User talk:Iñaki Salazar

I'm sorry. 😔



Savvyjack23 (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Savvyjack23 (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Iñaki Salazar!


Happy New Year! Iñaki Salazar, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Caballero / / Historiador   ☊  14:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Deletion discussion in Spanish Wikipedia
Hi. Not sure if you are interested, but there's a discussion regarding the notability of an article I started on Spanish Wikipedia. It's an article on Dominican plastic surgeon Edgar Contreras (Spanish article here) I'm not sure if you contribute there, but feel free to add your 2 cents, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with my opinion to preserve the article. Thanks! Thief12 (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of José María Cabral Bermúdez


The article José María Cabral Bermúdez has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * The article seems to be not really notable. It seems the article is only focused on a lawyer and that is it.

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 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 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. Winterysteppe (talk) 22:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Constanza helada.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Constanza helada.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 04:30, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Aleppo
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Aleppo. 207.161.217.209 (talk) 03:12, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

 * hi Manuelmas90 (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Tito Dutta (talk) 21:46, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help
Hi ,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted. Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Despacito
Do not add fancruft tables like YouTube views to the article. They are fancruft and has no place in Wikipedia, especially sourced to crap website like Kworb.net. Further addition will be reported. — I B  [ Poke  ] 12:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft!
Hey! I hope you are well. Would you kindly take a look at this article and help me on getting it improved? I will appreciate your assistance. Thank in advance! http://wikivisually.com/wiki/Draft:Geovanny_Vicente_Romero ComPol (talk) 00:02, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Talat Xhaferi
Hi Iñaki, are you working on this page? I plan to add translations from French and Macedonian shortly. --Dans (talk) 10:04, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Czech Republic
In Czech Republic, why did you change "20 °C (68 °F) – 30 °C (86 °F)" back to "20 °C (36 °F) – 30 °C (54 °F)"? Surely you know that 20 °C (a very comfortable temperature) does not equal 36 °F (which is almost freezing)?! And that 30 °C (quite warm) does not equal 54 °F (quite chilly)?! —Stephen (talk) 19:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I was the person who made this change and I would like to know why I got a message saying that my contribution was not helpful. It is blatantly wrong to convert 20ºC to 36ºF; 36ºF = 2.2º C. Please reinstate my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.101.97.20 (talk) 20:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The text does not talks about a temperature reading, but about the temperature difference between summer and winter: it says that summery temperatures are 20 to 30 degrees Celsius higher than wintry temperatures.
 * "«On average, summer temperatures are about 20 °C (36 °F) – 30 °C (54 °F) higher than during winter.»"

- Czech Republic § Climate


 * As an example, a 20°C reading is ten degrees Celsius higher than a 10 °C reading, which is a temperature of 50 °F. However it is wrong to say that the 20°C reading is 50 degrees Fahrenheit higher than the 10 °C reading, since when you sum those 50 degrees F to 10°C/50°F it gives you a total of 100 °F, which is 32.2 °C and not the original figure of 20 °C.
 * 20°C–10°C=10°C The temperature difference is 10 degrees.
 * 68°C–50°F=18°F The temperature difference is of 18 degrees, not of 50 degrees. So instead of being 50°F higher, it actually is 18°F higher.
 * Hence, when comparing temperatures, 20 °C becomes 36 °F instead of 68 °F, and 30 °C becomes 54 °F instead of 86 °F. ★ Iñaki ★    (Talk page) ★ 05:32, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean. I think it would be easier to understand if it were expressed this way: 20–30 °C (36–54 °F). —Stephen (talk) 06:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Yep I get it too, my apologies. - eLBee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.101.97.20 (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Problem
Hi, can you help me with user "Nathazzapaduch" in the page List of most viewed YouTube videos? He continues to enter irrelevant information, thank you--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Issa Joke
Damn take a joke😭😭😭 Acefunnybull (talk) 08:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Damn take a joke Acefunnybull (talk) 08:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive behavior
As I replied on my talk page already please stop removing reliable source material and defacing the article for Mexicans, the view point that you want to force in the article is completely baseless, extremist and irrational : wheter you like it or not dark blond hair counts as blond hair. Same with eye colors such as green, light brown and honey: they're considered light eye colors, not "mixed eye colors". Your edit behavior now falls completely on the grounds of vandalism. Thank you. Pob3qu3 (talk) 03:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Please see the talk page of the article: Talk:Mexicans. ★ Iñaki ★    (Talk page) ★ 08:24, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Your United Kingdom edit
You appear to be a long enough established editor to know that this edit you made here, which introduced a previous mistake you made just so you could add a rather inappropriately placed edit-summary, and then top remove it, is actually quite disruptive. The more so, when a simple message sent to my talk page would be sufficient and not having such a ridiculous point now fixed on the editing history. Please do not introduce mistakes just to make points that could have been made in appropriate talk page messages! Thank you. DDStretch   (talk)  09:25, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Resignation of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski


