User talk:Danielg1987

January 2010

Your recent edit to the page Avianca appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Talk page consensus is that it should be 1940 not the misleading 1919 Bidgee (talk) 21:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have provided the necessary documentation to prove this information. The references have been added to the discussion.DG (talk) 23:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DG, qué pasó al fin con la disputa de la fecha de Avianca? Nadie dijo nada después de mi explicación y en este momento el artículo está desprotegido pero sigue con la fecha de 1940... pero no lo quiero cambiar hasta que el moderador se pronuncie al respecto. Mekanos (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DG, perdón por la ausencia. Acabo de leer el último mensaje que me escribiste en mi profile y estoy escribiendo un mensaje en el Talk de Avianca. Voy a estar más pendiente a ver cómo se desarrolla el tema... sin embargo vi que en la info. principal de Avianca ya tenemos la fecha como 1919... Mekanos (talk) 17:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ya lo leí y me parece muy bien. También le dejé un post a Flyguy explicándole un poco más el cambio del nombre y el rol de SACO. Realmente, el que SACO esté ahí metido es lo que jode todo porque lo toman como excusa para un "merger" pero eso no fue ninguna fusión tipo Alianza Summa sino el hecho que una aerolínea (Scadta) se tomó a la otra (Saco) pero tuvo que cambiar el nombre a "Avianca" por el tema de la II Guerra Mundial. Si Scadta hubiese seguido con el nombre, no dirían nada , al igual que si en 1919, el nombre Avianca hubiese sido el elegido. Yo me referí a eso en mi post largo en la discusión de Avianca tomando como ejemplos lo de Delta y Northwestern. Entonces como Delta absorvió a Northwestern entonces ahora su fecha de fundación es febrero de 2010? nooo, es la misma de antes. ´Como te digo, el lío es que Scadta cambió de nombre a Avianca... Mekanos (talk) 04:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, otra cosa. Creo que Ju98_5 apoya nuestra causa porque él incluyó las citas del Consejo de Estado y el libro en ingles con la información de las razones del cambio de nombre de Scadta a Avianca. Y creo que él fue el que le puso a los australianos que no cambiaran las fechas. Mekanos (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AeroRepública

Sé que las políticas es que te escriba en inglés pero como dominamos ambos es español consideré que es mejor así. No sé la verdad porqué revertiste mi edición si está claramente referenciada la nota que coloqué es de la página oficial de la aerolínea se nota que ni la leíste, del resto de ediciones menores, es mejor así, la referencia del vuelo a Quito es innecesaria ya que el vuelo ya inició. POr ahora voy a revertir lo que arreglé, voy a añadir referencia al vuelo a Guayaquil, por otro lado el vuelo a Miami aunque está aprobado aún la aerolínea no a informado fecha oficial de su inicio así que por eso no se debiera listar ya que Wikipedia no es una esfera de predecir el futuro. Cuando sea oficial añádelo.

Voy a dejar el vuelo a Miami y esperaré que busques en internet y te des cuenta que el nuevo eslogan de AeroRepública es "Así quiero volar", del resto me tomaré el trabajo de revertirlo, pero si no estás de acuerdo por favor discutámoslo. Luisfege (talk) 01:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Listo entendido. Luisfege (talk) 19:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bienvenido a WikiProject Colombia

Hello, Danielg1987! I'd noticed that you have joined WikiProject Colombia and Wikipedia in general. We have been encountering some problems in our WikiProject due to the lack of user participation, and we are hoping to recruit or keep new users interested in collaborating. If you have any questions regarding Wikipedia's vast rules and procedures, or anything related to WikiProject Colombia or its Portal let me know. Here is a few things you can help do within WP Colombia:

Stub-Class Colombia articles | Sort through the extensive number of stub articles within the scope of WP Colombia to see if you can help expand them.
Portal:Colombia | Update Colombian news, propose a new article or image to feature.
Images of Colombia | See Wikipedia:Images for tips on how and when to add pictures and images on articles, see what is around you and upload an image if possible and needed.

mijotoba (talk) 07:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Miguel, I have joined the group, and I keep lokoing and adding new articles that relate to Colombia. I constantly monitor the Airlines and airports of colombia. how are you able to see the new articles I add to the project? for instance I have added one today? in regards to adding images of colombia I do not have any of my ownn and I do not live in colombia which makes it very hard to optain images I could add to wiki with no copyright issues. DG (talk) 10:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on User talk:YSSYguy. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. I'm in fact neutral about Qantas (could careless how old it is). Bidgee (talk) 09:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:YSSYguy. Thank you. "but more to "Bidgee" looks to me that he is upsate that more people is providing good information about this fact." I suggest to start commenting on the edits not the editor. Bidgee (talk) 09:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the post Bidgee (talk) has made on yout talk page.

"Avianca issuses again!

Makes me wonder when they will stop using national pride over fact. Yet another editor breaches the consensus. Bidgee (talk) 09:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)"

after reading this post is not me no assuming good faith please learly read the post.

I'm infact commenting on the edits (using national pride = POV), your comment is clearly directed at the editor. Bidgee (talk) 09:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that, Won't happen again!DG (talk) 09:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!