Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:42, 20 July 2009

	Uruguay was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 13, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed November 17, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed June 16, 2009 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. South America This article is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Uruguay Top‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Uruguay, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Uruguay. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.UruguayWikipedia:WikiProject UruguayTemplate:WikiProject UruguayUruguay Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry WikiProject Countries to-do list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. Template:WPMercosur Software: Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. Template:V0.5

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on August 25, 2004, August 25, 2005, August 25, 2006, August 25, 2007, and August 25, 2008.

External Link Clean-Up Project

In Reply to I, RalphG2SL answer: Without being impolite i want to complain about removal of several important URLs from the External Link Section. There were a lot of highly official URLs to public services which were removed the 17 of October. I see that there was a lot of spam too, but while cleaning-up you just removed EVERYTHING. e.g.

Government resources

   * (Spanish) Portal del Estado Uruguayo - Uruguayan State portal
   * (Spanish) Presidencia de la República Oriental del Uruguay - Official presidential site
   * (Spanish) MEF - Official site of the Uruguayan Ministry of Finance
   * (Spanish) Poder Judicial - Official site of the Uruguayan Judiciary
   * (Spanish) Poder Legislativo - Official site of the Uruguayan Parliament
   * (Spanish)/(English)/(Portuguese) Ministerio de Turismo del Uruguay - Government tourism information site
   * (Spanish) INE - National Statistics Institute.

Sports

   * (Spanish) Asociación Uruguaya de Fútbol - Uruguayan Football Association
   * (Spanish) Federación Uruguaya de Basketball - Uruguayan Basketball Federation
   * (Spanish) Unión de Rugby del Uruguay - Uruguayan Rugby Union
   * (Spanish) Asociación Uruguaya de Golf - Uruguayan Golf Association
   * Club Nacional de Football
   * Club Atlético Peñarol

At this occation you removed the URLs to my Gallery too. Well, all the last years i had tons of forward-links to international wikipedias, because i want to support Wikipedias. We have a non-commercial website thats 90% about News & Fotos from Uruguay and that offers a unique collection of about 4.500 Pictures of Uruguay - in uncomparable resolution and because of thus in quality, too. When i realized you removed my URL, i added it again, because its really non-commercial apposed to many others which were there. I had success with that - for more than one week. Even while having some Google-Adsense there. Well, i reread the Guidlines over and over again and removed all Google-Adense from my Gallery. Hope, this page finds its way back to en.Misplaced Pages again. I´ve spent the last week translating more and more into english, even if i consider this not so very important for pictures. Btw: There are a lot of URLs i have in Misplaced Pages-Pages concerning Uruguay, Provincias of Uruguay, Cities or Villages of Uruguay. I cannot see that i brake your rules on External_links or WikiProject_Spam Please make up your mind. I think you don´t obey to your own rules. Please check out the article i wrote today concerning this discussion: En.Misplaced Pages.Org deletes useful Information - here are the missing Links —Preceding unsigned comment added by RalphG2SL (talk • contribs) 03:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Photos Uruguay

I´am big fan of this country, when i saw the photos of this guy i booked me a flight, now i wanted to show those fotos to a friend and they are gone, so why you cleaned it up? i am of the same opinion as RalphG2SL, cleaning up like this is no clean up - it is vandalism and is agains the project-rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.64.220.177 (talk) 17:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Fotos Uruguay - you are right

Btw: The old picture-gallery we were talking about is here.

In the meantime it moved to a new URL. Would be nice if someone adds it to the reflist.

Remotion of Education Section

I just noticed the Education section. Does anybody knows why?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin1homas (talk • contribs) 23:26, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Political bias

Ive noticed that in the political section there was the link only to one party, not the rest (I added them) and the only two pictures are (of course) of only that one political party. I consider this a rather important bias in this section of the article. Edit: Also, what are the church of san carlos and the rio de la plata in 1601 images doing in that section? Immortality 14:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting or ambiguous info

In the 1st paragraph: "The nation is the third smallest country in South America, larger than only Suriname and French Guiana" Under geography: "Uruguay is the second-smallest country in South America, after Suriname. " Is this an issue on one beign worng or the 1st paragragh refering to population and the otehr geography article refering to area? Pattersonc(Talk) 10:19 AM, Sunday; January (EST)

I s'pose that's because French Guiana is not a country. —Nightstallion (?) 21:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this, it is a colony of France.

Guyana is an independent country, so Uruguay is the third smallest country in South America, after Guyana and Suriname.

Images

I've inserted some much needed images which have given more life to the page. Jaw101ie 22:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Half of population of Italian origin?

