User talk:Vizcarra/July 16-30

On Merging UDLA-P and UDLA AC
I think the merge proposal should be removed. Both institutions are not related at all. They do share a common history but they no longer have any connection but a part of the name. Please see comments on page. Thanks. --Threner 04:31, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
After reading your bio and reviewing how you've handled different situations, I have decided to award you with a barnstar. I am very impressed and when I find people such as yourself, whose dedication in Wikipedia has helped to lift the image of us "Hispanics" in the U.S., I try to show my appreciation. I personally believe that everyone should know that us Hispanics are not only entertainers and sportspeople, but that we have also made contibutions to society as scientists, educators and much more. Good luck in your Masters, no se como puedes estudiar con el calor que hace en Arizona, pero se que ASU es un buen sitio para estudiar. Your friend Tony the Marine 04:18, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Images, categories and speculation
Hi Vizcarra, I've seen some of your contributions, particularly Jeffrey Max Jones and Julio Frenk. There are a couple of things that I would like to let you know :
 * 1) Neither images nor web pages from the Mexican government are in the "public domain" as you have claimed in most images you have uploaded. There is ONE particular server, fuente.presidencia.gob.mx that releases most images in the public domain, but that's it (notice that fuente.presidencia.gob.mx is not www.presidencia.gob.mx). The Mexican law is quite clear about it: Art. 29: ''Los derechos patrimoniales estarán vigentes durante: II. Cien años después de divulgadas: a) Las obras póstumas, siempre y cuando la divulgación se realice dentro del periodo de protección a que se refiere la fracción I, y b) Las obras hechas al servicio oficial de la Federación, las entidades federativas o los municipios... Pasados los términos previstos en las fracciones de este artículo, la obra pasará al dominio público. Ley Federal del Derecho de Autor.
 * 2) To speed up the process, it would be nice if you could a) Remove the pics from the articles and b) Request yourself the deletion of the images. If you need free pictures of Julio Frenk, José Ángel Gurria, Rosario Green, etc. you may visit the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the server listed above and please be sure to include all details regarding the source, author, date, etc. and where it says that they are under the license you are claiming them to be. If you need help take a look at the following examples:image:Ernesto Zedillo Jacques Chirac.jpg and Image:Beatriz Paredes.jpg.
 * 3) Regarding your rearrangement of categories, I would like to remind you that both the birth and death categories are less relevant than the others, that's why they are usually located at the end.
 * 4) In some of your articles, such as Jeffrey Max Jones, you tend to speculate (i.e. "His replacement would be María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez"). Since there's no way we can predict who the next senator is going to be, particularly one year before the election, is better to put those rumours aside. If you need more information, take a look at Policies and guidelines.

Cheers, Ruiz 21:44, July 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * 1) Thanks for the information. The Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores has informed me that the information on their sites are all public domain, and I must have assumed that meant all government pages.
 * 2) I will leave that to you since I have not verified the information you have given me.
 * 3) "Less relevant" or "more relevant" is very subjective. I have seen more pages with the birth and death before any other categories, and makes sense to me since numbers are usually placed before letter for alphabetic order. (see Marie Curie, Salvador Dalí)
 * 4) In this case you are speculating that I "tend to speculate", María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez' position is that of replacement senator, as a matter of fact. That's why she would be the replacemnt if Jones died, quit to run for presidency or was ejected from the position. I would suggest you informed yourself or ask before calling information "rumour".

Cheers, --Vizcarra 06:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Second notice
I tried to be reasonable with you but since you insist:


 * 1) I am requesting you some proof that the web pages of the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs "are all public domain".
 * 2) Your comments on most images you have uploaded keep misleading every single user of Wikipedia. You can take as long as you wish to "verify" the law that I've quoted or request written permission from every single source you have used. What you can't do, is to leave the text without modification in every image you have uploaded because you already admitted that it was (a rather naïve) assumption of yours, not something you could prove, so please substitute the public domain notice with Template:No license until you find a reliable source explicitly placing them in the public domain, as stated in Copyrights.

