User talk:Dentren

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Edit to Lican Ray, Chile 2 Osorno 3 Chiloe 4 User signature 5 Combination of articles 6 Algunas precisiones 7 Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia 8 Congratulations 9 improved navability 10 Lake Viedma 11 1984 treaty 12 Unspecified source for Image:Encomienda.JPG 13 Request for revision 14 villarrica volcano

[edit] Edit to Lican Ray, Chile

Hello Dentren,

I can see from your list of contributions you've made a lot of contributions to Chile, and I'd guess you have quite a passion for it, otherwise you wouldn't have done so much.

I'd guess you are living in Valdivia, or nearby, and have probably heard that today the government has approved the Region of the Lakes. (Are you going to be the first to do an article on it?)

My reason for contacting you is referece to your renaming of the article Lican Ray, Chile to Lican Ray.

I started that article and gave considerable thought to giving it the name of Lican Ray, vs Lican Ray, Chile and chose the latter because I believe that unless there is absolutely no way that this might be confused or thought of in another way, it should have the most complete and correct name possible.

I have to keep remining myself that, different from a print publication, Wikipedia makes it easy to re-direct people from one place to another. If it is necessary, or even just desirable a user could create a redirect from the simple name to the complete correct one, insted of the other way around.

If this approach were followed from the start with every new article which were written, it would avoid the need for considerable re-editing in the future, especially in cases where there are multiple uses of a particular name. Lican Ray is not liketly to be one of those cases, but one which is an excellent example is "Castro", which you might recognize from the island of Chiloe. See Castro, if you're interested in seeing what I mean.

I'd really like to encourage you to undo the change you made to Lican Ray and, in the future follow the principle which I've explained above if you create any new articles (which I'd be willing to bet you will). If you've not seen it you might be interested in reading Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements), especially if you expect to do new articles on other places.

By the way, I like your display of flags of places you've been. I might do that on my own page sometime but it might not leave much room for anything else. (a slight exaggeration perhaps, but I think I might have you beat ;)

If you'd like to compare notes on anyplace in Chile, feel free to contact me, I've been around a lot. --JAXHERE | Talk 02:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, but in the case of Lican Ray, it is already very specific. There isn't any other thing with the same name (now) in wikipedia, so i dont think you can compare it with Castro in Chiloe. Unless there is no wikipolicy about names i dont see any reason to change it, but if you insist let put a ", Chile" after it.

I see you also have edited and created some southern Chile related articles, maybe if we get more interested people we could start a wikiproject. Hablas castellano? Dentren 21:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that Lican Ray is not one where there is even any likelyhood of much conflict, but one never knows. My point in starting out as Lican Ray, Chile was that by doing what might need to be done at some unknown time in the future, I can save someone a lot of problems because it was a lot easier for me to add ", Chile" that it will be to change and redirect this page to that version if it were created in the simple form.

In a nutshell, as my granpappy used to say: "If you're going to do something at all, do it right the first time."

I also concede that there is no Wikipolicy specifically supporting my idea, except that the page I give you the link to, certainly would find this as acceptable. If more people adopt the idea, we actually make the Wikipedia more efficient in the long run because when a person comes to a page titled "Place, Country" they automatically have some information on the subject and we don't have to start the article with such as "Lican Ray is a town in Chile", we've saved a few small words and can jump right to the heart of the article with something like, "Lican Ray, Chile is a popular summer resort ...."

Also if you look at Las Vegas, you'll see that I didn't invent this idea, but it can be a very controversial topic as Talk:Los Angeles, California#Requested move #3 will show you, if you care to spend an hour or so reading about it.

Anyhow, I hope you might agree with my thinking about forming a habit of doing something that costs little effort now but may avoid future problems which we can't now forsee.