The article Resignation of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Content fork. Nothing said here can't be said at the existing articles of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski and Operation Car Wash"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:05, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Resignation of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Resignation of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Resignation of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring and hoax report, to the user User:Pob3qu3
Here I will leave the conversation that I had with User:Pob3qu3, that is dedicated only to delete content and valid references of the platforms in all the articles that have to do with Mexico, He never checks or proves the veracity of his sources, he limits himself only to misrepresent and lies about the articles of references that he provides, only to hoax himself and the people.

This user has had the same discussion not only with me, also in this article you can see that he discusses with someone else User:186.151.61.164 about the same topic, since User:Pob3qu3 he has vandalized the page more once with the same CONAPRED reference which is a simple popular survey that talks about racial problems in Mexico, it is not an OFFICIAL CENSUS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:White_Latin_Americans#White_Mexican,_population_and_percentage User:186.151.61.164 another discussion about the same topic with User:Pob3qu3, With all this, what I want to say is that he uses a reference in the Spanish language, references that have nothing to do with the article White Latin Americans http://www.conapred.org.mx/documentos_cedoc/21_Marzo_DiaIntElimDiscRacial_INACCSS.pdf,http://www.conapred.org.mx/userfiles/files/Enadis-2010-RG-Accss-002.pdf , http://www.conapred.org.mx/documentos_cedoc/Dossier%20DISC-RACIAL.pdf, to pass this inadvertently in the article that is in English, White Latin Americans, taking advantage of that nobody has time to read the PDF in Spanish and Gaining time to invent false data and misrepresent the facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:White_Latin_Americans#Someone_explain_me_about_Mexico_47%_white? https://www.animalpolitico.com/2017/06/racismo-discriminacion-piel-mexico/ In this link you can see a summary and the meaning of the references given by User:Pob3qu3 that have nothing to do with the White Latin Americans article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignorantes22 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hoax report in which it involves a false reference, which says that Mexico has 47% white people, Mexico only has 9 - 15% of white population in OFFICIAL CENSUS.
Excuse me for my english, but the topic that I am going to touch is of my interest and my knowledge because, recently the last two years, i'm looking at the White Latin Americans article, and i am watching recently that the percentages of the white population in Mexico are crazy and have no common sense, besides not revealing true sources where that is confirmed, since in the link provided by CONAPRED it does not appear anywhere that Mexicans admit to be 47% white, first of all and with all the respect and seriousness, I have always understood that the white population in Mexico does not exceed 10%, since it is a country mostly mestizo and with an important Amerindian population, since I understand that great civilizations Indians inhabited Mexico, as is the Aztec (all of Mexico) or the Mayan culture that inhabited Yucatan, in addition to other not so famous but considerable and many other Amerindian cultures, the fact is that I was reading the PDF of CONAPRED, and has nothing what to do with the percentages or censuses of the country, since people are saying the following:

