| Revision as of 07:59, 3 October 2005 editRHaworth (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users118,796 edits subpages← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:25, 3 October 2005 edit undoMarsden (talk | contribs)1,053 edits Your vote neededNext edit → | ||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
| ] and ] were in the wrong name space. I have moved them. Put a copyright tag on ] - you would not like to have it deleted would you? -- ] 07:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC) | ] and ] were in the wrong name space. I have moved them. Put a copyright tag on ] - you would not like to have it deleted would you? -- ] 07:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == Your vote needed == | |||
| Hey, Vizcarra. POV matter at . Thanks. | |||
| ] 13:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:25, 3 October 2005
Archive
Welcome
July 1-15
July 16-30
August 1-15
August 16-31
Extending a hand
Vizcarra, from your old page listing my comments as being part of a cabal with other users, plus your recent comments in Talk:Zionism (intervening against me when every other editor mentioned the other user in the dispute as acting belligerently), I gather that you feel I am somehow acting unfairly or otherwise against you (as you said: "Also, it seems that the "regulars" who agree on a determined number of POV seem to stick together anyway, so I'm doing it to balance the discussion."). I really would like to resolve this, because I don't think this sort of antagonism is productive. My interest in Jewish topics (which is only a section of my interests) are certainly shared with other editors, but I am not part of any coordinated effort to push a POV, and I am in no way related to the other editors. My only disagreement with you that I know of was on the issue of Passion Plays in the anti-Semitism article. I thought you were wrong, and I tried to prove it with my sources, but was unable to convince you of my point. I have had no other interaction with you than that, and I am not sure why it seemed so antagonistic to you. If I in any way insulted you in that exchange, I apologize, but I would appreciate it if we could bury the hachet here and move forward. We are likely to continue to disagree, but I would prefer it to be productive and not destructive. Work for you? Goodoldpolonius2 23:49, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
- I guess your reply makes your position clear. Ah, well. --Goodoldpolonius2 00:45, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
- Vizcarra, I still don't agree with your points, but our back-and-forth is not terribly productive, though, if you'd like, we can continue the debate started on my Talk page and I can reply in detail to all of your points. Failing that, I am not sure how to start over with you however, since I don't think I am incorrect about my interpretation of events and facts, and I know you also think you are in the right, even if I disagree. Can we indeed bury the hatchet on the discussions to date, and try to work together more harmoniously in the future? --Goodoldpolonius2 23:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
- Vizcarra, fair enough on your points on my page, lets move forward. My request is that you similarly assume good faith from me. --Goodoldpolonius2 00:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Barnstar
I,
, hereby give you this barnstar for excellent work on the Spanish Profanity article.
Take care,
14:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your kind words, things like this give me the will to keep trying to make WP better. --Sebastian Kessel 17:12, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
200.45.178.153
I guess we're tag teaming him with the test. :) (See talk page) :)
--Sebastian Kessel 20:11, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I didn't want to rv him/her, since the article actually reads better now. :)
- --Sebastian Kessel 20:18, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
POV
Hey, Vizcarra. A belated thanks for your comments on the Zionism:talk page. I am also currently tangling with a couple of your old friends at Occupied Territories. Specifically, Jayjg has been reverting my changes, and SlimVirgin joined him on at least one occasion. With apologies for bothering you with this, could I recruit you to make a revert on occasion if this ridiculousness continues? Thanks in any case. (For your amusement, you might note that Jayjg had violated 3RR until he reverted his last, revert.) Marsden 17:58, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Municipalities of Baja California
Hi Vizcarra. I'm working on the slow process of creating an article for every Mexican municipality (it'll take forever, but oh, well) and I came across your map Image:Bajamunicipios.PNG. I'm thinking of being bold and modify it in order to make all maps about Mexico consistent (e.g. similar to the maps of the states and boroughs of the Federal District). I just thought of letting you know and hope you don't mind. Cheers. -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 18:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Canales not Elizondo
Hello!.... current secretary of energy is Fernando Canales Clariond NOT Fernando Elizondo Barragán as you just updated. Anyway, i have already updated both bios.
cheers, Abögarp
PVEM
Hi there. On the Green Party's page, you call González a "public officer". Maybe "public official" is the term you're looking for -- ie, a civil servant, an employee of the govt bureaucracy. What exactly did he do before founding the party? –Hajor 14:56, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
My RfA!
My dear Vizcarra, I simply wanted to drop by, now that my RfA is closed to give you a big THANK YOU! for your kind support. I know we had a little argument regarding Anahi, but it serves to show how two mature persons can understand each other and move along. As a Mexican, perhaps you'd like to see some of my later contributions to Texas Ranger Division and see if I've focused the matter with a fully NPOV position, as I know it's a sensitive issue for many of your countrymen. You'll always have a friend in me. Un beso! 
Shauri Yes babe? 21:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Mexican state categories + Baja municipalities map
Hi again. Sorry about the map, I had changed it by the time you replied. It can be reverted to either my or your version at any time so that shouldn't be a big issue.
My concern here is that I noticed you removing Mexican State articles from Category:States of Mexico. You stated in the edit summary that it is a "redundant category" when it is actually far from it. My understanding of current usage is that the main state article can and should go under "divisions of X" (regardless of whether the article is under other categories) while all articles related to the state go into subcategories (and I think the main state article should NOT go into its own subcategory). See how Texas and other US state articles for usage examples. It would be real nice if you could revert the changes you made.
-- Rune Welsh ταλκ 22:38, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 23:51, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
subpages
User:Vizcarra/Articles and User:Vizcarra/images were in the wrong name space. I have moved them. Put a copyright tag on image:vizcarra.jpg - you would not like to have it deleted would you? -- RHaworth 07:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
