User talk:Hseldon10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 02:50, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Archives

This talk page was getting a little bit too long, so I archived past discussions. The archives are organized by topic. If you are looking at my talk page to find out more about my behavior, here is a small summary made by me:

1) I had a rough learning of wikipedia. I've made many mistakes. People have corrected me a lot of times.

2) I have been accused, sometimes with justification, sometimes without it, of having a bias in favor of right-wing politics in Mexico (for Mexicans, right-wing politics means liberalism and theocracy, however, since I am atheist, I believe that the accusations were more about my liberal perspectives). I have, however, learned a lot and now only make contributions when I can source them, and I strive for NPOV, which means that recently, when I make edits, I try to put both the "left-wing" and the "right-wing" perspective. Unfortunately, I don't get many comments on this new attitude of mine...

3) I have been accused of cheering for UANL Tigres. Of course, I do. The accusations come from editors at UANL Tigres and Clásico Regiomontano who say that my edits strongly favor the team I cheer for. I don't feel that way, because my edits are mostly verifiable. As I said before, I strive for NPOV. However, I am not perfect and ask for you to keep an eye on me. =)

4) I have been warned for vandalism. On December 28, 2006, I made a number of nonsense edits on many articles about Mexico and left an edit summary of "Inocente Palomita". December 28 is day of the innocents in Mexico, and is similar to April Fools in the USA, in that we make pranks and practical jokes. My edits were intended as practical jokes for other Mexican users and I had the full intention of reverting them after December 28. A user who is not for Mexico, however, did the reversion for me and not understanding that I was engaging in tradition, I got warned. I'll never do vandalism of this type again, except maybe next December 28...

5) Templates of some of my userboxes have been changed. I have also been asked to participate in a number of discussions. I've had some fights, and sometimes, the fights have found me.

If you want to dwelve on the detail of the above, feel free to consult the archives.

Hari Seldon 20:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussions about articles related to Mexican Politics

/Archive_Mex0

[edit] Discussions about Mexico, the article, cities, and other general information

/Archive_Mex1

[edit] Discussions about UANL Tigres, Mexican Football League, and other sport-related topics

/Archive_Mex2

[edit] Discussions about Monterrey and Monterrey-related topics, including ITESM, and edit war in Second City

/Archive_Mex3

[edit] Discussions on other topics, including vandalism on December 28, 2006 and other requests for participation

/Archive_Mex4

[edit] Economy of Mexico

Hi, I didn't have time to work on that article since I was working on revamping Etymology of Mexico and on opening a poll in Talk:Mexico so that the page can be unprotected as soon as possible. In any case, I had already made several comments last week in Talk:Economy of Mexico. Let me know what you think. As for the pics, you already have my email address so you can send them to me via email if you wish. Cheers! --the Dúnadan 01:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I recommend the following papers:
and oh well, these are a lot of academic readings, but I guess that reading the sources directly is better than reading the short, summarized, digested (and interpreted) version of the facts. Don't be overwhelmed by the size and content of these papers, of course I didn't read each and every single detail of these links, I just skimmed through them, and found very interesting facts that we can use. Just skim through them on your free time, or read the table of contents, and if a topic seems interesting, then go through the details. After all, we are not going to write a very comprehensive long treatise on the Economy of Mexico, but just an easy-to-read encyclopedia article with relevant information.
--the Dúnadan 03:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry I haven't done anything regarding this project. I hadn't had the time, and I was mostly focused on improving Mexico City and Greater Mexico City so that we can have a parameter to discuss in our decision as to which nomenclature to use. In any case, I will start editing Economy of Mexico probably today or tomorrow. If you have any additional information (especially on Monterrey as an industrial hub) let me know. By the way, I followed the link to your blog and I liked it a lot, very interesting and informative. Congratulations on that.
--theDúnadan 21:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Oh, thanks. I am honored, but I have to say that you also played an important part in the mediation and improvement of those articles. =) --theDúnadan 04:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image of Monterrey and Garza García

I am actually hesitant in including the image in either article. While I am for now assuming good faith, I doubt Supaman took the picture himself. His account was blocked from commons for repeatedly uploading copyrighted images claiming they were his or whose source was "my computer". The image [[Mariamexicovsarge.jpg]], which he said he took from his friend "María González" was actually first published by fifaworldcup.yahoo.com, and now hosted by soccerpulse.com. This image is used in Mexico in the sports section. I think we should really be cautious with the panoramic image of Garza-García, it looks way too professional (it had to be taken from a helicopter or an adjacent taller building), and we must not get in trouble with copyright infringement policies. --theDúnadan 22:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

The picture could have easily been taken from the adjacent Torre Comercial América, which is almost as tall as the Torre CNCI (shown). The view of the Torre CNCI at middlepoint, which further indicate that the picture was in fact taken from Torre Comercial América. In fact, it isn't difficult to take a picture such as that if one knows enough about photography. I could have taken that picture myself.
However, I understand your concern. If it were proven beyond reasonable doubt that this picture was in copyright infringement, I have many other pictures about both Monterrey and Garza García to contribute.
I am a little busy right now, since I work and also go to school. But as soon as I have some free time, I'll get current in some of the proactive projects in wikipedia, including the Economy of Mexico article, and a total re-do of the Garza García article, which is much needed.
Hari Seldon 22:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the Barnstar

Hello Hari. I have been sick (and getting ready for a gallbladder surgery) so I haven't been on for almost 2 weeks. I just felt better today so here I am. Thanks for the barnstar you awarded me, it was very nice and it certainly makes me wish to come back soon and create more works to help improve Wikipedia's graphical identity. Thanks again. AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 01:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] José Marroquín Leal

