User talk:Theryx7/Archives/Archive 3

Revert query
Hi there, you've just reverted a couple of my edits to the Colombia article, including one which you've flagged as vandalism, and I'm not sure why!

My first edit was some general tidying of the intro, and reinserting a couple of lines about post-1900 history and some internal links which were there in the past but seem to have been lost recently - I think both are quite important/useful.

The second edit, which you flagged as vandalism, was simply to indicate that Colombia is now the second-largest Spanish speaking country in the world, rather than the third, which reflects what the Wikipedia list of countries by population (linked to in the same paragraph) now says.

I'm sure this is just a misunderstanding, but I thought I'd check with you before editing again!


 * The section has been cleaned and improved in the past, some of the information that you added already is available in the history section. --Theryx7 (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again, thanks for your very rapid response, and also for restoring quite a bit of my original edit :)


 * I understand that Colombia's history is covered in depth in the history section (and you appear to have done a lot to improve that!), but I do think we need something post-1903 in the introduction. I've had another crack at this, which I hope takes your points on board (ie it's shorter!). I've also moved the reference to biodiversity up so that it sits alongside the one to topography,which seems a more logical arrangement.


 * I hope this all sounds sensible to you - I think collectively we've improved this, but just let me know if there's anything you're not happy with. 143.167.185.41 (talk) 20:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Which is better and why?:


 * a) Colombia is ethnically diverse. The interaction between descendants of the original native inhabitants, Spanish colonists, African people originally brought to the country as slaves and 20th-century immigrants from Europe and the Middle East, have produced a varied cultural heritage. This has also been influenced by Colombia's varied geography. The majority of the urban centres are located in the highlands of the Andes mountains, but Colombian territory also encompasses Amazon rainforest, tropical grassland and both Caribbean and Pacific coastlines.
 * b) Colombia is ethnically diverse and includes descendants of the original native inhabitants, Spanish colonists, African people originally brought to the country as slaves and 20th-century immigrants from Europe and the Middle East. Colombia is also geographically varied with distinct regions and topography. The majority of the urban centres are located in the highlands of the Andes mountains, but Colombian territory also encompasses Amazon rainforest, tropical grassland and both Caribbean and Pacific coastlines. --Theryx7 (talk) 20:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Well if I had to pick one, I'd pick the first, because it flows slightly better and includes a reference to culture (ie the consequences of the ethnic diversity). However I would opt for a third version, which has a slightly more fluent opening:


 * c) Colombia is very ethnically diverse, and the interaction between descendants of the original native inhabitants, Spanish colonists, Africans originally brought to the country as slaves, and 20th-century immigrants from Europe and the Middle East, have produced a rich cultural heritage. This has also been influenced by Colombia's varied geography. The majority of the urban centres are located in the highlands of the Andes mountains, but Colombian territory also encompasses Amazon rainforest, tropical grassland and both Caribbean and Pacific coastlines. 143.167.185.41 (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, your version has some serious grammatical issues. For example, what is meant by "This"?
 * If you were willing to work with an experienced editor and native English speaker to improve the article, instead of launching into ranty attacks, you would probably have more success. Your grasp of the English language is not great and your writing is often confusing. --Theryx7 (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

"This" means the rich cultural heritage. So: "The rich cultural heritage has also been influenced by Colombia's varied geography." With the exception of a "have" that should be a "has", which I missed, what other grammatical errors do you think you've identified?

I think you're being rather unfair. I appreciate you disagree with me about the history issue, but I'm not sure where I've made a "ranty attack". Indeed I've tried very hard, and am still trying hard, to be polite, and to take into account your point of view.

As it happens I am a native English speaker, I'm from England, I've got a Masters degree in History from a top-ten UK university, and I'm employed in communications, so there's a lot of evidence that I'm a capable communicator (albeit not evidence I intend to confirm to you!). In fact, I did considerable work on the Colombia article many years ago (c2008-09 - I've never bothered to register for an account which is why it doesn't show in the contributions history for this IP), and even before I made a single change this evening, the majority of the introduction was written by me. You seemed to be happy with that.

I gave up because I grew tired of the encounters with thugs and bullies, and over the years the Colombia article has gone badly to seed. I've looked through the edit history and you seem to have recognised this, and done a great deal to rescue it. It's a shame that your intransigence is preventing us from working together constructively now.

In respect of your comments about the history, I have read the History section, and you're right that this does provide a more extensive account of the twentieth century. However the introduction should offer a summary. Nineteenth-century history is also covered in the History section, but then summarised at the top. I'm going to repeat my edits and if you blanket revert them again, we're going to have to seek a third opinion. 143.167.185.41 (talk) 21:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * If you want to improve the article about Colombia I believe that you should not focus on drugs. Colombia is more than drugs.
 * The Peru article does not speak about the cocaine, Peru is now the largest producer of cocaine in the world. --Theryx7 (talk) 21:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You should improve the section of Visual Arts, music or theatre in the article about Colombia. --Theryx7 (talk) 21:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with you about the drugs, and I think taking it out of the intro is entirely reasonable. I've just fixed that have/has typo (which I mentioned to you but then promptly forgot!), and then I think the introduction's really strong!


 * I meant what I said before, you've done a great job at getting the article back into shape, and I've been much less depressed after visiting it today than I have for many years! I don't know too much about music or the visual arts, and, like I said, I've largely given up on Wikipedia, but I agree that the Visual Arts section is a total mess and I might get tempted into overhauling it when I've got a bit of time. The main article on Colombian art seems very good indeed, so I guess it's just a question of condensing that.


 * Thanks for talking things through this evening, and good luck looking after the page :) 86.143.64.91 (talk) 22:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Violence between the two political parties were frequent but at present does not occur those fights. --Theryx7 (talk) 01:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)