As I understood, on March 21 is celebrated the day of the elimination of racial discrimination in Mexico, then the National Council to Prevent Discrimination (Conapred) and the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) conducted a SURVEY (not census), with the aim of understanding racism in that country. What I could understand is that 65 - 70% of Mexicans are brown, that is to say, mestizos, these people say they have no problem in having to live with people of another race, while the remaining 23% said that they would not be willing, and 10% said that it depended on the situation, so you asked? who are that 23% and 10% who would not be willing? You will see as it says in the CIA factbook Mexico, says mestizo (Amerindian-Spanish) 62%, predominantly Amerindian 21%, Amerindian 7%, other 10% (mostly European), well we already understood the percentages, but our collaborator Pob3qu3 keeps insisting that the population identifies itself as white, when that did not appear at any time in the text of CONAPRED since I am Spanish speaker and very good Spanish, even better than English, as the text said IS A SURVEY ON SOCIAL PROBLEMS, NOT ON NATIONAL CENSORS EITHER RACIAL THEME STATISTICS, then for me, the references of Pob3qu3 do not have the necessary evidence to affirm that data, it also happens with the white population which is 11 million, there is no article on the internet that states that Mexico has 53 million white people at the height of Brazil , Argentina or Colombia, which are countries with large white population and official data, real censuses of those countries, which take into account racial identification through genetic tests, as a collaborator said recently, he read the 1921 census of Mexico and there it is affirmed that the Mexican population is of 9% or 10% as the CIA affirms factbook at the moment, so that was all, I wanted to leave you the restlessness, because I want to edit the population sections of Mexico, since I have the Valid references to do it, but I do not do it without your opinion, because I would be behaving in a malicious way like Pob3qu3 vandalizing the article with false information, regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignorantes22 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Race is a taboo topic in Mexico, especially when it comes to Mexico's two largest demographics who are Mestizos and Whites, because of this it's a common practice to calculate the percentages of Mexico's white population based on phenotypical traits such as hair or skin color instead of asking people if they think they are one race or another. For example one study, by the American Sociological Association asserted that, based in the prescence of blond hair the percentage of White Mexicans is 18.8%, another study made by Mexico's metropolitan University use this methodology and calculated 23%, thus, Mexico's white population being only 10% is not realistic (and the accuracy of the 1921 census, which is the root of that figure, has been contested), especially when considering that according to the article for Blond hair said trait has it's highest frequency on Scandinavian nations at around 50%-60% (nobody would go around saying that only half of Scadinavians are white!). Another fact is that in northern Spain (the zone from which most white Mexican's ancestors come from) the frequency of blond hair is 30%-40%. Going back to the Conapred, it does a similar thing just with skin color instead of hair color, and asserts that Mexicans with light skin are 47%. While in the documents terms such as "White" nor "Mestizo" are specifically used (because again, race is very taboo) "European looking" and "European features" are, which is beyond doubt used a less controversial synonym for "white". Pob3qu3 (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand what you describe to me about whites and mestizos, these populations also exist throughout Latin America, and the same social problem of racism is experienced throughout the region.

I do not need to explain the types of race, I am chilean and I understand it perfectly, the problem is that the survey carried out by CONAPRED is not a census, much less an official census, since the survey refers to to the social problem, affirming that 64% of Mexicans are mestizos and that the other remaining percentage would not like to live with other ethnic groups, but the remaining percentage never makes reference to 47% self-identified as white, on the contrary that 47% is divided into 21% Amerindian, 7% unidentified Amerindian races, 9% European descent and 2% Gypsies and foreign ethnic groups, it is absurd that you invent that 47% claim to be white, when the text never states this, much less says that they are 53 million, these are invented data.

