This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The English term is Iguassu. In Portuguese, it is spelled "igaçu" without an accent; words ending in l, u, z, i, or r in Portuguese have the emphasis on the last syllable unless they are accented. See www.fozdoiguacu.pr.gov.br.
is it bigger than Niagara Falls?
What do you mean by bigger? Height? Total length? Volume of water?
In portuguese it is called Iguaçu and not igaçu. What should we do with the Iguaçu article. Should we merge or...?
I'm no long so sure about the English name google reports 708,000 hits for "Iguazu falls", and only 280,000 for "Iguassu falls". Commens form any native English speaker? Mariano( t/ c) 13:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Someone asked my opinion here, but as for where the article should reside, I don't really have one. All the redirects should exist; all the common spellings should be listed in the lead section of the article; other than a mention of alternative spellings or in direct quotations, the article body should consistently use one spelling; but beyond that I have no opinion. - Jmabel | Talk 16:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not a native English speaker but want to make my comments anyway. I also believe that place names should not be translated when all possible. The original name of the falls is not Portuguese and not Spanish, it's Guarani. Though Guarani was not a written language it became one with a complete grammar and spelling rule since the Spanish Jesuits used it to instruct the natives hundred's of years ago. The real name of the falls in Guarani is Y'Guazú. Paraguayans, which actually speak Guarani name them Yguazú which is the nearest to the original Guarani term. I think it's important to notice the letter "Y" is also a word that means "water", so I think it's not a matter of spelling, it's a matter of meaning. LucasAntuna 15:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Mariano, your right, it's already there. I vote for Iguassu as the English term because it's easier to type (without accents and wierd characters that are not available on American keyboards). The comparison with other famous falls is excellent, I'm going to link my related site page http://www.iguassu-misted-falls-vacation.com/iguassu-falls.html to this page. Maybe you find something interesting there to publish here (of course, your authorized) or want to include it as an external link. 201.217.22.1 11:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Why does one name have to be used throughout consistently? When writing an article about 'Derry' in the north of Ireland one editor may prefer this name and another may prefer the unionist Londonderry. Deciding between the two would be a very political decision to make and this is demonstrated in British and Irish newspapers which often use Londonderry in the first mention and Derry from then on (or viceversa). As long as the article indicates in the opening paragraph that Iguazú, Iguazu and Iguaçu (and what ever strange name someone suggested was the "proper" English name - Igussu, was it?) are the same thing then it doesn't matter what's used in the rest of the article. If a reader is too stupid to read the opening paragraph then they should probably get back to playing video games.-- 217.203.166.113 ( talk) 21:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The current Guarani spelling used throughout Paraguayan schools (Guarani is an official language there, alongside Spanish) for "big water" is "y guasu" . Olga Troxler Vda. de Maldonado’s "Gran Diccionario", 2004 Edition, renders "yguasu" as "sea, water in abundance" and translates the Spanish "catarata" into the Guarani "ytororõ". In the other hand, there is an academic consensus that proper names retain their traditional spelling. Indeed, the "Map of Paraguay. Political Division. Scale 1:1 000 000. 1996 Edition. Reprinted in 2004." published by the Paraguayan Military Geographical Service Directorate, spells "Cataratas del Yguazú" Aldo L ( talk) 01:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Like in the Antarctica article, I suggest we remove the Iguazu Falls in fiction section of non-important trivial facts. Please see Antactica's talk page. - Mariano 07:26, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Such facts can be interesting, keep. 72.231.18.127 11:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus. "Correct" names in Spanish or Portuguese would be Iguaçu or Iguazú, BTW. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
As shown in #IGUAÇU, the preferred Englush name is Iguaçu. I don't understand why Marianocecowski refuses to move, what does he mean by this comment, or why he thinks that a random English-speaking Wikipedia editor's opinion should have more weight than three encyclopedias and one dictionary. Anyway, since he doesn't want to move, I can't move, and nobody else is here, I put the request on Wikipedia:Requested moves. I don't think a survey is necessary; but just in case... -- 193ypico 21:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The following voting is for popularity, meaning a voter can vote more than one of the options.
