Jump to content

Talk:Costa Rica/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Edits speak for themselves

See [1] and [2] -- I think these speak for themselves :-) Let's enjoy the rest of 2005 as we welcome 2006! --HappyCamper 22:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC) Pabloalbv 18:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)I have added some notes on trade and international policy, is someone wants to take a look at APEC membership or Costa Rica stance on foreign policy you are advised to check the electronic archives of La Nacion newspaper for December 2005 and January 2006: www.nacion.com, pabloalbvPabloalbv 18:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Formatting problem

I don't see this behavior in IE, but when viewed using Mozilla this page has serious formatting issues, and I'm not sure how best to address the problem.

To begin, the Foreign Affairs section is missing entirely in Mozilla. It doesn't even appear in the TOC. The only way to see this section in Mozilla is to click the [edit] link that appears to the right of the Flora and Fauna section! In order to edit Flora and Fauna, one must click the [edit] link that appears to be associated with the Demographics section.

All other [edit] links are piled at the bottom of the page like cordwood, instead of being at the top-right of each section, as they should be. I suspect that these problems are at least partially related to the fact that there is a large number of pictures in the Demographics section pushing the [edit] links to the bottom. I'm at work and have already spent more time on this than I can spare. Could some very helpful Wikipedian who knows a great deal about Wiki markup, as it relates to various browsers, take a look at this? Unfortunately, being at work, I have only IE and Mozilla with which to test the article. —CKA3KA (Skazka) 19:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Authenticity of Picture of Valle Central de Costa Rica

This picture looks suspiciously like a computer-generated (CGI) landscape. Can someone confirm that it's genuine? Thanks.

210.23.157.78 03:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm pretty sure your right (Its CG). Not sure whether or not its a problem though.


Yes, its text actually mentions it's from NASA's Visible Earth program. It's computer-generated and while it's an accurate representation of the topography of the region, it does not belong here amid actual photographs. I have removed it. CGameProgrammer 23:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Continuity Amongst Wikipedia Articles?

In this Costa Rica article, it is stated that "Costa Rica was the first country in the world to constitutionally abolish its army." However, in the linked "List of countries without an army" article, in reference to Liechtenstein it is said that they "Abolished their army in 1868 because it was too costly." Later on in the Costa Rica article, it is said that "In 1949, José Figueres Ferrer abolished the army". Obviously, there is discontinuity between these statements; which are correct? 68.52.68.18 02:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I read a little bit about this so I think I can say this...It's true that Lichenblabla dissolved it's army first, but I think there are 2 diferences, which I may be wrong in the first, but am sure about the second. First, Lichenblabla is a a Kingdom/Dutchy/Principality or something of the sort, they are not a democracy, or were not one at the time of abolishing its army. But as I said I'm not so sure about that one.

The second, and I am sure of this, is that beacuse they have no army, they depend on another country for defense. Before WWI they were more friendly to Austria, however with the increasing problems of the Austrian-Hungry Empire leading up to the war, they turned to Switzerland. To this day, Lichenblabla trusts it's national security to the Swiss, who in fact DO have an army, so in some way...They do have an army. In fact there are a number of islands in the South Pacific who also have no army, but rely on old Colonists for their defense. On the other hand Costa Rica has no army and depends on no other foreign army for their protection. So I guess it is trully WITHOUT ARMY.

And I hope somebody can inform me about this, but maybe Lichenblabla pays a certain amount of thier GNP to the Swiss for defense?? Does anybody know this? But anyway, that is why CR is thought to be the first country to abolish it's army. Although it could just be a mistake. Somebody would have to referee if what Lichenblabla actually did in 1868 is a valid abolishment of thier army. Hope it helped.--Manuzel 08:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Foreign Affairs question/concern

The last paragraph reads poorly, and makes statements that seem a bit dubious:


Costa Rica's main foreign policy objective is to foster human rights and sustainable development as a way to secure stability and growth. Nevertheless, economic pragmatism may prevail over ideology. For instance, during the Cold War Costa Rica was the first Central American country to have diplomatic ties with the Soviet Union as a way to boost its coffee exports, to the dismay of the Nixon administration.


It is unclear whether the "objective... to foster human rights" is an objective within Costa Rica, or a worldwide objective. If it is worldwide, fine, but if it is only within Costa Rica, it doesn't belong in the foreign affairs section. The bit about "economic pragmatism prevail[ing] over ideology" and then about Costa Rican ties to the Soviet Union during the Cold War doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It means that the "ideology" of fostering human rights and sustainable development was contrary to selling coffee to the Soviet Union. That is either blatantly POV or just plain nonsensical.

