User talk:Rockero/Archive01

Archive
01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09

November 2005

Welcome

Hello, Rockero, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -Willmcw 06:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oxnard, California

Responding to your comments at talk:Oxnard, California. Those two items are both worth adding to the Oxnard article. To start a new section just start and end a new line with two equal signs (like this:==New section==). Do keep in mind, especially when writing about the Oxnard gang injunctions, the Neutral point of view standard for writing articles. If you want to introduce a particular point of view into the article, it is often best to use a quote from some authoritative source (in this case, something from MALDEF or the ACLU would qualify).

I also just checked and there apparently is no overview article on gang injunctions, which is something that the Wikipedia definately should have. I'm in the Long Beach area and I know that there are several gang injunctions in Long Beach and the Wilmington/San Pedro areas. You can also see by the redlink in the last paragraph that the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund doesn't have an article.

Another area that desperately needs attention is any article on street gangs, such as the Crips and Bloods, where both the people editing the articles, and many of the resources found on the internet that are used for the articles, are either from gang member wannabees or police wannabees. I just trimmed some of the more obvious garbage from the List of Los Angeles street gangs article, but that list desperately needs a reality check from someone who has more knowledge on the subject that I do.

You might also look at both the California WikiProject and Southern California WikiProject. Please look at both projects and see if there is anything that interests you. If you have any comments or questions, please contact me. BlankVerse 06:16, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: your articles

In reply to your articles you asked User:Willmcw to comment on, they look pretty good, leagues ahead of the typical new article. Try to find at least one category for each article; a subcategory is better than a broad one. Add references whenever possible; a list of references will do, or you can make it fancy with footnotes, which I haven't really learned yet how to do.

External links should be entered like this:

==External links==
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rockero Rockero's user talk page], brief description may follow

And another extremely minor detail: don't wikilink inside section headings. Thanks for your contributions! --DDerby-(talk) 07:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chicanismo

Thanks for your comments, yes indeedy. I'd like to collaborate with you. Joaquin Murietta 01:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I re-ambiguated all the Calo and Caló articles. What's next?Joaquin Murietta 04:36, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at Chicanismo Joaquin Murietta 05:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also please look at this template Template:African American topics sidebar or {{African American topics sidebar|right}}

I have no objection to moving stuff out of Chicanismo and into Chicano Movement, in fact, we could keep a section and handle it the way JDWolff did in targeted therapy, there's a little italicised comment at the top of a section that says see main article. Joaquin Murietta 17:03, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- I made a few changes and also comments on the talk page for this article. Again, please feel free to make changes and to edit it as you see fit. Joaquin Murietta 22:18, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hi, I nominated Sandia Pueblo for DYK at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#November_17 Joaquin Murietta 17:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Sandia Pueblo, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Congrats! Joaquin Murietta 02:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Yvonne Wanrow, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

re: Your Sandia Pueblo article

Nice work on the Sandia Pueblo article!

The commentary on the "Moqui" at Sandia is a little ambiguous. I believe "Moqui" is a synonym for "Hopi." You may want to standardize on "Hopi." Also, why were Arizona Hopi at Sandia? I know that after the Pueblo Revolt the Spanish were never able to reconquer the Hopi Pueblos, and that the Hopi eradicated the Catholic faith there. Were these Hopi individuals who wished to remain Catholic and so found refuge at Sandia after their own pueblos repudiated Catholicism?

You mention that Sandia was re-established to serve as a bulwark against Navajo and Apache attacks, but then go on to cite not a Navajo or Apache attack but a Comanche one.

I'm also surprised that the Navajo would range this far east and south, but of course I could be wrong. I still have a great deal to learn about the history of the Rio Grande Valley, in my opinion one of the most fascinating places in the United States!

Thanks again,

--Jsch-(talk) 21 November 2005

Yvonne Wanrow

(moved from my userpage)

I like what you've done with your talk page. I 'stole' some ideas and changed my talk page accordingly. I agree Yvonne got an unfair trial, I just think the focus of why was wrong. The focus should not be one's gender or ethnicity, but answering "Did the circumstances the victim was in justify the victim's actions?". Rlevse 17:30, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again: Thanks for the tips on user vs talk pages. I'm new to Wiki and still learning it's ETTA KETTE-;). I took you up on your suggestions.Rlevse 20:34, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

on Barry Goldwater

(moved from my userpage)

You wrote: "Hello user Nfgii. Is there any particular reason you removed the sentence "By the end of his life, however, Goldwater had become frustrated with what he saw as the Christian Right's influence on the Republican Party." from the introduction to the article? It seems like an important aspect of his life and politics, and it is elaborated on later in the article. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.--Rockero 18:16, 25 November 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nfgii"

Reply: I didn't do that as far as I know but if you are sure it was me, it was an inadvertent error. On Goldwater I was only intending to add a relevant category. If I did this and you spotted this, thanks for your sharp eye, and please do restore it. Sincerely, Nfgii 18:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]