Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:22, 13 March 2008

Crime in Mexico

Hi Mhsb:

I see you have a lot of edits on crime in Latin America and South America.

Your edit on crime in Mexico is bound to be reverted because a lot of the statements are unsupported by references. If they are based on reliable sources, it would be a good idea to include them.

Best wishes, Wanderer57 (talk) 06:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Mexico

I do not know if you are a new user here, but I invite you to discuss instead of engaging in a rather unfortunate edit war. Calling someone a VANDAL for editing/removing/questioning your edits is not appropriate and a violation of WP:Etiquette. Per WP:Consensus, especially when dealing with controversial topics, you must obtain the consensus of the editors. You might want to review what truly constitutes WP:Vandalism, before calling someone a vandal. Moreover, the very nature of Misplaced Pages is free editing, you shouldn't be surprised, nor upset—much less resort to personal disqualifications—when another user challenges your edits. Like you aptly pointed out, this is not a personal encyclopedia (i.e. yours), but everybody's. Please, discuss, and obtain the consensus of the editors.

Given your insistence on reverting without addressing the concerns expressed at Talk:Mexico, I have requested the assistance of administrators and the full protection of the page. Please discuss, so that a true consensus and compromise is reached. We all build Misplaced Pages.

Cheers, --the Dúnadan 21:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your unconstructive behavior. We have already agreed that a section on crime is appropriate but disagree with the way you wish to present it. Please discuss and do not resort again to personal attacks and disqualifications. --the Dúnadan 00:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Brazil has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Two One Six Five Five _ʃ 00:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Violation of 3RR

Please be aware that there is WP:3RR rule in Misplaced Pages, in which a user should avoid edit-warring. At Brazil, you have engaged in an edit war and reverted an article four times in less than 24 hours. Please discuss with the editors involved in stead of engaging in systematic reversions. --the Dúnadan 00:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't fool yourself

Perhaps you should read the entire article before brining spurious accusations. Let's recap:

• You have pushed a particular POV with WP:WEASEL wording.
• You resorted to personal insults and attacks, as well as ad hominem argumentation. ("nationalistic", "patriotic", "you should travel a lot"). Perhaps you are the one who should travel, I do not live in Mexico, but have lived in three continents and travel extensively. But that doesn't make my arguments anymore truer than yours. What makes my arguments stand is that our proposals on a section on "Crime and Law Enforcement" are compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:CITE. We have also argued that economic issues should be discussed in the appropriate section, but that two different subjects should not be mixed. You have conveniently ignored our concerns and questions.
• You have disrupted other articles and falsely accused others of doing the same by assigning the actions of Supaman to every one who disagrees with you (currently all editors at Talk:Mexico).

Please contribute constructively. Like you aptly pointed out, this is the wikipedia where everybody edits. Do not be surprised when five users question your edits. --the Dúnadan 01:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Several points to note

Per WP:TALK:

• An editor can edit his or her own comments if they are not part of a debate of which other users may have already posted a response. You deleted another users comments. Since you inserted a comment at Talk:Brazil about editing the article because of a discussion at Talk:Mexico, you provided the link that Opinoso followed to express his opinion. I repeat, you cannot delete another user's comments.

Per WP:BLANKING:

• It is recommended that you do not blank your discussion page. Archiving is recommended.

--the Dúnadan 00:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Opinioso did not attack you, like I said you provided the link. Secondly, I never said you should not delete your talk page, I said it is recommended. You didn't need to cite the policy that I already paraphrased to you in my previous comment. Please read the second bullet, and you'll see what I actually said. --the Dúnadan 00:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Under that same standards, we should have deleted your comments from Talk:Mexico. --the Dúnadan 01:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, you direclty insulted us, but we cannot delete them because they were "related" with the discussion? You gotta be kidding me right? --the Dúnadan 01:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

What affiliation? I have no idea what you're talking about, but your spurious accusations do not suprise me. Maybe you haven't noticed, but there is a Canadian, an American, a Spaniard and a Mexican opposing your edits at Mexico. I really do not know what you are talking about. --the Dúnadan 01:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Catalan people

Ha, now you are following my contributions? That is indeed funny, just disagreeing because I said it, for the sake of disagreeing. Given your opinion there, I guess you know very little of the subject. "Buyers beware": get ready for an avalanche of responses from Spanish Centralists... you don't know what you just got yourself into. --the Dúnadan 01:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Really? I am following the contributions of other users? Do you mean "you"? Don't worry, I have more important things to do. But what a coincidence that you arrived at Talk:Catalan people. You should wait to see the responses you'll get... =) --the Dúnadan 01:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Mexico City

This is getting interesting. You keep on following my contributions... (cyber-stalking perhaps?) =) Reverting again for the sake of reverting? I mean, did you actually write something at Talk:Mexico? Gee...

In any case, please read WP:NOT. Images should be used when they illustrate a point in the section, not as decoration. Misplaced Pages is not supposed to be neither an album nor a repository of media files. A link—which already exists—to commons is the way to go.

--the Dúnadan 01:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

You are kidding me right? After all your offenses and the evident fact that you followed my contributions just to argue against whatever I said, you say I offended you? I urge you to take this project seriously; maybe you didn't start with your right foot with your first contributions; better to rectify and to work constructively that to bring spurious accusations against other users. Given your recent comments, and the fact that you continue to disrupt other articles without a reason, but just because you have a personal vendetta against me, you leave me no choice but to report you to the administrator board. Until then, --the Dúnadan 03:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I really don't know if I should laugh, or if I should feel offended. I have never attacked you: you did several times at Talk:Mexico, where you resorted to ad hominem argumentations to justify your claims. Then you disrupted Colombia and Brazil just to make a point., . At least five different users have asked you to rectify your actions and make more constructive edits.

