Jump to content

Talk:Bolivia: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 315: Line 315:
I tried to insert the following explanation of the foreign word "plurinational", but an error was flagged because I had allegedly committed an error of citation. This is the passage that I intended to insert, but in vain, alas: The Bolivian government chose as its official name in English “Plurinational State of Bolivia”, although “plurinational” is not an English word. It is an imitation of the Spanish word “plurinacional”, which is usually translated as “multinational”<ref>https://www.linguee.com/english-spanish/search?source=auto&query=plurinacional<ref/>However the Bolivian Constitution of 2009 makes clear that the “nations” meant here are Bolivia’s various aboriginal ethnic groups. For instance, “Article 2. In view of the pre-colonial existence of the indigenous autochthonous rural nations and peoples and their ancestral dominion over their territories, …”. “Article 98. I. … Interculturality is the instrument for cohesion and harmonious and balanced coexistence among all peoples and nations [of Bolivia].”<ref>Constitución Política del Estado (CPE) (7-Febrero-2009) https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/constitucion_bolivia.pdf<ref/>The usual term in English for what the Constitution calls “nations” is “ethnic groups”. Accordingly, the meaning of the term “plurinational” is “multi-ethnic”. [[User:Banderswipe|Banderswipe]] ([[User talk:Banderswipe|talk]]) 23:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I tried to insert the following explanation of the foreign word "plurinational", but an error was flagged because I had allegedly committed an error of citation. This is the passage that I intended to insert, but in vain, alas: The Bolivian government chose as its official name in English “Plurinational State of Bolivia”, although “plurinational” is not an English word. It is an imitation of the Spanish word “plurinacional”, which is usually translated as “multinational”<ref>https://www.linguee.com/english-spanish/search?source=auto&query=plurinacional<ref/>However the Bolivian Constitution of 2009 makes clear that the “nations” meant here are Bolivia’s various aboriginal ethnic groups. For instance, “Article 2. In view of the pre-colonial existence of the indigenous autochthonous rural nations and peoples and their ancestral dominion over their territories, …”. “Article 98. I. … Interculturality is the instrument for cohesion and harmonious and balanced coexistence among all peoples and nations [of Bolivia].”<ref>Constitución Política del Estado (CPE) (7-Febrero-2009) https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/constitucion_bolivia.pdf<ref/>The usual term in English for what the Constitution calls “nations” is “ethnic groups”. Accordingly, the meaning of the term “plurinational” is “multi-ethnic”. [[User:Banderswipe|Banderswipe]] ([[User talk:Banderswipe|talk]]) 23:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
:{{re|Banderswipe}} The Linguee.com source is [[WP:NOR|original research]] in this instance, so you'll need to rewrite. The reason your citations aren't working is because you have the / in the wrong place. It goes "/ref", rather than the "ref/" as you did twice. ~ [[User:Pbritti|Pbritti]] ([[User talk:Pbritti|talk]]) 00:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
:{{re|Banderswipe}} The Linguee.com source is [[WP:NOR|original research]] in this instance, so you'll need to rewrite. The reason your citations aren't working is because you have the / in the wrong place. It goes "/ref", rather than the "ref/" as you did twice. ~ [[User:Pbritti|Pbritti]] ([[User talk:Pbritti|talk]]) 00:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
:I'd like to add and reiterate that [[WP:COMMONAME]] still applies and, as "plurinational" is the overwhelmingly used term both by the government itself and nearly all reliable sources, any attempt to change the term to "multi-ethnic" will be reverted. [[User:Krisgabwoosh|Krisgabwoosh]] ([[User talk:Krisgabwoosh|talk]]) 02:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:09, 20 December 2022

Template:Vital article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Aircraft Inventory

