|This is MX's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to MX.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|
Just in case you're interested, I've forked several articles from the Cholula, Puebla article: San Francisco Acatepec, Santa María Tonantzintla, San Gabriel Convent, and Plaza de la Concordia. I've noted the forks at Talk:Cholula, Puebla and suggested additional trimming to the "Pyramid of Cholula and Nuestra Señora de los Remedios Church" section since there are separate articles about both. None of these articles are ideal, but hopefully they will get the ball rolling on some better standalone articles about seemingly notable topics. Just wanted to share in case you enjoy following along, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Unomásuno has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best of luck with the GAN review.
The article Unomásuno you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Unomásuno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catrìona -- Catrìona (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
DYK for 2015 Ocotlán ambushEdit
DYK nomination of Joselyn Alejandra NiñoEdit
Hello! Your submission of Joselyn Alejandra Niño at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:45, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
A belated thanksEdit
Hey MX! Thanks for the successfully nominating México en la Piel for DYK. I didn't think there was anything in the article that would warrant a DYK and yet you did it. So I just let you know that I saw and am grateful for it! Erick (talk) 23:19, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Magiciandude: You're very welcome! Thank you for getting the article to GA status. I'll be happy to review more Mexico-related articles you nominate. Cheers, MX (✉ • ✎) 18:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hmm, does this count as a Mexican-related article to you? I'm just curious since I've nominated it for DYK and GA. Erick (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
1999 Matamoros standoffEdit
|Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the copy edit you requested for 1999 Matamoros standoff at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 23:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)|
Help identifying subjectsEdit
Hello again! These statues are installed outside the Mexico City Metropolitan Cathedral:
Do you happen to know who the statues depicts?
- @Another Believer: Dang it, no idea. I tried looking online by Googling statues at Mexico City Metropolitan Cathedral and couldn't find any. MX (✉ • ✎) 20:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Just another FYI, you might enjoy seeing some of the recent updates at Monument to Christopher Columbus (Buenavista, Mexico City) and Monument to Christopher Columbus (Paseo de la Reforma, Mexico City). Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:59, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi MX, thank you for your good faith "citation needed" and "unsourced section" edits of the above article. Just letting you know that I've reverted them because the opening sentence of the overall section states the source on which the rules were based. HTH. Cheers. Bermicourt (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2015 Ocotlán ambushEdit
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2015 Ocotlán ambush you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 07:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
|The Tireless Contributor Barnstar|
|Awarded in admiration of your excellent and detailed articles on the topics of Mexico and organized crime, such as 2015 Ocotlán ambush. buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 01:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)|
Your GA nomination of 2015 Ocotlán ambushEdit
The article 2015 Ocotlán ambush you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2015 Ocotlán ambush for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 02:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
For hard work and perseveranceEdit
|The Good Article Barnstar|
|It is my great pleasure to award you this barnstar in recognition of the many articles which you have been instrumental in promoting to GA status. Long may this continue. Gog the Mild (talk) 03:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)|
DYK for Joselyn Alejandra NiñoEdit
- @Narutolovehinata5: Hello. Not sure what you need from me. Yoninah proposed a new hook and it is pending review. MX (✉ • ✎) 01:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- I meant I was pinging you to see if you could respond to her proposal. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:24, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for tagging John Leamy (merchant) today. I'm not sure how to resolve the citation-needed tag for "Tusculum Street still runs nearby". Isn't the mere uncontroversial existence of a public street, identified by location, a case of WP:BLUESKY? I could find a Philadelphia street map to cite, of course, but it seems a bit silly. It would be like citing the existence of a book to some outside source, rather than just giving the publication details. What are your thoughts? As for the introductory sentence to the Business section, this is a summary of the section, introducing (per my best effort) no claims not cited below. Kim Post (talk) 02:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Kim Post: Hi, thanks for coming to my talkpage. I'm more on the other side of the perspective, and think we should cite absolute statements of fact whenever made (notwithstanding if they are controversial or not). In the end, an additional source won't hurt. Besides, information on Wikipedia can quickly become outdated, so a source can help readers understand when the information was once relevant or factual (by adding an access date, for example). You are allowed to cite Google Maps or similar websites for specific roads, so feel free to do that.