In addition, "main foreign objective policy" seems to be referring to the present, whereas the bit about the Soviet Union refers to the past, and "economic pragmatism may prevail" is a statement about what might happen in the future. The author has tied all three together, which doesn't really seem logical.

This paragraph seems to serve no concrete purpose in the article, so if there aren't any objections, I will delete it. NewishUser 03:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


Ok, I went ahead and deleted it. I also noticed something some word choice/spelling issues in the following sentence:

The U.S. instead set up such a center in El Salvador, a country alleged to have a tradition of human rights equivocacy.

The word "tradition" doesn't really seem to fit. Also, I wasn't sure what equivocacy meant, so I looked it up and it wasn't a word. Perhaps the author meant "equivocation", but that is not something that can really be alleged. A country either "uses ambiguous language" or doesn't. The accusation seems to be of "human rights violations", and this is why "tradition" doesn't really fit. I believe it should read

The U.S. instead set up such a center in El Salvador, a country alleged to have a history of human rights violations.

Once again, if anyone objects, let me know, otherwise I will change it tomorrow. NewishUser 14:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm not sure you want mention of body parts in this article. Someone has been having fun with body humor....

sorry, but what does it matter if costa rica's policies dont line up to the usa. i dont belive it needs to be mentioned.

Paragraph length and specifics

I deleted the part in the politics that stated that Arias had beat Solis and Guevarra, because I think it's irrelevant to mention such specific information in a general paragraph. Actually the Arias stuff is a little specific, but I left it in for now. It should go on the Oscar Arias Page, not in the Politics of Costa Rica page and even less in the Costa Rica page subsection on politics. The subsections should be general and should give readers a quick idea about Costa Rica, but not the whole story.Manuzel 02:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC) they said oooo what a great place to be There were also other candidates in that election. The reelection thing could be important regarding costarrican politics (it has been a big issue). Politics shuld be rewritten (I might try to work some time to rewrite part of it): here in Costa Rica we elect a president and 2 vicepresidents. The rest of the executive changes a lot every 4 years (i.e. Oscar Arias has named one production minister that will oversee and maybe try to unify the ministry of economics industry and commerce and the ministry of agriculture. There are also some other big changes in the executive branch going on just now). So the cabinet and the number of ministers that conform it changes a lot. (Abel Pacheco even distanced a vicepresident from all of his government!) --Crio de la Paz 23:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

A map

The article needs a map of Costa Rica with the major cities. Page Up 16:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Is most of the content taken from another source?

Dont wnat to sound like a prude, but is this infomration taken from another source, it looks like it's taken from a USA textbook about costa rica in the manner in which it compares the two countires. GeorgeBuchanan 19:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)GeorgeBuchanan

Vandalism

For some reason I can not understand someone placed a picture of slums and had them labeled as "housing", nice try, I am Costa Rican, and to begin with those are not even Costa Rican slums. Whoever you are, refrain from doing that. Do not vandalize this page again (pabloalbv)

Agreed I its been removed already. So yeah its fine now Il put up some pictures of the San Jose and other houses soon hopefully. (FR-Altas 17:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC))

Given the recent number of vandalism attacks on this entry, I'm beginning to think editing should be restricted to those users who are logged in. croll 16:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Geography

I eliminated the Volcan Tajublabla and other 3 Guatemala peaks references...Nice try guys, but this is a CR page...Not that I have anything against Guatemala, but obviously somebody wrote it trying to include one countries peaks in anothers...And that is unacceptable because it allows anybody to include their facts...For example...Chirripo is the Highest mountain in CR, although it's 3000 metres smaller than Aconcagua in Argentina/Mount McKinley in Alaska/5000 m less than Everest in Nepal-China/700 m taller than Mt. Fuji in Japan...all true references...but not relevant.--Manuzel 08:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Where's the sports?

No mention about popular sports in Costa Rica. I noticed that football (with goals, not touchdowns) is popular there. Perhaps someone with better insight can add a section on Costa Rican sports.

DaDoc540 23:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm...good point. Maybe a separate article would be better thoughManuzel 02:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Da Doc is right, there is no mention of any popular sports in CR. Maybe we could include a chart with the names of the most important football teams, championships won, city they represent. We may also create a page of Football of Central America mentioning the major teams in the area

Pabloalbv 7:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Motto

So what do we call the motto, ¡Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz!, or ¡Pura Vida!. I've looked online, and they both seem to be used. -Patstuart 13:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


"Pura vida" is not a motto, it's like saying US motto is "Wassup, dude?". Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz is the final line of our National Anthem and it reflects Costaricans will to strive and live in peace. Quidnovi 16:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC) Quidnovi

General editorial problems

In the section 20th century, the last paragraph looks like the caption to a photograph; it begins "Below: photo of..." or to that effect. Mulp 17:55, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Moi 221.126.245.130 (talk) 04:20, 23 November 2022 (UTC)



I was wondering why the English page about Costa Rica and the Spanish page about Costa Rica have different information. For example, the english page saya that Columbus visited Costa Rica on his first trip in 1492. However, the Spanish page says Columbus went there on his fourth trip in 1502 and made the first european contacts with the indigenous people. What is right??