Aircraft Origin Type Versions In service[1] Notes
Trainers
Aerotec T-23 Uirapuru  Brazil trainer T-23 7
k-8  China trainer K-8 6
Beechcraft T-34 Mentor  United States trainer FMA T-34B 21
Canadair T-33 Silver Star  Canada Attack/Trainer AT-33A 19
Lancair 320  United States trainer 1
NEIVA T-25 Universal  Brazil trainer 6
Pilatus PC-7 Turbo Trainer  Switzerland trainer 9
Helicopters
AS 350 B3  France utility helicopter 2
Eurocopter AS 532 Cougar  France transport 2
Aérospatiale SA 315 Lama  France utility helicopter SA 315B 2 one was suffered an accident months ago, 4 people died at least
Bell UH-1 Iroquois  United States utility helicopter UH-1H 12
Bell UH-1 Iroquois  United States utility helicopter UH-1H 15
Bell 212 Twin Huey  United States utility helicopter 14
Transports
Basler BT-67  United States transport 1 An upgraded turboprop powered DC-3
Beechcraft Baron  United States Utility 55 2
Beechcraft Bonanza  United States utility V35 2
Beechcraft King Air  United States staff transport Super King Air 200 4
BAE Systems 146  United Kingdom transport 146–100 4
CASA C-212 Aviocar  Spain transport 3
Cessna 152  United States utility 10
Cessna 172 Skyhawk  United States utility 172K 2
Cessna 185 Skywagon  United States utility 2
Cessna 206 Stationair  United States utility 11
Cessna 210 Centurion  United States utility 4
Cessna 310  United States utility 1
Cessna 402  United States utility 402B 1
Cessna 421 Golden Eagle  United States utility 421B 1
Convair 580  United States transport 2
Fokker F27 Friendship  Netherlands transport F27-400M 4
Learjet 25  United States VIP transport 25B
25D 		1
1
Lockheed C-130 Hercules  United States transport C-130A
C-130B
C-130H 		2
4
1
McDonnell Douglas DC-10  United States transport DC-10-10F /DC-10-30F 2 acquired in late 2007[2]
Piper PA-34 Seneca  United States utility 2
Rockwell Sabreliner  United States VIP transport Sabreliner 60 1

References

  1. ^ Aerospace Sourcebook. Aviation Week & Space Technology 2009, 26 JAN 2009 240. Web. 14 Aug 2009.
  2. ^ Bolivian military aviation OrBat

Status of the Wiphala

Regarding this, the cited sources refer to it as either a dual flag or the “other national flag”. The IP should respect WP:BRD and discuss here rather than edit war to change the stable version. DeCausa (talk) 21:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"BoIivia" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect BoIivia and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 11#BoIivia until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 19:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Multi-ethnic" instead of "plurinational"

The article contains many instances of a non-existent, ostensibly English word, to wit "plurinational". I replaced this monstrosity with the intended meaning, which is "multi-ethnic". The Bolivian government officially calls itself in English "plurinational", but that is merely because they don't know English. Nonetheless my attempt failed , since an automatic blocker was switched on. I wrote to the Bolivian foreigmn minister explaining the blunder: Excelentísimo señor ministro: Yo soy traductor entre español e inglés profesional con una larga carrera: Con mucho gusto le enviaré mi currículum. Parece que se ha vuelto habitual traducir al inglés “Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia” como “Plurinational State of Bolivia”. Sin embargo este término es incorrecto, ya que incluye una palabra, a saber “plurinational”, que no existe en inglés. La palabra latina “natio” significa lo mismo que la palabra griega ethnos (έθνος). Por consiguiente la traducción correcta al inglés del nombre de su país es “Multi-Ethnic State of Bolivia”. Le saluda atentamente

