Jump to content

Talk:Cristina Fernández de Kirchner

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MewMeowth (talk | contribs) at 21:17, 18 June 2020 (Overview: Fix). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 6 November 2016.

Media control claim

I removed the claim that 80% of the media was controlled (directly or indirectly) by Kirchner, since I could not find a credible analysis stating this. The cited Guardian article gave no source. A detailed 2016 analysis of media ownership and concentration in Argentina published by Oxford Scholarship gives no such numbers. InverseHypercube (talk) 06:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. 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) 15:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lede concerning Alberto Nisman and other controversies

Some controversies are being removed from the lede. The information seems well backed by RS. @Cambalachero, any particular reason why this is being removed? Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Lead fixation. Yes, all that info is already included and referenced... in the body of the article. The lead must be a brief summary of info that is fully explained later, and a simple line "Several corruption scandals took place, and she faced several demonstrations against her rule." is enough at that level. Same for everything else: in my version of the lead, for each line that says something about her rule, there is an expanded info later on. That's why I did not mention, for example, the Universal allocation per child in the lead: it's mentioned in the "Economic policy" section, but there isn't much more to say about it than that sentence, it's just a social security program. Cambalachero (talk) 13:15, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. User:Dianaa seems to have been able to balance this out per their last edit. It looks fine to me now. If you think this needs further discussion let me know and we can perhaps open a RfC to get others involved. Regards. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 12:05, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

Articles do not need to have overview sections: that's what the lead is for. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section for details. Cambalachero (talk) 02:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As per MOS:LEADLENGTH an article of this size (4,500+ characters) can have 3 or 4 paragraphs in the lead section, which is exactly the number of paragraphs the article had before User:Elizabeta Kirkland's edits. The usage of an 'Overview' section is not standard and contrary to the purpose of the lead section. I suppose continued User:Elizabeta Kirkland's noncompliance with the MOS, disregard of consensus and unwillingness to participate in discussion (as we don't know the rationale behind their edits) should be dealt with administrative action. --MewMeowth (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]