Me están jodiendo??? dónde está la evidencia empírica. No puede ser que las contrastaciones para probar la creencia del 50/50, o la mejoradísima y conciliadora del 40/40 sean "mi vieja es italiana y mi perro también". Lo que es peor, la investigación del INE citada en el artículo especifica que "este informe presenta los resultados del estudio llevado a cabo por el INE durante 1996 y 1997, sobre las razas en el Uruguay, en base a la declaración explícita de los entrevistados sobre la raza a la cual creen pertenecer". Entonces, tenemos una investigación con 10 años de edad, al filo de una nueva generación, y que, a su vez, difunde datos de creencias. Lo cierto es que, aunque a los suizos del sur no les guste, una buena parte de los uruguayos es mestiza. Prometo borrar all the bullshit with genuine data. Les pido un poco de verguenza, acuérdense que no le ganamos a nadie. (pasate botinelli)

still —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.235.132.166 (talk) 03:03, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

I don't think half of the population has Italian origin, could you (XGustaX) please provide evidence of that? --Muñata 15:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

you certainly don´t think. uruguay population has, AT LEAST, half of it´s ascendants in italy.

Yes man, the population is half spanish and half italian. We are not beaners..-- Uruguayo 07:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

"We are not beaners..--" "Uruguayo": ese comentario esta totalmente fuera de lugar. Me molesta ser la unica URUGUAYA que reaccione ante el uso de ese termino racista y ofensivo. Perdon a los demas por escribir en español en un foro de discusion en inglés.83.205.54.196 11:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm Uruguayan too. That sentence needs a confirmation from a reliable source, since it is very subjective. I could say that may be 25% of population is of Italian origin, but I can't put that on the article without an objective and reliable external source. (Perhaps in Montevideo the number is near 50%, but that's certainly not the case on the other departments). --Muñata 19:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Muñata, you are not going to get confirmation on this from a reliable source, since it is not true. The overwhelming majority of people in Uruguay are of spanish or italian ancestry, but 50/50 is not possible. First of all we have to take into account the 4 or 5 % or people who are afro-descendants. Then lets take into account the people of Armenian ancestry, I would venture to say that 2% of the population has Armenian ancestry. If anybody has been to the departments that border the Uruguay River, he or she has surely seen the "colonias" of Russian, German and of course Swiss people. I would venture to say that in those three cases at least 1% of the population has ancestry that can be traced back to those countries. People of Sirian-Lebanese ancestry also may form up to 1% of the population. People of French , Greek and Portuguese ancestry also may make up 1% of the population. For crying out loud, what about the English? When they came over to build the railroads a bunch of them stayed. And finally but luckily, I have to mention those that can trace back their ancestry to the Charruas or any of the Tapes natives that inhabited Uruguay. By a miracle some Charruas were able to escape Rivera's genocide and they hid mostly in estancias in Tacuarembo or Paysandu. Today there are poeple amongst us that carry in their veins the blood of the Charruas and the Minuanes. They may be very few, but thankfully they do exist.

So to sum it up, I would say that perhaps 40 % of the population is of Spanish ancestry and 40% is of Italian ancestry. In some cases (as in my case... my father's family was from Calabria and my mother's from Galicia) we are a mix of both. --MarcelloCarlino 13:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but i think sirio-lebanese population in uruguay is higher then armenians. Lebanese ancestry is the 3rd most important goup in uruguay after spain and italy, so i guess is more then just 1%, just to piont it out =)

Look man, I'm an example of many races in Uruguay. For part of my father, he's half Italian and half Portuguese on his family, and my mother 1/3 from Morocco and just my grandma from Spain. This country have many cultures, and I think many Uruguayans have some Italian ancestary. (sorry 4 my english) Carlos Esposito.

This is removed by now Martin Thomas

=== Sorry, what means "Italian ancestors"? I have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8, 16, 32, 64... You mean the 64 (who lived before the unification of Italy haha! ) were born in what today is Italy? Then maybe there are a few thousands of Uruguayans in this situation. But why stop at these 64? 128, 256, 512, 1024. And so on, I am pretty sure there is more Charrua blood in Uruguay than Uruguayans think. But was is Charrua blood?? In the end, we are all humans coming God knows from where. So the 'beaners' comment is outrageous, racist, and stupid (sorry). If having Italian ancestry means "at least 1 ancestor (from which century?) from what today is Italy, then maybe even 60% is possible or maybe more, I am sure even the "Spanish" (what's that?) married some "Italian" sometime in the former milleniums. Let's define what we talk about. Ale MP.

Why the article says 94% "at least partly white" or something like that, it gives the impression that we are talking about 5 %, just go and look at the people, and the history, someone is trying to distort reality. Not that there is anything bad with any race but do not misguide people. At least 90 % of the population of Uruguay is Spanish and Italian(more Spanish), with some other swiss, german, jewish, french, british, and, I forgot,lots of portuguese blood there too. Yes, some charrua blood survived, thanks God, and some guarani came from paraguay, and God bless, African Uruguayan but it is mainly european, go and see them. It is not a caribbean country, beautiful by the way, but someone is trying to change reality. written by Tiberio,Uruguayan, people who writes here should stop pushing their own agenda —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.22.238 (talk) 21:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be a misrepresentation of the facts to say that 94% is of Euopean Ancestry. Unless we clarify that only 85.8% is of ONLY European descent as the National Survey clearly states.

