User talk:Jcmenal/Archive 2008

Where is Mexico?

Hello Jcmenal:

I see your edit to Mexico:geography and your edit note that the change was agreed by majority. Please let me know where I can find the discussion or vote that you are referring to.

Gracias, Wanderer57 (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - - -

Thanks for the information. You have been working on the Mexico article much longer than I have. I thought in the fall that the "disagreements" between Alex C., Corticopia, and one or two other editors made it impossible to reach agreement about the sentence about the location of Mexico, so I gave up on that. Buena suerte! Wanderer57 (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

North America (continent)

Hi Jcmenal, since I see that no one discussed in the North America's article talk page, I think I should tell you what are my changes, tell me if you are well with these ones, if you don't like the changes, tell me why;

My proposed changes to the page are currently adding a hatnote notifying people how the article refers to North America, as there are several ways of reffering to it. Also, I wanted to place a reference that will guide readers to the rest of the largest cities that are beneath the 10th largest. I think we should place it along with the reference to the ten largest cities as reference number two. I also think we should forget about the subregions since the matter is complicated and we may take some days to address the situation.

Cocoliras (talk) 23:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, would you like telling me why is adding a reference to the 100 largest cities in North America beyond the largest 10 cities in the article a problem to you?

Cocoliras (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Independencia

Hola Jcmenal me gustaría contactar con gente interesada en la independencia hispanoamericana. ¿Conoces más gente interesada?.¿Hay algún grupo de trabajo?. Por otro lado me he dado cuenta que deseas retirar el mapa animado, que he hecho yo mismo. Yo creo que es historicamente correcto incluir México, ¿tú deseas excluirlo?, ¿es por el título del artículo?, ¿crees que hay que cambiar South American wars of independence por Hispanoamerican wars of independence?. Yo apoyaría un cambio de nombre si de eso se trata, pero me gustaria conocer en realidad cuál es tu objeción.Un saludo cordial. Si crees que hay algo que mejorar del mapa por favor contacta conmigo.--Resvoluci (talk) 19:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Yo estoy de acuerdo contigo, no tiene mucho que ver la situación geografica, Florida y Texas también formaban parte de la Monarquía española, y lo mismo que México tampoco forman parte de América del Sur. Pero, ¿con quién, qué usuario digo, habría que dialogar para proponer un traslado de nombre?. Por otro lado ¿tienes alguna preferencia para "Hispanoamerican" versus ¿Hispanic American?, yo prefiero el primero por ser mas corto, pero ¿tiene algún significado distinto en el mundo anglosajon?, ¿quizá no es linguisticamente correcto?. Mira, te paso el título del primer libro historiografico existente sobre la independencia hispanoamericana, mira su título y saca tus propias conclusiones, fue escrito en el año 1830 para ilustrar a Fernando VII sobre los hechos ocurridos en América, y puedes leerlo en Google books [1] Un Saludo.--Resvoluci (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hola de nuevo

Hello JC I sent you an email but you haven't replied yet. So here I am just to inform you that I'm fully back and that I hope that we can continue to improve the articles. Please keep me updated about your recent projects so I can give you a hand. What about the document you discovered about the Declaration of Independence of Northern America (Mexico)? Cya Alex C. ^{( Talk? )} 22:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of North America

Hi Jcmenal,

I don't understand why you reverted my re-wording. To me, it seems that the relevant information is where the settlements were located (i.e. modern-day Mexico and Florida,) rather than what the Spanish called the whole territory. Your current version lacks clarity, and I think it should be reverted. Please reply here so we can keep the discussion in one place. --Confiteordeo (talk) 06:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, well the Spaniards called such region as Northern America, and that is a historic name, it was Mexico's first official name as an independent nation, while your edits does not include the Spanish settlements in the former Mexican territory and "Northern America"/"colonial Mexico" does. Probably this name should be in another section. Cheers. JC 23:55, 22 Feb 2008 (PST)

Thanks for getting back to me. I have a few questions about the accuracy of your edits, though. Weren't the only successful colonies in Spanish territory north of Mexico and outside of Florida established in the late seventeenth century (in the 1690s or so?) In that case, it would indeed be better to talk only about the settlements in modern-day Mexico and Florida because those predate the other settlements talked about in the section (Jamestown, Plymouth Colony, and Canada.) Implying that there were Spanish settlements (and not just explorations) outside of Mexico and Florida isn't accurate. Another question- wasn't the area referred to as New Spain after 1535? Do you have a source that shows that "Northern America" was used before that? Mexico became independent long, long after the period in question, so the fact that it called itself "Northern America" is irrelevant. Because of these reasons, I think that the current version is too vague. Please reply here so we can keep the discussion in one place.--Confiteordeo (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maxican Spanish

Could you please write a stub about Kurów in Mexican here – just a few sentences based on http://kurow-wiki.openhosting.pl/wiki/es:Kurów ? Please.