Hey Hari, There is already an article about Pipo at José Marroquín, I'm not that sure about the process to follow in order to have both articles in one page, if you know how to fix it I'd appreciate you to do it. I have some contributions but I will wait for you to fix this problem as you seem more experienced to deal with this kind of problems. Regards. Aldoman 07:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I've made José Marroquín redirect to José Marroquín Leal. I hope this is satisfactory. Hari Seldon 07:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Plaza Fiesta San Agustín Logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Plaza Fiesta San Agustín Logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 12:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About metro areas and cities

Well, I opened up a debate/poll in WikiProject:Mexico so that all users can participate on this debate. I tried summarizing your opinion in there, but I think I did a poor job. Please feel free to change what I wrote about your proposal and your argumentation so that it appropriately resembles your opinion. I want to be fair with all of what you wrote. I hope more users participate. Cheers! --theDúnadan 20:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I have to admit I was a little disappointed at this debate. You've said it before, you feel very strongly about Monterrey, and I respect that. I don't know if you are thoroughly reading my arguments, since you did not respond to them. I wouldn't have minded at all if you had rebutted or refuted each particular argument, so that at least the debate would be moving by a mutual understanding of our the valid points we are both making. But in this debate, I am surprised that you preferred to cling to a popular conception instead of looking at sources, and I was willing to send you all the files that I downloaded, and that I have been reading and studying regarding metro areas in Mexico from CONAPO.
In spite of that, I consider you to be one of the best editors and contributors for Mexico-related articles that I have met in Wikipedia. And if you feel this is a personal matter for which you feel strongly, then I am willing to stop the debate. I believe we both can work as a team on many other articles and projects about Mexico, and I rather do that, and leave this issue aside for a while, especially if nobody else says anything. Sounds cool? =)
--theDúnadan 00:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a portal about Monterrey is an excellent idea, especially with all the information you have about it, and that several users come from Monterrey too. I would be willing to cooperate with whatever I can. I haven't lived in Monterrey or Mexico City or Guadalajara, so I don't have as much information and pictures, but I can sure help with searching stuff in books and encyclopedias.
Actually, I also wanted to improve all subarticles about Mexico, starting with Economy of Mexico, and then going to Demographics of Mexico, Metropolitan areas of Mexico, Languages of Mexico and the most interesting one of all: Politics of Mexico. =) And, of course, revive the Portal:Mexico.
--theDúnadan 00:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh, about Gruma, I think the article is quite good and informative. I remember reading a NAFTA book that talked about the monopoly (or duopoly) of tortilla (or tortilla flour) production in Mexico, and the effects of the abolishment of corn price controls and subsidies in CONASUPO and corn mills (of which Maseca is one, isn't it?) during the 1990s. I do not know if it is related at all to Gruma, but it might be interesting to research on that. --theDúnadan 00:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject:Monterrey

I'm in. Gilbertogm 03:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Mexican-Americans

Disculpa que te moleste, pero siendo un mexicano que vive en Estados Unidos crees que podrías mejorar el artículo de Mexican Americans, de todo los artículos de hispanos me aprece que el de los mmexicanos es el menos profesional, yo quiero saber realmente como va la situación de los mexicanos allá en Estados Unidos, si van emjorndo o empeorando si se vuelven mas rico o mas pobre, en fin tu me entiendes, si tienes tiempo libre me gustaría ver si lo puiedes mejorar y si necesitas ayuda pues claro que te ayudare.

Mexxxicano 05:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

avec plaisir Hari Seldon 05:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing reversion by you

In the Andrés Manuel López Obrador article I changed the phrase "...like price ceilings for tortillas[72] that protect local producers of corn, " into "like price ceilings for tortillas[72] that protect local consumers of corn". Because the price ceiling protect the consumers who need to be able to buy tortillas at a reasonable price - protecting the producers would be done by fixing a minimum price. My change was then reverted with the edit summary "That is an opinion. The government's stated purpose is to protect consumers.)" This is self conrradrictory if the governments expressed purpose is to protect consumers (which I believe it is) why would you then revert the text into saying that price ceiling protect the producers (which basic economic theory says it doesn't). I am confused. please state which one you actually mean and provide an actual source stating whether the government wants to protect the consumers (which would be logical) or the producers (which would be illogical since the problem is too high prices, not too low prices). ·Maunus· ·ƛ· 20:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, as long as it is Calderon being illogical I can live with that. The way I have understood it the higher prices are mostly due to the US diverting a larger portion of maize to production of Bio-ethanol. ·Maunus· ·ƛ· 13:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
You are ok with the Commander in Chief, and Supreme Executive of the Mexican Federal Government being irrational? Mh... Hari Seldon 16:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I just meant that if he is then it doesn't surprise me. ·Maunus· ·ƛ· 18:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the argument is that, although international prices of corn are rising, the internal industry should not be affected. National producers of corn, who are heavily subsidized, confirm that their price to intermediaries has been relatively stable, and producers of tortillas confirmed that intermediaries are the ones inflating the price. Calderón, and tortilla producers argue that by taking actions against intermediaries, such as price controls, local producers will benefit. Hari Seldon 19:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Banorte

I'm not sure where this building is located, I'll try to take some pics of it if I'm able to locate it this weekend. However I have a picture of the first building that Banorte owned in Morelos Strees and Zaragoza. This building is still a Banorte office. AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 22:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That building (Banorte in Morelos) is beautiful! However, I am referring to the Banorte tower, in Avenida Revolución and Avenida Alfonso Reyes, near Tecnológico de Monterrey. If you go to the ITESM and climb the CIAP, or the tall parking building, you can see it from there. Hari Seldon 22:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] North America (Americas)

I'll try to explain it as simple as I can. You know Corticopia has been pushing the POV that Mexico is part of Central America. As you know we had an edit warring in the article Mexico and a debate Talk:Mexico, in which mainly Dunadan provided enough evidence that a portion of southeastern Mexico is physiographically in Central America, but that geopolitically Mexico is in the North American region. He agreed and proceeded to edit the article in that way.