Estancia tourism

I think this thing about estancia tourism, agritourism and dude ranches needs to be clarified. The trouble is that I don't understand what exactly goes on in estancia tourism so I can't decide whether dude ranch or agritourism is closer to estancia tourism. Can a bit of detail be added? I have read both dude ranch and agritourism and it looks to me like dude ranch is actually a subset of agritourism, so should the link go to agritourism only? The other thing is that the way dude ranch is currently written it makes it look like a historical phenomenon and not a contemporary one. Mona-Lynn 04:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's a starter, I don't know a whole lot about it either http://www.estancias-uruguay.com/ Gene Nygaard 13:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I've read both articles and agritourism is definetely more appropriate. Dude ranch is not the same. --Muñata 15:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

That Web site is somewhat helpful but I wouldn't put it in this article itself. Basically you can have asado, ride horses, rest and relax, and maybe go fishing or swimming in the river. I'm going to remove the "dude ranch" link now. Mona-Lynn 20:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Flame war!

In regards to the sport of football in Uruguay, it is well known that the general population regard it as their divine right to play in the World Cup purely because they won the first one. This is despite the fact that they have consistently failed to perform on the world stage in the past half a century. Just like the way the Uruguay football supporters live in the past, the country itself both economically, socially and politically is also rather backward.

Uh?? What??? I'm uruguayan, so I can tell you that what you've said is nonsense. No-one in uruguay thinks that way...

I guess if your only understanding or knowledge of a country stems from who they play football against , then you are not a historical or economic knowledge giant are you? So Perhaps when your country actually wins the worldcup you may be able to comment on whether it should be a honourary priviledge or not as to whether you should have to qaulify against a nation who still calls football - soccer. As for being backward your knowledge of football truly astounds me , the only reason your country was able to play a world champion football country like uruguay came only after playing against teams in the pacific islands. Thankyou for acknowledging that uruguay has a history of football and untrue of your current circumstance. Perhaps what wounds you more is that uruguayans all over the world celebrate with pride every aspect of our countrys wins and refuse to forget our history, is that something that your country can claim it does, well I guess we will have to wait and see whether your country will maintain its history in the memory of its people for generations to come. Good Luck because I know you will need it, by going up against another South American country called BRAZIL.

This discussion is totally nonsense. You guys better go a chat room or forum to talk about that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.126.22.39 (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Ctheir divine right to play in the World Cup purely because they won the first one ??? and What about the second one in the 50's ? and what about 1924 in the olimpic games ?

Bravissimo. They dont remember anything because they have not history. Countries like Uruguay have history, and we should be proud of it.

Economy section

Can someone look at the last sentence of the economy section and try to figure out what "a crash jobs programs" is? Thanks, Mona-Lynn 05:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

you´re right, the term is not really accurate. I think it´s refering to the "emergency programme" (in spanish: plan de emergencia) that includes a state policy of rejoining unemployed people to the system. this involves certain kinds of jobs often related to community services, construction or formal rejoining supervised by the government. the emergency programme has, in fact, the characteristics of assistencialism.

I have changed that to the name of the plan, Emergency plan, and added a reference. Martin Thomas

Motto

Is Libertad o Muerte the national motto? My Spanish is sketchy, to say the least, but from what I understand of this page on the website of the presidency, it has something to do with commemorating a battle in 1825. Does anyone know more about this subject? I am unagle to find another reference, but that might be because i don't speak Spanish. Pruneau 21:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to help out with this. "Libertad o muerte" was supposedly the rallying cry that was used by the liberating party that crossed the Uruguay River and reached Agraciada Beach on April 19th, 1825. Legend holds that they were 33, for that reason "33 Orientales". Amongst those who were there, we can name some men who had long fought for Uruguay's independence, for example Juan Antonio Lavalleja. I do not know if to qualify "libertad o muerte" as a national motto. Marcello.

Yes. The national motto is "Libertad o Muerte". Immortality 13:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No is not, is "Bizcochos con Mate o Muerte", maybe I am wrong. 200.108.215.226 (talk) 19:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

History Last Paragraph

It reads : "In later years the economics have determined the decadence of the Uruguayan national teams and clubs". Which does not really make sense in English, i think the writer probably meant decline or something. Anyway I'm no Uruguay expert, but the sentence generally makes little sense.

Yes you are right it meant "decline"

Are you kidding me?

Who the hell wrote that Jose Artigas led the fight to independence in 1825, rather than Juan Antonio Lavalleja? Wesborland 19:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Switzerland of America?

I'm Uruguayan, but I certainly don't think that Uruguay is the "Switzerland of America." That was an expression to describe Uruguay between the 20's and 30's, but now Uruguay is anything but the "Switzerland of America." I'm taking it out, it's an outdated expression, and I hope they don't add it again. 199.196.22.39 (talk · contribs)

Indeed, but I think the article should still mention that Uruguay was once dubbed "Switzerland of America" (in the 50's, not 20's) --Wesborland 14:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Politics

Press Freedom

I added references, sorry for the multiple edits, regarding the press freedom in Uruguay. I tried to add the info so that whomever will 'own' the article in the future can find the info and keep it up-to-date if desired. JT Pickering 16:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The most politically and economically stable?

I would say that Uruguay is the most politically stable country in S. America (along with Chile), but is it really the most economically stable? I think that Chile is more stable. Are there any sources for this? --Martin al300 05:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Chile is more prosperous, but it has a higher social polarization.

