User talk:Ruiz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Contents

[edit] Comments

[edit] Criticism

  • None yet

[edit] Suggestions

  • None yet

Template:MexicanStates. Fuller reply back on my talk page. –Hajor

now: Template:States of Mexico. I mention this, because I will ask for deletion of the old one. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fidel Castro

There is another picture in Fidel Castro that doesn't have copyright information, yet you haven't removed it. Why? Maybe you don't like the image of Castro and the Pope? If you're going to play policeman then at least play by the rules --Cantus 19:03, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Unperson question from non-unperson without username (yet)

Ruiz, thanks for the name fixes for article "Hernán Cortes." I suppose I should get a username... How do I link Orwell's "Unperson," to the page I found Unperson on, namely, the same page as the definition of "Damnatio Memoriae"? (I knew Cortes was known as Unperson in Mexico, which led me to his page, which I then proceeded to edit, closing out often because there's no spell-checker!!!) I read the instructions but it didn't work. Do you know what Unperson is in Spanish? Lisa LisaHelenW@aol.com

Hello Lisa. Unperson is not a Spanish word. As far as I know, it's a term originally coined by George Orwell in 1984. It may look quite similar to "Una persona" (a person) but that's not what Orwell tried to depict. As the 2nd paragraph of this website suggests, when they say Cortés became an unperson they are making an orwellian analogy. Now, regarding your first question, you just have to wrap the word in brackets (i.e. [[word]]) wherever you found it. I've done it for you already in Damnatio memoriae. Ruiz 23:14, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, coined by Orwell. I tried bracketing it without success even though I know it's on several pages, but there's a Wikipedia instruction to the effect that the ability to cross-reference to a hyperlink within another page isn't yet available but will be in the future. I read somewhere, I think in the tome "The Mexico Reader" (the article by Octavio Paz?), that Cortes is known as Unperson in Mexico, "not Nonperson." I'll ask a Mexican to clarify this crucial question :-)

[edit] Mexican States

Good to see you back. I've been away for the summer myself; just restarted editing this evening. If you have a moment, please glance over at Talk:States of Mexico: I'm not quite sure how/what to respond, and I'd appreciate your input. (I'm the person who "put it back wrong", of course.) Saludos, –Hajor 05:52, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Presidencia

Excellent news! Of course, you spend 40 mins looking for a photo, downloading it, trimming & resizing it, uploading & labelling it, and then some moronic troll comes and overwrites it with a 'fair use' photo from Reuters. I stopped frequenting that Brazilian site (nightmare to navigate, but some splendid pics available) largely for that reason. I suppose image:AMLO should be brought across to w:en, but it's time I was in bed. Slds, pues, –Hajor 06:38, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Politics of Nuevo León

Hi! First of all, thanks for giving us a hand with the Spanish-English translations. Regarding the question you posted in here, the two independent deputies were representing two of the four political parties that were part of the winning alliance. After the victory, the alliance was dissolved, but it didn't prevent them from getting their seat by means of "proportional representation" of the alliance as a whole. Now, in those elections their parties failed miserably at a national level, an internal struggle followed, and long story short, they became independent. One of them is now green by the way, so I'll update the table and the numbers in the body of the article. I hope everything makes sense now. If you have further questions please let me know. Cheers, Ruiz 03:53, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you sort out the disagreement I had with someone in that talk page: did I understand the history and the meaning of the constitution correctly, or should I have translated literally? I find that in doing translation on historical topics I need to do a lot of non-literal translation, because of different reasonable assumptions about cultural knowledge. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:56, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

By the way, if you have other specific articles you think merit translation into English, let me know. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:54, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Agualeguas.jpg

I listed Image:Agualeguas.jpg as a possibly unfree image because the link no longer works. If you want to add anything, please go to that page. --[[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682 (talk)]] 06:55, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] NL date

Well spotted. Must have been my fingers when I was typing in all those dates. I'm also somewhat upset (mildly putting it) that that date format doesn't work on w:es. Wikitheory holds that if I ignore it, either someone else'll fix them or they aren't that important after all. Wonder what'll happen... –Hajor 19:33, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Clever work with the search and replace (I still think w:es should have recognised that ISO date format, tho'). Now, any idea where I can find a list of the DF's late, unlamented regentes to flesh out my Head of Government of the Federal District article? –Hajor 14:08, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikistress!

