Uncategorized

Get PDF Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition) book. Happy reading Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Confianza (Miscelánea nº 1) (Spanish Edition) Pocket Guide.

Eduaute Obtenido de " http: Actores de Lepe , por ejemplo Acaso Esto no es un plagio? Diegogrez es un usuario con un historial muy interesante. Y eso significa algo. Recientemente he creado un nuevo anexo aqui. Un usuario opina que el mismo es irrelevante, y yo considero es valido, ya que sigue los lineamientos del Wikiproyecto: Los invito a que opinen en la pagina de discusion, siguiendo los argumentos citados, y si lo desean incluir nuevos de su parte. Lamentablemente han borrado informacion muy util sobre la historia de un barrio como es La Boca.

Seguramente estimado Kavanahg o como te llames, no sabes nada sobre la historia de los barrios de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, y te cres con derecho de borrar lo que tu ignorancia no te permite conocer. Te invito a que vayas al barrio de La Boca y le preguntes a cualquier persona por la calle que es El Trapito, y que lugar tiene en la historia esa importante entidad. Antes de borrar cosas que no conoces, fijate las pelotudeces que escribis. La lista es antigua, pero si alguien tiene ganas de borrar, puede darse una vuelta y ver que hay para limpiar.

Description

A los autores que son muchos , mejor concluir alguno que abrir nuevos. Un saludo, Filipo Mensajes a la botella Las cuestiones con usuarios particulares se resuelven con esos usuarios. A veces busco cosas y no encuentro lo q qiero Buscaba info sobre "tigre" pero como signo del zoodiaco chino Otro dia con mas tiempo encontre la tabla con la data sobre "tigre" However it transpired, the reaction was swift. Canvassing and, of course, sabotage.

All easily fell into the category of very-active editors. Particularly contentious was the expulsion of the most active of these, a user who had averaged more than edits a month and was well-liked. Critics maintained — including a pair of dissenting admins — that her participation had not been conclusively proven. There was clearly some disagreement among admins regarding the whole affair.

In another case the saboteurs hoped for the intervention of a particular admin seen as sympathetic. Admins on Spanish-language Wikipiedia are not an especially large group — it numbers people at the time of writing. Any who might have been tainted by the scandal appear to have not faced any consequences for a presumed association, at least not as of yet. To some editors the punishment also seemed far too harsh given the offense, and given the consequences of expelling four very-active editors.

Norms that we accept as a community have been violated, but I think the gravity of the deed does not justify the quantity of harm to the users. What was discussed publicly was the extent of the punishments, however. One of these who had previously left the admin listserv argued:. The closed nature of the arguments [made there] prevents me from knowing what the comments of the rest [of the admins] were. It is a shame that so few can see these wise arguments, and that they only see the consequences. It should be noted that as admins were are not very transparent… and worse, measures are being taken without knowing the full extent of the facts.

According to another admin: It also appears that not only those who were against the verdict were concerned. I think that from this muck have come both kinds of mud, […] although the line had not been crossed until this point. The expulsions have held, although a door was left open to one user to appeal for readmission the most active, whose ban was most questioned. Meanwhile, the fallout from the affair seems to have continued, given the fact that not all the participants were identified.

Nonetheless, the conjecture and accusation of sabotage that you make with respect to [admin A] is unacceptable. Retract it immediately and abstain completely from forum-izing on the topic. If not, you will garner yourself a block of considerable duration given your long history of offenses. You have been warned. Around this time, yet another admin admin C also publicly accused the same editor of being part of the plot.

Admin C was highly troubled by the fact that the plot had included an attempt to recall him from his admin position. In this instance, the accused editor offered to send his private email correspondence to admin C to prove his innocence, by demonstrating he had rejected the requests of the faction to join the external forum where the plot was hatched. One thing was certain however: Nearly a month later, the same editor opened a case on the Administrator's noticeboard WP: He alleged Wikihounding WP: The Wikihounding case was quickly declared to be spurious, and within an hour of his allegation the editor was blocked for six months.

The admin who banned him Admin A, who had posted the warning almost a month earlier noted in announcing the block:. Have a nice day.

La lengua que heredamos: Curso de español para bilingües, 7th Edition

The blocked editor in question is a relatively experienced contributor: Or was he the target of an admin witch-hunt? Again, members of the community are likely highly divided.

