Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Puerto Rico/Archives/2012/December

Puerto Rico Schools for the 21st Century

For those interested in education, feel free to create Puerto Rico Schools for the 21st Century:

• http://www.p3.gov.pr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/School_Modernization_Program.pdf
• http://www.p3.gov.pr/?page_id=965&lang=en

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 05:12, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment - Puerto Rico statehood article structure

There's been a bunch of bickering, reverting, moving and edit wars over the topic of Puerto Rican statehood. Some of these were based on discussions that lacked enough opinions to be considered a strong consensus. Clearly we need to get more editors involved to address these issues. The first dispute was whether there should there be separate articles for Puerto Rico (proposed state) and Puerto Rican statehood movement. - Then Puerto Rico (proposed state) got moved to Proposed political status for Puerto Rico, further confounding the issue. Please comment and help us solve this confusion without further edit wars. Ego White Tray (talk) 19:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The fix is simple:

1. Puerto Rican statehood movement remains as a stand alone article. This is supported by Puerto Rico independence movement, Puerto Rico free association movement, and [1].
2. Puerto Rico (proposed state) becomes Proposed political status for Puerto Rico which will detail the different political status proposed for Puerto Rico and their implications. Essentially it will be the parent article for Puerto Rican statehood movement, Puerto Rico independence movement, and Puerto Rico free association movement with an overview, history, and sections detailing each movement and their implications. The sections detailing the movements should use {{main}}.
3. Political status of Puerto Rico remains as a stand alone article about what Puerto Rico is today.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable, but for number 2, may I suggest instead Future political status of Puerto Rico? Ego White Tray (talk) 22:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:SPECULATION, Proposed political status of Puerto Rico would be more suitable since the word 'future' could be interpreted as speculative (something that is expected to occur). "Proposed" adheres to WP:NPOV as it is a posture rather than an expectation. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 01:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Ego White Tray, per guidelines (wp:rfc), RFCs are to be placed at the Talk Page of the article in question. I suggest you move this discussion to the Talk page of Puerto Rico (proposed state) (or whatever its dynamically current title is).

That said, I agree with Ahnoneemoos' #1 and #3 above. The problem is #2, because, in its past and current form, this is an article that shouldn't exist: It was born out of the recent (Nov 6, 2012) first-time majority statehood win elections. As such, the article is not one of encyclopedic value because it was, and continuos to be emotionally charged. Like laws that are born out of emotially-charged incidents, articles that are born out of emotionally-charged elections do not make good articles. That article also was, and continuous to be, strongly statehood-biased. Therefore, so much for the "will detail the different political status proposed for Puerto Rico and their implications" comment above. But that aside, Puerto Rico (proposed state) is an article that shouldn't exist as it stands today: it really serves no purpose other than to glorify the Penepes, it is also biased in that was created as a "split off" from the article 51st state, and it also says nothing that was not already said in other related articles. Ahnoneemoos' idea to have the article "be the parent article for Puerto Rican statehood movement, Puerto Rico independence movement, and Puerto Rico free association movement with an overview, history, and sections detailing each movement and their implications" is a noble one. However, for that to happen, for the edit-warring to diminish, the article would first need to be worked on so it can be PERCEIVED by all political sides as fair. A title change to something like "Options for the political status of Puerto Rico" will eventually be needed so there is no hint the title (and the article) is somehow/somewhere biased. Proposed political status for Puerto Rico is a bad title; Future political status of Puerto Rico is even worse. If you want to win this battle, you will need to come up with solutions to these various issues. Let me proffer this one piece of advise: start by moving this discussion to that article's Talk Page. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 02:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

I'm making changes to Proposed political status of Puerto Rico as we speak so that it becomes a viable Wikipedia article. Give me a few weeks to bring it up. Also, please WP:CIVIL, don't accuse contributors of having agendas. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 03:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

For the record, I put the RfC here since it affects multiple articles - there isn't just one article affected. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I see your rationale and it makes every sense. But then, since not everyone concerned may be watching this Project page, I think a message should be placed at the pages you are alluding to with a link pointing to here. What do you think? My name is Mercy11 (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

Yeah, don't worry about it. Let's keep it here. As the subject matter experts on Puerto Rico topics it should be our headquarter for stuff like this. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 03:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Mercy11, I just finished the lead section. Check it out I think it looks promising! I also added {{pov}} to it to safeguard it from your concerns. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 03:34, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Seems to me like a great start. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

For the record I agree with User:Mercy11 in his assements to the issues involving political articles of Puerto Rico. He has my compete trust and his opinions in these issues can be accepted as my own. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

The current title "Proposed political status for Puerto Rico" is not a good title. It seems to contain an implicit assumption that the political status of Puerto Rico is something that needs to be proposed. Actually, Puerto Rico already has a political status. No proposals are strictly necessary. A better title might be "Proposals to change the Political status of Puerto Rico". However, it is not clear to me that the article really needs to exist as a separate article. —BarrelProof (talk) 07:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Just because something is proposed it doesn't mean that it needed to be proposed. I can propose that everyone on Wikipedia wears a hat when they edit Wikipedia but that doesn't mean that such a thing needed to be proposed. We already have articles that begin that way anyway. See Proposed top-level domain and Proposed provinces and territories of Canada. Now, there's a reason why they are "proposed" and it has to do with Senate and House hearings and the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status who actually proposed these political status. So, in the context of this particular subject the adjective 'proposed' makes perfect sense. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 07:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• RfC Response -

Proposed solution 1 : Ok. Looks good.