Well that is easy to correct. Columbus' 4th trip was in 1502, so it was definitely 1502 (1492 was his first trip). The english page is wrong.Manuzel 08:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Animal Sounds of Costa Rica

I think visitors would enjoy hearing some of the wonderful sounds of the diverse Costa Rican animal kingdom.

REMOVED SPAM FROM TLAK PAGE (as well as rest of wikipedia) --Shakehandsman 05:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Columbus expedition

I've changed the mention of the Columbus expedition, as it was in his fourth travel that he arrived at what is today Limón. Thats what we are teached since primary school, anyway when I have a little bit of time I will look for a couple of sources and expand a bit on the conquest period. Not to do it overly long, but to add certain key aspects (the principal conquistadores, Hernandez de Córdoba, etc. the fact that most of the first conquest was done from Panama through the pacific coast and that the hinterland -so-called Central Valley- was settled by spaniards only after the 1560s, much later than most of the region) 201.198.104.118

Proposed WikiProject on Costa Rica

There now is a proposed WikiProject for Costa Rica at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Costa Rica. Any parties interested in joining should add their names there, and we will see if there is enough support to make this an active project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone put a link to the anti-CAFTA documentary "Costa Rica SA" on the External Links section, under the Government and Administration subsection. I am removing this, since this documentary is not endorsed by the Costa Rican government and only represents certain people's point-of-view.

Motto of Costa Rica

The motto of Costa Rica: "Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz" is taken directly from the Costa Rican national anthem (Himno Nacional) and means "Long live (or 'hurrah for') work and peace."

Noble patria, tu hermosa bandera expresión de tu vida nos da; bajo el límpido azul de tu cielo blanca y pura descansa la paz.
En la lucha tenaz, de fecunda labor que enrojece del hombre la faz, conquistaron tus hijos labriegos sencillos eterno prestigio, estima y honor.
¡Salve, oh tierra gentil! ¡Salve, oh madre de amor! Cuando alguno pretenda tu gloria manchar, verás a tu pueblo valiente y viril, la tosca herramienta en arma trocar.
Salve oh Patria tú pródigo suelo, dulce abrigo y sustento nos da; bajo el límpido azul de tu cielo ¡vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz!

"Live in work and peace" is an erroneous translation. The motto is NOT in the imperative, and if so would have to read:

"Vivan siempre en trabajo y paz"

and without the article "la" in front of "paz." Mkhkoh 19:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Geography Section.

So, on the main page under the geography section it says "people in costa rica poop alot." Could someone who knows how to use this please remove that?

Review

Please check the parragraph on Oscar Arias and the TLC. It's full of errors. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.169.11.192 (talk) 00:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

IF SOMEONE COULD PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT COSTA RICAN ARCHITECTUR THAT WOULD BE A BIG HELP!Thanx a lot and yes I know its in the wrong section but i didn't know where to put it.

No Tourism Section???

costa rica being the main central american tourist destination and why not add a tourist section when this country is known for their extreme beauty and beautiful country?Bacanaleranica

The risk is writing the section in a way that doesn't turn into an advertisement. Regardless, it's a huge part of the economy (largest single portion?) and would be a worth addition to the article IMO. croll 14:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Add El Semanario to list of new sources

I feel that the University of Costa Rica newspaper El Semanario should be added to the list of news sources. It is prominent and offers a different viewpoint from some of the mainstream news sources.

here is the link http://www.semanario.ucr.ac.cr/

Sarahs1024 05:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Sarahs1024

Geography: List of Rivers

I'd like to see a list of rivers of Costa Rica. Shall i just start one, under the Geography section? Thanks naomi 19:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good idea, SqueakBox 19:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Typos in Costa Rica article

There are two typos of the same word in the article about Costa Rica (english version.) Under the "Politics" header, 4th paragraph reads "...each directed by a major. Majors are choosen..." The word "major" is used instead of the correct "mayor"

I am not allowed to fix this error and appreciate it if someone could help correct this "minor" error.

get it-

Thank you, Amuniz78

I've never wriiten here before so in case you need proof - Major and mayor are homophones meaning that they sound alike but have different meanings.

