User talk:Eddiemsidel

Ecuador Military:

Hello mate, it has been some time since I started to care for this site (check history). So no offense but the details you provided are wrong.

1st alteration: SPENDING budget was meant, and not Total Military Budget (that later is the one you put in). 2nd alteration: Why did you change the troop number to 59.500? (Just because some other website states it doesn't mean it is actualy up to date).

59.500, was, but isn't anymore. Therefore the wiki-stats are current! In future, please check twice before altering someone elses hard work. It's good you wanna help but PLEASE do your research first. ThanksUlan76 (talk) 10:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for your reply. You don't offend me at all. I'm not ecuadorian (or similar) :-) but the article was pretty bad as i encountered it and believe me I'm interested in providing a decent, fair article to everyone. Also the Ecuadorian Military shall not be neglected and be represented as good as possible (which they are). I can see your point. So lets work on it together, what do you say? My sources are as followed:

A Comparative Atlas  of  Defence  in  Latin  America / 2008  Edition / Ing_Atlas2008_15[15].pdf - Adobe reader (The thing is, its extremely accurate about pretty much everything; Total Budget, Spending Budget, Personnel, Defence Policy, School candidates, Peacekeeping missions and troop deployment. It provides sources and names. Wouldn't you say that the troop numbers would not only be correct too?) You can check it by clicking on the little number behind the troop number which leads you in exchange to the source. (its a pdf file)

In exchange: http://www.saorbats.com.ar/fuerzas_armadas/Fuerzas-Armadas-de-Ecuador.php is useful and I draw information from them as well, however its sort of a blog, created by one or few people. Check their website under news and you'll find that the wikipedia-site (English) is more up-to-date. They've missed many details, their military ORBAT comes from 2003! Also the sources are vage!


 * The say wikipedia but although I love wikipedia, its is full of mistakes created by people like us! Also it changes day-by-day so you can quote Wikipedia, but Wikipedia won't quote you :-). That's why Others, You, Me shall provide sources as accurate as possible in order to back up our information.
 * The provide sources like; "CEPAL" and "Anuario Latinoamericano de la Defensa", where, which page?

Maybe we should change it to 59.500, could you find more relible sources, please? A Blog or wikipedia in spanish don't seem to be more reliable to me. Also its great you're from there since you can be a better help to the article than me. Just make sure you double check sources. The news in Ecuador have been a problem ever since :-) (just joking). But seriously I know one person working for the press, drawing her sources from the internet, see what I mean?

Another note: Wiki is not only for "me" and my ego. Its for other people too. They have the right to know and not to be fooled. "Its better to be a student of reality than a master of illusion". I have no intention to argue with anyone here. So if you want to place 59.500 onto this site then do so but please get reliable "THIRD-PARTY" sources. Saludos Amigo Ulan76 (talk) 10:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)