User talk:Cambalachero/Archive 8

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of 2013 Buenos Aires train crash at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jetstreamer ^Talk 18:40, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, there

I just wanted to gently let you know that I addressed your comments regarding Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/68th Academy Awards/archive1.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Argentine legislative election, 2013 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |align="left" |[[Broad progressist Front

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Argentine legislative election, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oscar Martínez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I was hoping if you can give me opinions and comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/61st Academy Awards/archive1 as you have done for my other Oscar ceremonies? I would like to receive feedback so I could make necessary improvements. I promise that this will be the FINAL Oscar ceremony list I promote this year (I have one more list left). I would be grateful for the help.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 17:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

surely Orwell believed he lived somehow in the stalin era. indeed that was part of what bothered him so much. when you say animal farm is not about the politics of the real world - that is untrue. indeed it is only about the politics of the real world at large. its not really about animals in a farm is it. I think the category should be put back . unless the category explicitly states it refers to only works set in the soviet union. Sayerslle (talk) 01:06, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Cemento at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! DoctorKubla (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that you have been unblocked. I would advise you to make a list of the topics that you want to work with and that someone may seem as historical or somewhat related to history, and make a request for clarification. All this issue would have been resolved a lot sooner, or not took place at all, if there was a formal clarification "sports are not considered part of history" available. That's what I did, current politics are not history but someone may see them as history, so I requested my own clarification. Have in mind that many users may not have a background in history and may fall in oversimplifications such as "if it mentions something historic, then it's a history article"; try to consider things from their perspective when preparing the list. Cambalachero (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Great! I've got some portal work to do over the weekend, but once that's done I'll take a look if no one else has in the meanwhile. Miyagawa (talk) 18:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Cambalachero. I filed a clarification request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 18:23, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Cambalachero, thanks for the enforcement request notification. I'm debating on whether to comment on it or not. It seems that the more I write on the matter, the greater the grudge becomes, and the more my statements get distorted.

Plus, I'm sure Sandstein and the others will take care of it regardless of what I comment. I mean, I also made a mistake when getting involved in War of the Pacific, and I still got blocked for it despite the matter had become stale after two weeks (and even after I had marked out my statements & disengaged).

Maybe I should just write that one line. I'll think about it.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 16:35, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Remember that an interaction ban can be reduced to a basic premise: don't talk to or about the other party of the ban, period. There is an exception when a party reports that the other party has violated the ban (which I have just done), but that's basically it. Don't comment on the enforcement case unless the arbitrators have questions for you, and continue the clarification request as if the other party had not said anything at all. At least, that's how I understand the rules. Cambalachero (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you for the advice Cambalachero. My interpretations of the rules are always wrong, so I'll follow yours. [:o)}--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm surprised the clarification request has so many participants. It must have been something in the turkey.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 05:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Just let it go. I'm sure that, eventually, the arbitrators will focus again in the original request. Cambalachero (talk) 13:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Homenaje, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Almafuerte (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mis amigos de siempre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diego Pérez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Osvaldo Civile at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias ^talk 12:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Cambalachero. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tango music, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: it's been move about a bit in the past from this title, which makes it de-facto contested. A RM is a better idea than a straight move at this point. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a courtesy notice indicating that a motion has been proposed by an arbitrator in a request which you are a party to. For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 11:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

You have made a statement in the clarification request relating to Argentine History. This message is to let you know that a motion amending the original decision has now been proposed. You are welcome to add comments on this motion underneath your original statement. Thanks, AGK [•] 11:43, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Sin código at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Gatoclass (talk) 16:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

"The part that they do not know is the real world identity of the people using those fancy usernames, but no infiltration will help them with that. Unless someone discloses his identity, there is no way to find it out"

It is easy for any member organisation of the UKUSA Agreement to identify a Wikipedia user if they so wish with the minimum of effort. It is basically the same as is used on Wikipedia for a Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations#Quick CheckUser requests, with the additional advantage that they can trace the IP address back to the person paying the bill. What is more SIGINT will usually allow them to work out who the user is even if the ISP is in a country hostile to the members of UKUSA Agreement. If they cannot work it out easily then that in itself would be part of SIGINT intelligence that would probably flag interest and hence more effort put into identification. So while one can remain anonymous to other Wikipedia users, it is unlikely that if they so wish your identity would remain anonymous to the members of the UKUSA Agreement. --PBS (talk) 13:45, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Campeones de la vida, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mariano Martínez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hermética, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KISS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I will continue to edit Hermética tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Leo A. Mercer (talk) 06:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The Committee has resolved by motion that:

In remedy 2 of Argentine History, the following text:

"the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces."

Is replaced by:

"(A) the political, economic, and military history of Latin America prior to December 1983 and (B) any other aspect of the history of Latin America that is directly related to geopolitical, economic, or military events that occurred before December 1983. This restriction applies across all namespaces."

