User talk:Edubucher/2009
Changes in the article by the antarctica
[edit]Hi, you made some changes to the article on Antarctica, particularly in the section Countries interested in participating in a future territorial division of Antarctica, where you have removed three countries (Spain, Peru and South Africa) stating that the references have been placed are poor, because I know you want to do that are not any source, the first institution belongs to the INTER-AMERICAN DEFENSE OF CHILE, and the second of the Foreign Ministry of Ecuador, they express a great interest in these four countries in the sharing of the territorial antarctica, maybe you do not know this as it was in Spanish, also if you read the article by the Spanish in antarctica record the same section, as it is mentioned as a serious reference, also advise you to read the article in Spanish on the basis of Machu Picchu in Peru, where he also expresses the interest of this country in the territorial distribution of the antarctica, greetings --Edubucher (talk) 17:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- The problem with the quoted two sources is not their Spanish language at all but their wide discrepancy both among themselves and with the suggested group of countries with possible territorial interest in Antarctica. Namely, it is suggested that
- Brasil
- España
- Perú
- Sudáfrica
- are taken from the two quoted publications. However, the first one defines a group of countries that "tienen pretensiones territoriales, pero que por disposiciones del propio Tratado Antártico no pueden formularlas" comprising
- Brasil
- Estados Unidos
- Perú
- China
- España
- India
- Rusia
- Sudáfrica
- while the second source considers
- Brasil
- Uruguay
- Perú
- Ecuador
- It’s a serious thing for a country to have declared territorial interests in Antarctica, even potential or conditional ones, and one would have expected to see more definite sources, including sources in English too; as for Spanish language, one certainly would have expected to see for instance some official Spanish source in Spanish language confirming the alleged territorial interest of Spain. I am not saying that such territorial interests or intended interests do not exist, just that we would need better agreement between the article text and quoted sources. Apcbg (talk) 18:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)