Someone is federalizing all the Mexican city articles ([[Chilpancingo, Guerrero]], etc.), while someone else is adding a "NNth president" to the presidents' infoboxes! I don't know where to start... –Hajor 5 July 2005 23:07 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, and for the reassuring message. Let me buy you a beer. I just guess you're a lot better at being bold than I am. There isn't a Wikiproject for Mexico yet; there is one for LatAm as a whole, but there's never any activity on it. There is someone currently trying to set up a Caribbean Wikipedians' Notice Board, which would probably be a useful resource for communicating among all the users involved with that part of the world, but they're still caught up defining its scope: Seems logical to me to include Mex and CentAm in with the islands, just because there are so few editors in both regions, but there's been no decision as yet. (Let's make it a real beer if you're ever down in the Big City, ok?) Cheers, –Hajor 7 July 2005 04:40 (UTC)


[edit] Images, categories and speculation

Hi Vizcarra, I've seen some of your contributions, particularly Jeffrey Max Jones and Julio Frenk. There are a couple of things that I would like to let you know :

  1. Neither images nor web pages from the Mexican government are in the "public domain" as you have claimed in most images you have uploaded. There is ONE particular server, fuente.presidencia.gob.mx that releases most images in the public domain, but that's it (notice that fuente.presidencia.gob.mx is not www.presidencia.gob.mx). The Mexican law is quite clear about it: Art. 29: Los derechos patrimoniales estarán vigentes durante: II. Cien años después de divulgadas: a) Las obras póstumas, siempre y cuando la divulgación se realice dentro del periodo de protección a que se refiere la fracción I, y b) Las obras hechas al servicio oficial de la Federación, las entidades federativas o los municipios... Pasados los términos previstos en las fracciones de este artículo, la obra pasará al dominio público. Ley Federal del Derecho de Autor.
  2. To speed up the process, it would be nice if you could a) Remove the pics from the articles and b) Request yourself the deletion of the images. If you need free pictures of Julio Frenk, José Ángel Gurria, Rosario Green, etc. you may visit the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the server listed above and please be sure to include all details regarding the source, author, date, etc. and where it says that they are under the license you are claiming them to be. If you need help take a look at the following examples:image:Ernesto Zedillo Jacques Chirac.jpg and Image:Beatriz Paredes.jpg.
  3. Regarding your rearrangement of categories, I would like to remind you that both the birth and death categories are less relevant than the others, that's why they are usually located at the end.
  4. In some of your articles, such as Jeffrey Max Jones, you tend to speculate (i.e. "His replacement would be María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez"). Since there's no way we can predict who the next senator is going to be, particularly one year before the election, is better to put those rumours aside. If you need more information, take a look at Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines.

Cheers, Ruiz 21:44, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

  1. Thanks for the information. The Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores has informed me that the information on their sites are all public domain, and I must have assumed that meant all government pages.
  2. I will leave that to you since I have not verified the information you have given me.
  3. "Less relevant" or "more relevant" is very subjective. I have seen more pages with the birth and death before any other categories, and makes sense to me since numbers are usually placed before letter for alphabetic order. (see Marie Curie, Salvador Dalí)
  4. In this case you are speculating that I "tend to speculate", María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez' position is that of replacement senator, as a matter of fact. That's why she would be the replacemnt if Jones died, quit to run for presidency or was ejected from the position. I would suggest you informed yourself or ask before calling information "rumour".

Cheers, --Vizcarra 06:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Second notice

I tried to be reasonable with you but since you insist:

  1. I am requesting you some proof that the web pages of the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs "are all public domain".
  2. Your comments on most images you have uploaded keep misleading every single user of Wikipedia. You can take as long as you wish to "verify" the law that I've quoted or request written permission from every single source you have used. What you can't do, is to leave the text without modification in every image you have uploaded because you already admitted that it was (a rather naïve) assumption of yours, not something you could prove, so please substitute the public domain notice with Template:No license until you find a reliable source explicitly placing them in the public domain, as stated in Wikipedia:Copyrights#Image_guidelines.