The result of the debate was keep Iguazu Falls. Mariano( t/ c) 07:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
As the choice is now between Iguazu and Iguassu, I'd say we have a vote on just those two options. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Support
Oppose
Support
Oppose
Who really cares about whether or not the falls were in a soap opera? That is the tackiest thing I have ever read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.6.184.65 ( talk) 12:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
This is incorrect the waterfall that appears in this episode is Gullfoss, located in Iceland in Hvítá river. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.148.69.158 (
talk •
contribs)
An unregistered user has changed most but not all of spellings in the article from Iguazu to Iguaçu. This was done despite a vote to the contrary (see archives below) and with no recent discussion. It was also done inconsistently. I have reverted the page. (I have no strong feelings one way or the other but have an aversion to sloppily executed edits by unregistered users on controversial topics without prior notice.) Rivertorch 23:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
This is the coolest waterfall ever! I love it soo much! I have to do a report on this, and it was so helpful to have a page that is so informative! :) Thanx, Anyonoumus —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.102.108.21 ( talk) 20:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC).
The article currently has no discussion of the geology of the falls. See for example the Niagara Falls article. Geology could be grouped with other aspects of a natural history survey. -- Figsyrup 14:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I am unable to find any non-wp related google reference to such named falls? However "Livingston Falls" is an alternate term to " Victoria Falls". If there is another "Livingston de Chutes", please reinsert with reference or link. Ekem 00:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I can find no explorer by the name "Boselli" on Wikipedia, per the sentance in the introduction, "The falls were rediscovered by Boselli at the end of the nineteenth century, and one of the Argentinian falls is named after him.". Could somebody please clarify? Nigholith 17:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I uploaded a picture I have of Iguazu Falls to Wikipedia. It's entirely my own work, and I thought it'll be great if you guys can use it or add it somewhere in the article.
Let me know if it will be added. -- Mitchipr ( talk) 14:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
When I visited Iguacu falls in 2003, I was told that the falls are located on the borders of Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay, although I did not visit the paraguayan side, because apparently there is a shopping mall there. Is it true that the falls lie between the borders of 3 countries? If it is true then we should change this in the article. 86.163.117.233 ( talk) 21:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
An editor reported (within the article, not on the talk page) that "Some of the numbers cited in this [Comparisons to other famous falls] section do not agree with the ones given in the reference (i.e. references 4 and 5, data from world-waterfalls.com). Should be reconciled." Anybody have time to check this out? I probably can't get to it for a couple of days. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
There's an understandable tendency for specific editors to switch Spanish phrases to Portuguese and vice-versa, but it doesn't serve the article for this to happen. I am changing the article to use "Devil's Throat" rather than "Garganta do Diabo" or "Garganta del Diablo" throughout the article except for the first occurrence, where I have the other forms in parentheses. This would seem to be the best solution, since this is the English Wikipedia and it's awkward and confusing to switch back and forth from one language to another when referring to the same thing. Rivertorch ( talk) 17:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Further note: there should be a similar consistency to the spelling of "Iguazu", so I'm doing something similar along those lines. ("Iguaçu" is perfectly legitimate as well, but let's go for consistency rather than randomness after the lede.) Rivertorch ( talk) 17:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The following statement seems to have been completely invented, because I have never seen it anywhere else: "The falls divide the river into the upper and lower Iguazu." Considering that the Iguaçu/Iguazú river is over 1,100 km long and the falls are only about 30 km upstream from its mouth on the Paraná River, this extremely uneven division does not make the least sense in geographic terms. I strongly suggest that it be removed. -- UrsoBR ( talk) 06:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
These falls are near to the Friendship Bridge (Paraguay–Brazil). Agre22 ( talk) 03:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)agre22
Regarding Crech's edit of earlier today: If I understand correctly, IMDb is deprecated as a reliable source except in certain limited areas, none of which involve content of a film (e.g., setting or location). See Wikipedia:RS/IMDB#IMDb and Wikipedia:Citing_IMDb for discussion on this topic. It's not a policy or even guideline, as far as I can see, so there's probably plenty of wiggle room. Also, including the year of each movie's release seems a bit unnecessary. It's nice to know, but why stop there? Cast and director would be cool too, but it's all off-topic. In any case, that info is a mouse click away in each case and doesn't need to be in an article about a waterfall. Finally, the bulleted list format seems unnecessary for so small a group of films and distracts from the flow of the article. Rather than simply reverting, I thought I'd shoot for consensus. Your thoughts, Crech? Anyone? Rivertorch ( talk) 04:59, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Clarifying, per a request on my talk page: on Dec. 14, I placed a "contradiction" tag in the first paragraph of the Geography section. The last two sentences in the paragraph seem to contradict each other:
The Devil's Throat ([Garganta del Diablo] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help) in Spanish or [Garganta do Diabo] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help) in Portuguese), a U-shaped, 82-meter-high, 150-meter-wide and 700-meter-long (490 by 2300 feet) cataract, is the most impressive of all, and marks the border between Argentina and Brazil.
and
The Argentine side comprises three sections: the upper falls, the lower falls, and the Devil's Throat.
