Jump to content

Talk:Arica

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 2005

[edit]

I am an American living in Arica now for 5 months. Comments: i have big dig

1. The external link is broken, as the city of Arica seems to have decided that they don't want to publish informaiton directly about their city and converted it to a private site for city employees. The content has been picked up by someone frustarted with the situation: http://www.infoarica.cl/

2. I would not say that Arica itself is dry, why not include a link to WiKi http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Atacama ? As Arica has rivers and water (that is why the grow produce and people live here). Agreed it doesn't rain, just that there are dryper parts of the Atacama that have neither rain nor rivers. -> Comment by PabloM: Seems a nice idea. I would like to say Arica doesn´t have a "tropical climate" as stated in the article. Is closer to a desert climate. (there are several kilometers to the north of Arica which aren't tropical either... i would say even lima isn't tropical)—Preceding unsigned comment added by PabloM (talk • contribs) 1 July 2005

3. I think the railroad is no longer active, or at least is only freight and no longer has transport for persons.

4. Things I would like to see added: How Bolivia has no Pacific Port and has a free trade zone in Arica, dispute with peru and bolivia is still in the news today even after the war ended long ago, 21 de mayo pedestrian mall, universities are big here (external links), Chincorro Mummies, poverty/unemployment (as a rural area, has more like 10% vs. Chile has a national average closer to 6%).

I will try to come back and contribute more.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.246.56.130 (talk • contribs) 9 January 2005

Neutral point of view

[edit]

I made some changes in the 1868 Tsunami part. I wrote:

On August 16, 1868, the Peruvian port of Arica was devastated by a tsunami which followed a magnitude 8.5 earthquake in the Peru-Bolivia Trench off the coast. The earthquake and tsunami killed an estimated 25,000 people in Arica and perhaps 70,000 people in all, this tsunami is well documented by press and photo. An officer of the US ship Wateree, L.G. Billings, who later became a rear admiral, in 1915 published a horrifying account of his experience as a witness of this earthquake in the Peruvian coast.[1]

This part of Arica's history belongs only to Peruvian history, since that port was then part of Peru. The account is completely neutral because there are no discrepancies in the text: - The text is completely accurate in historical terms. - The Tsunami affected only the Peru-Bolivia border, since it was barely detected in Cobija, thus it could not be felt in Chile. - The accounts of Admrl Billings describe very vividly the experience lived in that Peruvian port. The phrase "earthquake in the Peruvian coast" belongs to him.

The text was deleted by one editor who belongs to the Chile Wikipedia group. I find no reason for doing this, since the text is completely neutral and accurately describes the historical events. Please reconsider your decision. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.37.120.18 (talk • contribs).

It is tendentious and biased to repeat the info about the Peruvian sovereignty. The earthquake issue is used only as a excuse to include nationalistic text, it is only question of looking at your history on Wikipedia for proving this fact. To call Peru-Bolivia Trench to the Peru-Chile Trench is original research and blatant POV-pushing. Jespinos 22:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In response to your reply: it is not tendentious, nor biased. It is an historical fact and the truth. The earthquake was felt only in territories that in those times were Peruvian and Bolivian. You are using nationalistic text by denying or minimizing the historical fact that Arica was a Peruvian port in the exact moment of that historical event. The Earthquake is NOT part of the History of Chile because it did not happen in Chile. It is part of the History of Arica and Peru. The victims were Peruvian, the city was Peruvian and even the "America" was Peruvian. I studied very closely about this event and own several relics from those times. The events that ocurred in 1880 have nothing to do with the earthquake, the Aricans could not have foreseen the future. You are biased and tendentious by denying a big portion of of Arica's history, making everybody believe that its history begins in 1880. The city is more than 500 year old. 1880 was only 127 years ago. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.40.127.90 (talk) 01:30, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
FYI, the Arica area has thousand of years of history, being the Chinchorro culture the most notable example. Additionally, following your argumentation, the events that occurred here before Peruvian independence (1821) would not be considered part of the Peruvian history. Then you are those who magnify the scarcely 59 years of sovereign control by the Peru. However, the most critical is the inclusion of false information. There are not an oceanic trench called Peru-Bolivia Trench and the same source given in the article indicates that the tsunami damaged ships in Caldera, Chile. Jespinos 17:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, the Peruvian nationality and culture is considered a continuum even since the pre-inca cultures, but more accepted, after the forming of the Inca Empire, which is the first political union of what we call now Peru. Later events, as the Spanish conquest, the creation of the viceroyalty of Peru (which expanded through almost all Hispanic South America, and in the late XVIII century was subdivided into seral viceroyalties) and the republican period are only stages in the history of an already established nationality. To consider 1821 as the begining of Peruvian history is tendentions in order to establish your point of view regarding this argumentation. If that were the case, Ramon Castilla would not be considered Peruvian because he was born in Tarapacá before the independence. You are right about the "trench", I am sorry for that, and I admit my mistake. I would change that for "The Peru-Bolivia border", but that is only my opninion and I don't have any power to make my point of view prevail in this article.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.37.120.18 (talk) 17:56, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

No Citation for Sunshine Hours

[edit]

Under Climate, there is no citation for the sunshine hours and I'm not sure where to put the CN. Does anyone know why there are only 45 hours of sunshine in September, if that number is accurate? 76.121.211.59 (talk) 01:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I put in the reference for the sunshine data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (on pg 67). I think the low sunshine total in September is probably due to the fog from the Peru current. Ssbbplayer (talk) 21:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the daily sun hours, you should have only daily or monthly, monthly as preference, as per http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Template:Weather_box 151.231.171.107 (talk) 11:44, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think there should be further discussion about this on the template's talk page or on wikiproject meteorology. Some city articles such as Sydney only display daily hours, which I find a bit controversial since you can't compare the data across different cities and was implemented with weak consensus. I do prefer monthly amounts although I put in daily amounts as well since not every reader might understand the Spanish source for the sun data (although some readers, especially on weather related forums don't understand at all and complain that the sunshine data is not what they expect and call it "wrong", even though the data is correct). I am not going to revert that edit. Ssbbplayer (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Arica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arica&oldid=1216891432"