User talk:Echidna2007

Welcome!

Hello, Echidna2007, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like María Juana Ostoic Dragnic, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! RandomHumanoid^(⇒) 02:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on María Juana Ostoic Dragnic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. RandomHumanoid^(⇒) 02:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits [ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chile&diff=262091910&oldid=262070106] to Chile don’t quite fit as encyclopedic material since they're not based on a neutral point of view (NPOV). In addition, tourist guides meant to attract visitors to a country are not considered realiable sources to be used. If in the future, you plan to make any major changes to the article, please take a moment to discuss your intentions in the article’s talk page. Thank you Likeminas (talk) 14:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you have shown interest in the topic. As you probably already know, there’s an ongoing disagreement on whether the section should include a recent genetics analysis. It’s important that more people discuss this issue so that we can reach a consensus. Please feel free to participate if you’re interested.

Likeminas (talk) 18:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Chile has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 18:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Chile. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Cosmic Latte (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Chile removed sourced information and replaced some of it with vague and unref'd generalities. I have reverted your changes and would appreciate a discussion on the talk page of the article before such changes are attempted again. Thanks! Cmiych (talk) 15:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Echidna:

Thank you for your interest in the Argentina article.

I moved the op-ed bit you added to the header to the relevant section, and largely kept it in the article despite its being sourced by the highly disreputable Heritage Foundation, a PR arm of the Republican Party.

I don't doubt that anything similar this hack group has to say about your native Chile would fail to pass muster with you (as well it shouldn't, and by the way, if anyone tries to sneak something like that in the Chile article itself, let me know, and I'll have it removed on the grounds of its being a flagrant POV imposition).

Let's keep in touch.

Sherlock4000 (talk) 10:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw that you are interested in including a new picture to the article on Demographics of Chile, if so, you can give your opinion here.--Ccrazymann (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Echidna:

Although one does want to avoid cluttering the intro with details that could just as easily belong in a section, this brief and factual sentence couldn't possibly take from the article in any way – unless the G-20 membership itself bothered the reader in some way, in which case it would be the reader's own NPOV problem, rather than an objective or stylistic one.

Look, I haven't raised any objections to having Chile's recent invitation to the OECD repeated in the intro and economy sections (congratulations, by the way), and I don't think anyone else has, either, so there's really no cause in deleting the sentence at all. It's brief, factual, and not a matter of point of view in any way.

If you're interested, you should suggest Wikipedia put the news about Chile and the OECD in the 'Did You Know?' ticker.

Take care and good luck.

Sherlock4000 (talk) 14:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Echidna:

I regret that you feel the need to repeatedly delete a factual sentence; the membership of the G-20 is of public record, and its mention in the header is not against the rules. As you know, it's no way different from any one might see on other country article headers, such as in the Chile article, where an erroneous reference to the OECD being a group of the "most developed countries" (it includes Mexico and Turkey, after all) was left uncorrected, for instance. Speaking for myself, the mistake was left alone in the interest of harmony among Wikipedians of different nationalities.

Accordingly, you left me no choice but to warn you that this insistence is in conflict with Wikipedia's 3RR policy, wherein, among other things, users are discouraged from deleting self-evident facts from an article (where NPOV is not at issue with the fact).

Again, I've decided not to touch the factual error in the Chile article, or apply your own yardstick to the Chile article (which repeats a laundry list of points on the intro and in relevant sections). So, please, desist, and remember: you might like having my help someday if users from third countries attempt to impose an arguable or unfair POV on Chile. We're all in this together.

My regards,

Sherlock4000 (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Argentina. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NeilN,

I have received your message and I have no problem in understanding your point of view. As you can see this user Sherlock has an important history of disputes regarding Argentina.

Also, I cannot understand why he/she states that I am national of Chile. It can be any and also it is not a matter in Wikipedia, because this is an open world for everyone, regardless nationalities. I am considering it as a personal attack.

In my edition I just have followed same criteria used with other sentences about Argentina in the first paragraph. I have eliminated duplicated information explained further down in the article. He/She has duplicated information about G-20. I could say without probe and only based on my "guess" (as Sherlock usually does), that h/she added G-20 topic as a reaction of the new Chile's invitation to be a full member of OECD. Another guess could be: Sherlock can be the same user that put opinions in "La Nacion" Argentinian newspaper regarding G-20 and its importance comparing with OECD after Chile's invitation.

Regards

Echidna2007

Hello, Echidna2007. You have new messages at NeilN's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NeilN,

I have received your message and I have no problem in understanding your point of view. As you can see this user Sherlock has an important history of disputes regarding Argentina.

Also, I cannot understand why he/she states that I am national of Chile. It can be any and also it is not a matter in Wikipedia, because this is an open world for everyone, regardless nationalities. I am considering it as a personal attack.

In my edition I just have followed same criteria used with other sentences about Argentina in the first paragraph. I have eliminated duplicated information explained further down in the article. He/She has duplicated information about G-20. I could say without probe and only based on my "guess" (as Sherlock usually does), that h/she added G-20 topic as a reaction of the new Chile's invitation to be a full member of OECD. Another guess could be: Sherlock can be the same user that put opinions in "La Nacion" Argentinian newspaper regarding G-20 and its importance comparing with OECD after Chile's invitation.

Regards

Echidna2007

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Argentina. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. NJA (t/c) 19:51, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crime in Argentina was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! AJCham 20:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crime in Argentina, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Echidna2007. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Crime in Argentina.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crime in Argentina}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Crime in Argentina, from its old location at User:Echidna2007/Crime in Argentina. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Crime in Argentina, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Echidna2007. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Crime in Argentina".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]