Talk:Cochabamba

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 August 2018 and 29 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cislamag, Cislamgiaca.

Above undated message substituted from

talk) 17:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

People and Culture

The original posting that cites the racial composite of Cochabamba city (under the People and Culture subheading) included the anthropological term "Caucasian" (read Caucasian race). This term was selected to describe the diverse geographic origins of the Caucasian (or White) demographic in Cochabamba city. A significant majority of Caucasians (or Whites) are descendants of Iberian and/or German descent who have resided in Cochabamba city for several generations. Also, there are Caucasians from other Latin American republics, Europe, Australia, Canada, and USA (particularly missionary groups).

The terminology "white European" excludes the diverse range of Caucasians of other continents (as cited in the paragraph above) and nationalities, especially if it is implied as a cultural label. Additionally, the term "white" is frequently misinterpreted--particularly in the United States--to specifically denote Nordic-featured peoples, excluding those of Mediterranean composites within the Caucasian racial group.

el yanqui chapacocochabambino 09:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I wrote the following yesterday (or at least something similar), but for some reason it didn't appear. Caucasian is a disambiguation page, so it is pointless to link there. Also, the term Caucasian is an inaccurate, out of date and USA-centric word to use when describing all white people. In that context, it is rarely used outside the United States (although some people have picked it up from watching American TV). The real meaning of Caucasian is people from Caucasus, known on Wikipedia as Caucasian peoples. Spylab 13:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cristo de la Concordia, tallest?

Both of these paragraphs are copied from Wikipedia. The information as you can see, is contradictory.


Perched atop the San Pedro hill, the 33m (109ft) tall statue of the Cristo de la Concordia (seen at right) is the tallest of its kind in the world (although it is commonly believed that the Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro is the tallest). Visitors can climb inside up to the arms for a unique view of the city.

Christ the Redeemer (Portuguese: Cristo Redentor), is a statue of Jesus Christ in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.[1] The statue stands 39.6 metres (130 feet) tall, weighs 700 tons and is located at the peak of the 700-m (2296-foot) Corcovado mountain in the Tijuca Forest National Park overlooking the city.[1][2][3]

Ambiguous title

I am new at this but there is a Department with the same page. Should this page be moved to Cochabamba (city) and an ambiguous page be started here. Or is there a better solution speednat (talk) 09:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As there are obvious cross-references from each of the two pages to the other page, it is not necessary to start a disambiguous page called Cochabamba. I'd suggest you leave it the way it is. -- Meister (talk) 19:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The more I think and forage around on Wikipedia, (there are more

Cochabamba Cathedral, Cordillera de Cochabamba, Cochabamba-Santa Cruz Highway, Cochabamba Highway),and the more I read on the disambiguation pages, the more it seems that Cochabamba
should point to the disambiguation page since none of the cochabamba's are a primary topic. Again thanks for the discussion. speednat (talk) 03:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You really have found quite a number of Cochabamba pages, but there already exists a page called Cochabamba (disambiguation). A procedure like this is suggested at WP:Naming conventions where it says: "The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term. If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added to the name of the disambiguation page, as in Jupiter (disambiguation)".
To my understanding (and it seems not only to mine), the present Cochabamba page is such a primary topic page, and that's why I'd suggest that you do NOT alter the Cochabamba page to something like "Cochabamba (city)". -- Meister (talk) 22:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, let me state, I am in no way trying to upset you. I, make that, we are just discussing a point, as opposed to me just doing it. (no threat intended). Initially, I had no idea what was the best course of action. I was just learning the ins and outs, and I am still learning...a lot. However I do believe in this situation Cochabamba should redirect to the disambiguation page, since there are so many ambiguities. This seems to agree with me, but before I read that, as I have been editing pages, I have noticed when (acting as an editor) entering wikilinks, it is a lot easier to fix bad links, if I can mouse over and see the 3 or 4 top terms, instead of a statement to link somewhere else. I also like it more as a reader, because the first click takes me to the list of links as opposed to the "oh!!!! what this". Oh click here to get the list of links. In fact, in our scenario there was a problem in that the Cochabamba (city) page only listed one other of the links and no disambiguation statement. The Disambiguation page 24 count them 24 hits all month in December. That means either nobody cares about the Cochabamba's or a vast majority they weren't finding the links. Ponder this question, what harm would it cause to rename this page and set up the Disambiguation page on the newly vacated site? Bot's will fix the links, everybody will find the new page, and more people will find the other pages. Just mull it over, I am going to work on some other sections for now, looking forward to your response. speednat (talk) 01:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi speednat, I am not feeling upset, and I'm sorry if I sounded like I was. I think, discussions like this help to keep Wikipedia lively. Of course, there are arguments for and against altering the present situation, where anybody looking for "Cochabamba" is directed to the Cochabamba City page where a Redirect in the first line leads to the disambiguation page. I'd suggest we wait for other users to enter on this discussion to see what the general feelings towards this subject are, outside you and me. -- Meister (talk) 13:15, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Places of Interest Copied From Cochabamba Travel Guide

This whole section is basically copied verbatim from the Cochabamba Travel Guide in the references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThyrsusExx (talk • contribs) 15:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

The ONLY reference/link used for the weather in this article is a broken link, and I have doubts of whether the data shown is accurate at all. For instance, the precipitation shown for Cochabamba in February is higher than the one for London! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.15.109 (talk) 15:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

World People's Conference on Climate Change

World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth was held in the municipality of Tiquipaya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barrioflores (talk • contribs) 20:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Cochabamba. 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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cochabamba&oldid=1211989588"