User talk:MarshalN20/Archive 13

Hi there, help needed
I see your userpage features the Coat of Arms of Lima. Could you please help with the translation/construction of Flag of Lima? It also seems the Flag and Coat of Arms are being confused since it's linked with the CoA Spanish article. Any help is appreciated...-- Sığe  &#124;д･)  20:45, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Sigehelmus! There seems to be more information available for the coat of arms rather than the flag, so it doesn't surprise me that the Spanish article links to the coat of arms. Best.-- MarshalN20 T al k 22:45, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015: The results
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is. All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. , a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to. Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
 * wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

, and  18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bicycle kick
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bicycle kick you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alpinu -- Alpinu (talk) 18:40, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Belgium NFT nomination for FA
Hi Marshal, this morning I nominated Belgium national football team as featured article candidate, which would not have been the case yet without the fundamental remarks and the helpful advice and sources you offered me. You can follow the review process here, leave comments whenever you like. Regards, Kareldorado (talk) 11:14, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll make sure to comment before the FAC review closes. I am at present working on getting the bicycle kick article through a GA review (and there's a few problems with an editor there—feel free to provide your input on that discussion if you are interested in the topic). Please, please, please do remind me of this again next month (I should have more time then to provide a FAC review; although I assume by that point there will be plenty of comments from other senior editors). By the way, you've done a fantastic job with the article! I had to go through a couple of FA (or was it three?) reviews before it passed, so don't feel discouraged if this first one doesn't pass (let's hope it does, nonetheless). Best wishes.-- MarshalN20 T al k 05:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I don't want you to comment on it immediately, feel free to do so when you have time for that. The "bicycle kick" article is surprisingly long to me - not too long or so, but apparently there is a lot to tell about it. I'll read through it, and see if I can make any helping c/e. I can offer two things from the Low Countries that may contribute to this article. 1) In Dutch, the name is "omhaal", meaning as much as "turnaround drag", emphasising the backward flip of one's body and legs. 2) Once the Belgian international Marc Wilmots made a notorious goal with a bicyle kick as this happened during the 2002 FIFA World Cup, against Japan. Kareldorado (talk) 09:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding your GA nomination, indeed, the review seems a hard nut to crack. Don't get discouraged, neither will I with my FAC because it is apparently normal to fail 1 or 2 FA nominations before the moment is there (as I have seen many GA/FA overviews). Simply try to tackle one issue at the time and explain if a solution seems impossible. I think the point the reviewer wants to make is that adjectives are not necessarily 'bad', but that you have to be cautious with them, in order not to lose the encyclopaedic (NPOV) tone. IMO, performing a bicycle kick itself is not that difficult, but performing a successful one (say, for a forward a shot aimed within the woodwork, not necessarily a goal) is. However, I think you stress the difference enough. Kareldorado (talk) 09:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Aside of that, I find it a bit unlucky that a Peruvian and a Chilean editor have to argue about the origin of the bicycle kick. That is comparable to the same editors arguing about pisco, or a Belgian and a French editor who have to debate about who made the first 'French' fries (papas fritas). It would be better if an experienced editor who is not Peruvian or Chilean guards the neutrality during the review. Kareldorado (talk) 09:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bicycle kick
The article Bicycle kick you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Bicycle kick for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Third opinion request for Rondo in C minor (Bruckner)
Dear Marshal,

My reply: I avoid as much as possible to use references from popularising sources as, e.g., "AllMusic". They mainly use ad hoc writers, who are not citing their sources. See the sentence coming from van Zwol's handbook, which I have added in the meantime to String Quartet (Bruckner): (Translation of the Dutch text) "The Quartet was not issued during Bruckner's life, since it concerned a sample of capability during his study period at Kitzler." In this section, van Zwol cites also the additional Rondo, which he describes further on p. 676, because it was edited later in another Band (XII/1) of the Gesamtausgabe. I think this would be a more credible reference.

I have not removed anything, but I have added van Zwol's reference, which (in my opinion) supersedes the popularising, not sourced references from "AllMusic" and "The Rough Guide to Classical Music".

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

PS: I suggest to remove the popularising, less credible (because not sourced) references from "AllMusic" and "The Rough Guide to Classical Music" from the section "History", because they have no real added value. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:45, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My suggested text to replace that coming from the low-credibility popularising references:
 * "The String Quartet (U. Harten, p. 406, C. van Zwol, pp. 682-683) and its additional Rondo (U. Harten, p. 370, C. van Zwol, p. 676) were not issued or performed during Bruckner's life, because he considered them only as samples of capability during his study period at Otto Kitzler. (U. Harten, pp. 233-234, C. van Zwol, pp. 682-683)"
 * Sources:
 * Uwe Harten, Anton Bruckner. Ein Handbuch. Residenz Verlag, Salzburg, 1996. ISBN 3-7017-1030-9.
 * Cornelis van Zwol, Anton Bruckner 1824-1896 - Leven en werken, uitg. Thoth, Bussum, Netherlands, 2012. ISBN 978-90-6868-590-9.
 * Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.

After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine (User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason (User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew (User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.

We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.