Formal name

I have changed "Eastern Republic of Uruguay" to "Oriental Republic of Uruguay," which is the long form named given by the CIA World Fact Book. There is a debate in the archives from two years ago on this subject, but the arguments in favor of using "Eastern" were all on the lines that "Eastern" is a better translation of the Spanish "Oriental", rather than that "Eastern" was the translation that is actually in use. Given that long form names of countries in various languages are not necessarily a matter of accurate translation, but rather of convention, it seems to me that we ought to use "Oriental" on the basis of the World Fact Book, until such time as some evidence can be provided that "Eastern Republic of Uruguay" is actually used in formal contexts. This is especially true given that neither name very accurately represents the Spanish meaning of "Republica Oriental del Uruguay". john k 01:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Eastern" is used by the UN. Ybgursey 03:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Cite? john k 16:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

UN Bulletin 347/1 "Terminology - Country Names" Ybgursey 19:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree, Eastern is the right translation, since i.e, far east is called in spanish 'Extremo Oriente'. Martin Thomas

There is no real right or wrong answer to this question. In the past the full translation was 'The Oriental Republic of the Uruguay'; mid-century 'The Oriental Republic of Uruguay' was common, and now, where the full title is used, it is most commonly 'The Eastern Republic of Uruguay'. However, as none of these names works very well in English, the government of Uruguay simply refers to itself in English as 'Uruguay'; I would have thought it appropriate for wikipedians to follow their convention. Cripipper 12:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the best is to set the real name of the country as "Republica Oriental del Uruguay" and maybe it meaning in english

Which of the various feasible translations of oriental editors here consider "right" or "appropriate" is irrelevant. As an encyclopaedia, we editors do not have opinions, we simply report what authoritative sources in English use. What do, for example, the embassies in London or Washington use? Kevin McE 09:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, there's a Uruguayan delegation in New Zealand at the moment, and they refer to themselves as from the Oriental Republic of Uruguay. --Matthew Proctor 22:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The word 'Oriental' (or 'Eastern') can not be preceding 'Republic'. Making it precede 'Republic' will turn it from being part of the compound name to be an adjective of 'Republic'. 'Oriental' is not a kind of 'Republic' as Popular Republic or Democratic Republics can be. So 'Uruguay' is not the name of an 'oriental republic'. Instead, the name of the 'Republic' is 'Oriental del Uruguay'. These are language facts, to be compliant with Kevin's observation of the encyclopaedia. The only name in the facts is the one detailed in the country's constitution and it is written in Spanish. Any attempt, including Foreign Affairs' or President's, to translate it to English is an opinion, normally done to keep it friendly. At least, it should keep the meaning. This being said, the name is 'Oriental del Uruguay Republic' (constitution), therefore in English, and in my opinion, it is Eastern of Uruguay Republic. To give sense to this name we need to refer to History where the name was always a geographical description. Originally the name was the 'Banda oriental de los territorios del rio Uruguay'. (Being 'banda'='zone', a non-political way to refer to a territory). The first change (due to usage) was the cropping of the words in Italics. Then from 'Banda' it was change to 'Provincia', later to 'Estado' and finally to 'República'. This makes the current official name: República Oriental del Uruguay. (The original name in English will be 'Eastern territories of Uruguay river Zone", hence after being 'Province', 'State' and 'Republic' it became 'Eastern of Uruguay Republic') -- Santiago.M.Ferreiro (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

"Oriental Republic of Uruguay" is used by the CIA World Factbook, the U.S. Department of State, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. 58.70.49.169 (talk) 13:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, in such a case I would prefer to use whatever the Uruguayan Government uses. You know, it's their country so I guess they're the best authority regarding its name.

Unfortunately, their portal has no English translation. The Uruguayan embassy in the U.S., however, use the term Eastern Republic of Uruguay .

As for the exact translation, I vouch for "Republic east of the Uruguay" (the Uruguay being the Uruguay river), which is what I was originally taught in school. However, as said above, we should use whatever the Uruguayan Government uses... pedro gonnet - talk - 04.01.2008 10:31

