User talk:Hseldon10/Archive Mex0

Fox and Echeverría

Dear Hseldon10:

It is widely known that Fox made minimal changes to the Mexican bureaucracy and power structure. The Wikipedia article did not mention this, so I decided to input it. You erased it, the reason being lack of reliable sources. I had put as footnotes a breakthrough article in The National Interest, a leading journal in Washington, called "Mexico's Wasted Chance", and a more recent piece by acclaimed author Martin Walker, until recently the editor in chief of United Press International, who discovered that Fox held several meetings with controversial former president Luis Echeverría, and later placed many of his allies in positions of power, including the head of the SSP, presidency, national security advisor and ambassador in Washington. Unless you have better sources that say that Fox did not leave the former regime largely intact, it would be very much appreciated if you help find a way to explain Fox's perceived failure and co-opation (the word by renowned writer Lorenzo Meyer) by the former regime rather than simply erasing what has become obvious to many Mexico-watchers.

Please, get a username and sign your comments.

I don't know the sources you quoted. I double-checked them, and they made references to third parties, such as President Calderon's family to accuse Fox of cooperation with the previous regime, particularly with a man that he himself accused of genocide, and that has continously been charged and prosecuted through the Fox administration, and that costed Fox a great number of his proposed reforms.

Indeed, "percieved" is not the same as "factual" and "renowned" is not the same as "correct". Simply, living in Mexico all my life, and watching from a very close point of view the actions of Vicente Fox, to me, it is quite doubtful that what you describe is true. However, if backed with appropriate sources, I would see no reason to delete it, but unknown sources quoting third parties that may have not been involved in what you describe do not qualify as such. Please, add more sources. Hari Seldon 05:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, signed in. Like you, I have also lived in Mexico almost my entire life. More than that, I handled the foreign relations of the Fox campaign and have widely published on the perceived failure of Fox. You can check my "Mexico" section in my website, www.ariasking.com. While you are right that the Fox-Echeverría link is too newly discovered to become the type of "generally regarded as true" information necessary to input into Wikipedia, nonetheless Fox’s proclivity to leave intact the former regime does fit that precondition. With your permission, I will add back the section but omit the specifics of his Echeverría connection. Cheers.

You don't need my permission. You need to conform to wikipedia guidelines, including:

• Notability
• Reliable Sources
• Fact checking (In this case, and the above, you need to provide specific sources that are far more authorative than a citation of Calderon's unknown brother in law)...
• Guidelines for writing biographies of living persons
• No Original Research
• Neutral Point of View

Please make sure that whatever you add conforms in detail to all of the above. My objection to what you wrote is that it doesn't, and if it doesn't, I will continue to erase it. As I said earlier, Echeverría is under arrest, and it was Mr. Fox's administration that arrested him, and the continuous support for the investigation that culminated in his arrest costed Fox numerous reforms. This has been widely published in major recognized newspapers and by many political theorists. What you propose seems to me like original research that goes against the widely held point of view. At the very least, write your position as the less accepted point of view, and write and cite the more accepted position first. By the way, please sign like this: Hari Seldon 15:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Respectful response to Warning

Dear Hseldon10:

I have no political vinculation or anything of the sort. I am only a THINKING mexican. Portraying López as a Center Left, not allowing renown and international news agencies opinions on what López is and the sort of leader he could be for our country does not precisely talks about yoour political neutrality or, for this matter, Wikipedia´s. He is Leftist. He is Populistic. He is violent. He does not have any respect for the law and the legal system. He knows nothing about public finances. Why avoid saying it on wikipedia´s page dedicated to him?

As I said, I have no policitcal interest but I know it is extremely important for people around the world that read about him to know who he really is.

Regards.

Gerochoa

I share your opinion about Lopez Obrador, but Wikipedia is not a place to post opinions. You can get a blog to do that. In Wikipedia we contribute with neutral content and cited sources. Please do not post your opinions in controversial articles.

Hari Seldon 15:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hari Sheldon:

With due respect, most of my words are not my opinions, they are respectable information sources, including the Lopez' Spanish version in Wikipedia:

- For starters, please search these three words on google: Lopez Obrador Izquierda. You will get over 438,000 sources where you can clearly see he is not "Center-Left", he is leftist.

- Check http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2006/01/20/internacional/1137778090.html, where you can see a more neutral opinion on him

- Designing "policies that appeal to low income citizens", having a "84% approval rating" and increasing over 400% the public debt of the government he led is not populism? so what is it? please check populism and see if he fits

- Violent? please check today news. Carlos Ahumada's wife was going to release 5 more videos that implicated him and persons really close to him in bribery and other sorts of extorsion. Guess what? merely 5.30 hours before the release of those videos, she and her kids get a shower of bullets from an unidentified car. is it too difficult to figure out who send the marksmen?

I am getting busy and I do not like to be called politically biased when the artcicle itself is the one that´s biased. I will do my best to have it changed to a more neutral view. Any thoughts?

Since AMLO is a controversial topic, please discuss your edits in the Talk page before editing the article page.

• Please learn to indent your comments
• The spanish version of the wikipedia has its own issues, and it is generally of a lower quality than other version
• We had a discussion in the talk-page on how to refer to AMLO. The consensus is "Center-left". Please revise Wikipedia policies.
• El Mundo is only one source. Neutrality is achieved with many sources. The article you submit is a statement of opinion.