The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Figureskatingfan (talk), and Godot13 (talk).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bicycle kick
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bicycle kick
The article Bicycle kick you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bicycle kick for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks Gerda! You're awesome!-- MarshalN20 T al k 14:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Award
Hi Marshal verify my work, i ask if i deserve an award that you grant. saludos--Vvven (talk) 05:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi! I will gladly provide an award, but first require that you make a case as to why you should receive it. In other words, what are your best contributions on articles about Peru and/or association football? Thanks!-- MarshalN20 T al k 07:00, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

ok, I made completely the following articles: Template:Lima landmarks, Basilica of Nuestra Señora de la Merced (Lima), Puruchuco, Gold Museum of Peru and Weapons of the World, Walls of Lima, Palomino Islands (Peru), Ventanillas de Otuzco, Template:Peruvian dogs, Historic Centre of Trujillo, Park of the Exposition, Church of San Agustín, Lima, Peruvian Viceroyal architecture, Chiribaya Shepherd, List of songs dedicated to football, Template:Fanatism in Association football.

And with my former account (User:Venerock) i expanded considerebly the article Cusco.--Vvven (talk) 07:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks man i really appreciate, you are THE Marshall, first time that give me a credit for make articles, because in real life criticize me much, althought they are right, the life is precious, for that, i divide my life between my proposes for my beliefs and first of all my knowns and my life, lol i speak too much. thanks man, althought i ask, you are that decide, and i hope that you give me that cuz i deserve according to you think, and not for ask. have a great life--Vvven (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)


 * In wikipedia i focused now in other topics, but later sure will contribute in knowledge of the secrets of the Peru--Vvven (talk) 00:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you! You deserved the award. There's so much activity going on in Wikipedia that asking about an award is one of the best ways to have a specific evaluation of your contributions. I am sure that all of us interested in Peru and Latin America are grateful for your many improvements to the coverage of the topic. Stay in touch.-- MarshalN20 T al k 17:21, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Need your comment
Marshal, first of all I want to congratulate you for your work on Bicycle kick. I really appreciate your work with controversial/complicated topics like pisco sour and bicycle kick. Unfortunately the most controversial article of all; War of the Pacific, is still in a stalemate. I we had new editors that article would make some progress. But I am not here to talk about that I would like to see if you want to comment on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mountains. Also, do you think that place is the right one to raise the issue? – Dentren |  Ta lk  20:20, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, Dentren. I'll think more about editing the War of the Pacific article in the future. It is unfortunate that the article is in such a mess. Thank you for working to at least let the readers know there are many inaccuracies.--05:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Beg a favour
Can I get a second opinion on the contributions of this guy. Some seem like genuine improvements others look like wikifiddling. WCM email


 * Hi WCM! There's not much of an edit history with the IP. His edits could be small steps towards becoming a serious contributor, but it may also just be wikifiddling. I do not think his contributions as a whole are a cause of problem.-- MarshalN20 T al k 19:32, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter


That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by, and two each by , , , and. Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by. Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. ,, and --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)
Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. ,, and .--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Good source for Belgium NFT match facts?
Dear Marshal, I wonder if you can recommend me a website with detailed match facts other than eu-football.info. The good thing about this website is that it is a treasure of match details, the bad thing is that it cannot be regarded as a "golden standard" IMO since the owners of the website don't describe their policy of obtaining or fact-checking information. Of course the RSSSF is generally regarded as a first option source for football facts, but they usually carry less details (like team lineups, match events, stadium, attendance, ...), especially with respect to friendly matches. Can you help me to find appropriate sources for the citations where I still used eu-football.info, or do you think I can defend the use of this site somehow? Thanks in advance, Kareldorado (talk) 10:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Kareldorado! I remember being in a similar situation when working on the Peru nft article, and I remember realizing then that sometimes "less was more." In other words, it is sometimes best to remove information that is not cited by a reliable source from the article that is going to be reviewed for FA status. Of course, I do not suggest to delete the information from Wikipedia, but rather to move it to another article where it can still be relevant but not a problem for review.
 * RSSSF is by far the best acceptable reliable source on football facts. I suggest using their information as a foundation for the records mentioned in the article (and also as a good way to find out those records that are not quite as relevant for a summary of the national football team). I hope this helps.-- MarshalN20 T al k 16:11, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

History of South America
Hi, thank you for your constructive comments about the History of South America article.

Through some basic trimming (since 27 March) I have managed to reduce the article from 185kb to 93 kB "readable prose size"

I did try to explain elsewhere that before I started editing the article had very few references and many templates. (version as of 18 March 2016) I noticed that much of the article was repeated in the daughter articles (which were well referenced), so part of my method of working was to bring in text from these articles (along with the references) merging into the original. This way I could sort out the referencing, then trim the article back down to size. My intention was never to create a 'monster' article, just to temporarily expand for technical purposes.

