Jump to content

Talk:Puerto Rico/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

UNOCHA Map

I've added the UNOCHA map of Puerto Rico to the infobox to show a more detailed map of the island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SantiagoFrancoRamos (talk • contribs) 12:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

This is not a good map - it shows both Ponce and (especially) Mayaguez in the wrong places - too far from the sea. tom fisher-york (talk) 01:55, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Geography and islands/islets

Found new wikilinks and sources relevant to this article. Worked on the text to accommodate them in the first paragraph of the geography section. Please, let me know if these are favorable additions, or not. I would hate to intrude in other people's work. Cheers Caballero/Historiador (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

GINI index

Greetings. The Gini-index number is written differently for other nations/unrecognized nations/territories. We ought to write Puerto Rico's number in a similar way.

--84.202.87.128 (talk) 08:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Temperature measurements

Just today, Ip 2601:807:8103:2680:D8F4:B5D0:8BF9:473D changed the conversions in temperature (metrics) that CheshireCat95 had placed in the article on January 4, 2016. In the last few weeks, features like this one has been changing from one point to the other through the hands of various users. Could someone more knowledgeable on the topic explain what is going on? Thanks for your help. --Caballero//Historiador ☊ 13:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

CheshireCat95 was wrong in making everything Celsius first and destroyed some precision in measurement. PR observations are obviously Fahrenheit based. The user also used the wrong temperature conversion template (degree conversion instead of previously degree change conversion). I've restored back to before that edit. HkCaGu (talk) 17:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
@HkCaGu:, thanks for the explanation and for your contributions. Cheers, Caballero//Historiador ☊ 18:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Changes without edit comments, and other stuff

On February 7, I reverted the changes of ImageFix Now. Though in the past I have approved of this user's contributions, this time, I thought most were unwarranted, and these are the reasons. But before offering my explanation, I should say that this user included a sourced paragraph that I found useful, so I re-included it here. First, they came without an edit summary (WP:ES). Though while working on smaller articles or less trafficked areas missing on an edit summary is not a big deal, it is in parent articles like this one (Puerto Rico). Second, the change to which I am referring (here) eliminated relevant and reliable sources. Third, it eliminated or change data that was correct. For example, the word "landscapes" refers to a plural for a reason obvious in the paragraph's context. The pronunciation of Puerto Rico as ˈpwelto ˈχiko is not only obvious to people familiar with the pronunciation, but is also recognized by experts. So, I placed a source there to make it explicit. As I mentioned above, the paragraph that was added (in the law section), I reincluded because it was sourced, relevant and correct. I invite your thoughts. Cheers, Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 16:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC) 

    Caballero/Historiador ⎌ , thank you for the information and support. Funny thing, I actually didn't make any of those changes the history shows for this interaction. I merely fixed the Access Date of a reference I added a while back. Apparently we just experienced a bug in the Wikipedia servers. Respectfully, ImageFix Now.  —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I have added link to Fun Facts About Puerto Rico - but it was deleted via Moderator. https://funfactsabout.org/fun-facts-about-puerto-rico/ - Why it's not possible to add link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshileus (talk • contribs) 07:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

"Fun facts" are generally seen as trivia, and trivia lists are strongly discouraged. If you can organize them into paragraphs discussing why they're useful pieces of information (and not just interesting), they're more likely to survive. Martin Blank (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

OCHA Map of Puerto Rico

Some of the cities on the map of Puerto Rico from OCHA are in the wrong location, specifically Mayaguez and Ponce, which are much farther inland than they are located. You can easily see this if you just check on Google Maps. Is there anything doable about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CB:0:BB00:FD39:3285:8077:8925 (talk) 11:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

H.R. 5278: PROMESA is Law - President Obama sign the law on June 30, 2016.

H.R. 5278: PROMESA is Law - President Obama sign the law on June 30, 2016.

This shall be included on the article:

This is a law approved on June, 30, 2016, which would establish a financial control board in Puerto Rico, with the power of making sweeping cuts in order to deal with $72 billion debt. The control board power is over the Puerto Rico Government.

108.Autonomy of Oversight Board

(a)In general.—

Neither the Governor nor the Legislature may—

(1)exercise any control, supervision, oversight, or review over the Oversight Board or its activities; or


(2)enact, implement, or enforce any statute, resolution, policy, or rule that would impair or defeat the purposes of this Act, as determined by the Oversight Board.


(b)Oversight Board legal representation.—

In any action brought by, on behalf of, or against the Oversight Board, the Oversight Board shall be represented by such counsel as it may hire or retain so long as the representation complies with the applicable professional rules of conduct governing conflicts of interests.

MAJOR PROVISIONS Under the United States Constitution, the federal government retains sovereign authority to govern U.S. territories and insular areas. H.R. 5278 would create a legal framework for the federal government to establish oversight boards with broad authority to exercise control over the fiscal and budgetary affairs of U.S. territories.1 The bill also would outline procedures under which territorial governments could restructure public debt, subject to the approval of any such oversight boards established on their behalf. In general, oversight boards would be established only at the request of territorial governments; however, H.R. 5278 would automatically establish an oversight board for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, which currently faces a financial crisis. It has already failed to make scheduled payments to service the territory’s outstanding public debt—which currently totals more than $70 billion—and further defaults are widely viewed as inevitable.2

To help Puerto Rico address its mounting financial difficulties, the bill would establish a seven-member Financial Oversight and Management Board (hereafter, the board) that would assume control over fiscal and budgetary decisions of the Puerto Rican government, including its municipalities, agencies, and public corporations (hereafter, instrumentalities). The President would appoint all seven members of the board, six of whom would be chosen among individuals recommended by Congressional leaders. The Governor of Puerto Rico (or a designee) would serve on the board as an ex officio member without voting rights.

the significant degree of federal control involved in its establishment and operations. In particular:  The authority to establish the oversight board derives from the federal government’s constitutional power to “make all needful rules and regulations” regarding U.S. territories;4  The President would appoint all seven voting members of the board; and  The board would have broad sovereign powers to effectively overrule decisions by Puerto Rico’s legislature, governor, and other public authorities.