Yes I do speak and write a bit of Spanish, and if you do get some Chile project going I'd be interested in knowing about it. By the way, did I guess right about where you live? --JAXHERE | Talk 23:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

You are maybe right in that some things, specialy geographical names, must have a more specific name, but going back to the specific question; what is a town like Lican Ray more, a parth of Chile or a town? I mean, if a place article like Lican Ray must have a specific name it should rather be "Lican Ray (town)" (like Valdivia (city)) than "Lican Ray, Chile". Because Lican Ray exist with or whitout Chile, but it will always be a settlement, if not, it would not be Lican Ray. Do you see the point?

I have been searching a time for some wikiproject about Chile to join, but there isn't any. Maybe we could start one about Chile, Southern Chile, Los Ríos Region or anything else realted to this parth of the world, do you have an idea? Dentren 00:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe that what you're saying is that it doesn't matter if Lican Ray is called "Lican Ray" or "Lican Ray, Chile", it (the settlement) isn't going to change, and I agree. But that is like saying that if your name is "John", then calling you "John Smith" isn't going to change who you are, and that, too, is true.

This isn't the concern I have in mind. My concern is that Lican Ray, Chile is more precise and unique than simply Lican Ray, just as John Smith is more unique than "John", even if you are the ONLY John in the world, we make it more precise by adding relevant information, such as telling other's not only the name, but where it is. Even if Lican Ray is never duplicated anywhere else it still is more useful for the typical English speaking user of Wikipedia to know that it is in Chile, if, for example it becomes twinned with another place outside of the country such as Magog in Quebec, became twinned with Villarrica. You see here that if you click on the link for Magog you don't immediately go to Magog, Quebec. What I'm trying to do is aid the person who is just learning about Lican Ray is that it is a part of Chile. Including that in the title of the article will help in that regard. It will help someone who at 3:30 in the morning was search for some material about a report they wanted to make but forgot to write down the name and just remembers that it started with an "L" "Where was that little town?", they think. If they remember the Chile part, they've got a start.

About a project, for this area, one of the things that has crossed my mind is to do something with all the place names with Mapuche origins and translate them into their equivalent English meanings. Another idea is a project on all the Volcanos or maybe Hot Springs that exist in the country. Did you know that Chile has 25% of all the active volcanos in the world? (I can't tell you just now where I read that, but it was from a pretty reliable source, I believe.)--JAXHERE | ^Talk 03:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

"Even if Lican Ray is never duplicated anywhere else it still is more useful for the typical English speaking user of Wikipedia to know that it is in Chile", I know, I know, but i have my objections if this would represent a worldwide view, do they do the same with other small towns (that do not share name with other things) in England or USA? Wikipedia in English is not only for the natives of the language, as English is the modern lingua franca it should be so neutral as posible when used in encyclopedias.

I will start a new category (and maybe a list too) of places with Mapuche names. I have an old Mapudungun-spanish dictionary at home and I know some specific words in Mapudungun. We could colaborate in that work by correcting each other, and also made something like a "work plan"..

Apart from this, how do you edit your signature? Dentren 12:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems that we may never agree on this topic, but I can tell you that there is a generally accepted view that major, well known cities like London, Tokyo, New York, etc. are OK to stand on their own. I think we might agree that Lican Ray is a long way from the status of say, Tokyo.

Another guideline I think of is that where it states that names of articles should be what most English-speaking users would tend to use or feel most comfortable. I think that you and I would feel comfortable just saying "Lican Ray" because we are both in Chile and know what we are referring to, but in speaking with someone who is neither in Chile nor even has any idea of what we are talking about we'd probably say "Lican Ray, Chile".

I think we've about beaten this topic to death -- if you wish to support me fine, I'd be happy to have you on my side, if not I'm not going to hate you nor engage in any kind of edit war with you. --JAXHERE | ^Talk 22:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Osorno

Dentren,

I want to thank you for your edits to Osorno, Chile. I am very interesting in improving this article, and the photo and information you added are excellent. I hope you don't mind that I re-wrote the text you added, to improve its grammar. Please never hesitate to add to the article, even though English is not your first language. Any addition is greatly, greatly appreciated, and I will be more than happy to look over your work.