Proposed solution 2 : I don't really see what the purpose of Proposed political status for Puerto Rico or Puerto Rico (proposed state). I see a total of 5 articles regarding Puetrican political status. Aren't these getting a little redundant? I'd suggest we delete Puerto Rico (proposed state).

Proposed solution 3 : I'd sorta merge some of the concepts of Proposed political status for Puerto Rico into Political status of Puerto Rico. If Political status of Puerto Rico is just about Peurto Rico at present, it should only be a single line (i.e. Puerto Rico is a US territory). NickCT (talk) 18:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, the thing is that Status quo movement in Puerto Rico, Statehood movement in Puerto Rico, Independence movement in Puerto Rico, and Free association movement in Puerto Rico are articles about movements (ie: people gathering towards the same goal). But Proposed political status for Puerto Rico is about the implications of Puerto Rico becoming any of the status promoted by the aforementioned movements; as detailed by the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status and as a consequence of the Puerto Rican status referendum, 2012 results. For example, the Independence movement in Puerto Rico dates back to 1511 when the Taíno rebelled against the Conquistadores. The article, as a whole, is not solely about the current political status of Puerto Rico or about what will happen to Puerto Rico in the future. In addition, Political status of Puerto Rico is now WP:TOOLONG so WP:SPLIT towards a different article is not only fine but encouraged. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 00:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Man. You know looking over this again, there seems like there is a ridiculous amount of coverage on the Puerto Rican statehood/secession issue. Compared to more important statehood/secession movements like the Quebec sovereignty movement, Puerto Rico occupy a great deal of space on EN Wikipedia. I wonder why this is? I wonder whether Political status of Puerto Rico just needs to be cut down to size, and then merged with Proposed political status for Puerto Rico.

Some uninvolved editor really needs to take a good look at amount of content here and make a decision as to what should stay, what should go and what should just be reorganized. NickCT (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

• RfC commentary I am a little confused by the background on this. It looks like it is implied that the Independence movement in Puerto Rico should be a single movement, but the page says that it "refers to initiatives throughout the history of Puerto Rico aimed at obtaining independence for the Island...". This belief doesn't seem like it should be included in the statehood movement because being independent of any island would mean that there would be no state. I don't know about splitting the Puerto Rico (proposed state) and Puerto Rican statehood movement up, but need some more research and guidance before I would consider that a comment that leans one way or the other. I would support merging the information. The third proposal looks great as it. Dreambeaver(talk) 23:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

29th House of Representatives of Puerto Rico

Hi folks, 29th House of Representatives of Puerto Rico and Template:29th House of Representatives of Puerto Rico have both been nominated for deletion due to their incomplete nature. I need help finishing both as I have been busy with other articles. In case you don't know this is the upcoming House of Representatives that will be sworn in on January 2, 2013 (in 2 weeks) and is considered an article and template of utmost importance to WikiProject Puerto Rico. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

• The situation as I see it in the article "29th House of Representatives of Puerto Rico" is that there are no reliable sources to post as references. at least I didn't find any. In regard to the template, I voted as "oppose" to the deletion since there isn't any problem that can't be fixed. Ahnoneemoos, you may have better luck then I did in finding the sources. If not, then at least provide sources for the members of the house and I think that will take care of it for now. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Portrait collection that may be of interest to this WikiProject

I have uploaded a set of formal portraits of all the Judges who served on the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. As some of these individuals have notability that extends beyond their court service, some or all of these portraits may be of interest to this project. Link to the collection at Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Judges_of_the_United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Puerto_Rico Safiel (talk) 23:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Very nice! Well done. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I think User:Mercy11 and User:Pr4ever are the ones that specialize on judicial matters. Perhaps it would be a good idea to let them know on their talk pages? —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 02:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of the Victoria Liegh Soto article

I wrote an article about Victoria Soto, the brave teacher of Puerto Rican / Irish-American descent who gave her life saving her students in the Connecticut shootings. For some unreason it was speedy nominated for deletion and redirected. There is a discussion going in a review of these actions here: [2]. Tony the Marine (talk) 19:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Thief12

Gentlemen, please join me in showing our gratitude to User:Thief12 who created every single article of both the 25th Senate of Puerto Rico and the Template:29th House of Representatives of Puerto Rico. This was done in time before these legislators are sworn in on January 2, 2013 (in a few days) as the new government settles in. Thief12's work will help Puerto Ricans in knowing who they elected to represent them. While most of these articles are stubs, this is the first step in creating WP:BLPs for the people that will enact laws in Puerto Rico in the next four years. Please feel free to expand these articles in gratitude to Thief12's work! —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 04:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

AfD: Victoria Leigh Soto

Folks, there is an WP:AFD on Victoria Leigh Soto, the teacher involved in the Sandy Hook school shooting. Please participate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria Leigh Soto and state your opinion, whatever it may be. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Article alerts

This project now has Wikipedia:Article alerts. Please make sure you add Wikipedia:WikiProject Puerto Rico/Article alerts to your watchlist so that you can see alerts about AfD, RFCs, discussions, etc. related this project. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)