This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

FYI, I changed the date because of this: Help:CS1_errors#deprecated_params. I'm not bothered either way. Fuddle (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

My understanding is (as I said in my edit summary) that the "year" parameter is needed, for the Harvnb templates to work. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for calling my attention to the policy re some recent edits I made. The sources for the parts I deleted are not up to the standards of what I require of my students, but do appreciate the policy and the reasons behind it. Nonetheless, there should be some appropriate way for those with interests in a particular topic to remove material that is inadequately sourced. Hoping the policy will provide good guidance on that. Thanks again. DStrassmann (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem. If you want to read up more on the relevant Wikipedia policies, there's lots of information at Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. In brief, when you have a conflict of interest, you are encouraged a) to declare it and then b) to contribute on the appropriate talk page.

Meanwhile, for what it's worth, it's pretty clear that the issue on that page has little to do with reliable sources (as those sources were certainly reliable enough for the claims that were being made), but rather with original research. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Jon, do you have time to help me with a Spanish question? I've been working on Graduados, rather hampered by my lack of knowledge of Spanish. I've resolved most of the issues that have come up, but I would like to be confident of the right translation for the Tato Award categories. The article currently refers to categories called "daily fiction", for example; the source is here. What would the most natural translation be? Soap opera? Daily drama? Daytime drama? Or is "daily fiction" really the right translation?

Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:43, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Heya. It's not a term I'd heard before. NB "soap opera" would usually be "telenovela" (though there are significant differences between Latin American telenovelas and Anglophone soaps.) Nor do I know either the show or the others that won prizes. But given that the relevant distinction here seems to be between "ficción diaria" and "ficción unitaria," what appears to be at stake is its ongoing status, as a series whose episodes are not self-contained. As such, my suggested translation would be "TV serial." Though this may be more a British term than a US one. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I think I'm the first native English speaker to work on the article, so British English is probably OK, unless South American articles get US English by virtue of being in the Americas. The Tato page listing all the award categories is here; they mention telenovelas under a similar category: "Ficción Diaria Comedia/Telenovela". Graduados is definitely a telenovela, which is why I was wondering about "soap opera", though in the US I think "telenovela" has some recognition as a term because of their availability on Spanish-language channels here. I suspect "daily" is necessary, if we're not going to use "telenovela" or "soap opera", each of which would imply a daily episode, because Ficción Unitario category was won by es:Tiempos_compulsivos, which appears to be weekly episodes, and that could fairly be described as a serial too. I don't think we need "TV" since the Tato awards are all TV awards. So how about "Daily serial"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Looking further down the Awards section of Graduados, it talks about the es:Premios Martín Fierro, which also have a Unitario category that was won by a serial, es:El hombre de tu vida. Graduados won the ficción diaria award there too. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Latin American literature
Thank you for quality articles on Latin American literature such as The General in His Labyrinth, on academic background, for teaching, knowing "potential pitfalls", in teamwork, for your "attempt to keep to a zero revert rule", but improve instead, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (7 April 2009, 26 June 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Pleased to meet you at the memorial service reception today. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Likewise! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed that you removed a revision that I added to the page on Mario Vargas Llosa. I am certainly more of a beginner than you are here but I was wondering why you did this. I felt it was left quite unclear what exactly the Investigatory Commission was investigating. Since there is no background in the article and no link provided I thought the article could be strengthened with the link I provided. In your edit summary you seem to indicate that I had created a redundancy. I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks. Ian.w.t.n (talk) 23:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, the Commission had been mentioned earlier in the article. I agree it could have been clearer, so I adjusted the wording accordingly. But your link was misleading, I felt, in that it suggested that the commission was investigating the "government response" to internal conflict. In fact, its remit was in some ways more restricted and in others more open: it was investigating one particular massacre, which was not directly the responsibility of the government. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, please excuse me for missing the explanation earlier in the article. Initially I had assumed that sort of detail would be found in the section on his political involvement and did not look closely enough elsewhere. Also, excuse me for the misleading link. I mistakenly linked to that section of the Internal conflict in Peru because of the criticism of his conclusions included lower in the same paragraph we revised. It is quite unfortunate that there is no article on the Commission or the massacre that could be linked here. I still think it would be valuable for readers who are not reading the entire article to be directed elsewhere for more detail and context surrounding the massacre. Do you think there is room for that? Ian.w.t.n (talk) 23:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind comments about my research to find additional citations and sources, at Talk:Adrianne Wadewitz !

Much appreciated,

— Cirt (talk) 09:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Latin American studies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William B. Taylor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The ungrammatical sentence was driving me batty, but I was waiting until Monday to have the conversation with my class on how best to fix it. Oh, well. If you don't mind, I'd like to use your change to show students how to thank someone on WP. I am trying to get them to be graceful in their exchanges. --DrX (talk) 11:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC) P.S. Pity I did not get to meet you in person. I hope we can fix that in the future.

Hey, no problem, and thanks for the presentation. Tell your students they also did a great job, both on the article and in the conference. Ciao. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 14:15, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Ha, I just received 18 thanks for that edit! Wow!  :) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jbmurray, given recent discussions, I'd like to re-run your old "Let's get serious about plagiarism" dispatch from 2009. Would you have any objections? If needed, I'd love for you to make any pertinent updates or changes. Best, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Fine by me. Talk me through the process. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I've copied the old article to here. Please feel free to make any updates, corrections, or tweaks! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Latin American studies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William B. Taylor. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

The article Federico Gil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No references

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Before you condemn me to everlasting punishment and damnation, perhaps you could take a few minutes and prove to yourself that what I did was completely and utterly wrong. Then prove it to me please.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:42, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Relax with the hyperbole. It's simply that the harvnb templates used for references in those articles require the year parameter to function. Documentation is here, but essentially it requires the year parameter, which it picks up from the citation template. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

You know, I just checked it out at Gabriel García Márquez, and it seems I may be wrong. If so, I certainly and fulsomely apologize. It seems that, in some cases at least, harvnb can pick out the year from the citation template even without the year parameter. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:14, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

The ((harv)) family and ((sfn)) templates don't actually pick out the year from the citation template. Rather, they simply create CITEREF links from their own parameters that match CITEREF anchors that the CS1 and CS2 templates create frowm their own parameter. Module:Citation/CS1 can create a CITEREF anchor from any MOS-compliant date. The year initial numeric date format is the only date that requires |year= and then only if the CITEREF anchor requires disambiguation: |date=2014-12-07 |year=2014a.

You might find this tool useful: User:Ucucha/HarvErrors. There are several broken harv references at Gabriel García Márquez.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:09, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.