If the Devil's Throat marks the border between the two countries, then is it really one of the three sections on the Argentine side? Conceivably, yes, if the border lies just past the Devil's Throat, but then the phrase "marks the border" is imprecise and shouldn't be applied to a 700-meter-long cataract. My reading of "marks the border" suggests that at least part of the Devil's Throat belongs to either country. A large-scale map of the falls (from a reliable source) clearly showing the international border would be helpful . Rivertorch ( talk) 05:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
No, the limit border is the Waterfall "Union", which is the beginning of "Garganta del diablo" (devil throat). -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 00:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
I will bring a map, and its reference, then you will see that I was saying the truth. -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Here is the map, you should look to this webpage: http://en.argentina-excepcion.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=905 And if you are a neutral person, please write that I wrote before. -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:41, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Is it enough? -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 23:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok! then... good luck in tour trip, I hope you enjoy it. And when you see through your eyes that I said is the truth, please remember the nick "el_rrienseolava". And when it happens, please, write here (again) that I wrote a few days ago, thanks.
OH! and... I recommend you visit the Argentine side and you would live something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnuV2xVIfgs (From brazil you can't do this thing.... obviously, the reason is my that I said in the text removed by you... :) )... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 20:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick note--this book seems like it might be a useful source. There's a chapter on the falls, starting on page 76: Waterfalls, p. 76. Have to run, more later. Pfly ( talk) 20:57, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm trying to do a general overhaul/copyedit of this page and just made a relatively simple first pass. A few points: I noticed one of the sources I had used recently was an exact duplicate of the Encyclopedia Britannica's entry about the waterfall, so I changed all those refs to Britannica (and added a few more). There's a good number of references now so I took off the "refimprove" tag--although like most pages it needs additional work. I took out the "Name" section because it was not just about the name but also touching on history. It made sense to include in the lead. Also, I took out the sentence "The falls were rediscovered by Boselli." This sentence was referenced to a blog website, [9], and I have not been able to figure out who this "Boselli" might be, when he or she lived, or anything about this "rediscovery". So, pending further info, it seemed best to just remove the sentence. The blog website ref is used elsewhere on the page, but probably ought to be replaced with something more reliable. What else? I guess that it about it for now. Perhaps over the weekend I'll do a few more copyedit passes. Pfly ( talk) 09:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
What do you thin about this map? I think, this one show the distribution between Argentina and Brazil.... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 18:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
sorry..., about this map: http://www.google.com.ar/imgres?imgurl=http://www.forodefotos.com/attachments/argentina/12034d1276138670-parque-nacional-de-iguazu-mapa_cataratas_del_iguazu.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.forodefotos.com/argentina/2618-parque-nacional-de-iguazu.html&h=602&w=618&sz=147&tbnid=xx8aiK4ntI3GPM:&tbnh=132&tbnw=136&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmapa%2Bcataratas%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=mapa+cataratas&hl=es&usg=__ZfBTq1XuR1CAb7YUfHs636qt-S4=&sa=X&ei=QZvXTfCQO8anhAfv_ry1CQ&ved=0CCwQ9QEwAw -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 11:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The border is in the middle of Iguazu river... can't you imagine it?... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iguazu Falls. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I nominate this sentence for our list of incomprehensible WP(-presented) CONCEPTS. Seems to me that borders are indeed between, and therefore not defined for triplets of anything. And a junction is either a point, or an 2- or 3-dimensional region, whereas borders are 1- (or 2-) dimensional demarcations between adjacent pairs of regions on a surface (or of surfaces where volumes are in contact).
(I fully endorse the elimination of this travesty, tho my own priority is harnessing it as an
object lesson. An ideal editor to repair it is one who sez "OMG, that
equine posterior is right, and I could have been the one who wrote it, if the opportunity had presented itself to me to make the same error." But as always, I endorse the concept of every WP editor being their own
assignment editor. The
negative example does not highlight a problem whose solution is trivial, and I'm grateful for both the opportunity to think it thru myself, and the occasion that I hope colleagues will take to likewise polish their editing -- and other, related, analytical -- skills.)