Related Content

It would take considerable research to unravel the lengthy background to this case, and the others. Moreover, it is difficult for a non-participant to pass judgment in a situation like this one, nor is that the objective here.

What can be said is that it has clearly had a profound impact on the community. Leaving aside the bans, it seems that there are also users who have retreated from Wikipedia in despair or even disgust. As far as the basic facts of the matter, it is clear that some group of editors formed an explicit faction to achieve certain goals on the site, very likely breaking Wikipedia policy in the process.

It also seems evident that the faction was born of longstanding tensions and conflict — de facto factionalization — between different groups of editors, which broke in part along admin and non-admin lines. The non-admin critics strongly believe that certain admins function as arbitrary tyrants. The critics have also been previously involved, it appears, in efforts and arguments to constrain admin powers on Spanish-language Wikipedia.

There have always been groups, and groups. Admins versus non-admins, Spaniards versus Argentines, etc.

Related Resources

What there is are periods of peace where one group gets tired and leaves the rest in peace, but with time groups get reactivated because new people arrive who clash with the old, or what have you. Moreover, although factionalization might be the result of a lack of formalized means of conflict resolution, according to this editor, factionalization in fact provides an explanation for the lack of these means: Thus for many users, leaving matters in the hands of powerful individual admins might be the least of all evils.

Yet while it is widely agreed that Wikipedia is not a democracy WP: NOT , a question remains: Spanish-language Wikipedia continues to grow and improve, and it boasts a population of highly-committed editors. Can the discord that exists simply be ignored by most users?

Can it be positively mitigated through a different approach to conflict resolution, and a different conception of the role of admins? Should the system be changed, or merely some of the people who administer it? Or is this placing the blame in the wrong place entirely? Ultimately these sorts of questions can only be answered by the community itself.

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki. This page is currently a draft. More information pertaining to this may be available on the talk page. Normally, drafts should not be marked for translation.


  • Basic Geological Mapping (Geological Field Guide).
  • Menú de navegación?
  • Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment (with functioning Table of Contents);
  • Related Content.

Open access no url provided. I hope to conclude the research outlined in this post in future. As the later sections of this document will illustrate, recent events in the Spanish-language editor community provided the impetus for the shift in direction. Although the editors were not asked their nationality in the interview and no explicit attempt was made to obtain editors from every Spanish-speaking nation, due to reasons of scope , a review of user pages indicates that the nations of origin of the editors include at least Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Spain.

The comparison used is the rate of new articles relative to total articles, calculated monthly. The information here and in the rest of this section is obtained or calculated from stats. Wikipedia funciona y es sostenible, y millones de personas la sostienen. Eso tiene que significar algo. Esto es una enciclopedia. Era lento e ineficaz, y entraba en bloqueo operativo cada dos por tres.

Pero nunca se pudo llegar a un consenso, con lo que cada biblio hace lo que quiere, con todo el drama que eso genera. Denuncias espurias en el Tablon de bibliotecarios. Que a veces tenemos que usar sus armas y jugar sucio, […] pero con estrategia por favor. Han violado normas que aceptamos como comunidad, pero creo que la gravedad del hecho no justifica la cantidad del mal producido a los usuarios.

Se nota que como administradores somos poco transparentes En tanto no te has retractado, sigues presumiendo mala fe y haces gala de acoso, te doy el bloqueo que estaba pendiente desde la aquella advertencia: Siempre ha habido grupos y grupos.

Pero no es nuevo. Retrieved from " https: Drafts projects Wikimedia hosted projects Wikimedia supported projects Open access projects lacking a URL Open access projects Completed research projects.

Research:WikiHistories fellowship/Spanish - Meta

Views Read Edit View history. In other languages Add links. The seventh edition of La lengua que heredamos: Curso de Espaol para Bilinges is an essential resource that is written for anyone who speaks Spanish at home but wants to improve their knowledge of the language. This revised and updated edition offers a wealth of visuals and dialogues that present the vocabulary is an easy to understand manner. This important book will give you the confidence to build your knowledge of reading, writing, and vocabulary skills.

Request an Evaluation Copy for this title. View Instructor Companion Site. Contact your Rep for all inquiries.