Now he's denying that and is editing all the articles that mention Mexico is in North America (namely Americas (terminology), Middle America (Americas), an article he defends a lot; and used to edit the article Central America).

He nominated the article North America (Americas) for deletion, saying that it was created following a POV pushing. I created the article in order to avoid confusion and in order to have the different models used in the Americas (North, Central, South or the model Corticopia likes, Northern, Middle and South). Also because the Template:Regions of the world lacked an article about the NA region, it used to have a link to North America (continent). As you can note in the article North America (disambiguation), he even edited it once it was created (I guess because he was OK with it then).

Can you please vote in this? I think it is unacceptable to try to delete a perfectly valid article, just because he wants to. Thanks for your help. AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 14:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Other than being a veiled ad hominem argument, I think YOU have gone too far AC. As I've stated there, there is a key difference -- the content regarding the sub/regions of Northern America (which is not merely a UN construct; see article) and Middle America (numerous definitions provided) are well sourced, while that of the 'region' of North America isn't. This doesn't deny other continental models, but no sources have been provided that clearly delineate what the model upon which the nominated article is based. The sources in North America (Americas) do not support the content in that article, and a read of those sources will reveal that. Regardless, if necessary, applicable content can be added to the North America article instead of forking and conflating. Sorry to use your talk page, HS. Corticopia 14:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Hadn't we reached consensus on this issue? Why can't we just stick with what he had agreed on?!
You two resolve this. Corticopia, I feel that your position is a little bit too intolerant. The region of North America needs only one source, the NAFTA document. It is a point of view that can be easily documented. Just because it currently isn't doesn't mean that it cannot.
And you, Alex, should put more attention on the guidelines. Your point of view is valid, and you can make it bullet proof against vandalism following the rules. Why don't you just provide reliable sources and reference them accordingly? That way, if someone attacks your contributions, you have the protection of the guidelines, and you can always ask an admin to help you out.
I am not an admin, so this is as far as I will go. Stick to consensus, stick to guidelines, and assume good faith. Good luck to the both of you.
Hari Seldon 17:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I see your point. As the AfD tag says, they encourage improving the article. I have added more sources indicating that North America is a subcontinent (as taught in several parts of the world) and a region. I thought it was ok not to add so much sources, but Corticopia is a little bit too extreme and nominated the article for deletion based in the "lack of sources". AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 17:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
We did for Mexico, but all things are not equal -- particularly when pushing a point of view. Sourced content in the fork (the content of which is not substantiated by the sources, even the ones recently added) can be placed in North America. Just because NAFTA is a pact amongst three countries in North America, it does not mean that they alone comprise North America (which includes more than that). Should I equally argue that North America is JUST the US and Canada because of NAFTA's predecessor? (However, there may be other grounds for that basis.) It's like saying Europe and the European Union are the same thing.
Anyhow, thanks for your comments. Corticopia 17:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm ... Embracing differing points of view does not equate to creating article forks to justify them. If sourced properly, there is no reason why North America cannot be edited to include these points, which it already may in the 'Countries and territories' and 'Human geography' (e.g. talk of NAFTA) sections. I am more than happy to work collaboratively with this editor to achieve mutually beneficial aims but, frankly, Wikipedia is not our mother and I am not his. Thanks. Corticopia 21:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
BTW: what were you saying about working co-operatively? Corticopia 22:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice. Corticopia 21:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hari, I need to go now, but I just read your message. Thanks for your condolences, I deeply appreciate it. AlexCovarrubias

( Let's talk! ) 18:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hola (otro regio)

Hi Hari. I'll write in English 'cause it seems to be the rule around.
I'm a regio too, and about 3 months or so ago finished reading the Foundation novels (I'm still to read Forward the Foundation, 1993), that is why I was curious about your username, and because I saw your comments in Alex Covarrubias's discussion page.
I'm into writing articles about Monterrey's cerros. So far I've created Cerro de las Mitras & La m, and contributed to Cerro de la Silla, La huasteca and Puente Atirantado (both in English and Spanish).
Of course, I'd like to follow them with articles on Topo Chico, Obispado, Loma Larga, etc., etc.
Do you happen to have photos, or know about someone having photos of this cerros?
That's just all. And... oh, if you like Asimov, try Orson Scott Card and his Ender Saga, or Brian Aldiss and several of his earlier short stories.
--Valdezlopez 01:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

James, La gloria è a dio has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


[edit] Carlos Slim

Hello. Carlos Slim has the Lebanese nationality and speaks Arabic as his native tongue. He and his son visit Lebanon every few months. Emбargo 14:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm sure you wouldn't mind providing sources. Hari Seldon 18:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] North America

It's uncontraversial that Mexico is in North America (i.e. I could probably provide 100 reliable sources to this effect without much effort) - what is contraversial is that Mexico might also not be in North America. Anyways, your version was problematic because it implied Central America wasn't in North America (that it is in North America is easily referencable) - don't confuse North America with Nortamerica, or Central America with America Central. WilyD 17:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is so old!... I just wish revisions about this would cease! Hari Seldon 17:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Mexican billionaires

Not meaning to invade your user talk page but... What do you mean by "See talk page"? --FateClub 20:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I mean for you to wait a few minutes until I finished writing my arguments in the article's talk page, and then read what I had to say for reasons for my revert. Sorry I wasn't fast enough :)
By the way, fellow editors are always welcome to my talk page, and you are too. Hari Seldon 20:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New articles

Hi, Hari, I hope you are doing well. I finished the major revamping of Demographics of Mexico and Politics of Mexico, after a somewhat extensive research through INEGI, CONAPO, and the constitution of Mexico. Please feel free to review them, and tell me what you think. Cheers! --theDúnadan 17:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clasico regiomontano