--
Jerzy•
t 08:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
a very used sex site — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.116.100 ( talk) 12:57, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The English term is Iguassu. In Portuguese, it is spelled "igaçu" without an accent; words ending in l, u, z, i, or r in Portuguese have the emphasis on the last syllable unless they are accented. See www.fozdoiguacu.pr.gov.br.
is it bigger than Niagara Falls?
What do you mean by bigger? Height? Total length? Volume of water?
In portuguese it is called Iguaçu and not igaçu. What should we do with the Iguaçu article. Should we merge or...?
I'm no long so sure about the English name google reports 708,000 hits for "Iguazu falls", and only 280,000 for "Iguassu falls". Commens form any native English speaker? Mariano( t/ c) 13:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Someone asked my opinion here, but as for where the article should reside, I don't really have one. All the redirects should exist; all the common spellings should be listed in the lead section of the article; other than a mention of alternative spellings or in direct quotations, the article body should consistently use one spelling; but beyond that I have no opinion. - Jmabel | Talk 16:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not a native English speaker but want to make my comments anyway. I also believe that place names should not be translated when all possible. The original name of the falls is not Portuguese and not Spanish, it's Guarani. Though Guarani was not a written language it became one with a complete grammar and spelling rule since the Spanish Jesuits used it to instruct the natives hundred's of years ago. The real name of the falls in Guarani is Y'Guazú. Paraguayans, which actually speak Guarani name them Yguazú which is the nearest to the original Guarani term. I think it's important to notice the letter "Y" is also a word that means "water", so I think it's not a matter of spelling, it's a matter of meaning. LucasAntuna 15:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Mariano, your right, it's already there. I vote for Iguassu as the English term because it's easier to type (without accents and wierd characters that are not available on American keyboards). The comparison with other famous falls is excellent, I'm going to link my related site page http://www.iguassu-misted-falls-vacation.com/iguassu-falls.html to this page. Maybe you find something interesting there to publish here (of course, your authorized) or want to include it as an external link. 201.217.22.1 11:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Why does one name have to be used throughout consistently? When writing an article about 'Derry' in the north of Ireland one editor may prefer this name and another may prefer the unionist Londonderry. Deciding between the two would be a very political decision to make and this is demonstrated in British and Irish newspapers which often use Londonderry in the first mention and Derry from then on (or viceversa). As long as the article indicates in the opening paragraph that Iguazú, Iguazu and Iguaçu (and what ever strange name someone suggested was the "proper" English name - Igussu, was it?) are the same thing then it doesn't matter what's used in the rest of the article. If a reader is too stupid to read the opening paragraph then they should probably get back to playing video games.-- 217.203.166.113 ( talk) 21:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The current Guarani spelling used throughout Paraguayan schools (Guarani is an official language there, alongside Spanish) for "big water" is "y guasu" . Olga Troxler Vda. de Maldonado’s "Gran Diccionario", 2004 Edition, renders "yguasu" as "sea, water in abundance" and translates the Spanish "catarata" into the Guarani "ytororõ". In the other hand, there is an academic consensus that proper names retain their traditional spelling. Indeed, the "Map of Paraguay. Political Division. Scale 1:1 000 000. 1996 Edition. Reprinted in 2004." published by the Paraguayan Military Geographical Service Directorate, spells "Cataratas del Yguazú" Aldo L ( talk) 01:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Like in the Antarctica article, I suggest we remove the Iguazu Falls in fiction section of non-important trivial facts. Please see Antactica's talk page. - Mariano 07:26, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Such facts can be interesting, keep. 72.231.18.127 11:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus. "Correct" names in Spanish or Portuguese would be Iguaçu or Iguazú, BTW. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
As shown in #IGUAÇU, the preferred Englush name is Iguaçu. I don't understand why Marianocecowski refuses to move, what does he mean by this comment, or why he thinks that a random English-speaking Wikipedia editor's opinion should have more weight than three encyclopedias and one dictionary. Anyway, since he doesn't want to move, I can't move, and nobody else is here, I put the request on Wikipedia:Requested moves. I don't think a survey is necessary; but just in case... -- 193ypico 21:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The following voting is for popularity, meaning a voter can vote more than one of the options.