I would say it's OUR country, and definetely President's also but only as a citizen, whose vote is not more than mine. There is only one entity hierarchically above the government and that is the State (set of nation, territory and government). The State is defined only by the Constitution and the Constitution foresees the name only in Spanish. Being the name only in Spanish and English a language that does not translate names, the name in English should be 'Oriental del Uruguay Republic'. Eastern Republic of Uruguay has never been our name in English before which has always been just 'Uruguay', precisely to avoid misleading interpretations. (Please check the Uruguayan Embassy web site in Washington D.C.) It is misleading in terms of language. It means something different to what it should, it qualifies 'republic' when it shouldn't. Its vagueness is not acceptable. This name is conceptually wrong. We either stuck to a literal translation or we start deploying an Also known as: list. It's academically inappropriate to assign a different name to the very same thing depending on circumstancial reasons as the president in turn. The president will change. The country is still the same. The name can not change every 5 years if the country remains the same in all aspects (besides the president). The origin of the name stated in my previous contribution is well known by those concerned (the Uruguayans), and crystal clear for everyone speaking Spanish. Google 'Eastern Republic of Uruguay' and you are not going to get a document older than late 2005. A name requires to remain the same for the same thing. The country names which have change in Europe, for instance, reflect different borders or different Constitutions. The complete name of the country in English is just 'Uruguay', hence it was in brackets in my edition. As a note I can tell you that the current goverment addressses the 'fernandinos' (the inhabitants of Maldonado) as 'maldonadenses' and that happens in Spanish. From all the above you have plenty of references to check. If something needs to be distinguished with a qualifier it is because it differs from the original concept (Democratic Republics as the former Germany or Congo, Popular Republics as Cuba) and Uruguay is just a plain REPUBLIC with all what the term implies. -- Santiago.M.Ferreiro (talk) 12:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Santiago, the complete name of the country in English is not "Uruguay", wether we consider Eastern or Oriental (I prefer the latter) the correct translation, countries have full names and these must be translated when writing or speaking in other languages. I do see your point about "Eastern" not being a type of republic, though. Furthermore, and adressing the Eastern/Oriental discussion, the meaning of the word "oriental" (of the east) is still the same in English, even if it's mostly used to refer to things pertaining Far East. MaGnUs was here! (talk) 06:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

What about the Oriental people?

Please allow me to introduce one more issue to this matter, one that nobody has pointed out here before.

A little history.

In times of the Spanish Empire, today's Uruguayan territory was part of the historical Banda Oriental. Since Portugal never respected the Treaty of Tordesillas nor Spain settled stable colonies in this bordering region, Banda Oriental suffered many Portuguese annexations (first the region of Ibiazá or Mbiazá, then Río Grande, followed by Misiones Orientales). By the time when the territory gained its independence from Spain, the name "Banda Oriental" was reduced to be used only over a territory barely bigger than that of today's Uruguay.

It became then Provincia Oriental, as part of the Liga Federal (a federation that included other ex-territories of the former Spanish Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata). Then came a period of occupation and annexation—first by Portugal, later by Brazil—when it was officially known as Provincia Cisplatina ("Província Cisplatina", in Portuguese).

In 1825, Provincia Oriental declared its independence and decided to rejoin to the other provinces from the old Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata that constituted the United Provinces of South America at that time (the pre-Argentina). This was ratified by the Congress in Buenos Aires. Then the Argentina-Brazil War started. Britain helped the war to come to an end resulting in Provincia Oriental becoming an independent state.

And then, the "Oriental" issue arose.

Brazil did not want the term "Oriental" for the new state (which would had been its natural evolution: Estado Oriental) for it had historical links to the Spanish and Argentinian past of the new country. So, the first attempt was to call it Estado de Montevideo. Meanwhile, another solution appeared: the linking of the word "Oriental" to the name of the Uruguay River.

Many people think the name "Banda Oriental", meaning East(ern) Bank, was refering to the Uruguay River. It is easy to make such a mistake nowadays, considering the modern name of "Uruguay" and the fact that the country is at the East side of that river. But "Banda Oriental" was actually called that way because of the Río de la Plata, not the Uruguay River. The fact is that from Buenos Aires, the Uruguayan shore seems to be slightly to the East (especially in the maps used at that time) rather than to the North (as it really is) so that was why the Eastern adjetive was used originally. Since the Río de la Plata was the main geographical reference to the region, all territories North to it, between the Jesuitic Reductions and the Atlantic Ocean, were known as the "Banda Oriental". But by adding "del Uruguay" the meaning apparently changed: now, it seemed as not being linked to the Eastern Spanish/Argentinian territory, but refering to a territory East to the Uruguay River. And that was why Brasil accepted that name for the new state.

Then, the Estado Oriental del Uruguay was born. After a while the state became officially renamed as República Oriental del Uruguay.

Now, the question is not only: "how to translate 'Oriental'?" There are actually some more questions. What is the real name of the country then? Is it "Uruguay", or is it "(República) Oriental", or even "Oriental del Uruguay"? Is the word "Oriental" only used as a geographical reference (like "Western" is in "Western Australia"), or is it secretly related to the Oriental people, the Orientales (Oriental, in singular)? Remember that "Oriental" is also a synonym for "Uruguayan" in Spanish, and it is also used officially (e. g. in the Uruguayan Constitution).

If it is only something geographical, a translator should decide on translating "Oriental" as Eastern—to avoid any confusion with the more extended use of Oriental in English for Eastern Asia ralated things—, or to keep a more literal translation and use Oriental to preserve style while using a synonym for Eestern. If that were the case, I would favor Oriental (never forget style).

But if the real and hidden meaning of "República Oriental del Uruguay" is "the republic established by the Oriental people in the territory that now is called 'Uruguay'" (occupying just a part of the territory from former Banda Oriental and Provincia Oriental) I would have no doubt: Oriental would be the word for that is the name of that particular people. Then the issue would be to indicate a different pronunciation for the word or not (William Henry Hudson came up with Orientál in his novel The Purple Land, set in nineteenth century Uruguay.)

So, the name Oriental Republic of Uruguay seems to cover most of the main aspects. It keeps the meaning of Eastern (if you consider geography) and it also keeps the possible reference to the Oriental people (aka Uruguayans). And it is more similar to the original in Spanish as well.