Hehehe, I think I can help, I'll try to do my best. AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 18:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hari, I have bad news for you. I personally don't have any picture that can be used in the article. I asked several friends, but they also don't seem to have any. I was thinking about taking pictures about people wearing both teams camisetas, what do you think? AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 17:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not such a huge football fan, but I like Rayados better. I honestly don't care about who is listed first, hehehe, I just did it to see your reaction! AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 11:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I read that Clásico 28 was suspended. Can you tell me why? It sounds interesting (I hope), and don't you think it should be in the notable classics section? AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 11:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Ouch! I was afraid it had something to do with a fight. Well, I'm glad you liked the image as well as the small table, you're welcome. About the MMA template, I'm not so sure. It looks flat... something's missing... I dunno! AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 12:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Mexican general election 2006 controversies

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

If this continues, I will report you to the 3RR incident board:

RE: I did not violate the three revert rule. Additionally, I am not reverting your edits, rather I made an edit that you are reverting without properly addressing the concerns I present in the talk page. True, wikipedia cannot explain everything to every reader, however I am not asking about the origin of the atom here, I am asking for a logical link between the contested information and the article's presentation. At the very least, it should be properly explain why it is the lead to the whole section. Is it that this controversial piece is the main reason why the election was contested? Obviously not! Irresponsbility and inability to discuss logically/negotiate do not assume good faith, and that too is against wikipedia policy. Lets not make this content dispute transform into a personal dispute. I have nothing against you, and I do feel that this warning is rather premature. Hari Seldon 02:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NAFTA article lacking information

Hola Hari, the article about NAFTA lacks information about the agreement between Mexico and the US. As the article is now, it only focuses in the tariffs that were eliminated between Canada and the US, but nothing about Mexico. Since you're interested in economics, would you mind fixing this? Thank you. AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 13:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, but I cannot promise anything soon, for this is one of the busiest months for me. I'll se what I can do. Hari Seldon 13:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Un mensaje

Este usuario es una persona muy inteligente!! Felicidades! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.137.130.129 (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] License tagging for Image:O-norte.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:O-norte.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I tagged the image as public domain. I created it and released it to the public domain. Hari Seldon 22:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes and code

Hello Hari. No, I don't mind at all. In fact I'm honored that thought my userpage layout is usable. I liked your userboxes a lot, they're great. Reading your userpage I learnt something about you. I was not aware that we share some interests and that we have some things in common. I'm also 24, I'm from Monterrey and I'm a Leo. I also support the pro-choice proposal about abortion (I read that in your blog). Wow.

Hey, let me help you with the Tigres logo, because it has a white background that can be removed, I'll make it transparent. AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 23:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, your userpage inspired me to create a new userbox, hehehe. User:AlexCovarrubias\Userboxes\Leo AlexCov ( Let's talk! ) 23:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks! I'll be using your new userbox instead of the old Leo one! Hari Seldon 23:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Check this user page and check his signature at his talk page... specially read his intro... It freaked me out... User:João Felipe C.S and User talk:João Felipe C.S

intersting... what a coincidence! Hari Seldon 05:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it was a coincidence. He copy-edited it from me! Once we used to edit an article together. ¬¬ AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 06:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I did the exact same thing! only, i did ask for your permission before using your code... Hari Seldon 06:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
No, I'm not talking about the code. I'm talking about the copy-edit of my words, the intro paragraph :O that's what freaked me out. I mean... he could have written something of his own... but he just copy-edited the same words! xD Freaky! AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 08:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like you have an admirer, or a very lazy person.... or a very lazy admirer :) Hari Seldon 08:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Or a very lazy admirer/stalker? :o Jajaja, I don't think so. AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 22:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León

(Aclaración: no soy un usuario ni contribuyente frecuente de Wikipedia, así es que no sé utilizar bien todas las opciones de edición, etcétera. Además te pido disculpas por editar tu página en español. Espero que no te moleste.)

Soy estudiante de medicina de la UANL, y por experiencia personal te puedo decir que el estándar para evaluar la calidad académica de las escuelas y facultades de medicina en México es el Examen Nacional de Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas (ENARM). Los mismos miembros del H. Consejo Universitario de la facultad nos lo han hecho saber en distintas ocasiones. El ENARM es un examen por concurso que todo médico aspirante a una especialidad necesita tomar y se le considera el primer paso rumbo a la especialización. Para concursar es necesario haber obtenido el título de Médico Cirujano (y Partero, en el caso de la UANL) y cumplir con requisitos propios de la institución de procedencia. En el caso de la UANL, por lo general el examen se toma recién concluído el servicio social.

En lo personal, considero que los resultados del mismo no necesariamente reflejan con exactitud la calidad de una institución o de su alumnado, no sólo por las deficiencias inherentes a un examen estandarizado, sino porque además ignora a los médicos que optan por una maestría en lugar de una especialización. Pero a final de cuentas, la mayoría de las universidades se basan en este examen incluso para modificar sus planes de estudios. De hecho, a partir del 2006, la UANL modificó su plan de estudios para la licenciatura de Médico Cirujano y Partero basado en parte en los resultados que su alumnado ha obtenido en ese examen en los últimos años.

En el siguiente link puedes encontrar más información al respecto. Los resultados más recientes (2006) los puedes econtrar aquí. Por lo menos desde el 2001, la UANL no ha obtenido precisamente los resultados más brillantes en este examen. Como podrás observar, la Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, la Universidad Panamericana y el ITESM son las instituciones que más destacan, aunque la cantidad de sustentantes de dichas instituciones es considerablemente menor a la de la UANL.

Te puedo decir que al menos por el momento no creo que haya una manera objetiva de hacer un ranking de las mejores escuelas de medicina del país. De hecho, según otro estándar que algunos directivos de mi facultad utilizan (el suplemento de ranking de la Reader's Digest, jaja), la UANL está por encima de la UASLP en el campo de Ciencias de la Salud, mientras que la UNAM está por encima de todas (contradictorio a los resultados del ENARM).