In addition:

  • Neither Marie Curie nor Salvador Dalí has its categories arranged alphabetically, so where do you get that it "makes sense to me since numbers are usually placed before letter for alphabetic order"?
  • I misunderstood your Jeffrey Max Jones contribution: "His six-year term expires in 2006 since there is no re-election for senators in Mexico. His replacement would be María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez." To me, it sounds like Ma. del Carmen Jiménez would be her successor, not that she IS, in fact, a substitute senator.

Ruiz 08:15, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think you have been reasonable, but rather rude and condescending. "I insist"... with?

  1. I do have proof. How do you want it?
  2. I seriously doubt that "every single user of Wikipedia" has visited the mentioned articles and if they have, they have read my "misleading" remarks. I would substitute "the public domain notice with Template:No license" it if your manner as at the least proper but it isn't. I rather risk not being able to contribute to wikipedia ever again than honor your arrogant demeanor. I am a volunteer, I don't get paid to contribute, so if volunteering for wikipedia requires putting up with hostile wikipedians, I rather not contribute at all.

And "in every image you have uploaded" you have got to be kidding me! Even movie poster?!

In addition:
Neither one of those articles has categories arranged alphabetically, so, by your own observation are births and deaths more important than the others?. Where do I get that it "makes sense to me"? Are you kidding? I've known myself long enough to understand what makes sense to me. Also numbers are generally placed before letters. See any list, including here, in a category for example.

Yes, you did misunderstand me. Successor and replacement are two different concepts in Mexican politics. And Jeffrey is a he not a she ("her successor"). Would be and will be are also different. --Vizcarra 17:15, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Third notice

You are old enough to decide by yourself whether you want to keep contributing or not. That's your call, not ours. But if you decide to keep contributing you have to obey the rules and follow the guidelines. Every contributor, including myself, is a volunteer and nobody wants to log in everyday and spend hours cleaning after you when you do know exactly what your doing, you couldn't care less if you break the rules, you keep on forcing people to fix your mistakes and you keep on manipulating and picking up conflicts with users in both w:ES and w:EN.

Image tagging is as important as writing content. People can't use the pics freely if they aren't sure about the source/license and keeping the wrong tags and making false statements deceive users. The pic at your user page is a perfect example. Would you like someone to download it, write stuff on it or use it to promote all sorts of products, from pyramid schemes to porn websites? Someone could, because your own picture isn't tagged properly and there's a HUGE warning sign at the upload page saying: "If you upload a file here to which you hold the copyright, you must license it under the GNU Free Documentation License or release it into the public domain." so it would be safe for him/her to assume that, since you took it by yourself with a a webcam, you own the copyright and you decided to license it under the GFDL or the pd. See? those assumptions are the ones that are gonna give us a headache in a few days, weeks or months if you don't fix the Mexican politicians pics you uploaded. People could start copy/pasting content from the govt. websites or adding dozens of new copyright'd pics because of your claims.

So, in short, if you do care about this project assume your responsibility: go fix the tags, post the e-mail or the scanned letter where the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowledged that their websites "are all public domain" or request the pics to be deleted altogether if you know it's just a lie. I can help you out finding free pics of most politicians involved.