Thank you so much for your help. Korossyl 15:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Its ok, english is not my speciality. I can see from your list of contributions you've made a lot of contributions about Osorno. Osorno is just so small.. how do you know it? Dentren 18:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I have a very good friend who's going to study in Osorno this Summer, so I wanted to see what Wikipedia had to say about it. I'd like the page to be as nice and complete as possible, and I'm willing to devote some time to making it that. Did you live there? Korossyl 20:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No, no, I actualy live in Valdivia, a city just 100km north of Osorno. If you understand some spanish you try to translate from the spanish version, if you not, you can "copy and paste" the images from the spanish version.

Thank you so much for the suggestion! I have added quite a bit to the article, brining over much from the Spanish version. What do you think? Korossyl 06:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice, after I saw it i put the same infobox in the Valdivia article. If there is something you need help for translation ask me for help. Dentren 15:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chiloe

Hi Dentren. I'll attempt write to you in my poor English :). In Chiloé Island there are some statements that aren't true and maybe you could correct them. When it is told the last colonial stage tells about a Spanish reoccupation, but Spaniards never went from Island until 1826. Another issue is architecture, stilt houses were made at end of 19th Century in Castro, Chonchi and another villages, but they didn't a normal way of houses' construction. Bye. Lin linao 05:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Si eres de Chiloe seguramente tienes razon, ya corregi el articulo y aproveche de crear el articulo Chilota architecture. Eso si tengo dudas si realmente se dice "chilota architecture" y no "Chiloes architecture"..

Viendo los articulos que has mejorado o creado seguramente te interesaria crear un wikiproyecto acerca de Chile, de chiloe o algo asi.. Estoy tratando de reunir contribuidores interesados en crear un wikiproyecto relacionado con Chile. Que dices? Dentren 18:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User signature

If you want to modify your signature, as I did you need to create a sub page to your user page and then experiment til you get what you like. Then see Wikipedia:How to fix your signature and Wikipedia:Customisation#User_name_and_signatures. I'm no expert but if you need more help ask me something specific and I'll try to steer you in the right direction. --JAXHERE | ^Talk 22:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Start by putting your experiments on this link → /sig ←. As soon as you add something there and save it your new sub page called User_talk:Dentren/sig will be created. You might try playing around with the signature which is substituted in this page for my sig, just copy the following and play with it until you see something you like

[[User:Jaxhere|<font color="Blue">'''J'''</font><font color="Red">'''A'''</font><font color="Green">'''X'''</font><font color="Blue">'''HERE'''</font>]] | [[User_talk:Jaxhere|^{<font color="Blue">'''T'''</font><font color="Red">'''a'''</font><font color="Green">'''l'''</font><font color="Blue">'''k'''</font>}]]

Just be careful you're using complete tag pairs, in your experiments above you don't have matched pair which might cause the results to not be what you want.

--JAXHERE | ^Talk 00:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

test [[User:Dentren|<span style="color:orange">Dentren | [[User talk:Dentren|<span style="color:grey">talk]]]] 01:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I just noted that my sig had an error in it's code, which wouldn't help you much in copying it.(the </span> ending tag wasn't supposed to be there.

<font color="Blue"> is an opening tag, and </font> is a closing tag,

what ever is in between will have a blue color, like this → Blue texy ← provided you don't use the "nowiki" tags at the beginning and end .

Thanks for help.. look now at my signature Dentren | Talk 02:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

• Nice going. The talk part doesn't link, though, because it's a self-link to this page (I suspect) Here's another resource I just found Wikipedia:Tip of the day/June 30, 2006--JAXHERE | ^Talk 02:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
  • finally ready.. Dentren | Talk 02:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

• • • Not quite ... you've misspelled the "gray" in your Talk color. You have "grey", which won't work. --JAXHERE | ^Talk 02:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Combination of articles

Hello again Dentren,

You may have noticed that I've proposed the merger of two articles you created: Huilo-Huilo and Huilo-Huilo Natural Reserve.