Look, I understand how difficult are the issues of racism and discrimination, in Chile you live the same situation, but you can not put that kind of references in a racial census article, you should put the CONAPRED reference in a wikipedia article that speaks of racism and discrimination, because in this article you do it in the wrong way, inventing data and generating controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignorantes22 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Nowhere in any of the cited documents there's a reference to Mestizos, directly or indirectly (unlike with White Mexicans, who are refered to as being "European looking"). I assume you are basing your "64% of Mexicans are Mestizos" claim on the question on which 64% of Mexicans considered themselves morenos, however moreno and Mestizo is not the same as moreno has no racial connotations (maybe it does in Chile but not in Mexico, where it is used equally for white people with dark hair/eyes as it is for Africans), I don't think that you are not aware that morenos (tanned and/or dark eyed/haired people) exist in Europe. That you are trying to pass moreno as being the same as Mestizo and at the same time dismiss "European looking" as an equivalent for White screams "double standards" to me. This with no mention that the extant evidence that is already cited in the article (frequency of blond hair, light eyes, Mongolian spot etc. books that assert that the majority of northern and western Mexicans are white, books that point out inconsistences in the 1921 census and books with the populations for colonial cities) completely contradict the "Mexico is only 9%-15% white" posture you are trying to push, no matter how much you criticize the Conapred source for not being completely direct, all these other sources also support the claim of Mexico's white population being between 40%-50%, forget about reverting the percentage of White Mexicans to 9%-15%, it's simply not true. Pob3qu3 (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Is that I'm not inventing myself, here http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Mexico.htm https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mx.html https://www.britannica.com/place/Mexico/Ethnic-groups I will leave the three references that rule that Mexico does not exceed 9-15%, stop repeating the same sermon as always, that the moreno, that the guero, the moreno and the guero exist in all Latin America, there is even more in Chile than in your beloved Mexico, so i can understand it perfectly, also "MORENO" and "GUERO", "RUBIO" are not even races taken into account in the census of any country that is not even taken into account as races, what are you talking about? do not want to admit the little white population that your country has, then take any article you find in Spanish and invent whatever it takes to modify the data at your convenience, the other collaborators have had the same discussion with you, and you are always disqualifying official pages like the CIA FACTBOOK, like BRITANNICA O LEZCANO, but it does not lack words to invent things, as I say I am Chilean, I am Spanish just like you, and the PDF of CONAPRED only speaks of racism and discrimination in Mexico, limiting itself to speak only about that topic, the only percentages that are given there are the same as those given in the CIA FACTBOOK and those shown by BRITANNICA, at no time are people claiming to be white, mestizo, etc., since Mexico has not had No census in recent times, and the reference you give, is limited to being a popular survey of social problems carried out by a university and a foundation, Give me TESTS AND GRAPHICS, as the censuses that the governments of the countries give, or of foreign pages that worry precisely about that topic, stop seeing us the face of idiots, that here has someone who knows Spanish and does not allow himself to be duped. I know how you always disrupt and manipulate all the articles that have to do with Mexico, just for your convenience, as Iñaki warned you at the end of 2017, until you do not prove the reason of your inventions, reverse the changes until you get tired. If you do not give me concise and demonstrable proofs, such as those given by the collaborators and I, I will stop paying attention to the repetitive and meaningless answers that you give.
 * Aca mis referencias y pruebas de lo que aporte en el artículo, ahora solo te falta desacreditar la CIA FACTBOOK que es lo unico que sabes responder ..... / Here my references and proofs of what I contribute in the article, now you only need to discredit the CIA FACTBOOK since it is the only thing that you know how to respond ......

https://www.britannica.com/place/Mexico/Ethnic-groups (GRAPHICS 15% MEXICO WHITE POP)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mx.html (CENSUS AND PERCENTAGE 9% MEXICO WHITE POP)

http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Mexico.htm (15% MEXICO WHITE POPULATION AGAIN)

¿Entonces yo me lo invento? haber sacame otra excusa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignorantes22 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

The worldfactbook bases it's estimation on the 1921 census, as I told above, in recent times it's accuracy has been disputed, as according to local censuses and church registers previous to it multi-racial marriages were rare compared to unions between people of the same race/ethnicity, thus it's not a figure to base the sections of Mexico on. Encyclopedia Brittanica does the same thing, it attemps to actualize it a little, but if the root figure has been deemed inconsistent it's figure is imprecise too, additionaly the article takes various liberties that are factually wrong, for example, it asserts that "The north of Mexico is overwhelmingly Mestizo" which is completely wrong according to actual field research made in Mexico such as the ASA paper, which points out that blond hair (the actual percentage of Mexicans with blond hair alone is 18.8%, which is higher than the estimation Brittanica gives for ALL white Mexicans!) has it's higher frequency in north Mexico, this evidence alone proves Brittanica's text and estimations are currently wrong. Your third source, worldstatesmen, only reuses the figures britannica gives so it's not valid either, in conclusion there's no reason to prioritize sources that actual field research and published books by people specialized in the field prove wrong, we have to go with the best sources aviable, not the most "popular" ones. By the way, you didn't even try to say anything to refute these sources I mention above (frequency of blond hair, light eyes, mongolian spot, the book by Howard F. Cline, the book that shows the ethnic composition of colonial Mexican cities etc.) all of which back up the 40%-50% figure, i don't really know what more proof you need. I also must add that in fact, I had a very similar discussion some months ago with an IP user, i'm almost sure it too was you the editor has the same arguments and intentionally leaves his posts unsigned, I'm don't want to fall on your game of personal attacks but I'm confident that you've been behind practically all the discussions I've had about the percentage of white Mexicans on this site (and behind this message  on my talk page). You are not looking very good here thus I think it's better if you keep composture because to treathen with blindly revert changes you don't like until I "get tired of fixing them" further worsens your image. Pob3qu3 (talk) 04:42, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Nice excuse saying that I had already had an argument with you, when I do not even know who you are, or what your intentions are, I do not know what your racial complex is, of which you can not admit that Mexico has a low white population, I do not know what your political intentions or lies are for the purpose of a hoax, if people have had the same discussion with you, it is because it is known in all articles of the internet, that the population of Mexico does not exceed 9% or 15%. %, wikipedia is not made for self-conscious people who want to manipulate articles for personal satisfaction, I have no problem with the reference of CONAPRED, I have problem is that you misinterpret the text data, THE CONAPRED TEXT SAYS "y un 47% señaló que los indígenas no tienen las mismas oportunidades para obtener un trabajo en México." , At what point are people saying that they have light skin? This is a confirmed hoax with the sole purpose of deceiving people, with the excuse of using an article from CONAPRED that has nothing to do with it. This page sums it up very well