En todo caso, considero una gravísima exageración el asegurar que la facultad de medicina de la UANL es "la mejor del país", pues hasta el momento no conozco una sola fuente fidedigna que avale dicha aseveración, que por cierto es bastante común aquí en Monterrey. Aún así creo que es aceptable que el artículo UANL proclame a su facultad de medicina como una de las mejores porque es algo que una buena parte de la población (por lo menos de Monterrey) parece aceptar como hecho. Aunque revisando el artículo de nueva cuenta, me doy cuenta que ese enunciado necesita una fuente fidedigna... ¿quizá sería mejor eliminarlo?

Saludos, y espero que te sirvan de algo los links a los resultados del ENARM.

Daniel 148.221.77.254 01:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I've seen the ENARM report. UANL is not the best, but it certainly is among the best, according to the document (if you only take medical knowledge). The ENAMR report is sufficiently good as a source.
However, you are right, there is no reliable ranking for Mexican institutions. This is a sad situation.
Hari Seldon 02:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Foxilandia

Greetings.

If you keep adding information, especially controversial information, it will keep being removed, not by me exactly but anybody ("Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that anyone may edit").

  • "Foxilandia is a critical term used in the Mexican political culture to make reference to the administration (2000-2006) of President Vicente Fox. This term was created as criticism to former President Vicente Fox..." I am sure you have a strong opinion on this subject but do we have to have mention "criticism" towards Fox and then immediately paraphrase it in a second paragraph?
  • "...and it is very common, but not exclusive, in material supporting losing candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and the Mexican left in general." You are implying that:
  1. The term is common in material supporting AMLO
  2. AMLO is a candidate
  3. The term is very common in either a) material supporting the left??? or is common in the left??
  • You are basically letting your POV towards AMLO and towards the left affect the NPOV the article must have. The purpose of Wikipedia is to be a vehicle of knowledge, not to convince people of our POVs, plus including controversial content with no source to back them up creates edit wars.
  • In order for others to agree with your edits, you have to actually provide realiable, unbiased sources to back them up, not just emit strong opinions and hope for them to stick. Maybe somebody else who agrees with your POV will provide sources, otherwise anybody else will be free to remove the content. --FateClub 01:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
I know. I believe that the content I am adding is neutral, if poorly worded. I don't see what is wrong with saying that the term is commonly used in material from the left. I am not so irresponsbile as to continously add opinions simply to see if it sticks. I genuinely believe the information I am adding is not an opinion and it is not POV.
In any case, if the consensus is that the content is POV, I wont re-add it. But there is at least another user who believes it is neutral...
And no, AMLO is not a candidate. He was a candidate. The election is now over.
Hari Seldon 02:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Very much over, but the article describes AMLO as a "candidate" and he is certainly not.
  • Adding "criticism to Fox" twice in the first two sentences does not sound neutral, but rather apologetic towards Fox and negative towards everybody else who may disagree with him.
  • I agree with some of the contect you have been including, however, these are my personal beliefs and we must not input our personal beliefs because that is original research. Whatever is controversial, and some of these statements are, must be sourced. --FateClub 02:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Category and Userbox "Users who hate América"

I am sorry, but I disagree with your decision to delete the userbox and the category. First of all, the discussion states that "no" userboxes would be deleted as a result of the discussion, only categories. Yet, my userbox was deleted promptly. Next, you obviously did not read the arguments in favor of the "hate América" wording. This is part of the marketing technique of the team "Club América" and is not intended as a "hate" or "offensive" userbox or category. That is why a suggested a rewording/renaming. I mean there are userboxes for how communists ruined the chinese language, why shouldn't there be a userbox on the lack of preference for a very popular team, whose marketing states that "no one is neutral to América, everybody has feelings for the team: you either love it or hate it"? I am sorry, I just disagree, and I emphatically disagree with the deletion of the userbox. If the category was out of line, that is understandable. But why did the userbox had to go with no warning, no discussion or defense, and no comment in anyone's talk page? Hari Seldon 09:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Attempting to respond to all your concerns:

  • 1.) The userbox was deleted as a result of the T1 speedy deletion criteria. The WP:UCFD page merely alerted me to the userbox's existence.
  • 2.) The category was deleted as a result of the G10 speedy deletion criteria.
  • 3.) As you were involved in the debate discussion, I didn't feel that an additional notification on your user talk page was necessary. Which obviously was the case, since you posted this rather promptly : )
  • 4.) I did indeed read the associated talk page(s), as well as other comments involving this. There are several key policies and guidelines which the userbox (and category) violated, which I linked to in the closure of that discussion. I suggest that for future userboxes you might wish to read Wikipedia:Userboxes#Designing a userbox. One of many key sentences which would apply would be: Avoid categorizing "not"-based userboxes. For example: "This user does not like <noun phrase>." - and the userbox in question took that to the next level by using the word "hate" which then makes it inflammatory and divisive. And under Wikipedia:Userboxes#Content restrictions it states: Userboxes must not be intentionally inflammatory or divisive.
  • 5.) To directly answer your rationale for the userbox's existence: Having a category for like and a category for dislike would mean that we would have 2 categories which would potentially encompass all Wikipedians. As such, it's been previously determined by consensus that we should only have one of the two, and further that it should be the "like" category, and not the "not"/"dislike" category, since the positive category is more likely to be useful for collaboration on articles, and the negative category is more likely to be simply divisive and not helpful.