PS. Article about Kurów is already in 276 languages and dialects. If your village/town/city isn't yet on PL wiki, I can do article about it. (I'm first author of requests and this article have the biggest number of interwikis) Pietras1988 ^TALK 12:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of the west coast of North America

Oye, amigo - ¿por qué es nosotros no vamos a utilizar el nombre moderno de México en el subtitulo de este artículo? Why are we not using the modern name of Mexico in the subtitle of this article? Using an old name is confusing to modern readers. If you want, we can include a footnote that at the time of independence, the Declaration of Independence was for "Northern America," and not for "Mexico." Pero, uso hoy de ese nombre antiguo y anacrónico no es indicado en Wikipedia. Use today of this antique and anachronistic name is not really the way we do it in Wikipedia. If you wish to make a point about the text of Declaration of Independence, let's please do it in a footnote (or in text), not in a way that is confusing to modern readers. Please reply on the talk page of that article. NorCalHistory (talk) 18:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UnderstandMexico

Would you please provide an explanation as to why you reverted the external link to the Baja California page of UnderstandMexico? If you can find a more suitable replacement for investment data, perhaps from Bancomext, Sedeco, Detac or Copreen I welcome you to replace it, but as to my very informed knowledge no such information exists on the Internet I request you restore the link to the Baja California investment guide on UnderstandMexico. Aburda (talk) 01:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JC, thanks for you comments, in reply - you are correct the investinbaja.com site is quiet good (the sedeco folks for Baja are probably the best in Mexico). Bancomext (http://www.mexico-trade.com/) is the federal site and it is generally awful. A few of the other states have investment portals but in general there is limited information, what information is available is usually in flash or barely search engine readable. Maquilaportal.com is another example of an attempt at creating a portal.

My goal is to slowly gather information on each state and city and create a useful investment guide and set the whole system up so that companies can easily add and update their profiles. In regards to Wikipedia, I know investors end up on wikipedia when they are trying to find out information about where to invest, so as an investment guide reaches the point where it has enough info for it to be useful, I'll add an external link to that particular city or state's wikipedia article. You can access all of the guides using the map on the front page.

On an aside, where are you at in Baja, you don't happen to be in Ensenada? Aburda (talk) 21:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mesoamerica. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. JD554 (talk) 07:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declarations of independence

Hi Jcmenal. I saw you undid my edits of the Declarations of independence page. I stated my reasons in the talk of the page, I'm looking forward to your reaction. Joost 99 (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CONCACAF WC Qualification

Hey man,

I just wanted to let you know that I'm assuming good faith on your edits to the various CONCACAF WCQ articles.

I appreciate you trying to improve the page, but if you look at the FIFA website you'll see that the groups are consistent throughout qualification.

One of the things it helps show is that no matter what happens Mexico, Honduras, and Canada could never qualify for the WC together because only the top 2 teams from their group will go on to the final group.

The draw was set up so that they would only have to do one, so they made the paths to the WC clear for everyone from the very beginning.

I appreciate what you were trying to do and look forward to working with you on the article in the future. -- Grant .Alpaugh 16:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:AN/I

This report concerns you. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 04:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Northern America (disambiguation). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 24 hours

Following this warning you continued to revert another user. You've been warned several times, but continue to use reversion in place of discussion. There is no "right" to three reverts, and to run right up to the line is still disruption. In particular, engaging in reversion with no edit summary is unnacceptable. All blocks are subject to discussion, of course. - brenneman 03:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NAFTA

Let me know what you think about this. Alex Covarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 20:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user supports NAFTA.

NAFTA

Let me know what you think about this. Alex Covarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 20:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user supports NAFTA.

Zona Norte

Why did you move Zona Norte to Zona Norte (Tijuana)? It does not appear to require disambiguation. Shereth 15:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Club America

The source you added to the Club America article is not reliable per WP:SPS. SPecifically message boards are not considered reliable sources of information. Paul Bradbury 16:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you seem to have ignored my comment and again added a source that is from a discussion forum, someone else has reverted those edits. Please stop with your disruptive edits or let me know why you think they are correct. If not I will have to assume that your edits are vandalism and proceed accordingly. Paul Bradbury 22:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's listed as most hated in the source, but sometimes an encyclopedia article needs to use more diplomatic language than a questionnaire. One is not obligated to use the exact phrasing when there can be a more polite way of saying things. matt91486 (talk) 19:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not sure it's fair to have some of the article headings translated into English (for the most hated status), but leaving the pro-America data title in Spanish. It's sort of a very subtle bias, but to an English reader with no knowledge of Spanish, it reinforces one and not the other; I'd personally leave both in Spanish, but they should definitely either both be translated or not. matt91486 (talk) 19:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War at Club America