https://www.animalpolitico.com/2017/06/racismo-discriminacion-piel-mexico/ I will have to send your reference   to List of Hoaxes on Wikipedia.

It's true Mexico does not have a national census since 1921, but it can be true and official, so you do not have to eliminate it and impose yours, the wikipedia is for everyone and the sources must be reliable and approved, soon I will contact an administrator, with you there is no agreement of any kind.

You suffer from a tremendous racial complex! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignorantes22 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Duchess of Medinaceli
Hello, I’d like to know why you edited the name of the page Princess Victoria of Hohenlohe-Langenburg, Duchess of Medinaceli. Thank you Aude9331 (talk) 07:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Precedence of the infant
Some people cite the infant as having precedence under "Younger sons of Dukes of the Blood Royal",do you see the second son of the Duke of Cambridge as not qualifying under that description?12.144.5.2 (talk) 03:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

DR a full signatory to the IACHR?
Hi,

I'm reverting this edit of yours. You didn't provide a ref, and per the 2017 annual report of the IACHR (link under Inter-American_Court_of_Human_Rights), the DR is still a full member. — kwami (talk) 22:07, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

2018 FIFA World Cup
Please do not remove position markup in World Cup group tables. It's standard WP:FOOTY practice to color the rows which give right to advancing to a further round. The status letter convey whether a qualification/elimination has been secured, not the colors.Tvx1 10:20, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I have not edited those templates because of the colored rows per se. When parameters  and   are used with ko, it displays a sentence in the table cell indicating that that team in the group has qualified to "advance to knockout stage", which misleads readers if it has not occurred. So if no team has qualified, or only one of the two teams, then it is inopportune to use the former and the latter parameters until that situation had occurred and is needed. It's confusing especially at first glimpse to see that X team OR teams have qualified when they aren't. Also an alleged "standard practice" is not a rule so it can be ignored when suitable and appropriate.  ★ Iñaki ★    (Talk page) ★ 11:56, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Also, we gerenally use status like A to show whether advance or not. The colour only tell us top two will advance. Hhkohh (talk) 10:57, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It is not about the colored row. Also, its nonsensical to say that a colored row is needed to "tell" that two teams will pass, despite the introduction of the "Group stage" section already says so. The issue of having parameters  and   activated is that it misleads readers as it literally states that that team in that group has qualified to "advance to knockout stage", so if no team has qualified, or only one of the teams, it is inopportune to use those parameters until that a qualification has occurred and then it is needed.  ★ Iñaki ★    (Talk page) ★ 11:56, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We can switch status_XXX to A if the team advanced. Hhkohh (talk) 12:07, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * A full sentence with a colored cell is visually more striking than an letter A inside parentheses.
 * No it isn’t because we use “advance” instead of “advanced” in those sentences. That little grammar difference means it a conditional occurence and not a confirmed one. This is standard practice per consensus achieved at WT:FOOTY. You cannot unilaterally change the format without achieving a consensus first. Tvx1 12:08, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * + 1, also this format will not mislead readers and editors. Hhkohh (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Advance is a also a noun, not just a verb, and it definitely adds confusion since it may imply that the team gained the advance to the KO stage. It misled and confused me, so don't say that it won't mislead anybody when it when it has already has done it. ★ Iñaki ★   (Talk page) ★ 12:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature has a missing end tag and a stripped tag.