The definition of the word mayor is 1. the chief executive official, usually elected, of a city, village, or town. 2. the chief magistrate of a city or borough.

whereas major is generally used to refer to a position in the military 1. a commissioned military officer ranking next below a lieutenant colonel and next above a captain. 2. one of superior rank, ability, etc., in a specified class.

source: www.dictionary.com

--Amuniz78 02:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Done with the major / Mayor correction Elegarth 22:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Requesting a source

  • "It is also the only country in which both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans can be seen from the same point." Does anyone have a source for this? I would delete it, but i simply don't know whether its true or not. LaNicoya 05:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
You can see the Pacific, and the Carribean sea at the top of Mt. Chiripo for about 250$. (FreddyG)
  • Thats great, i was requesting a source not original research. The sentence claims.. "It is also the only country in which both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans can be seen from the same point." Since Costa Rica is larger in width than Panama i doubt its the only country, I'm deleting it until a source becomes available. LaNicoya 03:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • LaNicoya, you are right, both oceans can be seen from Panama also. One clarification first, even though Panama is narrower than most of Costa Rica, the key for this sight to happen is altitude. All reported places are above 3000 m.

Here are the references for both countries:

  • In Costa Rica, from three places: (1)Volcán Irazú (3432 m), access by car to the National Park and then a short trek, (2) Cerro Chirripó (3823 m), access only by a two-day trek, this is the highest summit in CR, and (3) Cerro de la Muerte (3400 m) can be seen from the Inter-American Highway, just before the summit. There are plenty of references, as this opportunity is sold to tourists:

http://es.centralamerica-photo.com/volcano-irazu.php; http://www.joluva.com/Toursxsp.html; http://www.viajeshvtour.com/America/InfoAmerica/CostaRicaInfo.htm; http://coastsmountainscr.com/ES/about_costa_rica/about_costa_rica.phtml; http://www.diariofrontera.com/index1.php?action=show&type=news&id=31687; http://www.sunnylandtours.com/PDF/SLT_Costa_Rica07.pdf; http://www.guiascostarica.com/magia.htm; http://www.chirripo.com/classic.html; http://www.guiascostarica.com/magia.htm; http://coastsmountainscr.com/ES/about_costa_rica/about_costa_rica.phtml;

  • Note that in all cases there is a warning: "on a clear day one can view both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts". This condition is in fact very rare, because you need not to have clouds at those altitudes (usually they are lower than the summits), so your changes are better if you are there early in the morning (at dawn), and hope for the best.

Finally, I do not know where this curious fact was mentioned, but I think it belongs more properly to some article o section about tourism in CR. Mariordo (talk) 18:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Source coming soon....

I added some information about the colonial history of costa rica as well as a mention of the united fruit companies role in the construciton of the railways. I read this information in a book on costa rican history, in two volumes, pulbished by oceano, written in spanish. I do not have the exact details, however, to use it as an inline source, and I wish I did. Also, can someone help me with the dates for the part I added? It was in the middle of the history section, the part about the isolation of costa rica from guatemala city, etc... that paragraph and the next one. tahnks Friendly1013 23:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Slave Trade

There was a bit of recent editing back and forth concerning the slave trade in Costa Rica. A quick google search turned up a number of links indicating that Costa Rica did, in fact, have slaves. (See http://www.infocostarica.com/people/black.html and Atlantic slave trade.) I don't want to revert this though without discussion due to a possible revert war. croll 16:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, There was slave trade in Costa Rica, as there was in all Central American states. The article should be changed to indicate that there were fewer slaves and far less accessibility to slaves than other central american nations, not that there were no slaves at all.

Friendly1013 09:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Glaring factual inaccuracy, too big for me to feel comfortable editing

But...

The article twice references the distance from Guatemala City, present day capital of Guatemala.

Firstly, and most worryingly, as being capital of Guatemala during "Spanish colonial times"

In fact, the principal city of Guatemala, capital of all Central America, was Antigua, Guatemala. Guatemala City is not even founded until the 18th Century (1773)

The article then makes a second mention of distance from Guatemala City, that is perhaps incorrect for the reason cited above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinhut (talk • contribs) 03:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually what is today "Antigua Guatemala" was the second capital of Guatemala. Current Guatemala City is the third capital that the Capitanía, Central American Republic and República de Guatemala has had. --Crio de la Paz (talk) 06:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Rearrangement of sections

Being new to this article, I don't want to make this change without agreement. I suggest moving the section "Provinces and cantons" from under "Politics" to under "Geography." Do you agree? DBlomgren 15:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with this idea. Provinces and cantons are political subdivisions and not geographically based. Green Giant (talk) 08:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Biased on the Tourism section