Traductor Banderswipe (talk) 18:51, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not generally go by personal translations but by what most sources use. The translated word "plurinational" is overwhelmingly used by reliable sources compared to "multi-ethnic". Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I just wrote to the Bolivian government so they can fix the problem. Banderswipe (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The very least Wikipedia can do is provide an English translation of the made-up word "plurinational", which can be found in no dictionary. Banderswipe (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by calling "multi-ethnic" a "PERSONAL" translation? Are you out of your mind? I have already explained in detail why the proposed solution is a stupid blunder committed by bunglers, and why "multi-ethnic is the only correct translation. I would gladly provide further details if those do not suffice. Banderswipe (talk) 19:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What you mean to say is you don't give a f*ck about whether Wikipedia is in English or is comprehensible to monolingual English-speakers, so you can toss in some made-up foreign word here and there without explanation. I can tell you are a person of profound integrity. Background in the subprime loan business, I suppose. Banderswipe (talk) 19:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All English-language reliable sources use the word "pluri-national" in this context. That's what we follown, not Your personal opinion which is irrelevant. If you carry on in this vein, and particularly if you carry on with personal attacks against other editors as above, you will be blocked from Wikipedia. DeCausa (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not my personal opinion. It is the correct translation, which happens to diverge from what is usually written. How come important editorial decisions at Wikipedia are made by people who are obviously completely unqualified for the job? Banderswipe (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Spanish words are adopted into English and vice versa all the time. The term "plurinational" seems like a pretty clear-cut case of that. Even accepting a different term should be used (which I nor most sources nor the Bolivian government itself agree with) I don't think "multi-ethnic" translates as well as you think it does. The term "multinational" as in multinational state fits much better. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 21:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What you read every day is “real” and “objective”, but if a professional translator points out that what you read every day makes no sense, is in a foreign language and is incomprehensible to many people, then that’s just my “personal” view, which by virtue of being “personal”, is worthless and must be ignored. You must have worked all your life in Walmart. Banderswipe (talk) 21:08, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cut it out. This is your last warning. You're wasting our time. You're clueless on Wikipedia policy. If reliable sources use the word then we use it. If you're going to edit here you need to learn Wikipedia policy. that's all we follow. No one;'s interested in half baked claims of "expertise". DeCausa (talk) 21:12, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To add to what DeCausa is explaining, our job in Wikipedia is not to editorialize but to add information based on available sources. I myself am plenty knowledgeable on Spanish terms given my professional experience as a Spanish-to-English translator, but without an accompanying citation to back my claim, I could not add it to Wikipedia. If you're set on changing the term to "multi-ethnic", I'd suggest perhaps publishing a paper on the term or lobbying the Bolivian government to change its own preferred English name. Who knows, perhaps it will gain widespread adoption, at which point you could change it here. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 21:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of "plurinational"

I tried to insert the following explanation of the foreign word "plurinational", but an error was flagged because I had allegedly committed an error of citation. This is the passage that I intended to insert, but in vain, alas: The Bolivian government chose as its official name in English “Plurinational State of Bolivia”, although “plurinational” is not an English word. It is an imitation of the Spanish word “plurinacional”, which is usually translated as “multinational”<ref>https://www.linguee.com/english-spanish/search?source=auto&query=plurinacionalCite error: The opening <ref> tag is malformed or has a bad name (see the help page).However the Bolivian Constitution of 2009 makes clear that the “nations” meant here are Bolivia’s various aboriginal ethnic groups. For instance, “Article 2. In view of the pre-colonial existence of the indigenous autochthonous rural nations and peoples and their ancestral dominion over their territories, …”. “Article 98. I. … Interculturality is the instrument for cohesion and harmonious and balanced coexistence among all peoples and nations [of Bolivia].”<ref>Constitución Política del Estado (CPE) (7-Febrero-2009) https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/constitucion_bolivia.pdfCite error: The opening <ref> tag is malformed or has a bad name (see the help page).The usual term in English for what the Constitution calls “nations” is “ethnic groups”. Accordingly, the meaning of the term “plurinational” is “multi-ethnic”. Banderswipe (talk) 23:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Banderswipe: The Linguee.com source is original research in this instance, so you'll need to rewrite. The reason your citations aren't working is because you have the / in the wrong place. It goes "/ref", rather than the "ref/" as you did twice. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to add and reiterate that WP:COMMONAME still applies and, as "plurinational" is the overwhelmingly used term both by the government itself and nearly all reliable sources, any attempt to change the term to "multi-ethnic" will be reverted. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bolivia&oldid=1128426323"