Ruiz 20:10, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

  • "You are old enough to decide by yourself whether you want to keep contributing or not."
That is the difference, you know how old I am and you have plenty of information about me (from my profile). You? I have no idea who you are. But I'm assuming you are "old enough to decide" to conduct yourself in a professional manner.
  • "That's your call, not ours."
"ours"? You and cookie?
  • "But if you decide to keep contributing you have to obey the rules and follow the guidelines. Every contributor, including myself, is a volunteer and nobody wants to log in everyday and spend hours cleaning after you"
Well, if you are not willing to contribute by cleaning others mistakes you may want to let somebody else do it. Many have pointed out my mistakes and I have apologized for them, but the mistakes were pointed out in an educated manner before.
  • "when you do know exactly what your doing,"
You go from saying I made "naive" assumptions to say that "I know exactly what" I'm doing? Make up your mind, which is it?
  • "you couldn't care less if you break the rules,"
And you know that from? Do you know me? Remember that you have misunderstood me before (based on your own confession).
Is this remark consistent with the spirit of wikipedia?
  • "you keep on forcing people to fix your mistakes"
I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I contribute, if I make mistakes than somebody else could choose to point it out. I myself have chosen to point mistakes out, nobody has forced me.
  • "and you keep on manipulating and picking up conflicts with users in both w:ES and w:EN."
What conflicts have I picked? Cookie accused me of being "unethical" for deleting her remarks form my discussion page. What I decided was to avoid conflict by desisting from uploading any image and told Cookie right away that if she wanted to delete them then it was fine. If you have noticed (and you should have before making any accusations) I have desisted from uploading images in w:ES and mentioned about the "fair use" policies of w:EN which are different from w:ES.
  • "Image tagging is as important as writing content. People can't use the pics freely if they aren't sure about the source/license and keeping the wrong tags and making false statements deceive users."
I'm trying to deceive users now?
  • "The pic at your user page is a perfect example. Would you like someone to download it, write stuff on it or use it to promote all sorts of products, from pyramid schemes to porn websites?"
No, I wouldn't, but that's the risk I took by posting it there.
  • "See? those assumptions are the ones that are gonna give us a headache in a few days, weeks or months if you don't fix the Mexican politicians pics you uploaded. People could start copy/pasting content from the govt. websites or adding dozens of new copyright'd pics because of your claims."
I think you covered that already, and you said that it "would be nice" if I tagged them properly, not necessary, not essential. I assumed that's what you do here at the wiki (again, I know nothing about you), so that would be your job no? I had assumed that the pics were on the public but not that you have pointed it out otherwise I will make sure when I upload one not from the SRE site. So to avoid headaches you could have tagged them properly instead of spending so much time writing insults at me. It's easier to point mistakes out, give links to where the policies are, that way the wikipedian can act appropriately in the future.
  • "So, in short, if you do care about this project assume your responsibility: go fix the tags"
Well, since its your job to fix tags, I will let you do that. I know it "would be nice" for me to do it, but I rather focus on other things at the moment.
  • "post the e-mail or the scanned letter where the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowledged that their websites <<are all public domain>>"
Could you care to explain me where do I do this?
  • "or request the pics to be deleted altogether if you know it's just a lie."
I'm sure someday you will learn more appropriate ways to phrase this remak. And I'm also sure you will learn to use titles that are less likely to be considered hostile than "Second notice", "Third notice".
  • "I can help you out finding free pics of most politicians involved."
No thanks, I want the least interaction with you as possible, because of your demeanor.
If I didn't care about the projects why would I write hundreds of articles?
If you care about the wikiproject, you will show some gratitude to those who contribute instead of saying how you've "seen" them. If you do care you will ask explanations before jumping to conclusion about wikipedians contributing with "rumours". If you do care about the wikipedia projects you won't make people feel bad about them "forcing you" to fix their mistakes.
--Vizcarra 21:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Final notice

Since you insist, I am gonna take this issue to the next level. We are all volunteers and most of us have a rather busy schedule. Because of that, most of us do not enjoy being forced to clean after you because you "rather focus on some other things" as if your interests were more important than ours, as if your spare time was more important than ours, as if the quality of the encyclopaedia was solely our responsability and as if we should be grateful that you are leaving a bunch of misleading statements all over.

"Since its your job to fix tags, I will let you do that". No, it is not my job, it is your responsibility. It's called ethics. You can't keep writing that kind of stuff and telling people it is their job to find out whether you are right or wrong and then telling them it is also their job or someone else's job to fix it because you "rather focus on some other things".

If you want to keep participating in Wikipedia you need to stand behind your contributions and play by the rules.