I hope this clarifies your questions. If not, I have this talk page on my watchlist, so please feel free to ask for further clarification. - jc37 10:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I see your point. Thank you for your explanation. Hari Seldon 19:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories on América

Ok, I am sorry to be here again. Thank you for the insight you provided. However, I would like to know your thoughts on Category:Wikipedians who think América is a better team than yours. I think that it is just as divisive as the one just erased, and thus I'm thinking of changing the "like América" userbox and category to be less inflamatory. This category would need deletion. What do you think? Hari Seldon 19:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

First, no reason to apologise. Honest questions are always welcome : )
As for the category, this one would seem to just need a rename. The current convention of Category:Wikipedians interested in sports teams would seem to be "Wikipedian <team> fans", so something like: Category:Wikipedian Club América fans. (Presuming the accurate name of the team is Club América.)
The userbox has a "bit" more latitude, as long as it isn't divisive or inflammatory. Though the words "better...than yours" is contrary to this, obviously.
Hope this helps : ) - jc37 22:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and nominated the cats for renaming/merging at WP:UCFD. - jc37 06:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thank you! I am sorry I couldn't do this myself. As you can see, I am still learning. Hari Seldon 06:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV en Vicente Fox

Te escribo en espanol por que los 2 somos mexicanos y la verdad no se me hace estar hablando en ingles personalmente, la etiqueta del articulo de Vicente Fox yo la puse y no es vandalismo, no necesitas ser un experto en politica para ver que esta escrito por gente que no simpatiza con el Fox , solo hay criticas repeticion de sus comentarios (lamentables por cierto) y puras cosas malas, no defiendo a Fox tuvo muchisimos errores pero este articulo no es nada enciclopedico y desde su forma de que esta redactado hasta su conenido. En las proximas semanas ire agregando informacion y dejando un poco mas, de lados sus comentarios personales(que si fueron estupidos) y opiniones de otras personas hacerca de Fox.

Por eso mantendre esa etiqueta , espero que podamos llegar a un acuerdo en esto. --Pacoworld 21:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

We are in the english wikipedia and we owe other editors the benefit to follow our discussion.
Who writes the article is irrelevant to neutrality. "POV" would be an article that gives too much weight to a particular point of view without proper citations, or using strong adjectives. In its current form, the Vicente Fox articles does not do that. It can be improved by adding cited material on his term, but that doesn't mean that whatever there is now is unencyclopedic or "partial". Again, source facts take precedence over "balance" or "unsourced facts" that "even" the article. I again invite you, for the third time, to read the guidelines. Hari Seldon 16:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

i can't believe you would place 6 or 8 "citation needed" on 4 lines of writing. No where on wikipedia, have I seen an article that requires that much citation. What's the matter with you?--Dcrcort 02:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

it has to do with writing style. For instance, the use of weasel words, unconfirmed information, assumptions, and other unencyclopedic writing. Hari Seldon 03:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Warning on Vicente Fox

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

Thank you for warning me, Drcrot, but reverting vandalism is not against 3RR. Even when the vandalism is comitted by you. Hari Seldon 00:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User Category for Discussion

A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies. This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized.
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page.
VegaDark 02:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Business and Economics Barnstar

The Business and Economics Barnstar
I award you this Barnstar for your high quality work in the article Economy of Mexico. Your contributions are very appreciated and I personally want you to be around here for a long time. Congratulations! AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 08:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Economy of Brazil

Economy of Brazil article is in need of attention, you can help? JoãoFelipe ( Let's talk! ) 21:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but not this week. Hari Seldon 21:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Gracias! JoãoFelipe ( Let's talk! ) 21:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Science

Hari, with all due respect, you don't seem to know what you are talking about when it comes to science. IT seems that you follow the liberal consensus which is precisely what has put the country in the tough spot that it is now. Things are far more complex than the balance of the market or just numbers. I cannot help but be upset about the fact that you think that you know everything and are unwilling to listen, please keep in mind the times where you have said and stood up by things that turned out not to be true (e.g. the role of research on education, the UNAM budget, the large number of edits to the Reforma article, etc). And please be open to my comments and opinions that as you have pointed out are so different from yours and would help keep an article balanced. Andy Rosenthal 21:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No, my dear friend, the "tough spot" of the country was caused by irresponsible marxist economic policy in the 1970s and 1980s that destroyed the wealth of the nation. It had to be rebuilt using liberal economic policies that still go on today. Rebuilding is hard, but it is illogical to blame the destruction on those who are repairing.
As for science, if science is to be used for profit, then he who wants the profit should pay for it. If science for the sake of science is worth doing, then, a rational private entity will fund it. Who funded the development of the Three Laws of Motion, or the Law of Universal Gravity, or the Theory of Evolution, or the Theory of Relativity? When science has been funded by Universities, always, some one else than the tax payer has gained more than the tax payer: the researcher has gained fame, a company has gained a new product, and the tax payer has gained the pride of paying taxes. If the researcher wants fame and respect, let him fund it. It a company wants a new product, let him fund it.
I don't think I know everything, and I am willing to listen. I simply feel that there is nothing more valuable to rational thought than scrutiny. Feel free to scrutinize, with evidence, my opinion. I offer the same to you. I've defended opinions that where incorrect in the past, yes... when I was 15 years old I believed in a god, but grew over it. I believe that the virtue of any true scientist, and of any individual, is the capacity to scrutinize and abandon old thought when proved unsustainable, either by evidence, or by logic.
This is the reason why I am open to your opinions and comments. Believe me, I seriously consider them. That is the reason I scrutinize them. Scrutiny is the greatest respect an idea can get, and if the idea survives scrutiny, then it proves to be worth that respect.
As for science, I know a lot about science. But morality is a matter of opinion, and deciding who funds science is an entirely moral matter. No one can deny the value of science, but deciding who that value goes to, who benefits, and who should pay is a completely different matter. Because I am an atheist and do not believe in dogma, I usually prefer amoral solutions. The amoral solution, in my opinion, is private funding. But again, this is an idea that must survive scrutiny. And I am not standing by it, I am merely, preseting it for consideration.
Finally, I am in the middle of exams week and I have a particularly difficult finance exam tomorrow. I haven't slept since sunday, and am running low on gas. I have spent too much time already discussing this. Could you please wait for me to continue this discussions until monday?
Hari Seldon 21:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Again with all due respect you know a lot about science and you did not consider research a part of higher education? Please some modesty would not hurt. As smart as you may be you are definitely dogmatic (even though it seems you have rationalized the concept, you are VERY dogmatic) and I will tell you why. Whenever you don't agree with something one has to fight your scrutiny instead of facts, and instead of your giving someone the benefit of the doubt (say some scholar up in COHA who for sure can be more knowledgeable about a subject than you are) you interpret things in your own peculiar way with and analyze people with a cookie cutter and reinvent the wheel every single time. I am sure you believe and like whatever your MBA teachers say, so do you have a double standard?. Do you scrutinize them as well? Andy Rosenthal 21:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] calderon

just do it yourself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dcrcort (talk • contribs) 19:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