There is no way to measure his public debt because of his opacity in government. Please contribute to wikipedia by finding a source for this and publishing it in the article. "Populism" is not a neutral word.

Violent is not a neutral word either. No one has yet judicially accused Lopez Obrador of attempting assasination on Ahumada's wife. Please see Videoscandals (Mexico)

My thoughts are that you are biased. Lopez Obrador is not a saint, but he isn't the devil either. Please be thoughtful of neutrality when editing, and please discuss your edits in the appropriate discussion page previously.

Hari Seldon 16:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Gerochoa.

President of Mexico

Please use verifiable sources to back up your recent additions to this article. Introducing personal opinions goes against the Neutral Point of View policy of Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 22:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please could you be a little bit more informed

What I have written the last days is not for Political Campaign. I am not with any party or with any religion. I am a M.S. student interested for the problematic that is being carried out. Calderón and the PAN were complicit in the approval of the FOBAPROA, which has been a very costly Bank rescue for mexicans. And I think this must be published as you have published the recent polls. About the polls I ask you: What polls? Not all the polls show that Calderon is being the leader.

1) They where not. The FOBAPROA is arguably a crime. It was the financial mechanism that saved the Mexican economy after the 1994 collapse.

2) If you say they where, cite your sources.

3) Incredible coincidence that you find this out only after the PRD started its mediatic campaign saying just this.

4) Even if they where, you still need to cite your sources and stop using weasel words.

5) See Mexican general election, 2006 for more information about cited sources on polls

6) This discussion belongs in the Talk:Felipe Calderon page, not here

7) Please sign your contributions to talk pages.

Hari Seldon 02:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Elected president = not a dictator

On June 3, you edited Mr. Fox's article saying "Fox is not a dictator, he is an elected President." Please remember that Adolf Hitler gained 43.9% in a democratic election before coming to power. And he sure was one dictator; in spite his 'democratic' mandate Herrk 18:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Herrk

Of course I did not "suggest that President Fox's administration is in any way similar to Adolf Hitler's regime!". I was merely pointing out your deficienies in terms of argumentation. Herrk 18:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Herrk

REFORMA

I can see that you have a history for bias (with an obvious tendency to the right) and being opinionated in your contributions. This is a reminder to BEING OBJECTIVE in your Reforma piece.--Andres lopez 05:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Dear Hari:

I'd like to congratulate you for your honest attempts of keeping a NPOV.

It is only natural that many people come to your talk page and argue about their political beliefs after the historicaly narrow elections in Mexico, seeing how you've edited several pages about the issue. Nevertheless, you've been mature and respectful about their comments, insults, rants and whatnot.

Congratulations! Keep up the good job :)

Pablo 18:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposal for Vicente Fox article

I look forward to working with you and others on Vicente Fox now that this incident has... passed. However, personal attacks you made against me, specifically your statement that I am a "dictator of Wikipedia" are not allowed, and normally are removed from Wikipedia pages.

I have asked three administrators, CBDunkerson, Capitalistroadster, and DMCdevit, to remove the attack, but none of them are willing to, for reasons unknown to me.

Therefore I respectfully ask you to remove them yourself. Regards, freestylefrappe 22:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Concerning Oaxaca edits

Hey! Thanks for all the valuable input on the article. Would you mind perhaps formulating the changes you think should be made in a list, or even better yet, making the changes yourself and explaining the changes? The biggest problem i see with the page is that very few people are citing sources, and even fewer are making changes while explaining the changes. Also, as i mentioned on the talk page, a lot of space is taken on Brad will's death compared to everything else. I'd opt for more coverage of other things, lest it seem as if Brad Will's death is the only important thing happening. --Chalyres 08:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Calderon's cabinet

Hi Hseldon10, I've reverted most of your edits concerning Felipe Calderón's cabinet since they haven't been officially appointed. They are likely to be sworn on 1 Dec 2006, which is still 9 days away and we just can't foreknow the future. Cheers, All-Bran 19:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, that's fine, you can add a succession box for Gil Diaz, but please do not appoint Carstens as his successor just yet. Cheers, All-Bran 19:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:AMLO Presidencia legitima.jpg

Si publicas tu imagen en el dominio público, porque no la pones directamente en commons para que los otros proyectos tengan acceso a la imagen ? Lo hice.

Saludos.

132.248.81.29 19:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC) mffff. fr:Utilisateur:Lachaume

reverting vandalism

Hi there. You just reverted vandalism on the page on President of Mexico. Rather than marking it as a minor edit, it would probably be more informative if you mark it as an rv or rvv. Magidin 20:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Mexican election controversies

In case you are interested and/or stopped watching the page, I've begun adding quotes and links to the page on Mexican general election 2006 controversies. At least some questionable claims have been removed (perhaps as a result?), though there is still a long way to go. And some of the information I tried to add was (tentatively, at least) removed. In any case, you might want to take a look. Magidin 21:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Apology

Hari, I apologize if you felt offended at any point by my comments or if the tone that I have use in my edits is too rough. I want, however, to praise you for your good intentions and the enthusiasm you have for participating to provide the readers of this encyclopedia with an idea of what Mexico is. It takes a better man to admit to be mistaken, and I do not have anything but respect for the fact that you always read and accept other's points of view. Hopefully I will have the opportunity to participate with you in improving this invaluable resource ' wikipedia' Andy Rosenthal 03:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)