Anyhow, the Uruguayan government seems to have already chosen Oriental Republic of Uruguay as the official English translation for the name of the country since that is how it appears in official papers (e. g. passports).

Check out AOL Travel: Uruguay

I have a web link to a feature story on "unexpected" Uruguay, from the view of one American tourist wrote on his adventures (two pages) in the country. Other information not stated in the article are found here. 63.3.14.2 09:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC) AOL Travel: unexpected Uruguay

Please Remove Peacock Terms

Note that any statement featured by an encyclopedia should be rather neutral. Terms such as "most pleasant" and "most friendly" appearing in this article are very subjective and may not be factual. My humble suggestion is that you remove these terms. I do understand that one can be very proud of his heritage or his girlfriend's heritage, it's actually truly praiseworthy, but it doesn't fit an encyclopedia. Verblyud

I have removed some of them.

- - - -
Agreed. Came here to express the same concern. Not only terms, but also the cherry-picked comparisons and over-all tone of promotion. I don't know enough about formats & editing to contribute much; just spelling & punctuation as yet. This is the first time using a talk page so forgive if I am doing it wrongly. Tickerhead 08:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Uruguay Demographics

I dont think that the estimate of the white population in Uruguay is accurate. Various sources state that 88% of the population is white, 8% mestizo, and 4% black, mixed, other. 97% is more like Argentina's. More than half of Uruguay's white populaiton is of Italian origin. There are 1.5 million Italians, while Spaniards, and other Europeans make up the balance. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uy.html#People http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/worldguide/html/1055_people.html

According to the governmental 2006 National Survey of Homes (), most demographic information here was incorrect so I updated it.

The survey states that 9.1% of Uruguayans consider themselves Afro/Black and 4.5% Native-American.

Can someone tell me how to link all three reference to the same one. I currently have three references that should be pointing to this sqame url. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playasolmar (talk • contribs) 20:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. To reuse the same reference, give it a name (as you did, calling it "one", and on subsequent uses just say <ref name="one" />, or whatever name you used.

In the infobox you don't need to give references at all, unless the numbers prove controversial. If nobody contests them (and nobody should), it's enough to reference the CIA factbook once, in the body of the article. I'm going to be making some adjustments now, and I'll fix this.

Thanks again for your work. -- Zsero (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the demographics and religion data needs to be protected because it has been changed several times to make it appear as if Uruguayans are "whiter" then they actually are. The data is official and provided by the national survey conducted by the government. The same is true for the religious information where references to Atheist/Agnostic and Afro/Umbanda religions was removed when they represent almost a quarter of the population. Why was Afro/Ymbanda removed if they represent 0.6% of the population and Jewish left when they represent 0.3%. Why was Protestant (11.1%) and Jewish (0.6%) left when Athiest/Agnostic represent more than 22%. I think removal of these facts (clearly stated and backed by the National Survey) is racist and discriminatory.

Also the data provided by the own country's official government run national survey should take precedence over data provided by a another country's agency (i.e. CIA World Fact Book)

Population

Population

- 2006 estimate 6,431,932 ?
- 2002 census 3,399,237

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.112.80.220 (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

2007 est is 3323906

Martin Thomas

Protected

This article has been vandalized way too many times. Therefore, I've protected it from being edited by anons or noobs. Please don't remove the protection tag without discussing it here first. Thank you. --~ ~ James Hetfield (previously Wesborland) ~ ~ 17:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed the tag as article was not protected. Protection of articles requires Admin access. You can request page protection at WP:RFP. WjBscribe 17:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

That explain why the tag wasn't working :) I'll request the protection there then. --~ ~ James Hetfield (previously Wesborland) ~ ~ 17:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Done! The article is now protected. --~ ~ James Hetfield (previously Wesborland) ~ ~ 16:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

All the pictures are clogged up in different parts of the article, rather than equally distributed. Anyone care to give me a hand with that? --~ ~ James Hetfield (previously Wesborland) ~ ~ 18:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

imports and exports

NEW IMAGES

Hi, maybe we could put the image of Jose Artigas in the history section. We could use the image that appears in the article "Uruguay" in spanish. The one in wich he is in the "Puerta de la Ciudadela". Anyone can do that?

RECENT HISTORY

Also, we can add, some of the recent history, like the 40s 50s, Uruguay in the Second World War, The Graff Spee, The "Switzerland of America", the World Cup of Brazil, the "famous Maracanazo". Maybe we can put comments of Eduardo Galeano or Franklin Rodriguez. That will be great!

Pronunciation

Nothing drastic, but the IPA guide needs a slight alteration for the Spanish variation of the name. In Oriental, the lettering appears to be /rj/. I'm no expert on this but this combination is rare and its inescapable sound may well be represented by another lexeme. /j/ is different from /i/ in that it is a frictionless consonant (ie. pronounced quickly) and when it follows a number of letters, it softens them. The Czech language features this sound and the letter is /ř/ - pronounced by trilling an R and raising the back of the tongue simultaneously, often explained in phrase-books as a /rʒ/ sound (rzh). Indeed in oriental, there is more emphasis on the /e/ but if there is not to be a 'rzh' sound, then there would be a glottal stop sign (like the Russian hard-sign). I suggest the sign /j/ be changed to /i/ which I know to be correct. I would prefer to read suggestions first. Evlekis 20:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

No, it's pronuonced much more like rje. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.135.161.226 (talk) 03:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Uruguay Receives the Words First Batch of OLPCs

Uruguay receives the worlds first order of OLPC. This may demonstrate the nations commitment to improvement and education.