I'm happy to help in any way to go forward constructively. :-)

Kind regards -- Marek . 69    talk  03:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism at Picarones
Hi MarshalN20, it came to my attention that this IP is constantly vandalizing the Picarones article, constantly claiming it as a Chilean product without any sources. I've seen in the article history that you dealt with this IP before, and he just keeps going at it. I don't suppose there is a way to notify an IP to block him? (N0n3up (talk) 04:38, 25 April 2016 (UTC))
 * Try to avoid placing too much focus on it. Sometimes these IP editors are just single purpose accounts that will only get more aggressive if they are continuously reverted. I will monitor the page and see if the vandalism persists; if so, I can take it to the 3RR board for further action. Just make sure to avoid breaking the WP:3RR in the process.-- MarshalN20 T al k 05:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, but just in case, just letting you know he's done it again just now: . Clearly the IP isn't here to contribute anything at all but to vandalize. (N0n3up (talk) 02:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC))
 * Yeah, but you should not have reverted him again . The 3RR policy is very strict, and if I now take the case there it is very likely that you will get blocked for it as well (per WP:BOOMERANG). I don't want you to get blocked, so please refrain from reverting the user again. Simply notify me or another user of the situation and then I can take action. Patience is key.-- MarshalN20 T al k 03:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll try, but the thing about 3RR is that you can revert after 3 edits only after 24 hours have passed, as in the case here. And since the IP keeps going at it, I think it's time we do something about it. I tried to talk to an admin but no response yet. (N0n3up (talk) 03:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC))
 * Just so you know, the IP won't stop vandalizing. This is the latest edit the IP did and the second one since our last conversation. I think it's time we did something about it. (N0n3up (talk) 02:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC))

WikiCup 2016 May newsletter


Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.

Round 2 saw three FAs (two by and one by ), four Featured Lists (with three by ), and 53 Good Articles (six by  and five each by, , and ). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by and five by ). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. scored 265 base points, while and  each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, and, broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. ,, and -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

mas material para wikipedia research
felipe pardo y aliaga: https://books.google.com.ar/books?id=5p6oE2oGj3wC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Felipe+Pardo+y+Aliaga&lr=&hl=es#v=onepage&q&f=false

de la pucp: http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/pensamientoconstitucional/article/viewFile/3231/3059

la constitucion del 56: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=vboWAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22la+constitucion+del+56%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi-0MbB5qHdAhVI0VMKHRm-CQgQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q=%22la%20constitucion%20del%2056%22&f=false

las constituciones del peru y situacion actual: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=lOoyAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22las+constituciones+del+peru+y+la+situacion+actual%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIt_n85qHdAhXG11MKHSMSBgIQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

el peru en 1860: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=vaU4Z4_p5msC&pg=PA285&dq=%22el+sistema+representativo+y+la+cuestion+del%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiX5ZKn56HdAhVK4VMKHaHmDwIQ6AEIKjAB#v=onepage&q=%22el%20sistema%20representativo%20y%20la%20cuestion%20del%22&f=false

el sistema representativo y la cuestion del dia: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=_pEVAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22el+sistema+representativo+y+la+cuestion+del%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiX5ZKn56HdAhVK4VMKHaHmDwIQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q=%22el%20sistema%20representativo%20y%20la%20cuestion%20del%22&f=false

proyecto de reforma de la constitucion de 1856: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=DJEWAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22proyecto+de+reforma+de+la+constitucion+de+1856%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJvuuY6KHdAhUIzlMKHY0AAwQQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

proyecto de reforma constitucional: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=TL4WAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22proyecto+de+reforma+constitucional%22&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip_9fl6KHdAhWPv1MKHdNxDv0Q6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.62.146.210 (talk) 17:00, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

mi defensa, paz soldan (informacion de elias): http://www.worldcat.org/title/mi-defensa/oclc/21467060 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.62.146.210 (talk) 22:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

timoleon: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=xqlJAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=es#v=onepage&q&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.62.146.210 (talk) 23:48, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

this might be useful too... http://www.worldcat.org/title/informes-y-polemicas-sobre-el-guano-y-el-salitre-peru-1854-1877/oclc/253347509 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.37.4.27 (talk) 18:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

try algodonera http://www.worldcat.org/title/ensayo-sobre-la-industria-algodonera-en-el-peru/oclc/48310512

este tambien sobre algodonera https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=IJBdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA104&dq=juan+norberto+casanova+ensayo+sobre+algodonera+peru&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiEibu9yKTdAhWso1kKHdz9BUEQ6AEILjAC#v=onepage&q=juan%20norberto%20casanova%20ensayo%20sobre%20algodonera%20peru&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.37.4.27 (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

ever so friendly juan de arona http://www.worldcat.org/title/inmigracion-en-el-peru-monografia-historico-critica-por-juan-de-arona/oclc/456827214 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.37.4.27 (talk) 19:13, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

espinosa mi republica: https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=CLOOfrcUVlUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=juan+espinoza+mi+republica&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0r4za-qTdAhXE51MKHUFNCQMQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

pensamientos de lorente: http://www.worldcat.org/title/pensamientos-sobre-el-peru/oclc/253191645 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.62.146.210 (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

pablo macera: https://books.google.com.pe/books/about/Poblaci%C3%B3n_rural_en_Haciendas_1876.html?id=MiSjNAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.62.146.210 (talk) 23:28, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Great stuff! Thank you for sharing this with me.--MarshalN20 ✉ 🕊 20:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)