The result of the debate was keep Iguazu Falls. Mariano( t/ c) 07:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
As the choice is now between Iguazu and Iguassu, I'd say we have a vote on just those two options. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Support
Oppose
Support
Oppose
Who really cares about whether or not the falls were in a soap opera? That is the tackiest thing I have ever read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.6.184.65 ( talk) 12:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
This is incorrect the waterfall that appears in this episode is Gullfoss, located in Iceland in Hvítá river. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.148.69.158 (
talk •
contribs)
An unregistered user has changed most but not all of spellings in the article from Iguazu to Iguaçu. This was done despite a vote to the contrary (see archives below) and with no recent discussion. It was also done inconsistently. I have reverted the page. (I have no strong feelings one way or the other but have an aversion to sloppily executed edits by unregistered users on controversial topics without prior notice.) Rivertorch 23:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
This is the coolest waterfall ever! I love it soo much! I have to do a report on this, and it was so helpful to have a page that is so informative! :) Thanx, Anyonoumus —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.102.108.21 ( talk) 20:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC).
The article currently has no discussion of the geology of the falls. See for example the Niagara Falls article. Geology could be grouped with other aspects of a natural history survey. -- Figsyrup 14:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I am unable to find any non-wp related google reference to such named falls? However "Livingston Falls" is an alternate term to " Victoria Falls". If there is another "Livingston de Chutes", please reinsert with reference or link. Ekem 00:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I can find no explorer by the name "Boselli" on Wikipedia, per the sentance in the introduction, "The falls were rediscovered by Boselli at the end of the nineteenth century, and one of the Argentinian falls is named after him.". Could somebody please clarify? Nigholith 17:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I uploaded a picture I have of Iguazu Falls to Wikipedia. It's entirely my own work, and I thought it'll be great if you guys can use it or add it somewhere in the article.
Let me know if it will be added. -- Mitchipr ( talk) 14:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
When I visited Iguacu falls in 2003, I was told that the falls are located on the borders of Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay, although I did not visit the paraguayan side, because apparently there is a shopping mall there. Is it true that the falls lie between the borders of 3 countries? If it is true then we should change this in the article. 86.163.117.233 ( talk) 21:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
An editor reported (within the article, not on the talk page) that "Some of the numbers cited in this [Comparisons to other famous falls] section do not agree with the ones given in the reference (i.e. references 4 and 5, data from world-waterfalls.com). Should be reconciled." Anybody have time to check this out? I probably can't get to it for a couple of days. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
There's an understandable tendency for specific editors to switch Spanish phrases to Portuguese and vice-versa, but it doesn't serve the article for this to happen. I am changing the article to use "Devil's Throat" rather than "Garganta do Diabo" or "Garganta del Diablo" throughout the article except for the first occurrence, where I have the other forms in parentheses. This would seem to be the best solution, since this is the English Wikipedia and it's awkward and confusing to switch back and forth from one language to another when referring to the same thing. Rivertorch ( talk) 17:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Further note: there should be a similar consistency to the spelling of "Iguazu", so I'm doing something similar along those lines. ("Iguaçu" is perfectly legitimate as well, but let's go for consistency rather than randomness after the lede.) Rivertorch ( talk) 17:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The following statement seems to have been completely invented, because I have never seen it anywhere else: "The falls divide the river into the upper and lower Iguazu." Considering that the Iguaçu/Iguazú river is over 1,100 km long and the falls are only about 30 km upstream from its mouth on the Paraná River, this extremely uneven division does not make the least sense in geographic terms. I strongly suggest that it be removed. -- UrsoBR ( talk) 06:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
These falls are near to the Friendship Bridge (Paraguay–Brazil). Agre22 ( talk) 03:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)agre22
Regarding Crech's edit of earlier today: If I understand correctly, IMDb is deprecated as a reliable source except in certain limited areas, none of which involve content of a film (e.g., setting or location). See Wikipedia:RS/IMDB#IMDb and Wikipedia:Citing_IMDb for discussion on this topic. It's not a policy or even guideline, as far as I can see, so there's probably plenty of wiggle room. Also, including the year of each movie's release seems a bit unnecessary. It's nice to know, but why stop there? Cast and director would be cool too, but it's all off-topic. In any case, that info is a mouse click away in each case and doesn't need to be in an article about a waterfall. Finally, the bulleted list format seems unnecessary for so small a group of films and distracts from the flow of the article. Rather than simply reverting, I thought I'd shoot for consensus. Your thoughts, Crech? Anyone? Rivertorch ( talk) 04:59, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Clarifying, per a request on my talk page: on Dec. 14, I placed a "contradiction" tag in the first paragraph of the Geography section. The last two sentences in the paragraph seem to contradict each other:
The Devil's Throat ([Garganta del Diablo] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help) in Spanish or [Garganta do Diabo] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help) in Portuguese), a U-shaped, 82-meter-high, 150-meter-wide and 700-meter-long (490 by 2300 feet) cataract, is the most impressive of all, and marks the border between Argentina and Brazil.
and
The Argentine side comprises three sections: the upper falls, the lower falls, and the Devil's Throat.