Before doing some editing and to avoid an edit war, let me raise the point that this section was written with a complete biased regarding sexual tourism. Tourism is key to the Costa Rican economy, it is well known and recognized around the world becuase it does have true ecotourism, but someone decided to emphasize only sex related tourism. First, prostitution IS NOT legal in Costa Rica, even some of the references included regarding sexual tourism says so. Second, the article is completely unbalanced, just look at the irrelevant details regarding sexual tourism, that belong somewhere else, but NOT in a country article. Third, just follow the sources, are these valid for a Wiki article?. After the discussion, if one occurs, I would like to work on the real issues regarding tourism in Costa Rica, including sex related, but with the proper proportions of the issue. Mariordo (talk) 13:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, sex-tourism does need to be de-emphasized. However, I don't see anything wrong with the sources used. But it is too detailed on sex tourism for the country-level article. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Dear User:Kww, If you want to discuss sex tourism, the country´s main article is not the place to do it. Instead, go to the sex tourism article and contribute over there. I included real info about tourism and left a short mention to sex tourism, with all the references, just in case someone is interested. I also placed the subject on the talk page for discussion, and the only other participant agreed this is not the place to discuss this subject. I will not start an editing war with you but instead I am requesting a Wiki administrator do undo your changes, or you can do it, and please, keep the real tourism info that´s already there. Mariordo (talk) 02:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
    • PS: and by the way, a newspaper article is not a good enough source to include that sex tourism is 10% of total tourism earnings. By Wikipedia standards you need a more reliable source, like the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, etc. I seriously don´t know if you are criticizing sex tourism in Costa Rica or trying to make propoganda for single men to go there. Either way, wiki is not a blog to express personal opinions or do personnal researd. Check your facts, despite what one of your sources says, prostitution is ilegal in Costa Rica. Mariordo (talk) 02:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no particular interest in sex tourism. I did not write that information originally. I simply noticed that you had removed sourced information for an invalid reason. If you can find reliable sources that contradict the information, feel free to revise it. If you want to expand the other tourism information so that it appears larger and more important, feel free. Deleting sections because you think it doesn't belong in a mainstream article doesn't make sense to me at all.Kww (talk) 03:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I was asked by Mariordo to have a look. I think Kww is correct in the amount of material he has retained, which amounts to only two sentences and is a small part of the tourism section. The material is sourced, and is presented in an objective fashion, without inappropriate detail. The amount of material quoted in the note is reasonable, in order to show that the statements in the text are supported. This topic could well be expanded elsewhere, but I do note that attempts to expand similar material have met with various difficulties. But Mariordo is also correct in expanding to a reasonable extent the material on ecotourism, and adding an appropriate picture from Commons. This could also be expanded elsewhere, and should meet with fewer dffficulties. For this summary article, my advice is to leave well enough alone. DGG (talk) 04:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Where is Costa Rica located? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.86.254.74 (talk) 23:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Central America: between Nicaragua and Panama.

  • Since there is a new article on Tourism in Costa Rica, and sex tourism was clearly not a subject that belongs to a country article, I exported the entire paragraph to the new article, where there is a whole section on the environmental and social impacts of tourism in Costa Rica. Besides sex tourism, I will edit on the impact's section issues regarding the boom of beachfront developments, environmental impact of some hotels and resorts (such as Tambor and Caribbean Village in Papagayo), overload of national parks carrying capacity, etc. Feel free to contribute. Mariordo (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Anexation of Nicoya

There seems to be a misconception here: the anexation of the Nicoya Party was at a time when this party was mostly independent: they responded to the authorities at Guatemala City, not Nicaragua (at an earler period even Costa Rica's governor resided in Nicaragua, but later on this wasn't the case) and it was through a Cabildo Abierto, that is: the independent territory of Nicoya (La Alcaldía de Nicoya) decided, on it's own, that they wished to be part of Costa Rica. This was mainly because most trade was with Costa Rica through the sea and both countries had even a political history together: since neither had enough population to be represented at the Concejo de Indias they joined together and designated a representative for both. Saying that "Costa Rica anexed Guanacaste _from_ Nicaragua is oversimplified and doesn't reflect real events. Some nicaraguans would wish that Guanacaste was part of Nicaragua, as some guatemalans still seem to think that they are the Capitanía General of all of Central America and some mexicans still believe they Mexico City still is the capital of the Virreinato (Vicekingdom). --Crio de la Paz (talk) 06:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Costa_Rica/Archive_2&oldid=1123325892"