Jump to content

Talk:Lima

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CaradhrasAiguo (talk | contribs) at 19:34, 28 July 2020 (OneClickArchiver archived 1 Contradicting Info to Talk:Lima/Archive 2). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

This article is the current Peru Article Improvement Drive.

Help select the next collaboration now!

Nominate an article you think needs improvement or vote for one of the candidates here.

Callout for a NEW main Lima Image

The Main image of Lima,Peru 'the top of Cerro San Cristobal' was taken on the 21st of September 2003. I think this photo is considerably outdated, and a much recent photo would suffice in portraying the city of Lima more accurately......... VineViVenci (talk) 13:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree, that image is a disgrace. Untill a new one is found, it should be taken down. 203.134.11.248 (talk) 10:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it disgrace? It shows the city's core from one of it's most traditional vantage points. I think it's alright. --Victor12 (talk) 13:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista estadio.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Vista estadio.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Lima Main Image

The pic of Lima from the San Cristobal Hill should be replaced. It just shows one view of the city, while Limaperu1.jpg feels like a proper city collage highlighting the most important parts of the city, like in various other city articles. What do you guys think?

File:Limaperu1.jpg
I think that the image we have is fine, and should stay the same. It shows an unvarnished view of the city, as a previous poster indicates, in an iconic way. We should not attempt to make this article about a city into a brochure. Wikipedia is not a guidebook. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. The edit history of this article over the last few years has been a basic edit war to prevent this article from becoming full of "peacock images". There are various images that demonstrate notable things about Lima in the article already. Another reason for leaving the image alone is that we don't need to imitate other articles, which is an argument that has been made before. Just because other articles do it, doesn't mean we need to do it that way here. Hires an editor (talk) 14:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually infoboxes of cities across wikipedia are slowling being changed to this sort of image because it better represents the locations that are the subject of the article. Infoboxes are supposed to give quick summaries of the article and these do a better job of that then a single image. It also helps cut down on the number of images in the main body of the article which often creates clutter. This certainly isn't the only page where this style is used and eventually most will likely be converted to this style. Now in saying that I don't know if these are the best landmarks to show. Usually the images put in a cities collage show a mix of history, culture and current. So if its the pictures that are the problem its easy enough to find better representative pictures. But we definitely should make the change. It drastically helps out the page. -DJSasso (talk) 13:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One of the better examples I know of is File:Calgarymontage4.jpg because it has an image of a very unique landmark, then it has a picture indicating some of the cities culture which is of the Calgary Stampede, the worlds largest outdoor rodeo and what the city is best known for, then it has another shot of the Olympic Winter Games ski jumps which shows its past as an Olympic Host City, and then it has some images of other history buildings to show its past and then it has a a good picture that shows its greenspaces. Overall it gives a quick well rounded outline of the city in a single image, which is what the purpose of the infobox is. It has also helped drastically cut down the number of images that would get thrown into the body of the article cluttering it up. -DJSasso (talk) 13:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:CollageLima.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:CollageLima.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:CollageLima.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blake24 - Images

I'd like to try to understand the images issue, because I'm not. Why keep adding images? Hires an editor (talk) 03:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 10 February 2013 Ubicacion de LIMA en el Mapa

La Ubicacion de Lima , capital del Perú , en el mapa esta erronea , sale cerca de YURIMAGUAS y no en el lugar que le corresponde. 85.49.251.211 (talk) 22:10, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

State your request in English, please. RudolfRed (talk) 22:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 13 February 2013

I need your help; Why Lima, Peru "[1]" on the map of Facebook appears in "Yurimaguas-Loreto, Peru" need to be changed! Thanks in advance for your answers and modifications. 200.106.105.154 (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wikipedia does not control Facebook content. Rivertorch (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Language - edit request

The text currently reads: "Lima's Spanish is characterized by the lack of strong innotations..." Does someone know what "innotations" is a typo for? This should be fixed. Jd2718 (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FRANCISCO PIZARRO, FOUNDER OF LIMA There should be a picture of Francisco Pizarro, the founder of the city of Lima.--83.34.142.186 (talk) 07:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PIZARRO FOUNDED LIMA There should be a picture from Francisco Pizarro, the founder of Lima.--83.37.96.205 (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use/non-copyrighted or otherwise questionable ownership collage