In addition:
 * Neither Marie Curie nor Salvador Dalí has its categories arranged alphabetically, so where do you get that it "makes sense to me since numbers are usually placed before letter for alphabetic order"?
 * I misunderstood your Jeffrey Max Jones contribution: "His six-year term expires in 2006 since there is no re-election for senators in Mexico. His replacement would be María del Carmen Jiménez Méndez." To me, it sounds like Ma. del Carmen Jiménez would be her successor, not that she IS, in fact, a substitute senator.

Ruiz 08:15, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think you have been reasonable, but rather rude and condescending. "I insist"... with?


 * 1) I do have proof. How do you want it?
 * 2) I seriously doubt that "every single user of Wikipedia" has visited the mentioned articles and if they have, they have read my "misleading" remarks. I would substitute "the public domain notice with Template:No license" it if your manner as at the least proper but it isn't. I rather risk not being able to contribute to wikipedia ever again than honor your arrogant demeanor. I am a volunteer, I don't get paid to contribute, so if volunteering for wikipedia requires putting up with hostile wikipedians, I rather not contribute at all.

And "in every image you have uploaded" you have got to be kidding me! Even movie poster?!

In addition: Neither one of those articles has categories arranged alphabetically, so, by your own observation are births and deaths more important than the others?. Where do I get that it "makes sense to me"? Are you kidding? I've known myself long enough to understand what makes sense to me. Also numbers are generally placed before letters. See any list, including here, in a category for example.

Yes, you did misunderstand me. Successor and replacement are two different concepts in Mexican politics. And Jeffrey is a he not a she ("her successor"). Would be and will be are also different. --Vizcarra 17:15, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Third notice
You are old enough to decide by yourself whether you want to keep contributing or not. That's your call, not ours. But if you decide to keep contributing you have to obey the rules and follow the guidelines. Every contributor, including myself, is a volunteer and nobody wants to log in everyday and spend hours cleaning after you when you do know exactly what your doing, you couldn't care less if you break the rules, you keep on forcing people to fix your mistakes and you keep on manipulating and picking up conflicts with users in both w:ES and w:EN.

Image tagging is as important as writing content. People can't use the pics freely if they aren't sure about the source/license and keeping the wrong tags and making false statements deceive users. The pic at your user page is a perfect example. Would you like someone to download it, write stuff on it or use it to promote all sorts of products, from pyramid schemes to porn websites? Someone could, because your own picture isn't tagged properly and there's a HUGE warning sign at the upload page saying: "If you upload a file here to which you hold the copyright, you must license it under the GNU Free Documentation License or release it into the public domain." so it would be safe for him/her to assume that, since you took it by yourself with a a webcam, you own the copyright and you decided to license it under the GFDL or the pd. See? those assumptions are the ones that are gonna give us a headache in a few days, weeks or months if you don't fix the Mexican politicians pics you uploaded. People could start copy/pasting content from the govt. websites or adding dozens of new copyright'd pics because of your claims.

So, in short, if you do care about this project assume your responsibility: go fix the tags, post the e-mail or the scanned letter where the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowledged that their websites "are all public domain" or request the pics to be deleted altogether if you know it's just a lie. I can help you out finding free pics of most politicians involved.

Ruiz 20:10, July 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * "You are old enough to decide by yourself whether you want to keep contributing or not."
 * That is the difference, you know how old I am and you have plenty of information about me (from my profile). You? I have no idea who you are. But I'm assuming you are "old enough to decide" to conduct yourself in a professional manner.


 * "That's your call, not ours."
 * "ours"? You and cookie?


 * "But if you decide to keep contributing you have to obey the rules and follow the guidelines. Every contributor, including myself, is a volunteer and nobody wants to log in everyday and spend hours cleaning after you"
 * Well, if you are not willing to contribute by cleaning others mistakes you may want to let somebody else do it. Many have pointed out my mistakes and I have apologized for them, but the mistakes were pointed out in an educated manner before.


 * "when you do know exactly what your doing,"
 * You go from saying I made "naive" assumptions to say that "I know exactly what" I'm doing? Make up your mind, which is it?


 * "you couldn't care less if you break the rules,"
 * And you know that from? Do you know me? Remember that you have misunderstood me before (based on your own confession).
 * Is this remark consistent with the spirit of wikipedia?


 * "you keep on forcing people to fix your mistakes"
 * I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I contribute, if I make mistakes than somebody else could choose to point it out. I myself have chosen to point mistakes out, nobody has forced me.


