Talk:Santiago, Chile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Cities on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments for details.

Santiago, Chile is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Geography article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents 1 Restaurants 2 Spanish Wikipedia 3 Picture of poor Neighborhood 4 list of universities 5 Religion 6 New Metro Line 7 Citation about the fire 8 Page move

[edit] Restaurants

This list does not belong here, WP is not a guide. Scriberius

Somebody should include the list of sister cities of santiago, thank you

.

[edit] Spanish Wikipedia

The spanish-language article (es:Santiago de Chile) has a lot of stuff (pictures, presumably information though I don't speak spanish) that could be put into the english-language article. Tlogmer 04:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of poor Neighborhood

The picture of a poor neighborhood of Santiago is out of place. I any other article of a capital I've seen pictures of poor neighborhoods. It has a little of bad intention, because everybody knows that all the cities have places like this one, but in an article of an encyclopedia, it's not necessary to show them because there are neither landmarks nor attractions of the city. I will thank everybody if that picture was taken off the main article. Thank you.

Wikipedia is not a list of landmarks or attractions, it is an encyclopedia. Many other articles for cities, for instance Rio de Janiero, contain similar pictures. I'll thank you not to continue removing the picture. Eliot 20:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, then you should post pictures of all the poorer parts of all the cities, not just Santiago. There are much better pictures of Santiago to post, of more important parts, it's such a beautiful city. Also, that picture is not representative of Santiago, not even 15 per cent of the population live in those conditions

You are invited to add your own pictures to the entry. Please upload pictures you've taken yourself rather than ones downloaded from the Internet, as these are encumbred by copyright issues. Eliot 22:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] list of universities

That list is very large, i think that the page must have the most important, and a a link to a new page "list of universities in Santiago" (I've seen pages that are more nonsense than it). Chile is a curios case when if i do a speech on the street they give me the title of valid university, so to put every private university is a waste of space.

[edit] Religion

Why is it only listed one particular religion's temple building in the Religion listing? I think this religion is not the most relevant for the region nor the only one. It should be either complemented or removed.

[edit] New Metro Line

I've just made a minor change, there are two new metro lines, Line 4 and 4a that is used as a union between line 4 and line 2. Soon i'll be uploading a map of the entire subway system.

[edit] Citation about the fire

A short notice can be found at the site Chilean firemen (search for 1863). More detailed report can be found here. Unfortunately I do not know how to cite it. --Fpga 12:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page move

I'm sorry, but I disagree with page movement. This is a very great change and hence it is necessary to discuss it first.Jespinos 16:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Jespinos. I also disagree with the rename. For one thing, the capital of Chile is Santiago not Gran Santiago. --Dúnadan 18:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps there should have been some discussion about this change of name, and I admit that it did cause me to think quite a bit about what to do before I made the change, but let me explain my reasons then we can consider what to do.

1. Anyone searching for Santiago, Chile, will be automatically re-directed from that page to this one ... so there is no loss to anyone doing a search.
2. Although the article is entitled "Greater Santiago" most native English users would mentally filter out the "greater" part of the name when thinking or speaking of the city. The term is used to signify that there is a group of settlements which are conceptually considered to be part of a certain place's name.
3. The original article (before the name change and the merge of the material from "Santiago (municipality)") was really about Greater Santiago and not Santiago - the municipality - itself. (Consider what is written in "[edit] Basic urban data (2002)", "Demographics", "Economy", "Transportation", "Construction", "Political divisions". Many references are made that do not relate to the municipality of Santiago, itself. To be about the municipality named Santiago, a great deal of material would have to be edited out and that would be a major re-write of the article. Using re-directs to this article seemed to me the more efficient way of dealing with this issue.

If this article is to stay with the title it now has (Greater Santiago) with the redirects, it might be useful to do a bit more editing to clarify the distinctions between Santiago (the municipality) and the Santiago conurbation or Agglomeration. From the viewpoint of encyclopedic utility, I do think that in the end, we should have only one article, regardless of what it is called. There simply isn't enough unique material to justify having two different articles. JAXHERE | ^Talk 13:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the issue Santiago (the municipality or commune) vs. Santiago city, the simplest way to resolve it is putting a disambiguation link on the pages involved. It is not necessary a disambiguation page, because the most people that search for the phrase "Santiago, Chile" or "Santiago de Chile", do it having in mind the city or agglomeration, not the commune. For that same reason, it is not necessary to put "Greater Santiago, Chile", due to that the majority of persons presuppose that "Santiago, Chile" and "Greater Santiago, Chile" are equivalents.