Later, I started to think about the tremendous effort you've been putting into adding articles about Chile and, after looking at a few of them, would like to suggest that you might consider how you might combine certain articles when you create them to produce articles which are a bit more substantial and will not face the risk of being deleted because they are considered to be of insufficient importance in the English Wikipedia. An example of an article which might be in danger of being deleted is Riñihue.

I get the sense that Wikipedia policy is not to just delete any small article just because it is small, but there are users who object to tiny articles and would prefer to see small articles included in larger ones (up to a certain point).

The point I'm trying to get to Dentren, is that you might be able to prevent this kind of manipulation if you simply see if there are ways of combining your material from the start in order to produce articles which are of greater importance.

One of the combinations which I though might produce an important and interesting article would be a fusion of the various articles you've written about the Valdivia fort system, Corral Bay forts and the other related articles.

Please don't think that I am suggesting that what you've been doing is not valuable, I'm simply trying to help you avoid seeing someone else tear into your work who is not aware of the efforts you've put into it.

If you'd like to discuss any ideas you have for producing combination articles with me, just leave a note for me on my talk page.

In the meantime, keep up the good work.--JAXHERE | ^Talk 14:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Corral forts, san sebastian de la cruz fort and corral fort system should also be merged into the Valdivian fort system article until they are enought big. Would you help me? Dentren | ^Talk 15:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, I'll help if you put together a draft (borrador) article perhaps as a sub-page of your user account then we can look it over an polish it up before making the final move.

Further to the comment left by Jespinos on the merge of HuiloHuilo, sinc you created these articles can you provide some references to support the information in both the HUiloHuilo articles and the forts combination? --JAXHERE | ^Talk 16:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Algunas precisiones

• En la talk page del volcán Puyehue deje una explicación sobre cuál fue el volcán que hizo erupción en 1960. Si tienes una fuente confiable que contradiga lo señalado en dicha página, hazlo saber.
• La Región de Los Ríos aún no existe. Ver es:Región de Los Ríos.
• Creo que el nombre correcto es Lago Caburgua, en el sitio del Instituto Geográfico Militar de Chile no hay referencias a Caburga. Expón tus fuentes si crees que lo anterior es errado.

Jespinos 15:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia

I noticed that you edited the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia article. Unfortunately, you left a sentence unfinished:

He did not receive further punishment because he was deemed to be insane by both Chilean and Argentinean authorities and sent to a . (sic)

Completing it is beyond my knowledge—would you be so kind as to do so? DocWatson42 08:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

You are right. I forgot to finish the sentence because I couldnt find the word for manicomio (spanish), mental hospital/madhouse. Thanks for your help. Dentren | ^Talk 13:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

Hi Dentren, congratulations on the continuing contributions. There's a couple of points you might want to keep in mind as you continue to make additions:

1. In English we usually capitalize any word which refers to a country, or it's inhabitants. So we would capitalize Spaniard, Mapuche, Chile, Dutch, in any place that it is used.
2. Be conservative in putting in links to other articles. First, don't over-link. Usually wiki prefers that we link to only the first time a term is used in an article. Second, put in a link only if it is really relevant to the understanding of an article. Example, don't link to "river" or "seafood" in an article about Valdivia unless it is likely that a person would not understand what the article is about even though these words used.
3. When entering a link you can put in [[Valdivia, Chile|]] with the pipe symbol alone at the end and wiki will print out just "Valdivia". (This can save you a bit of typing).
4. If you have the Google tool bar installed in your browser, you can use it to spell check your edits. It won't catch words in another language, but it will catch most of the errors in the language it is set for and you can have it automatically detect the language, which will work most of the time except where you have a large mixture of different tongues.