You are encouraged to change
 * : ★ Iñaki ★  (Talk page) ★

to
 * : ★ Iñaki ★  (Talk page) ★

—Anomalocaris (talk) 13:46, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for updating your signature! —Anomalocaris (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Joaquín Árias
Hello Iñaki Salazar. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Joaquín Árias, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''R3 only applies to recently created and implausible redirects. Use WP:RFD if you want deletion.''' Thank you. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 15:25, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Casandra Damirón, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Thomas ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Casandra_Damir%C3%B3n check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Casandra_Damir%C3%B3n?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:14, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rafael Calventi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Juan Bosch ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Rafael_Calventi check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Rafael_Calventi?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hillary Clinton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elgin ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Hillary_Clinton check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Hillary_Clinton?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Selection bias in Forbes list of Billionaires
An edit explaining (and documenting) selection bias in the Forbes list of billionaires was removed without explanation or discussion on the talk page. The edit also removed discussion of taxation and billionaires.

The sources are academic articles and publications in major newspapers.

Given the lack of explanation for the removal, I plan to revert the changes. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wt984688 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Your article Panky
Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Panky to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It has been listed at Pages Needing Translation, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article will be listed for deletion. Thank you. Jmertel23 (talk) 11:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:14th of June Movement


Hello, Iñaki Salazar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "14th of June Movement".

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 and remove the, , or  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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Disambiguation link notification for October 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pedro Santana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indigenous. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Del Caribe, Números 28-33 book
Hi, you added that book as a source on Dominican Spanish, do you know anything more about it, like who wrote it? I cant' find any information about it online. Erinius (talk) 02:23, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Grandsons of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia has been nominated for merging
Category:Grandsons of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 12:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José Antonio Salcedo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Criollo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Francisco Espaillat
Please stop with the whitewashing of Francisco Espaillat, it is really unbecoming. And for your information, George Washington has a full paragraph of the lead of the article dealing with his slaveholding issues. Fram (talk) 08:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Fram Washington is described as "an American MILITARY OFFICER, STATESMAN, and FOUNDING FATHER who served as the first PRESIDENT of the United States from 1789 to 1797" in its first sentence, I don't see "slaveholder" there, just his occupations. ★ Iñaki ★  (Talk page) ★ 09:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Not in the first sentence, in the lead. Washington is somewhat more known than Salazar, so his lead is a bit longer as well. Fram (talk) 09:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Fram Well, I liked the way you re-phrased the lead. Although, I think that the comparison with Saint-Domingue's largest slaveholders was useful to get an idea of how things were in that time (not trying to make him look less bad, but trying to show that Espaillat was quite rich by Dominican standards but by Saint Dominican standards he was not that rich, especially since he had previously lived in Saint-Domingue) perhaps it should be re-phrased though. ★ Iñaki ★  (Talk page) ★ 02:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Patricia Villegas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Higüey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Orlando Jorge Mera.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Orlando Jorge Mera.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ivonne Haza.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Ivonne Haza.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
 * Buenaventura Báez
 * added a link pointing to Gallantry
 * White Dominicans
 * added a link pointing to Lower class

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Buenaventura Báez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallantry.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Currently
Please don't use words like currently as you did on Sanna Marin. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. The words you write today should still work in 20 years time, or at least stand a chance of still being true. Using words like "currently" builds in the sentence's obsolescence. MOS:DATED Cabayi (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Cabayi Sorry... I just thought that that sentence was ambiguous as it could mean 'the third youngest ever' the way it is written. ★ Iñaki ★  (Talk page) ★ 21:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dominican Republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inequality in the United States.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amelia Vega, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crème de la crème.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Descendants of Buenaventura Báez has been nominated for renaming
Category:Descendants of Buenaventura Báez has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Russian federal subjects by average wage, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PPP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:50, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Category:Dominican Republic people of European American descent has been nominated for merging to
Category:Dominican Republic people of European American descent has been nominated for merging to. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santiago Creel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Covarrubias.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)