Please see the talk page at Club America before making further edits or reverts at Club America. Paul Bradbury 20:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi not saying your edits are incorrect, however you are both in violation of WP:3RR and I have requested the same of User:Dedos07. I have put my reasoning at the Club America talk page Paul Bradbury 20:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Club America edit

Can I ask you to please stop adding the sentence regarding the poll about who's the most hated in Mexico? Adding it in the header of an article it's not appropriate at all. Put yourself in the position of someone that doesn't know anything about America and wants to learn about the team...what good is it to say it's the most hated team in Mexico? Like I said in the discussion page of the article that sentence will be more suited in a "popularity" section or, better yet, in the El Clásico (Mexico). Regards. Bruno18 (talk) 01:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amerindian Languages in Belize

I noticed that you disagreed with and reverted one of my edit on Latin America regarding the phrase that Amerindian languages are widely spoken in Belize. According to the 2000 Belize Census, a total of 9.8% of the population commonly speaks an Amerindian language at home: Maya Ketchi (4.5%), Mayan Mopan (3%), Mayan Yucatecan (0.3%), and Garifuna (2%).
Do you disagree with these statistics or do you think that 9.8% consititues "widely" spoken? There were actually 2 different questions on the census regarding languages spoken: one was regarding mother tongue (basically the language their parents spoke) and the other was regarding the language they currently speak at home. The language that their parents spoke would make it 12.3% instead of 9.8%. It's really not a big deal, but I was just curious. Thanks. Kman543210 (talk) 18:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good. I was just confused because I thought I was being careful to pull all the stats accurately from the website and thought maybe there was confusion on the discrepancy between the 2 language questions on the census, so I appreciate you relooking at it. The Belize census website doesn't actually have a specific page that automatically just shows the stats; you have to actually query the system, so I could have made a mistake. Thanks again. Kman543210 (talk) 02:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ayuda

Oye wey, necesito que por favor votes en dos discusiones que estoy teniendo una es para cambiar el articulo de "Chihuahua (Mexico)" a "Chihuahua" y la otra es para cambiar el articulo de "Hidalgo (Mexico)" a "Hidalgo (state)", ahi podras ver mi comentarios, por favor vota por el "support" pronto, si necesitas algo ya sabes, llamame, saludos. Supaman89 (talk) 01:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Central American mammals

Hi Jcmenal,

I have created a List of Central American mammals, which has been added to the Lists of mammals by region page. I have made the appropriate changes to the Template:Central America topic to be consistent with this list. I'd like to explain my reasons for doing so.

I'm actually not interested in the issue of whether Central America is viewed as part of North America or not. The former view is certainly more common, but it is not universal. However, from the standpoint of biology, it is very useful to view Central America separately from the rest of North America. Central America is a tropical region that shows a strong South American influence. The rest of North America is subtropical or temperate, and is only weakly influenced by South America. For example, in the United States only three mammals (the Virginia Opossum, the Nine-banded Armadillo and the North American Porcupine) originated in South America, while dozens of species of Central American monkeys, cavimorph rodents, anteaters, sloths, and opossums are descended from South American immigrants. Having a separate listing of Central American mammals helps to highlight this interesting and important difference.

Additionally, the current listing of North American mammals, which was made by others, does not include Central American species.

Let me know if you have any strong views on this subject. WolfmanSF (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Jcmenal.

"The wildlfe dont know about political borders and they cross to Colombia and to central Mexico beyond the Isthmus of Tehuantepec." That's true - sometimes, but not always. But there is a practical problem here. I want people to understand why some species are on the list and others aren't. The easiest way I can accomplish this is with boundaries. Consider these 2 examples (follow the links, scroll down and click to expand the range maps):

A) The West Mexican Cotton Rat

B) The Large-toothed Shrew

A) got on the list but B) didn't. They're both southeast Mexican species. It only makes sense if you know that the Isthmus of Tehuantepec is the boundary I'm using.

I put some effort into this article, so I would appreciate your understanding and cooperation with this situation. WolfmanSF (talk) 07:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

Just thought I would urge you to read this as you are about to violate it. As well I think you miss the point, all of these sentences are still correcet whether they include all the countries in North America or not. All they have to do is cover more than one country in North America, and in fact they don't really even have to do that to be called North American. -Djsasso (talk) 02:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Central Time Zone (North America)/Central Time Zone/Central Time Zone (Americas)

I really don't care where the article is located but what you did here is not acceptable. The page must have the history to coply with the GFDL. For now I have put everthing back. To figure out where the page should be got to Talk:Central Time Zone (North America) and discuss it. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 23:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]