Whether Santiago (commune) merits its own page or not, is something that would be determined by a group of editors. Notice that the same argument could be used for the rest of the communes forming the city of Santiago.

Another issue, Santiago Centro is only a part of Santiago (commune). Jespinos 19:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Jespinos, you've just opened up a real can of worms. I've just checked at the official government page and it shows that Santiago is 1) a region, 2) a province, 3) a comuna. To complicate matters further it is also a municipality and a city. Each of these terms has a different and specific meaning and, in some cases the equivalent Spanish term has a different meaning from the English one.

Our challenge, as editors of Wiki is to resolve these differences and create something which makes sense and is useful to the majority of English-speaking users. I think that this end is best served in a single article which incorporates all of these issues and lays them out in a clear realtionship so that every reader who is interested can understand them.

Regarding the issue that Santiago Centro is only a part of Santiago (commune), I'm not even sure if there is, officially, an entity called "Santiago Centro". I've seen the term used, but, we need to provide the definition and clarify how it is used correctly, or eliminate the term from the article.

Regarding your comment that "(the result) is something that would be determined by a group of editors", keep in mind that Wiki is not a democracy. If we, who are interested at this time, decide on a solution, that solution will go into effect and perhaps will remain forever unless someone in the future decides to change it. As I see it, our challenge is to produce a result that is so generally acceptable that no one will feel a need to make a change. JAXHERE | ^Talk 13:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Please remember that this controversy originated from the page move of "Santiago, Chile" and the merge of the article "Santiago (municipality)". In my opinion, almost all was well until the changes. The disambiguation page Santiago sorts out the issues mentioned by you, although it may be able to be improved. Don't make the mistake of thinking that all the well-intentioned changes improve the articles. Jespinos 17:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I was probably wrong in stating that you opened a can of worms. The problem was already in existence, you just helped make it more evident.

I agree that our discussion about the problems began with the page move, however, if you refer to reason #3 in my explanation above, and go to a saved version of the page prior to the move, you can see that the article which was named "Santiago, Chile" was to a large extent about Greater Santiago. The article was faulty in this respect, it simply wasn't discussed until I made the move.

I just became aware of another problem with the article in looking at the map shown in it. Some of those comunas shown in the map aren't even in the Province of Santiago, such as Pirque, Puente Alto,Padre Hurtado, San Bernardo, etc. nor are they consistent with the list of communities shown in the article for the Province. This is entirely misleading to a reader who isn't aware of the different divisions and their relationships to each other. Is the map even correct? What, officially, is the description of Greater Santiago?

You objected to the move on the grounds that it wasn't discussed. From the looks of the number of people participating in this discussion you and I and one other person are the only ones who are concerned enough with this issue to discuss it here. So, it's up to us to decide what to do.

Consider the following:

If we change it back to Santiago, Chile, would you agree to do a re-write of the article sufficient to make it clear to readers that what is said in the above-mentioned sections refers to Greater Santiago, and not Santiago, per se?

Otherwise, we leave the article titled as it is and work to eliminate the other confusing/conflicting issues in the article as it stands.

JAXHERE | ^Talk 23:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

After giving this matter considerable thought, and having consulted the reports of the National Bureau of Statistics, doing Google searches, reviewing the more than 300 comunas in Chile, I conclude that the best title for this article is "Santiago, Chile".

That being said, the article is still in need of considerable work to clearly explain to readers what are, and what is the relationship between the various terms and divisions that carry the name "Santiago"

We need to define (where it hasn't been done) and describe the relationship beween:

• Metropolitan Region of Santiago
• Province of Santiago
• Comuna of Santiago
• Municipality of Santiago
• City of Santiago
• Greater Santiago
• Santiago Centro
• Metropolis of Santiago
• Santiago de Chile
• and any other terms which might be mis-understood or mis-used if they are not clarified.

If someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll make the change together with the corresponding redirects and perhaps some disambiguation page(s), in the next few days.

I'd hope that Jepinos, would be willing to pitch in to do some of this, I will do some from time to time, and I'd hope that other users too will give some attention to these specific needs so that this article about Santiago can stand out as one of the top articles in Wikipedia about great cities. What do you say?JAXHERE | ^Talk 17:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)