For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ^{21 Call me Hahc21} 00:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Discuss this

  Hello! Your submission of Mis amigos de siempre at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! AdmrBoltz 00:45, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article You Are the One (telenovela) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mediran -- Mediran (talk) 07:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The K money trail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page José Gómez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Eduardo Arnold at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Soman (talk) 20:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, power has been back a few days ago, but as it came and go, I left the banner just in case. I will remove it now, as several days have passed without blackouts. Thanks for the help, and have a nice new year. Cambalachero (talk) 12:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The article You Are the One (telenovela) you nominated as a good article has failed  ; see Talk:You Are the One (telenovela) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mediran -- Mediran (talk) 10:42, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Madero Center, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Santa Cruz Province and Jorge Brito (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey Cambalachero! Sorry to trouble you with this, but BlueMoonset requested that you give a more detailed review of my above nom. He said this wouldn't qualify as a QPQ, and seeing that you've used this as QPQ for your nom on Madero Center, I wouldn't like to see you encounter any delays to your nom due to this QPQ issue. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 16:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Cambalachero. I started a clarification/amendment request that may be of interest to you. Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2013 Rosario gas explosion you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 07:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hermética you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The article 2013 Rosario gas explosion you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2013 Rosario gas explosion for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Cambalachero, have you had a chance to look at this yet? I could give you more time if you need it. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 13:42, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The request for clarification involving you has been declined as withdrawn. For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 20:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I am reading an interesting book on Philip II of Spain. You're probably wondering why that's important, but just I wanted to let you know that he is a good example on how controversial figures in history can have a dual negative/positive historiography. Even the WP article here mentions the dual perspectives. I wonder if anyone in a future "FA drive attempt" will try to portray him under the perspective of the Black Legend, and claim other perspectives as unreliable. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'm awar of that. In fact, there are two main groups of historiographic controversies (sometimes they overlap). The first group is when we don't have a very good idea of what has really happened in the past. As in "Julius Caesar did X!" "No, Julius Caesar did Y!" "No, Julius Caesar did x/2 + Y*2!". This happens when we don't have enough primary sources to reconstruct the events, when those sources tell only some info and leave huge gaps, or when the sources can not be completely trusted for some reason (for instance, an ancient battle report written as if the Roman generals fighting against a barbarian country was like a mythological demigod fighting against the orcs from Mordor). This is more common with the historical periods that are more distant in time. The second case is when we have a reasonable idea of the events that took place, but historians do not agree on the significance or interpretation. As in "Napoleon did X, and that's awesome!" "Napoleon did X, and that's terrible!" "Napoleon did X, but who cares?". Ultimately, those controversies are basically pointless, because historians tend to judge things with the ideas of their time and context, and do not fully try to understand the historical figures in their own context. A governor facing a severe crisis or fighting against a coalition of stronger countries may be forced to make questionable actions, and it is very easy to condem such actions when someone has never seen such a crisis personally. It's easy to be a champion of ethic codes and good governance when someone is writing in a computer in the comfort of his house, and the closest thing to governance that someone has ever done was to play "Sim City 4". Cambalachero (talk) 02:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Very true.

Historiography is perhaps the most difficult concept to grasp in history. It requires the historiographer to have read as much of the literature on the subject as is available during his lifetime (and in multiple languages).

I remember, in another Wikipedia, getting involved into a minor discussion over the usage of sources by language. Luckily, the "my language only" position did not prevail in that case.

I don't think anyone who might even dare consider himself a historian (amateur or professional) can make such an irrational case. Why, then, do all the top doctorate programs in history require knowledge of multiple languages? Is it not for practical reasons, or are they simply forcing it as a requirement for fun?

The questions are rhetorical, of course, but they are still worth pondering about, especially among us editors who focus on subjects relevant to the rest (non-English, or English as Second Language) world.

Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 07:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

The article Hermética you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hermética for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 16:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The article Hermética you nominated as a good article has failed  ; see Talk:Hermética for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

The article 2013 Rosario gas explosion you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:2013 Rosario gas explosion for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Somos familia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The K money trail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raúl García (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Please don't add spam links to wiki articles as you did at Página 12.[1] The links you added were to an expired domain which then passes users to other sites using URL redirection. Burrobert (talk) 13:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

The text of WP:PGBOLD states that Consequently, you should not remove any change solely on the grounds that there was no formal discussion indicating consensus for the change before it was made. Instead, you should give a substantive reason for challenging it either in your edit summary or on the talk page; note that it gives an explicit proscription of reverting without opposing the content of the edit in all cases, regardless of how substantial that edit was. I'm not going to edit-war over this, but don't do this again. Cheers, Mach61 (talk) 02:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Do you have source for Front for Victory's seats (58) for 2003. For example, a part of PJ was with Menem and Saá? Panam2014 (talk) 16:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I noticed you added a template to the article Rodolfo Barra. I created the article and agree it focuses too much on specific incidents in his past but I only read basic Spanish. There's very little English coverage of Barra and I'm very unfamiliar with Argentine politics. If you are willing to improve the article, I'd really appreciate it. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Greetings Cambalachero - This Saturnino José Rodríguez Peña article that you created on 13 March 2013 is un-referenced and an orphan article all these years. Today I tagged PROD, but hoping you might help improve. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 03:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)