Your GA nomination of 1999 Matamoros standoffEdit
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1999 Matamoros standoff you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 11:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 1999 Matamoros standoffEdit
The article 1999 Matamoros standoff you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1999 Matamoros standoff for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 19:02, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
DYK for 1999 Matamoros standoffEdit
DYK for Alberto Jorge's articleEdit
Thanks for your comment on my submission. I have done as you suggested.
While researching for the footballer's stats (that I copied from both the German and Spanish Wikipedia articles), I realized they were inaccurate or missing for some seasons; thus I had to go on research season by season, since his database profile has been deleted and does not seem to be any archive of it. Also I have added a few other interesting facts to the article such as how much León payed to bring him to Mexican football.
- @Cocu15: Thank you. Nice job with the article. I'm a Toluca fan myself, but I haven't been to the renovated stadium yet since I live far away from the State of Mexico. Do you plan to work on other managers for the team? I noticed a lot of red links at the manager's template.
- BTW, I did a few changes at the article, particularly with citation merging and archiving. Please let me know if you have any questions. Happy editing, MX (✉ • ✎) 14:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Cocu15: I'm also happy to review any of your articles if you ever need me. Just drop me a line here or at the article's talkpage. MX (✉ • ✎) 14:51, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Vaselineeeeeeee: Yes. This user keeps wanting to push the fact that Shakeel is dead when in reality there has not been an official statement from India, the U.S., or the Interpol. I initially thought he was right, but as I did more research it seems like the circumstances surrounding his supposed death are mysterious. The sources that claim he's dead do not even address this investigation conducted by India Today. They just claim he's dead, and that's it. I rather not give undue weight to any version. I'm not sure what to do at this point because the user doesn't seem to listen or want to engage in a discussion at the talkpage. MX (✉ • ✎) 14:17, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with you. Official sources should be used that are confirmed by the relevant officials before someone should be considered dead. Good work expanding the article by the way. I've added it to my watchlist; I won't actively search if the news is later confirmed, but if another IP adds it later, it'll prompt me to do a quick search to confirm. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 15:23, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh no.You guys got it wrong.It is an extremely intricate and complex subject but the fact is that he is no longer alive.The whole of India knows that and Pakistan would never admit that he even existed.Also the rumours began in early 2017 and go to a confirmation point via Intelligence analyst ocnus ( whose paper on Organized crime and politics has been published in many places) only in 2018 and in my opinion that changes the entire story and kills the rumours.But the State will not declare him dead.Since you know and are interested in organized crime-you might know why.There are a lot spelling errors on the article too.You need to analyze the time frames between the Rumours and the Confirmation after which there has been utter silenceClearwater555 (talk) 12:38, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Adán Medrano RodríguezEdit
Adán Medrano Rodríguez copyeditEdit
|Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the copy edit you requested for Adán Medrano Rodríguez at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Good luck with GA and all the best, Miniapolis 23:57, 11 February 2019 (UTC)|
DYK nomination for Rosalinda González ValenciaEdit
I have completed a review at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosalinda González Valencia, and noted a couple minor questions. Please respond there when you are able. Thanks! Flibirigit (talk) 02:57, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for United States of America v. Joaquín Guzmán LoeraEdit
Hi MX. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni (talk) 05:40, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
José Manuel Garza Rendón copyeditEdit
|Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the copy edit you requested for José Manuel Garza Rendón at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Good luck with GA and all the best, Miniapolis 21:37, 14 February 2019 (UTC)|
DYK for Rosalinda González ValenciaEdit
Orphaned non-free image File:Monica-Spear.jpgEdit
Thanks for uploading File:Monica-Spear.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
DYK for José Manuel Garza RendónEdit
DYK for Juan Carlos de la Cruz ReynaEdit
Juan Carlos de la Cruz ReynaEdit
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Juan Carlos de la Cruz Reyna has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best of luck with the GAN.