• http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/14/uruguay-youngsters-receive-batch-of-olpc-xos/ via Engadget —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.126.236.103 (talk) 07:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

Location of uruguay SVG file

Why does the location of uruguay SVG file in the country info box not visible like it is with other countries (chile, argentina, etc...)? On this page you need to click on it to see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.64.30.26 (talk) 13:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, editing the SVG file itself in an editor i just noticed that it actually contains vector data for the entire world, but only displays a fraction of the file. removing the extraneous data it looks exactly the same, but shrinks from 2.7Mb to about 900Kb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.64.30.26 (talk) 13:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Social Conditions vs. Social Problems: I think that the word condition is no so negative as problem so i decide to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.253.140.52 (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Demographics section

I have removed the lengthy annotation in the Demographics section (i.e. after the asterisk) because I feel that it is unsourced, non-encyclopedic, and quite opinionated. Furthermore, the validity of the claim at the beginning of the section (i.e. "strong blood roots") is not hindered by the removal of the annotation. If the annotation were to be kept at all, it should be moved to an article on ancestry or genealogy. Xinophiliac 00:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I am reposting this from the other section: I think the demographics and religion data needs to be protected because it has been changed several times to make it appear as if Uruguayans are "whiter" then they actually are. The data is official and provided by the national survey conducted by the government. The same is true for the religious information where references to Atheist/Agnostic and Afro/Umbanda religions was removed when they represent almost a quarter of the population. Why was Afro/Ymbanda removed if they represent 0.6% of the population and Jewish left when they represent 0.3%. Why was Protestant (11.1%) and Jewish (0.6%) left when Athiest/Agnostic represent more than 22%. I think removal of these facts (clearly stated and backed by the National Survey) is racist and discriminatory.

Also the data provided by the own country's official government run national survey should take precedence over data provided by a another country's agency (i.e. CIA World Fact Book)

8% of the population is mesitzo????

First you put in demographics that the population is 94% european...and then u changed it to 88%..My Question is, How is the population 8% mestizo??? i think u mean AFRO-URUGUAYAN being there is 290,000 afro uruguayan in Uruguay... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piatti908 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I am re-re-posting this, the facts are clearly stated in the reference material: I think the demographics and religion data needs to be protected because it has been changed several times to make it appear as if Uruguayans are "whiter" then they actually are. The data is official and provided by the national survey conducted by the government. The same is true for the religious information where references to Atheist/Agnostic and Afro/Umbanda religions was removed when they represent almost a quarter of the population. Why was Afro/Ymbanda removed if they represent 0.6% of the population and Jewish left when they represent 0.3%. Why was Protestant (11.1%) and Jewish (0.6%) left when Athiest/Agnostic represent more than 22%. I think removal of these facts (clearly stated and backed by the National Survey) is racist and discriminatory.

Also the data provided by the own country's official government run national survey should take precedence over data provided by a another country's agency (i.e. CIA World Fact Book)

Quick-failed Good Article nomination

According to the quick-fail criteria of the GA process, any article that,

...has any cleanup banners, including but not limited to {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}}, etc, or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, {{huh}}, or similar tags.

must be failed immediately and does not require an in-depth review. As I see multiple fact tags and one expansion banner, this article must be quick-failed. Other major issues include, but are not limited to, the complete lack of inline citations in the History section, and the length of the lead section. When these issues have been addressed, please feel free to renominate the article. If you feel this decision was in error, you may seek a reassessment. Thank you for your work so far, VanTucky 23:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

2nd GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Even if the last review's problems have been partially fixed the article still fails in too many areas.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   There is no need to have so many lists, like the "social conditions" section and the "International rankings" section. The "social conditions"s sub-sections could all be merged into one big "social issues" section, like in Brazil.

   B. MoS compliance:

   km = kilometres, the citations need to have a description and a retrieval date (see WP:ECITE), try to avoid sandwiching text in between images (see wp:mos#images), no need to wikilink years, etc.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   There are no external links, no further reading and too many sections unsourced. Even if the cleanup banners were removed there are still too many citations needed. Most of the article seems to be original research.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   The geography section is a stub, it has a lot of numbers and names but it doesn't say anything about the country's flora and fauna/environment and the climate section is not only 100% original research but it has also to much nonsense, i mean: The climate in Uruguay is temperate: it has warm summers and cold winters.? Also the "borders" section doesn't make any sense to me, it appears to be a list written in prose, i would get rid of that. And what about Uruguay's foreign relations? and do they not have an army? how about Uruguay's culture? There's no mention of the country's music, literature or traditions.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   I had never seen images copyrighted like this, i speak Spanish so they seem ok to me, but i'm not sure. Anyway i'm not failing it because of this.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Three beach images is too much, and the caption in the "Drinking mate political act" image is not appropiate. Also, having an image in the lead, at the same height that the infobox is highly discouraged, it becomes noisy visually (check out WP:GTL#images for more). That image could be perfect for the geography section (once it's expanded).

