User talk:Marco Carrasco/Archive7
Talkback edit
Message added 22:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
February 2013 edit
Hello, I'm Andreasmperu. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Pontifical Catholic University of Peru without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Andreasm just talk to me 14:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Please read both references carefully: they are two different rankings. Also, remember to avoid WP:3RR and stop removing content. Andreasm just talk to me 18:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Before adding a reference and change the text of an article, it is essential to confirm the relevance of the information. You added this reference, but in the first paragraph clearely states: «The report shows a set of bibliometric indicators that unveil some of the main dimensions of research performance of worldwide research-devoted institutions» (the emphasis is mine). Therefore, it is not a ranking of universities, but of institutions dedicated to research, including ministries. Once again, please be careful. Andreasm just talk to me 00:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- This new reference has the same problem as the last one. Also in the first paragraph: «This is the third edition of the Iberoamerican Ranking SIR, the tool for the analysis of the research performance of all Iberoamerican Higher Education Insitutions (HEIs).» (the emphasis is mine). So it only measure the research capacities.
- I don't know what are you trying to prove: it is clear that Peruvian universities are far behind regarding their Latin American peers. Other than that, there is not much to say about it. There are plenty of articles that lack references: you can use your skills to find them. Anyway, it is extremely important that you read first the references that you are planning to add. Finally, please revert your edits in the Spanish wikipedia and do not recover references that duplicate the information provided by a single source (the article of La República reports about Webometrics and this reference is already included). I hope you stop this behavior: it's already a lot of time waste. Andreasm just talk to me 01:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- As a matter of fact, I am in favor of removing both references (4ICU and SCimago). I just don't understand your insistence on showing the places since they go up and down each year, but the same trend remains: PUCP and UNMSM occupy either the first and second place, far away from other Latin American universities. Instead of arguing about such futile issue, you could have improved one of the two articles that lack references for the rest of the text. Andreasm just talk to me 01:52, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- We are on the English Wikipedia, so please write in English, since your Spanish writing is not that clear. I don't understand why you accuse me of subjectivity. Maybe I didn't explain myself well: I am in favor of removing the 4ICU reference because I am starting to think that it is not a reliable source and I firmly oppose the inclusion of SCimago because it is only limited to the research performance. I see now that you are not interested in improving the articles, and only want to prove some point (I failed to noticed which one). I appreciate my time enough to keep wasting it. If you want to make valuable contributions, you know where to find me. Andreasm just talk to me 02:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, there is: WP:SPEAKENGLISH. For obvious reasons, for me it is also easier to express myself in Spanish, but then only a few people would understand me. There is a policy (here again) that establish what is a reliable source and what is not. For instance, «The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made and is an appropriate source for that content». The reference that you provided does not support the information you added, unlike the rest of the references included in the articles. Andreasm just talk to me 02:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- We are on the English Wikipedia, so please write in English, since your Spanish writing is not that clear. I don't understand why you accuse me of subjectivity. Maybe I didn't explain myself well: I am in favor of removing the 4ICU reference because I am starting to think that it is not a reliable source and I firmly oppose the inclusion of SCimago because it is only limited to the research performance. I see now that you are not interested in improving the articles, and only want to prove some point (I failed to noticed which one). I appreciate my time enough to keep wasting it. If you want to make valuable contributions, you know where to find me. Andreasm just talk to me 02:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- As a matter of fact, I am in favor of removing both references (4ICU and SCimago). I just don't understand your insistence on showing the places since they go up and down each year, but the same trend remains: PUCP and UNMSM occupy either the first and second place, far away from other Latin American universities. Instead of arguing about such futile issue, you could have improved one of the two articles that lack references for the rest of the text. Andreasm just talk to me 01:52, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Before adding a reference and change the text of an article, it is essential to confirm the relevance of the information. You added this reference, but in the first paragraph clearely states: «The report shows a set of bibliometric indicators that unveil some of the main dimensions of research performance of worldwide research-devoted institutions» (the emphasis is mine). Therefore, it is not a ranking of universities, but of institutions dedicated to research, including ministries. Once again, please be careful. Andreasm just talk to me 00:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
May 2013 edit
Your recent editing history at Pontifical Catholic University of Peru shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Andreasm just talk to me 21:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thai help needed edit
Hello Kanon6996, I'm contacting you because we need some Thai translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on th.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Thai Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)