You followed my contributions and reverted my edits without a reason at Mexico City and opposed anything I said at Talk:Catalan people. You may edit any article—even if you follow my contributions—but at least do it with a justified reason, to make a better Misplaced Pages, not just out of a personal vendetta against me. There was absolutely no reason why you reverted at Mexico City. The images do not comply with WP:NOT: An anonymous user inserted five images, one of disproportionate size at +300 px inside a table: I justified the deletion of only two images, kept the rest, and standardized the sizes of all (as recommended in the Manual of Style). What reasons do you have for reverting it? Are you truly concerned with presenting the image of a French-architecture house of Maximilian of Habsburg in Mexico City? Are you truly concerned in the complexities of Catalan nationalism?

Maybe you should read the policies you so aptly cite. "Legal" threats or "violence" threats are unacceptable. Telling you that I will report your unconstructive edits is not a threat, it is part of the Dispute resolution process.

But don't worry, you can present all your arguments and your history of contributions before an administrator. Since it seems that you must have the last word in all our conversations, you can have it. It is too late, and I am tired of reading recurrent spurious accusations against me. I will not respond. We can meet at the administrator board, or at the dispute resolution process, if you may. If not, just take a breath, rectify your actions, and we will meet in a more constructive discussion tomorrow in the various articles you are participating at.

Cheers mate,

--the Dúnadan 03:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, what are you doing?

Look, you've been editing every topic related to Latin America, I just don't know what you're trying to do, you just can't expect people to take your edits seriously when you're having this attitude, you couldn't do your edits to Mexico then you go to Brazil and now to Mexico City and the rest of Latin America, if you keep on going like that someone's going to call an administrator to check on you. Supaman89 (talk) 17:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Start over

Thank you for your change in tone and willingness to dialogue in your last comment. It is well noted and commended. I am more than willing to start anew, and to try to reach a compromised solution in the many articles we are currently editing.

• Regarding Mexico, there seems to be a deadlock in your proposal, being objected by several users. I will make a proposal in the near future, in line with what has been discussed (law enforcement structure and several statistics that you showed).
• Regarding Brazil, I think it is relevant to talk about the carnival and soccer. We must beware, however, not to write an introduction with stereotypes. I think that as long as the article gives due weight to these renown traits of Brazilian culture in the appropriate sections we're on the right track.
• Regarding Mexico City, I still fail to see the need to keep five pictures clustered into a two paragraph section, one of which is of disproportionate size. I ask you to reconsider your position.
• Regarding Crime and Violence in Latin America, IMHO, the article is valid, but there are some issues that need to be addressed:

• The first one is that you are not paraphrasing. You are citing sources, which is good, but you copied the text of the sources word-by-word. You must not copy sections of text from different sources and then paste them in an article without changing the words (that is what I meant by a "verbatim" copy, which if you are not careful, may border on plagiarism). You should paraphrase, or if you cite the words of a very specific person, s/he must be properly identified by name, and his/her words need to be in quotation marks. I can help you paraphrase some of the sections, but please keep note of that in your future contributions. You can review WP:CITE, which has a good deal of advise on how to use sources, how to paraphrase and how to cite.
• The second issue is that you are presenting a very specific point of view (i.e. POV) of a group of social scientists that directly associate crime and violence to economic hindrances. Again, this is good, but it is only presenting a partial analysis of the subject (i.e. it is an essay). It is recommended that you present analyses of all pertinent authorities, even if they seem contradictory. An encyclopedia article, as a tertiary source, should present all POVs, citing all authorities without endorsing any particular thesis; and most of all, write about facts. In this particular case, I recommend that you review the very comprehensive analysis on Poverty in Latin America written by the World Bank. It is full of statistics and give a descriptive review, rather than a proscriptive approach. I also recommend that you include the affirmative actions taken by the various governments in Latin America and their results. For example, the drastic reduction in kidnappings and violence in Colombia during Uribe's administration, or the recent role of the armed forces in Mexico in certain cities to hamper drug-traffic activities and the political implications it has had. That way the article would have a very complete review of the situation, and not just the opinion of a couple of social scientists.

Let me know what you think, --the Dúnadan 02:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

As promised, I made a proposal regarding crime in Mexico. Let me know what you think. --the Dúnadan 02:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please, stop doing vandalism in my talk page. Opinoso (talk) 16:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Opinoso

Hi! I warned him. However, I request you to always start a discussion in the article's talk page when you add a tag to the article, explaining why you added the tag. If possible, try to fix the article's problems (for example: if the article is unsourced, try adding reliable sources) before adding a tag. --Carioca (talk) 01:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Mhsb, stop following and reverting Opinoso's contributions, as this kind of behavior is disruptive and you can be blocked for that. I also suggest you to start a discussion in the article's talk page if you disagree with Opinoso's edits, so a consensus can be reached, as this will prevent an unnecessary edit war. You and Opinoso are disagreeing in two articles, Gisele Bündchen and Model (person), so I suggest you both to find a third opinion. I also asked Opinoso to stop calling you a vandal. --Carioca (talk) 03:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Since renaming/moving this article is clearly controversial, I suggest proposing a move first, and arguing your case in the Talk Page before doing any changes. You can do this by adding a "split" template to the page. I would suggest splitting it into two, European Brazilian and Arab Brazilian. FilipeS (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You've been mentioned at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Hello Mhsb. You are welcome to join the discussion and give your own opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The archived location of the ANI thread is here. EdJohnston (talk) 02:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)