

The article has the following.

Caramel, also known as Manjar Blanco in Peru, is a very popular dessert.

Where did this statement come from? Manjar Blanco is not at all the same thing as caramel. Granted they are made from similar ingredients but the result is quite different. Perhaps this is a reflection of the fact that it is common in the U.S. to make a "quick and dirty" version of Manjar Blanco using condensed milk which resembles caramel more than Manjar Blanco. Nevertheless the statement is not correct. --Mcorazao 06:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unclear paragraph

From the European rationalist perspective, the Inca Empire has been seen like the utopia state. Nevertheless, this pragmatic interpretation tends to forget that the collision between two antithetic Weltanschauungs had a destructive impact on the harmony of the Inca Weltanschauung superiority, who took advantage of the Inca civil war triggered by two pretenders to the throne.

Maybe it's me who's stupid, but... I don't get it. I especially have a problem with 'who took advantage' - whom or what is this 'who' referring to? The Inca Weltanschauung superiority? Whatever it's trying to say, it must be possible to say it clearer. Obviously, I can't change it, as I don't know what it's trying to say. The Legend of Julie Egbert 02:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, I see what's happened. This was the original version:

From the European rationalist perspective, the Inca Empire has been seen like the utopia state. Nevertheless, this pragmatic interpretation tends to forget that the collision between two antithetic Weltanschauungs had a destructive impact on the harmony of the Inca Weltanschauung. Its spectacular collapse under a group of Spanish soldiers has been seen as a logical consequence of the Spanish technological superiority, who took advantage of the Inca civil war triggered by two pretenders to the throne.

The bold part was erased, creating a nonsense sentence. I'm restoring the original version. I'm not a fan of that either, to be honest, but at least it makes sense. The Legend of Julie Egbert 21:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't notice the page is protected. I hope someone else can make the change I mentioned. The Legend of Julie Egbert 21:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/e/r/Talk%7EPeru_a452.html"