Ruiz 04:03, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, good luck. --Vizcarra 04:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Presidents & Cardinals

Thanks for your succinct & eloquent arguments on the MexPres template. And the cardinals thing -- it's a convention, apparently, one that led to no end of disambig pages being created during the conclave. It sounded odd to me, but there were a lot of very earnest editors from Ireland and Chicago with whom I didn't feel like getting into a fight. If you look at Cardinal (catholicism), you'll see it says "upon elevation the word "Cardinal" becomes part of the prelate's name". I've certainly never heard it used when (eg) they interview Onésimo or Norberto on the radio, but I suppose it counts as "encyclopaedic" usage (?). (And drop me a note if you need another beer, ok?) –Hajor 21:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquette

Hi there. I saw your post over at Wikiquette alerts. I have told User:Vizcarra about my message here. Note that I am not a Mediator, and am merely offering an outside opinion and trying to be constructive in my view and criticism of the situation. I hope there need be no further unhappiness over the issue. If I have upset you or misunderstood or been unfair, please respond on my talk page, but note that I think this is a minor dispute and am not intending to further it or act as a mediator.

The question that you raise about the images is a valid one. I cannot read Spanish/Mexican and so I cannot verify the meaning of that copyright notice. I do not really understand why Vizcarra appears to refuse to do the small amount of work it would take to establish whether these images are, in fact, PD or not, and to tag them as appropriate. If they are not, they may still qualify under Wikipedia:Fair use provisions. Unfortunately, if neither of these things can be clearly established, the images must necessarily be deleted. Sticking a tag on an image is a few seconds' work. That said, the way of doing things round here is, if you see something wrong, {{sofixit}} and I would encourage you to do so rather prolong a minor conflict. That does not exonerate Vizcarra completely though, since he uploaded the images: it would be considerate to save others the leg work. It is not anyone's 'job' to check his images for him although many will volunteer. There is Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations and WP:PUI, although I imagine someone round here already knows the answer so a post to the Village Pump will probably do the trick. You may wish to pursue one of those options; I'd start at the Village Pump.

As to the question of Wikiquette, I think that you could have taken a less instructory approach. I'm not sure that issuing "Notices" like this is the best way to go. I would suggest a simple, brief, message in future will do, and then to simply take the images through the processes if no satisfactory response is forthcoming. Some of your messages are, I think, a little strong. Suggesting he misleads every Wikipedian, for example, is just an accusation that is very unlikely to persuade someone to cooperate. Gently cajoling will achieve more. If you want to change the order of categories, just be WP:BOLD and do it: don't allow something so minor to result in exchanges of irritated comments. Equally, suggesting that someone has "naively" made an error is unlikely to de-escalate a situation. Generally speaking, whilst Vizcarra might have looked into the images himself, getting annoyed about the fact that he won't just upsets your Wikipeding for a few days. Either ignore the images in question or, if good conscience forbids that, use the processes that are available to tag or remove unacceptable images yourself. At least then something will be done about it and that's better for all of us.

Some of Vizcarra's responses (but not all of them), however, escalate tension rather than de-escalate and that doesn't achieve much other than to upset people. If he feels insulted by a message, he should say so in simple terms; normally the other person will rephrase and apologise. Suggesting that someone's response is not "educated" doesn't achieve much. Saying that "you will learn how to phrase that" is somewhat condescending when he accuses you of the very same thing. That is unnecessary in my opinion, but it is the kind of thing one should simply rise above; it does not deserve the time it takes to get annoyed by it. It does, however, seem that Vizcarra brought some overspill from some upset in another Wikipedia — that should not have been done, whoever Cookie is.

I think this was a simple upset over a simple issue (image tagging and order of categories). I hope it can be easily fixed. I trust you will both offer a nice simple solution. -Splash 22:54, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Leonardo Rodríguez Alcaine

Thanks for expanding the stub I quickly put together this afternoon. News of his death simply came as a shock, especially after giving his support to Madrazo just yesterday. -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 21:20, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Hello Ruiz! Why did you decided to change the term mayor (@ Alejandro Encinas) for CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR? In spanish the correct word is "Delegado" or "Jefe delegacional but in english i believe the term MAYOR works? (go to the article mayor @ wikipedia and have a look) Saludos, Abögarp

