User talk:Coyotecal

Sept.01.15 - Thank you for the excellent, thorough, up to date listing of cat cafes around the world. I look forward to seeing the list of cat cafes grow.

August 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at America. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Per Talk:America_(disambiguation)#Requested_move_10_July_2015: "The result of the move request was: moved. Convincing argument made that the US is the primary topic for this title" --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Inclusion of "ruled from Mexico City" in El Salvador article

I think I see where you're going with your argument for inclusion, but my counterargument would be as follows: The section where you inserted "ruled from Mexico City" is a brief summary of El Salvador's history; as such, I would propose that including the fact of Mexico City being the capital of New Spain (while entirely correct) is out of place in the context of the section. That particular section exclusively discusses the changing political control of El Salvador, to which Mexico City is not relevant. Helmut von Moltke (talk) 04:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

"That particular section exclusively discusses the changing political control of El Salvador, to which Mexico City is not relevant" that is precisely my point: it IS relevant because at the time El Salvador was politically controlled by Mexico City and remained so for almost 300 years until Central America seceded from Mexico. How can the connection with Mexico not be relevant? This is the point where the history of regional countries come together with the common history of Mexico-New Spain that unites them and this perspective must be included and not taken as if El Salvador was apart from this common history. It is a correct statement as you granted, and relevant, doesn't hurt, please reinstate it, I see no reason to delete it other than trying to cut Mexico from the common history, which is no good reason.--Coyotecal (talk) 08:17, 15 August 2016 (UTC)