On Vicente Fox, I don't like what you did with the cabinet section. I think it looked better the way I had it, merged to the left side of the aticle, without it's own section. I think the new format leaves too much empty space on both sides of the cabinet table. I like your new title though.--Dcrcort 20:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

On Fox's Cabinet, well, I just did it because we did the same thing on Calderón, and because it is a subject that truly deserves its own section. Think of it this way: the extra space can be used for picutres.
Additionally, the table looks great in lower resolutions, which is one thing to take into consideration
Hari Seldon 20:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] School

Hey dude, you have better go back hit the books. Though I will not be able to do much until Wednesday, I will wait for you to come back Monday and we can work out whatever the editors recommended to improve on Fox's article. See you then Andy Rosenthal 20:26, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Addition in North America

Hello Hari, I'm Alex (editing from an anon. IP). Would you please give your opinion in this [1]? I'm trying to include the notion that North America is also a subcontinent in the single American continent model. Thanks. AlexCovarrubias 11:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:CFMtyLogo.png

Hello, Hseldon10. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:CFMtyLogo.png) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/Userbox/Rayados. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 20:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:CHIVASCAMPEON.PNG

Hello, Hseldon10. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:CHIVASCAMPEON.PNG) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/Userbox/Chivas. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 20:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:ClubAmericaLogo.png

Hello, Hseldon10. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:ClubAmericaLogo.png) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/Userbox/pro-america. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 21:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Minilogoprimera.jpg

Hello, Hseldon10. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:Minilogoprimera.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Minilogoprimera.jpg

Hello, Hseldon10. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:Minilogoprimera.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/Userbox/FMF. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Mexico, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your hard work in bringing El Clásico (Mexico) up to standard. You are an asset to the project. --Spike Wilbury 04:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:UANLTigres logo.png

Hello Hseldon10, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:UANLTigres logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:UANLTigres logo.png

Hello Hseldon10, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:UANLTigres logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/UANL Tigres. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:UNAM Logo.PNG

Hello Hseldon10, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:UNAM Logo.PNG) was found at the following location: User:Hseldon10/Userbox/Pumas. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Edit's on Vicente Fox's proposal

Hari, you have added a number of statements to the to do list. I please encourage you to read the refenreces that I have provided on each case. The phrases that are placed in quotation marks, come directly from the source, and do not reflect my opinion. If you think they are inaccurate or unfair, please find sources that document your ideas. I don't want to be harsh (or make this personal) but more often than not, you have said things in your comments, that have been proven wrong with proper documentation. It does not make sense to make the list bigger, especially if you are adding unsourced statements. Thank you. Andy Rosenthal 18:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've read your sources. You try to keep passing opinions as fact. This is unacceptable, and I am merely remarking on it. Hari Seldon 22:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Come on Hari, lets be honest. Half of those comments would not be there if you would have taken the time to read the sources. You had Andrade's opinion in there as a reference for a long time and defended its presence in the article to the last minute. For example the section on murders of journalists (that you want to have a source for) are abstracts of the articles published by the International Press Institute They are on quotation marks because they are direct quotes. I encourage you to read their article on this same encyclopedia. IPI enjoys consultative status with the UN, UNESCO and the Council of Europe. IPI's membership is made up of editors and media executives working for some of the world's most respected media outlets. Would you agree this is a reliable organization? I just made a quote from their report in Mexico. As I said before, if you disagree I encourage you to find sources as prestigious as this one and debate this arguments. I would be happy to work with you in the writing of a section incluiding your sources. These are perhaps opinions but they come from the experts in the field not me. Thanks. Andy Rosenthal 03:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
And I don't oppose to their inclusion! I oppose to their opinion being used as a statement of fact, instead of stating "according to IPI". If IPI is a consultant of UN, UNESCO, or the Council of Europe, then attributing to them their quote can only add to the article. Additionally, I also oppose to the discretional use of quotes. For example, you state their opinion on the status of things, but not on the causes, and government actions, on them. This discretional use adds no context and just leaves the reader more confused, or, at the very least, with partial information that does not conform to NPOV.
As for the Andrade quote, my defense was only that there was not a better reference, and referenced information is better than fact. Additionally, the reference was attributed. In fact, I don't see why we can't add it again with proper attribution (stating who is Andrade and how he relates to Fox). Hari Seldon 17:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
No better sources? I gave you the IPI, AI, and Worlpress.org and you completely disregarded them! You said that some teacher of yours in Monterrey said that they had a bias and you never were willing to include them in the article. Come on Hari, have some integrity. As Deepak Chopra says, be the example of the change you want to see. Is this the impression you want peoiple to have of the ones that share your political ideals? Andy Rosenthal 18:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that you have understood what I was doing. I was just making a quote from the report. That does not mean it has to be included, but an excerpt and important statements must be contrasted with other opinions (like Amnesty International, and Woldpress.org). And this should be informative to you, as you can appreciate what people that are knowledgeable in the area say. (as opposed to what you think, or what your impression is) Now in all fairness, do you honestly believe is accurate to include Andrade's statement? these are independent organizations that do not have any commercial relation to any of the parties involved and that is what makes them trustable. Someone else has documented who is Andrade and why his opinion would be biased, there is no data presented on why he makes such claims and he does not have the reputation in the journalism world that would make him a verifiable source. In all honesty Hari, I believe that before you were a little open to criticisim and sometimes even if you did not like or agreed with something you accepted it if it was properly documented. However, it seems that this is changing. When I came and asked you to modify Andrade's statement you completely ignored what the stance of very prestigious pro-freedomo of speech and human rights organizations is. You have radicalized and have become unwilling to accept critiques or anything that opposses your beliefs. What is perhaps the saddest is that you have made inaccurate or false claims to support your stances. What is the need of cooking statements, is it really worth it? I don't think you are a crook (and I would like to think you don't this on purpose) but I believe that you are extremely biased and this is precluding you from being constructive in your collaborations. I am only asking for what is fair. Do you see Mr Snow statements on Bush's article crediting for anything? I don't gain anything from soiing Fox's reputation but I don't want the article to be biased. I am here asking you to please be reasonable. Andy Rosenthal 18:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Economy of Mexico