[edit] MAYOR

Hello Ruiz! Why did you decided to change the term mayor (@ Alejandro Encinas) for CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR? In spanish the correct word is "Delegado" or "Jefe delegacional but in english i believe the term MAYOR works? (go to the article mayor @ wikipedia and have a look) Saludos, Abögarp

[edit] VfD vs speedy

Neither List of Mexicans nor List of Emperors of Mexico qualify for speedy deletion. Blanking the articles is also not appropriate, as an administrator may make the mistake of thinking it was just a blank article to begin with. Use WP:VFD if you wish to have these lists deleted. u◦p◦p◦l◦a◦n◦d 07:48, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gloria Trevi

Dear Ruiz: Hello! I am the writer of the article about Gloria Trevi, which now you have put as a possible copyright violation. Look up at the history link of the article, and you will see that I began it.

The type of license that we have here at wikipedia, allows other websites to use our articles. As a consequence, many websites will duplicate what we have written, which I consider an honor. This was the case, as a matter of a fact, the page where you found the article, one, says on the bottom that they borrowed the article from Wikimedia.....us!.

Other than that I want to thank you for at least trying to make a good job at Wikipedia, I hope to hear from you soon, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Your friend, Antonio La Perla Martin

Hey Ruiz! What's up? Hey dont worry, thats all right about the Gloria Trevi item. I remember myself when I first started on wikipedia, check Wilfred Benitez, go to that page's history and check on the botton, the first edition. You will see all the mistakes I did in just one article!

So don't worry, buddy, it's all right. By the way, what country are you from? Being that your user name is Ruiz that's kinda interesting.

Thank you and God bless you!! Sincerely yours, Antonio Jesus' age Martin

[edit] Julian Carrillo

Hello, thanks for the information on the Copyrighted material, I have permission from the webmaster to use all the information on his webpage, I have written all about it on the discussion page of the article and I have updated the article, I will try to find new pics and information for my other articles, thanks again. Quillito

[edit] Rosario Robles

Hello Ruiz, Rosario Robles is not a member of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (she used to be) So the new category you have included in rosario's article is incorrect. Cheers, Abögarp

[edit] Categorization

Hello again!

I noticed you have been working in cats and i also noticed that you moved all articles in subcategory: Mexican state governors to other cats. I have a comment.

From my point of view articles refering to people needs to be categorized in categories such as #### births, professions, nationalities, positions they have occupied (governors of... presidents of...) etc. Lets say, in case of Arturo Montiel category:Governors of the State of Mexico works. BUT articles refering to positions needs to be categorized different, that means the article Governor of the State of Mexico is an article refering to a position not a person so should be categorized different.

If you browse wikipedia you will find that article George Bush is categorized as Governors of Texas, Presidents of the U.S. (Both cats refer to people). But the article President of the U.S. is categorized as Executive Branch of the U.S. Government

Article kofi Annan is categorized as UN Secretaries-General. Article UN Secretary General is categorized as United Nations.

Article Elizabeth II is categorized as Queens regnant, Reining monarchs, etc.. but article Queen of the United Kingdom redirects to Brithis monarchy wich is categorizes as Government of the U.K.

For what i have seen you are categorizing the position and the person in the same category. I belive that articles such as Governor of xxxxx should be found in a category belonging to Mexican government not under a category belonging to Mexican people by occupation.


Saludos, Abögarp

[edit] "Mexican presidential candidates" category

You created this "new" category but "Candidates to the Presidency of Mexico" already existed. With interwiki for "Candidatos a la Presidencia de Mexico". If you disagree with the name of a category you can request it to be renamed, rather than creating the same with a new name. Cheers, --Vizcarra 21:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Mexican governors

Same case here. This is not a "new category" but rather a new name for an existing category called "Mexican state governors". If you would like to change the name of the category asked for it to be moved into the new name and add a discussion as to why you would like to change the name. I don't agree with the new name, because in that sense Guillermo Ortiz is a Mexican governor, being the governor of the Banco de Mexico although he's not a Mexican state governor. --Vizcarra 19:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Delegado