If the Devil's Throat marks the border between the two countries, then is it really one of the three sections on the Argentine side? Conceivably, yes, if the border lies just past the Devil's Throat, but then the phrase "marks the border" is imprecise and shouldn't be applied to a 700-meter-long cataract. My reading of "marks the border" suggests that at least part of the Devil's Throat belongs to either country. A large-scale map of the falls (from a reliable source) clearly showing the international border would be helpful . Rivertorch ( talk) 05:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
No, the limit border is the Waterfall "Union", which is the beginning of "Garganta del diablo" (devil throat). -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 00:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
I will bring a map, and its reference, then you will see that I was saying the truth. -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Here is the map, you should look to this webpage: http://en.argentina-excepcion.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=905 And if you are a neutral person, please write that I wrote before. -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:41, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Is it enough? -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 23:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok! then... good luck in tour trip, I hope you enjoy it. And when you see through your eyes that I said is the truth, please remember the nick "el_rrienseolava". And when it happens, please, write here (again) that I wrote a few days ago, thanks.
OH! and... I recommend you visit the Argentine side and you would live something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnuV2xVIfgs (From brazil you can't do this thing.... obviously, the reason is my that I said in the text removed by you... :) )... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 20:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick note--this book seems like it might be a useful source. There's a chapter on the falls, starting on page 76: Waterfalls, p. 76. Have to run, more later. Pfly ( talk) 20:57, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm trying to do a general overhaul/copyedit of this page and just made a relatively simple first pass. A few points: I noticed one of the sources I had used recently was an exact duplicate of the Encyclopedia Britannica's entry about the waterfall, so I changed all those refs to Britannica (and added a few more). There's a good number of references now so I took off the "refimprove" tag--although like most pages it needs additional work. I took out the "Name" section because it was not just about the name but also touching on history. It made sense to include in the lead. Also, I took out the sentence "The falls were rediscovered by Boselli." This sentence was referenced to a blog website, [9], and I have not been able to figure out who this "Boselli" might be, when he or she lived, or anything about this "rediscovery". So, pending further info, it seemed best to just remove the sentence. The blog website ref is used elsewhere on the page, but probably ought to be replaced with something more reliable. What else? I guess that it about it for now. Perhaps over the weekend I'll do a few more copyedit passes. Pfly ( talk) 09:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
What do you thin about this map? I think, this one show the distribution between Argentina and Brazil.... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 18:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
sorry..., about this map: http://www.google.com.ar/imgres?imgurl=http://www.forodefotos.com/attachments/argentina/12034d1276138670-parque-nacional-de-iguazu-mapa_cataratas_del_iguazu.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.forodefotos.com/argentina/2618-parque-nacional-de-iguazu.html&h=602&w=618&sz=147&tbnid=xx8aiK4ntI3GPM:&tbnh=132&tbnw=136&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmapa%2Bcataratas%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=mapa+cataratas&hl=es&usg=__ZfBTq1XuR1CAb7YUfHs636qt-S4=&sa=X&ei=QZvXTfCQO8anhAfv_ry1CQ&ved=0CCwQ9QEwAw -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 11:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The border is in the middle of Iguazu river... can't you imagine it?... -- El rrienseolava ( talk) 21:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iguazu Falls. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I nominate this sentence for our list of incomprehensible WP(-presented) CONCEPTS. Seems to me that borders are indeed between, and therefore not defined for triplets of anything. And a junction is either a point, or an 2- or 3-dimensional region, whereas borders are 1- (or 2-) dimensional demarcations between adjacent pairs of regions on a surface (or of surfaces where volumes are in contact).
(I fully endorse the elimination of this travesty, tho my own priority is harnessing it as an
object lesson. An ideal editor to repair it is one who sez "OMG, that
equine posterior is right, and I could have been the one who wrote it, if the opportunity had presented itself to me to make the same error." But as always, I endorse the concept of every WP editor being their own
assignment editor. The
negative example does not highlight a problem whose solution is trivial, and I'm grateful for both the opportunity to think it thru myself, and the occasion that I hope colleagues will take to likewise polish their editing -- and other, related, analytical -- skills.)
--
Jerzy•
t 08:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
a very used sex site — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.116.100 ( talk) 12:57, 27 March 2022 (UTC)