User talk:Alfredo elejalde

Could you read Wikipedia:External links please and get back to me? Thanks --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With point a), I agree with you but because this is outside my pervue, I didn't do anything in terms of movement (moving the information around). I would guess if that is an issue, you can feel free to move it.

With point e), Tables are necessary because the information is stastistical. I don't see the wasted space and yes, they are not easy to manage, but the pages of wikipedia are for readers, not editors. Yes, tables maybe cut into two or three pages (I've never tried), but if a table is big, then that's the baggage that comes with tables. I sympathize with your feeling that the nontable is better (I don't feel that way, but), but unfortunately, we have to keep information easy to read and readable.68.148.164.166 (talk) 07:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About tables: there is not one statistical piece of information in the tables you are talking about. You can see the wasted space when you compare the amount of information in each column. Some of them are crowded with information, some of them are almost empty, with just one or two words. If there were no crowded cells in some columns of the table, it may be a good format. But it is not the case. About the length of the tables: there should be no baggage, We, editors, must help the reader. Readers must have access to documents that can be printed easily, so it is not a feeling about tables or sympathy what I am asking for, but a decision to benefit the reader, not our editing likes or dislikes. Now, in what sense a table is easier to read than the traditional prose, with subtitles, bold, italic and underline texts?

I just need a good reason to change my mind. On the other hand, an editing of such importance (eliminating prose and usin tables, or viceversa) should be consulted with other editors before being done. Alfredo elejalde (talk) 18:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the length of the table may be too long, but we cannot cleave it just for people who print the articles. Some of the cells maybe crowded just because of that face that the information is not much. Say romanji, you really can't add more than a phrase in the cell. It's just the nature of the article. And that is statistical information. Statistics does not always mean numbers. The infomation can be categorized into variables. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.164.166 (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Saifa, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.yorkkarate.com/goju.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on