Hi, there. Saw your comment on Abögarp's page re delegados. I've always preferred calling them as "borough mayors", contrasting with the "city mayor" / jefe de gobierno. That would be similar to the terminology in London (NYC, although it has an overall city mayor, has 'borough presidents', I believe); I assume city mayors vs. borough/arrondissement mayors would work in Paris, too. What do you think? –Hajor 01:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Diferendo

Would you and Vizcarra like to meet up somewhere in my user space and hash out your differences under the oversight of an uninvolved party? We might manage to go some way towards establishing standard guidelines for dealing with Mexican articles in general, too. –Hajor 15:30, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your remarks

I have read your remarks left on my talk page. I have chosen not to respond to them and remove it. I will continue to do so as long as you keep a condescending tone. I will start replying to any remarks written in a polite manner. You can refer to User talk:Ruiz#Wikiquette, to determine what type of your attitude and wording is condescending and aggressive. Cheers, --Vizcarra 00:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Mexico

Hi, there. This is a cordial invitation for you to point your browser towards Wikipedia:WikiProject Mexico: something that a couple of people have talked about setting up in the past, and which I think could help provide a forum for broader discussions than the (somewhat unfortunate) ones that have taken place regarding Mexico articles in recent weeks. I sincerely hope you do sign up and, together, we can take our best shot at this thing. For instance, I've proposed creating a page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mexico/Terminology, precisely for discussing issues like what the heck to call esos delegados que tienen los chilangos. If you like, you could be the first poster. Best, –Hajor 20:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

So far so good? Drop me an email sometime, ok? –Hajor 23:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arsenio Farell Cubillas

He does have an Irish surname, how do you know for sure that he doesn't have Irish ancestors? ---> Sagitario 07:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

OK? well, it's not an Irish "sounding" surname... it's in fact an Irish surname. I also created these categories; Category:Black Mexicans, Category:Japanese Mexicans, Category:Chinese Mexicans, so i don't why why you're complaining about us creating categories only for European Mexicans. ---> Sagitario 04:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Just because the spelling is different from the common Irish surname Farrell, it doesn't mean it's not an Irish surname. Here's a link to a website that states that Farell is of Irish origin (and also, the many different spelling variations of the surname). ---> Sagitario 22:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] vfd

Hello Ruiz! Check this cfd discussion: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 9 Regards, Abögarp

[edit] CFD

These unneeded categories were created by Vizcarra, after related categories, which were also created by him, were already nominated fo deletion. Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#December_18 ---> Sagitario 20:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits

Hi. If you decide to change the image illustrating an article, please take care not orphaning the old image if it is also good and has a free licence, especially when it is an image unique to Wikipedia on the web and your replacement already can be seen somewhere else on the web. You might wish to make a link to the old image in the article talk page, or move the image to Commons if appropriate. Also, I notice you've changed links to "Mexico" to "Mexican". As "Mexican" is currently a redirect to "Mexico", that's probably not a good idea, unless there is some reason you think we should have a seperate article for "Mexican" and plan to create one. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 21:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reyes Tamez

Sure thing—it's back at Reyes Tamez. What is the policy for using the maternal last name, anyway? Vicente Fox and Ernesto Zedillo don't use it, but Adolfo Ruiz Cortines does. --Spangineeres (háblame) 06:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Hello Ruiz, I saw your comments on Spangineer's talk page... just FYI... User:Drini is also an administrator who is also Mexican.

Regards, Abögarp 0:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pregunta rápida

In this edit what is "PUI" standing for? Saludos. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 03:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the tip. I knew of Australia boy's image upload spree, I just didn't know how to deal with it myself. If you check his talk page I drew up a list of offending images. I didn't want to sound too harsh to him because he's still a newb and his English is not that good, despite of what he claims in his user page. Saludos. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 03:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nine Flowers hoax

Hello, I wonder if you could please help sort out whether The Nine Flowers of Christmas article is a hoax or not? Perhaps leave a comment on its talk page? KZF 16:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 01:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. 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-no-disclaimers}} 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 01:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 01:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. 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 02:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. 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 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 07:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Partido de la Revolucion Democratica.gif. 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 23:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)