Talk:Bahía Blanca

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentine Geography.

If you would like to participate, you can improve Bahía Blanca, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Ports, a project to improve all ports-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ports-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
Low rated as low-importance on the assessment scale

Contents

[edit] Partido name

All Partidos of Buenos Aires Province in Wikipedia follow the model xxx Partido. So this needs to be Bahía Blanca Partido, or at least a piped link or redirect so that any eventual page is more easilz found by other articles. Please see Vicente López Partido for instance. Martín (saying/doing) 14:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Style issues

I really like the way this article has grown. I've just done some style checking in this article and corrected a few things (format and style, not content). My only request is that the editors take some time to read the Manual of Style and proceed to clean up the article. Anyone can do it, but it's only fair that the original writer takes the time and patience to do it.

Since the article is already rather large, I'll try to move some details to their own sub-article(s), for example those about the Archdiocese, leaving a summary here. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ... and content issues

(about the port)
Some of these convenient features can be found extensively explained on specialized reports such as the ones from CREBBA. CREBBA, standing for Centro Regional de Estudios Económicos de Bahía Blanca, is a private and independent non-governmental organization in the city, supported by Bolsa de Comercio de Bahía Blanca, that studies and publishes reports on the evolution of local and regional economical and financial aspects of relevance [1]. Their growing reputation, widely proven by the acceptance and accuracy of their reports, means a valuable and accurate source of information regarding the economy of the area. The Board of Directors and its staff members are indeed quite a remarkable team of experts.

The above has a bit of a POV problem, but in any case it's too detailed for this article. It might be appropriate for an article on the CREBBA, provided there are some independent sources about the CREBBA, but there must be dozens of similar organizations all around the country, and they probably don't deserve an article.

I've reformatted the intro a bit, fixed some links, and removed some that were redundant. Things already covered by other articles should not be repeated here. I feel that immigration to the area is a very important subject to cover, but presidential/royal visits to immigrant communities in places located 100 or 200 km away from Bahía Blanca are not historically important and have nothing to do with Bahía Blanca itself. I'll leave that for you to decide. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 23:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Comment on: presidential and royal visits to the area

If you think so(what yoy've written above).... -you are the experts and I am an ignorant, of course. Hence it must be that way. Erase it. Delete it. Go ahead. Be happy. However, if you think what kind of diary has got any of those presidents and royals who visited the city -simply because they decided to pay tribute to those who emmigrated-, you -perhaps- might be able to realise why those visits were carried out. I know this is not "hola" magazine. This is something more serious (under the sword of censors, of cours...). History is made by facts, and all those immigrants, Sir, entered the area through Bahia Blanca by ship. It was impossible to do it otherwise until the railroad was constructed. Ships, vessels, were the only way of entering the area until the fortress was effectively taking care of the whole area, which was not quite accomplished often times, unfortunately.

That is why this it is mentioned. Presidents and royals do not spend time in visiting small domestic towns or cities unless there is an important reason to do that. And the historical and geographical conditions of Bahia Blanca made it possible, hence, presidents and royals caring about immigrated communities from their own nations were paid the corresponding tribute. That is a fact. It is not the visit of a president who yeilds and shouts looking for votes or sympathy, as we are used in some areas of Latin America. It is not one more line in the journals dealing with the royals. It is a true symbol of recognition. However, go ahead, you majesty....erase it....do ahead, please. Be a good arrogant argentinean an erase it with no reason whatsoever not even thinking why it has been written.... I hope this explains your concerns, despite which, you might cut it away as well. After all, you are almost a royal: you are a Censor. (Savonarola did the same in Spain. If there is nothing written on him I could try. Then I will let you know to censor it again.) Thanks, anyaway, for illuminating my ignorance. Have a good day. Mbertoni

I still don't understand what the problem is. I didn't erase anything. If a president or queen visited the immigrant communities in Pigüé and Tres Arroyos, you can mention it in the articles about Pigüé and Tres Arroyos! You can't have everything related to BB mentioned in its article; that's why we can easily make links to other articles and create them if necessary.
I don't get your attitude. Really. Believe what you want about me and the rest of us, but don't use that as an excuse to "slam the door" and quit editing. We're rather few and scattered already. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] and some concerns

Once again I comment about my concerns. None of the ones who corrected me know the area. THings were mentioned with the aim of explaining why things are the way they are, where they are and why they are. Titles were used according to the good use and style. I do not invent all those things. An encyclopaedia should keek these things in mind. Titles and honours of persons cannot be amputated on behalf of any manual of style. I have been corrected because I wrote "Province of Buenos Aires" and now I read it re-corrected to the previous way, the way I wrote it. It might be better that experts like you (there seem to be two, actually) reach an agreement on what to amputate, what to cut, what to erase and probably to erase it all.....It might be better. Rather than that you could write (Manual of use of MY encyclopaedia, as I want it to be...) and that will be it....

At the end of the thay doing lots of effort towards something in which I really believed demonstrated to be as useless as trying to correct the congenital argentinean arrogance.

Thanks, anyway, for letting me breathe in your own universe....

Mbertoni

PS: and sorry if I dare to send an email to any of you....it was not written on the manual of style how to communicate to the other human beings ...I am sorry, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa

Come one, man, those users are trying to give some format to the article, they didn't write the format's standards, and they are just try to improve the article. Don't forget to assume good faith from other editors. I must admit I also considered the article to be a kinda messy, and even though I understand that you try to give as much information as possible, but too much is as bad as too little. I'm glad you provided so much information to the article in the last weeks, but let's not forget that this tries to be an encyclopedia, and as such, some rules must be followed. And don't get mad about something changing what you wrote, this is a wiki, and that's the spirit of a wiki. Hope you can understand it, Mariano(t/c) 10:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] and some concerns

Apologies presented to all of you. Thanks for your help. See you then...

Mbertoni

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Pepe Warriors.jpg

Image:Pepe Warriors.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)