Hi Hari, long time no see (cybernetically, of course). =) I just nominated Economy of Mexico as a featured article. I think it is comprehensive and very informative. As I was reviewing it (probably for the 100th time), I came across some statements that you wrote that might need referencing (not that I disagree with them, but I am almost quite certain that the evaluation committee will ask us to reference them) mostly regarding the Banking System and Fobaproa. I am especially concerned with the following:

  • [Fobarpoa] ...and is now frequently denounced politically by detractors who claim the rescue of the financial system was used to commit fraud and corruption. I know there are plenty of newspaper articles that do talk that Fobaproa was a corrupted way to save the bank (with or without proofs), but as for fraud, that is a stronger claim that might need referencing.
  • [Fobaproa] ...The costly rescue—about 20% of GDP—continues to be managed by officials who must still sell off assets. I think we need a reference for both the size of the rescue compared to GDP, and the sell of the assets as a way of management.
  • [Corto] ...The corto is criticised for its lack of transparency and its tenuous hold overrates. I don't particularly like the corto, myself, as an economist, but we must cite who is criticizing the corto (eminent personalities) and why (i.e. its lack of transparency and overrates).

If you have time –I know you've been busy–, would you mind adding the references for this? Thanks in advance! --the Dúnadan 16:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the charges of fraud are stronger than those of corruption. According to "denouncing" books, the "corruption" was in the form of fraudulent borrowing by the bank's managers.
As for the size of the rescue, the "still sell off assets" claim, and the corto claim all come from the EIU. The reference is right there already.
I am currently on an internship with limited access to a library. I can't even find references for claims I know are easy to reference, if only I had access to a library... But maybe this weekend I can spend sometime in it?
Hari Seldon 18:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Paseo San Pedro Logo.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Paseo San Pedro Logo.JPG. 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 Wikipedia articles 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

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 insure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Donrober.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Donrober.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Rettetast 21:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC) Rettetast 21:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interplaza Shoptown

Interplaza Shoptown has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this organization or company might not yet be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the prod notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 02:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Franco_offside.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Franco_offside.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Franco_offside.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Franco_offside.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 11:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:AMX logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AMX logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

In my maternal family history I was told that my great grandfather, who at one time was sheriff of Brooks County, Texas had hidden Bernardo Reyes in his attic for a time to protect him. I don't know the years now but I will try and find out when this happened. Joe Guerra

[edit] "presidencia" website images re not public domain

Sorry, but yoyu're uploading images from presidencia website as public domain, but they aren't. Since april 2006, content is licensed under a creative commons, no commercia, no derivatives license, which is incompatible with the site. -- drini [meta:] [commons:] 12:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] De tu "articulo" sobre Bernardo Reyes

Tenías que ser del Tec, cuate, para hacer semejante alarde de ignorancia: ¿cómo se puede haber presentado Reyes como candidato a una elección en 1899 si en ese año ni siquiera hubo elecciones? Y lo peor es que eres de Monterrey!!! Hay dos libros sobre Reyes donde puedes informarte bien sobre su biografía, para que dejes de rebuznar como hasta ahora: el de Victor Niemayer y el de Artemio Benavides Hinojosa. Salud! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.152.46.236 (talk) 06:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Mi contribución fue producto de una investigación "express" que hice para que la página existiera. Queda a otros usuarios, como tú, modificar y elevar el contenido de wikipedia. Por eso este proyecto es colaborativo. Hari Seldon 23:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bias

this page does not include anything about the cost, financing, or controversies surrounding this event. Hari Seldon 10:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that article is so neutral that is neither incluiding positive nor negative comments about the event. I think (I may be wrong) that article is just listing general info about the event without the opinion of the one that included that info. As a matter of fact article doesnt include anything about cost, controversies etc.. but that doesnt means that article is not neutral, thats just meas that article is incomplete. Well, thats just my opinion. regards Abögarp 18:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Paseo San Pedro Logo.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Paseo San Pedro Logo.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] wrong buddy.

Dear friend, you couldn't be more wrong about Mexico's second city. Your pride for your city is so blinding that you are completely overlooking the facts. in your contribution you say that in all aspects of modern urbanization, Monterrey is Mexico's second city. WRONG! only one of them could be disputed which is Industry. Population: Guadalajara Culture: Guadalajara don't give me that non-sense about a writer from Monterrey, Guadalajara has been the sould of Mexico since the country's image started going around the world. If you ask a Japanese, German, Indian, Whatever they will tell you that what makes them think of Mexico is Tequila, the charro suit and Pedro Infante and Vicente Fernandez's music. I HAVE ASKED. Let's also don't forget the most successful soccer team of all time, chivas of Guadalajara. Lorena Ochoa, the #1 golf player in the world and Guadalajara is Mexico's silicon valley. I could go on forever. You my friend are wrong and need to accept it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.131.131.253 (talk) 13:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Axtel logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Axtel logo.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)