DYK for Chhota ShakeelEdit
Mexico 68 and Tlatelolco massacreEdit
I added to the Tlatelolco massacre talk page, suggesting that the narrative of the Mexico 68 movement there be moved to the supposed main article. That article needs a lot of help, and I was willing to put in time. But I think the more sensible solution is to move text from Tlatelolco massacre to Mexico 68. What do you think? It would be great if you weighed in on the question. BTW Congrats on your new usename. Best. Amuseclio (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2019 (UTC)Amuseclio
Víctor Manuel Vázquez MirelesEdit
|Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the copy edit you requested for Víctor Manuel Vázquez Mireles at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 21:21, 15 March 2019 (UTC)|
- @Baffle gab1978: Thank you for taking this. I appreciate the work done so far. Let me know if you have any questions. MX (✉ • ✎) 15:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- No worries; I've split off most of the text in 'Early Life', which usually means birth, childhood and early adulthood., and placed it into a new section because it didn't really fit in 'Early life'. The c/e looks fairly simple anyway; you do a fine job with these articles. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
(←) While copy-editing the Trial and proceedings section, I found some ambiguous phrases. There are:
- a) 1st paragraph: "His sentence was later dropped but Vázquez Mireles remained imprisoned and was issued with other charges." Does this mean the sentence was quashed/canceled/annulled or that it was reduced in length?
- b) 2nd paragraph: "This new charge was uncovered as part of an investigation headed by the Subprocuraduría de Investigación Especializada en Delincuencia Organizada (SIEDO), Mexico's organized crime investigation agency." Did the charge already exist but was forgotten until uncovered? In English, charges are usually "brought" or "laid", not "uncovered".
- c) 3rd paragraph: " He claimed this was a violation of his human rights and asked the court to allow him to serve his trial under conditional release". Does this mean he would have been released to be tried on the new charges or did you mean serve his sentence?
- Since he was in prison without a conviction for so long, the defense petitioned for Vázquez Mireles to be granted special privileges to allow him to be on trial as a free man (similar to being out on bail, but in this case Vázquez Mireles wouldn't pay anything to be out).
- d) 4th paragraph; "The tribunal determined the evidence presented by the PGR was deficient and asked the prosecution to re-examine and modify the evidence." This seems odd; why would they be asked modify (change or adjust) the evidence?
- Direct quote: el tribunal consideró que eran deficientes las conclusiones acusatorias que presentó la PGR en el juicio contra Vázquez Mireles, apodado "El Meme Loco" y por ello resolvió que [la PGR] tenía la posibilidad de revisarlas y, de ser el caso, modificarlas. I think what the source is saying is that the prosecution was told the evidence they presented was not good enough to convict Vázquez Mireles, and was given the opportunity to go back and fix they way it was presented (or find more/better against him). I hope my responses help. MX (✉ • ✎) 14:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Anyway, I'm happy to make changes based on your reply here. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:36, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- MX, thank you for your replies; they clarified the points well and I've amended the text in that section accordingly. Thanks for your help and good luck with the article. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 21:20, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Víctor Manuel Vázquez MirelesEdit
A bowl of strawberries for you!Edit
|Thank you for the Editor of the Week nomination. I'm honored to have received the award. ♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)|
PRI NPOV and UNDUEEdit
Dear MX, I am working my way through the article on the PRI, Wikifying it, adding text and citations. Since you tagged the article, could you take a look now? I plan on adding a section dealing with PRI presidential succession. I will likely trim significantly sections that don't directly deal with the PRI but more generally with the history of Mexico. BTW, thanks for the Mexico barnstar! I really appreciate it. Best, Amuseclio Amuseclio (talk) 17:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)Amuseclio
- @Amuseclio: Thanks for stopping by. I no longer follow the article on my Watchlist since I wanted to move away from politics as much as I could. But feel free to make the appropriate changes. Most of my concerns revolved around the past two presidencies (particularly about the undue weight on the electoral fraud claims). The article should probably narrow its focus to the PRI's role in those elections and not rely entirely on allegations/scandals. The dedazo practices and frauds (along with other authoritarian methods) of the past, when the PRI was the dominant party in Mexico for 71 years, are generally accepted by most accounts because that's how the PRI maintained a strong corporatist state. Cheers, MX (✉ • ✎) 18:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- @MX: Thanks for letting me know. I am deep into modern political history right now. I haven't gotten to the sections on the most recent elections yet, but will keep your comments in mind as I approach them. Saludos, Amuseclio (talk) 19:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)Amuseclio
DYK nomination of Gilberto García MenaEdit
Hello! Your submission of Gilberto García Mena at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Kingsif (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)