I think I've been persuaded that a collage of images of Lima is a good thing, but over the last few years collages have been removed for violation of copyright or unsure ownership - if we put another one, can whoever it is that is making them follow the proper procedure to make sure they are properly showed as owned/fair use images or whatever is required to make sure it doesn't get deleted again? Hires an editor (talk) 17:33, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Info for Lima Article

Hello everyone, I am a Peruvian born and raised in Lima, currently studying in the US. I want to improve the Lima article in English with a focus in the points below. In general, I believe we could add more specificity and precision to certain key aspects to understanding the city. Please let me know what you think:

1. More specific demographics – There is not a detailed account of the distribution of ethnic, religious, and socioeconomic backgrounds in the city and more specifically in different areas of the city. This sentence is very general and imprecise: “There are also numerous Jews of European descent and Middle Easterners”. We should instead include the % of them from the entire Lima population. In addition the total population of the city has not been updated since 2007 and there is not a breakdown of population per district, which is key to understand the relative size of the city and the differences between the districts.

2. Recent history – Although there is a History section in the article, I find that the history is focused mostly up to the 1970's, with little information about recent history. The only information about the twentieth century is regarding immigration from Europe and less about the key historical events like terrorism in the 1980’s and the recent wave of immigration from the inner regions of the country in the last 30 years.

3. Political system – This section is also weak in that it does not include any specifics about how the city hall governs over the city and the relationship between the elected mayor of the city and the mayors of the specific districts. It also does not include the key events or developments in the city by past mayors, or even the recount of the mayors in the past 30 years.

4. Urban challenges – In reading the article, it would seem that Lima has very little social problems or challenges, when this is not the case. Therefore I would include more about security and crime challenges, access to basic services by district (like water and electricity), and results in level of education, at least. This information can be backed up by data to add precision in the overall picture of the city. Finally, there could be more information about the environment in the city. Here, there could me a mention about environmental concerns, for example with respect to air, water, and percentage of green space.

5. Food & Culture - Talk about the blend of cultures in the city and how this has been represented in food and other cultural representations.

6. Education – In this section there is only a mention of higher education institutions, and nothing about K-12 education. There is no mention about how the K-12 education system is organized in Lima (who is responsible for what) or any result in this arena. There could be a portrayal of the types of schools present in the city and in what proportion (private, public, charter, etc.).

7. Sports - I would also increase more detail in this section with regards specifically to soccer and volleyball (which are mentioned briefly).

Thanks, Atiykuy (talk) 20:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Lima

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Current collage has fraudulent image?

In the collage, there is an image of San Isidro with three modern skyscrapers: the Westin hotel is on the far left and the Banco GNB is in the middle. Then on the right there is another skyscraper, the tallest of the three. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this building simply does not exist. I don't know if this was photoshopped or what but it should not be allowed on the page. Dawei20 (talk) 19:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There have been repeated issues with the image collage, usually for copyright violations. If this image is in the commons, I suggest you request that it be deleted for the reasons you state above. Otherwise, you can do it at the page's source here...Hires an editor (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the image is nice!. AlfaRocket (talk) 12:23, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Lima. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lima. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lima. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:06, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Lima. 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) 23:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lima. 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) 09:26, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The demographics are incorrect.

I am from Lima. So I know the majority of people in Lima are indigenous with little foreign blood, and then there are mestizos who you can see they have some mixture, but I have rarely seen a white or black person unless it's on TV. Can't we choose a more truthful source? The picture chosen to represent us is wrong. Why was the girl who looks like a minority chosen instead of someone with our Inca roots? That is very European centric and partial. Frandalila (talk) 13:57, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And the picture of the school children also does not represent us. I don't even think that is from here. 

Frandalila (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Itchyma

Citation requested for assertion in "etymology" that early Spanish articles (should this read chronicles?) called the area "Itchyma". No independent sources found to confirm this statement. Can anyone provide details to substantiate this statement? BobKilcoyne (talk) 04:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism or Religion?

It is rather typical of the biased Western approach - and anglo-saxon in particular - that all the religious buildings are presented under the section 'Tourism', that is : places to be visited. Please do remember and keep in mind that those churches, convents and monasteries are first of all places of worship and of other religious activities of the Christians of Lima and Peru. In this long article there is not even a section 'Religion' but under the section 'Tourism', the large majority of touristic places are in fact religious buildings. This bias is plaguing quite a few similar articles.--Zerged (talk) 04:36, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This Westerner agrees with you that the absence of a religion section is surprising. You could begin to create one yourself. HiLo48 (talk) 04:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lima&oldid=970023369"