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Please take a closer look at what is a good article? before you renominate. Thanks for your work so far. :) -Yamanbaiia (talk) 19:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Who put the penus comment in uruguy?

Who put the penis comment on uriguy? Fess up please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.120.116 (talk) 00:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The one with the vandalism identified in the edit summary? I thought that was friggin' hilarious! --Matthew Proctor (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Gini coef

That must be pure statistics! I live in Uruguay ,and the revenue difference is way important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.64.189.143 (talk) 02:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Does Uruguay have an official language?

The article states that Spanish is the official language. However, the Misplaced Pages article in Portuguese http://pt.wikipedia.org/Uruguai states, "Língua oficial Não há língua oficial, de facto o espanhol; o português é o segundo idioma mais falado." Translation: "Official language There is no official language, although in practice it is Spanish; Portuguese is the second most spoken language."

Neither the English nor Portuguese article gives references, and I personally do not know which is correct. 207.172.220.155 (talk) 10:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

State pickles?

What are "state pickles"? Or is this a mistranslation of a Uruguayan term? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.154.153 (talk) 01:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

woe

woe means to eat cheeseMedia:tiffiny window pians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.90.66 (talk) 18:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Barbecue record

I added this but it was deleted and then, reverted again and deleted. But it remains in the other article.

Hi, I want to submit hard evidence that my Uruguay edit on barbecue is notable: a) here it still stays this hour,Culture of Uruguay the Uruguay edit of mine was deleted by IP address, but was reverted by: 03:32, 17 November 2008 User:Commdor Commdor (Talk | contribs) m (49,824 bytes) (Reverted edits by 203.26.38.39 (talk) to last version by Florentino floro) (undo)--Florentino floro (talk) 08:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I've removed it from Culture of Uruguay as well. We don't support trivia in such articles; it might just about be acceptable in the Barbecue article, but certainly isn't important enough for major country articles. Black Kite 11:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Comedy against Uruguay

Why is the name "Uruguay" being made fun or mistaken by saying "You are gay", "You're a gay" or similar? --Master of the Aztecs (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

History section

I was just looking at the Uruguay page to find out when the dictatorship was and what the main events were during that time and was very surprised to discover that the Hhistory" section ends in 1828, and that the dictatorship is not mentioned anywhere in the article. I'm not qualified to summarize the rest of Uruguay's history but thought I'd point it out in case anybody wants to go for it. I guess the history section that's currently in there could also be made more brief and the detail left for the History of Uruguay page, should anybody feel inspired. Mona-Lynn (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, I also find it very strange that this period is missing. It must be the most important historical period. And beside that it is also very valuable to have some knowledge from that period available since the Uruguay economic declined very rapidly during that period. A lesson that could be valuable now. Anyone with better knowledge than me of the details want to add it? Nopedia (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Uruguay/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be reviewing your article. Thanks, Kensplanet_{Contributions}

Check out the Good article criteria here:

(1). Well written:
1 (a). the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
1 (b). it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

• Uruguay has an impressive legacy of artistic and literary traditions, especially for its small size. The contribution of its alternating conquerors and diverse immigrants has resulted in native traditions that integrate this diversity and many more....

(2). Factually accurate and verifiable:
2 (a). it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
2 (b). at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; and
2 (c). it contains no original research.

• It may contain original research.
  Many of the European immigrants arrived to Uruguay in the late 1800s and have heavily influenced the architecture and culture of Montevideo and other major cities. For this reason, Montevideo and life within the city are very reminiscent of Western Europe and many many more.......

(3). Broad in its coverage:
3 (a). it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
3 (b). it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

(4). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

(5). Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

(6). Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6 (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
6 (b). images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

• Tremendous amountof uncited material, especially in the History section, and all other section. Contentious claims not at all cited throughout. This article miserably fails as far as Criterion 2 is concerned. I would not spend much time on the article, as this article is nowhere near GA status. May I suggest a Peer review to be done.

• • Burundi, Comoros, Malawi, Mali, People's Republic of China, Republic of China, Russia, Ukraine, United States, Zimbabwe, India, Israel, Japan
    

Misplaced Pages:Featured articles#Geography and places
Some similar Country GA and FA models, which you can refer to improve the article. All the best. Thankyou, Kensplanet_C 05:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• Former good article nominees
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class South America articles
• Unknown-importance South America articles
• WikiProject South America articles
• B-Class Uruguay articles
• Top-importance Uruguay articles
• Uruguay (general) articles
• B-Class country articles
• WikiProject Countries articles
• Unassessed software articles
• Unknown-importance software articles
• Unassessed software articles of Unknown-importance
• Unassessed Computing articles
• Unknown-importance Computing articles
• All Computing articles
• All Software articles
• Selected anniversaries (August 2004)
• Selected anniversaries (August 2005)
• Selected anniversaries (August 2006)
• Selected anniversaries (August 2007)
• Selected anniversaries (August 2008)