Hope these suggestions are helpful to you. Ah, there's one more thing ... if you can add citations to your sources for the information it will greatly improve the quality of the information and avoid someone marking the article for lack of sources. Bye for now.--JAXHERE | ^Talk 16:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] improved navability

Dentren, re your edit in Valdivia, the change was made by an unregistered user back in December 2005 or so. To me the claim of improved navability does not seem unlikely ... do you know what "subsidence" means? This is one of those areas where sources is likely to be quite helpful. Can you cite some authoritative source which has stated that the earthquake lessened the navagability of the river? If you can't then you may have opened yourself up for a dispute over this change you made which can't be substianted. On the other hand, the other editor didn't cite any sources either, which doesn't justify his claim either, but that does not make it right for you to state the opposite. If we can't find a source to support either claim, then the correct thing to do is not to make any claim at all and just provide the facts from which a reader can arrive at their own conclusions.

Does this make sense to you? --JAXHERE | ^Talk 04:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe i should correct my edit. The fact of that the land sunk 2 meters doesnt mean that the navegability improved. Wen we speak about navegability its about bigger ships and not kayaks or minor sailing boats. Must of this land that came under water became wetlands and were full of dead trees. The routes that were already used bigger boats doesnt improved by the fact of that the land sunk 2 meters, they were already navigable, and the new wetlands made the borders of navigable more difficult to see. Ok the earthquake maybe didn`t decrease the navegability but decades without cleaning have decreased its navegability. Dispite of this there are still a lot of shipyards in Valdivia. Dentren | ^Talk 22:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lake Viedma

Creo que estás equivocado al incluir el lago Viedma como lago chileno. ¿Cuáles son tus fuentes?. Tal vez estabas pensando en el glaciar Viedma.

Otro asunto, has subido varias imágenes con licencias supuestamente compatibles con Wikipedia, pero en el los sitios que tú señalas no puedo encontrar donde se mencione dicha información. Deberías tratar de aclarar esto. No tomes mis comentarios de mala forma, notar que esto lo hago para que tú no tengas problemas. Jespinos 20:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Mira el mapa, el limite no esta definido, por lo tanto no se pueden tomar las pretenciones, Chilenas o Argentinas, como echos. Quiza habria que tratar mas ese tema en el articulo.

Tourism map of the Southern Patagonian Ice Field, note the undefined part near Viedma Lake

Dentren | ^Talk 21:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

No toda el área mostrada en el recuadro esta sujeta a disputa. Según un mapa que tengo en mi poder, la máxima pretensión chilena no llega al lago Viedma. Por otro lado, el glaciar Viedma tampoco ha retrocedido lo suficiente como para aumentar de forma significativa la superficie del lago y de eso modo se provocara que parte del lago quedara en la zona reclamada por Chile.

A propósito de esta imagen y de mi comentario anterior, no tengo claro el "free use" que tú mencionas. Jespinos 22:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

En google earth figura que Chile tiene soberania sobre dos pequeños golfos que sirven de dembocadura para el glaciar viedma. Por tanto tecnicamente hablando el lago es binacional.- y NO TE PREOCUPES NO ES LA PRIMERA VEZ QUE JESPINO APORTILLA A LOS CHILENOS Y TEN POR SEGURO QUE NO SEÀ LA ULTIMA TAMPOCO. Antarcticwik 05:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1984 treaty

movido a Talk:Argentina-Chile Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1984#Merge Discussion

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Encomienda.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Encomienda.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Samulili 20:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for revision

I'm not aware if it's considered rude or just not right no ask for an article's revision, but there's no harm in trying. Could you please check my translation for Mount Tarn? Thanks.- Kilroytech 17:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] villarrica volcano

Dentren, are you certain that Villarrica volcano (your recent edit) is part of the Los Rios Region? JAXHERE | ^Talk 16:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The limit passes trough the top. Note: the borders in Google Earth are wrong. See Turistel Map Dentren | ^Talk 20:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

OK with me, I was just a bit surprized to see it associated with a region outside of the 9th.--JAXHERE | ^Talk 19:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Apart from this dont you think each region should have a category? Maybe you could help. Dentren | ^Talk 20:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)