 * "and you keep on manipulating and picking up conflicts with users in both w:ES and w:EN."
 * What conflicts have I picked? Cookie accused me of being "unethical" for deleting her remarks form my discussion page. What I decided was to avoid conflict by desisting from uploading any image and told Cookie right away that if she wanted to delete them then it was fine. If you have noticed (and you should have before making any accusations) I have desisted from uploading images in w:ES and mentioned about the "fair use" policies of w:EN which are different from w:ES.


 * "Image tagging is as important as writing content. People can't use the pics freely if they aren't sure about the source/license and keeping the wrong tags and making false statements deceive users."
 * I'm trying to deceive users now?


 * "The pic at your user page is a perfect example. Would you like someone to download it, write stuff on it or use it to promote all sorts of products, from pyramid schemes to porn websites?"
 * No, I wouldn't, but that's the risk I took by posting it there.


 * "See? those assumptions are the ones that are gonna give us a headache in a few days, weeks or months if you don't fix the Mexican politicians pics you uploaded. People could start copy/pasting content from the govt. websites or adding dozens of new copyright'd pics because of your claims."
 * I think you covered that already, and you said that it "would be nice" if I tagged them properly, not necessary, not essential. I assumed that's what you do here at the wiki (again, I know nothing about you), so that would be your job no? I had assumed that the pics were on the public but not that you have pointed it out otherwise I will make sure when I upload one not from the SRE site. So to avoid headaches you could have tagged them properly instead of spending so much time writing insults at me. It's easier to point mistakes out, give links to where the policies are, that way the wikipedian can act appropriately in the future.


 * "So, in short, if you do care about this project assume your responsibility: go fix the tags"
 * Well, since its your job to fix tags, I will let you do that. I know it "would be nice" for me to do it, but I rather focus on other things at the moment.


 * "post the e-mail or the scanned letter where the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowledged that their websites < >"
 * Could you care to explain me where do I do this?


 * "or request the pics to be deleted altogether if you know it's just a lie."
 * I'm sure someday you will learn more appropriate ways to phrase this remak. And I'm also sure you will learn to use titles that are less likely to be considered hostile than "Second notice", "Third notice".


 * "I can help you out finding free pics of most politicians involved."
 * No thanks, I want the least interaction with you as possible, because of your demeanor.


 * If I didn't care about the projects why would I write hundreds of articles?
 * If you care about the wikiproject, you will show some gratitude to those who contribute instead of saying how you've "seen" them. If you do care you will ask explanations before jumping to conclusion about wikipedians contributing with "rumours". If you do care about the wikipedia projects you won't make people feel bad about them "forcing you" to fix their mistakes.


 * --Vizcarra 21:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Final notice
Since you insist, I am gonna take this issue to the next level. We are all volunteers and most of us have a rather busy schedule. Because of that, most of us do not enjoy being forced to clean after you because you "rather focus on some other things" as if your interests were more important than ours, as if your spare time was more important than ours, as if the quality of the encyclopaedia was solely our responsability and as if we should be grateful that you are leaving a bunch of misleading statements all over.

"Since its your job to fix tags, I will let you do that". No, it is not my job, it is your responsibility. It's called ethics. You can't keep writing that kind of stuff and telling people it is their job to find out whether you are right or wrong and then telling them it is also their job or someone else's job to fix it because you "rather focus on some other things".

If you want to keep participating in Wikipedia you need to stand behind your contributions and play by the rules.

Ruiz 04:03, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, good luck. --Vizcarra 04:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

This discussion has come to my attention via a message on Wikiquette alerts. I have posted my entirely non-professional opinion on User:Ruiz's talk page. It is just my opinion, and I am not a Mediator. If you are interested, please head over to User talk:Ruiz and read my message. Please leave any response on my talk page. -Splash 22:54, 27 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks Slash, for offering a NPOV of this (hopefully positive) discussion. --Vizcarra 23:27, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Ovo-lacto vegetarianism
Your transwiki request to wiktionary should be on VfD as far as I know, and not WP:RM. 132.205.3.20 15:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The transwiki template suggest to noting the request to wiktioniary in the WP:RM page. --Vizcarra 16:47, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see that, where did you find that? At Transwiki log, it shows clearly that things go to VfD first. 132.205.45.148 17:52, 30 July 2005 (UTC)