Ref: http://inewstoday.net/2016/07/obama-signs-bill-to-prevent-financial-disaster-in-puerto/

Ref: https://policy.house.gov/legislative/bills/hr-5278-puerto-rico-oversight-management-and-economic-stability-act-2016-promesa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.162.147 (talk) 03:27, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS

BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS - In the Supreme Court of the United States COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, PETITIONER v. LUIS M. SANCHEZ VALLE, ET AL.

Official position of the U.S. Government submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court. Puerto Rico is a mere territory without Sovereignty.

In the Supreme Court of the United States No. 15-108 COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, PETITIONER v. LUIS M. SANCHEZ VALLE, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PUERTO RICO BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES This case presents the question whether Puerto Rico and the United States are separate sovereigns for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause. The Court’s decision will affect how the federal government enforces federal criminal laws within Puerto Rico. It also may affect the federal government’s defense of federal legislation and policies related to Puerto Rico across a broad range of substantive areas, including congressional representation, federal benefits, federal income taxes, bankruptcy, and defense. Accordingly, the United States has a substantial interest in this case.

The task force’s 2005 report explained that “Puerto Rico is, for purposes under the U.S. Constitution, a territory,” and therefore is “subject to congressional authority, under the Constitution’s Territory Clause.” 2005 Task Force Report 5 (internal quotation marks omitted). Congress could “continue the current system indefinitely, but it also may revise or revoke it at any time,” and Congress cannot enter into an arrangement with Puerto Rico that “could not be altered without the ‘mutual consent’ of Puerto Rico and the [F]ederal Government.” Id. at 5-6. “The Federal Government may relinquish United States sovereignty by granting independence or ceding the territory to another nation; or it may * * * admit a territory as a State,” but “the U.S. Constitution does not allow other options.” Id. at 6. In 2007 and 2011, the task force took “a fresh look at the issue” and reached the same conclusion. 2011 Task Force Report 24-26; see 2007 Task Force Report 5-7. 7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.162.147 (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/US-amicus-brief-in-Valle-15-108.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.162.147 (talk) 16:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO ET AL. v. FRANKLIN CALIFORNIA TAX-FREE TRUST ET AL.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO ET AL. v. FRANKLIN CALIFORNIA TAX-FREE TRUST ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 15–233. Argued March 22, 2016—Decided June 13, 2016*

This case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 13, 2016 also reaffirmed the territorial status of Puerto Rico. Supreme Court Rejects Puerto Rico Law in Debt Restructuring Case.

Ref: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-233_i42j.pdf

Ref: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/us/politics/supreme-court-rules-against-puerto-rico-in-debt-restructuring-case.html?_r=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.162.147 (talk) 18:16, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:49, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Mónica Puig moved -> Monica Puig

Now that the Monica Puig article has had Spanish accent "ó" removed, will the accent "ó" also be removed from this article text and all other mentions in the article corpus? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC) ‎

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Angelique_Kerber&diff=prev&oldid=740726872 seems it has already started. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Republican Party Platform 2016 Approved on 07/18/16

Republican Party Platform 2016 Approved on 07/18/16 - Please add this to the article. This is related to the United States Citizens residing in72.77.55.89 (talk) 23:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC) Puerto Rico.

The Territory of Puerto Rico

We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state. We further recognize the historic significance of the 2012 local referendum in which a 54 percent majority voted to end Puerto Rico’s current status as a U.S. territory, and 61 percent chose statehood over options for sovereign

nationhood. We support the federally sponsored political status referendum authorized and funded by an Act of Congress in 2014 to ascertain the aspirations of the people of Puerto Rico. Once the 2012 local vote for statehood is ratified, Congress should approve an enabling act with terms for Puerto Rico’s future admission as the 51st state of the Union.

Reference: https://prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.162.147 (talk) 04:10, 20 July 2016‎ (UTC)

Infectious diseases.

you should restate some of that continuous use of ´european´ infectious diseases. They weren´t european, brought in from africa and the orient through spain, and overal remained in spain. Northern europe has somewhat of a distinct climate and for diseases to carry, you must have a virulent pool, which overal where italy, spain and france cities, especially in summer.

Thanks, very appreciative.

Ohhh, and ehhh, that slavery wasn´t ours either, that was overal spanish, northern african, middle eastern, with quickies into the baptist belts of the united states.

Also very appreciated if you kept that in mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.92.249.31 (talk) 19:53, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Sources

The quality of an article is often related to the quality of its sources. The frequent use of the CIA handbook is a poor choice. The handbook is but a bit above WP in the scale of reference sources.

So, changing a paragraph to include the handbook as a source while deleting scholarly sources (even if older), is not the best editing practice.

We prefer scholarly works of synthesis, including textbooks and review essays, over news or non-peer-review articles (current developments, of course, rely on news reports). Before making changes and adding sources, review the suggestions here (WP:HISTRS), (WP:SCIRS), and (WP:VERIFY).

If in doubts, you may visit the sources forum (WP:RSN) and submit your question(s) to experienced editors. It has proved a pleasant experience for me in the past. Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 21:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Taking note of the new law of the land

On March 20, 2015, in Commonwealth of Puerto Rico vs Sanchez-Valle, an 8-1 majority of the SCOPR determined that PR is a territory and lacks sovereignty. That is now the law of the land in Puerto Rico. Thus, it would be disingenuous to describe PR as autonomous within the US and to describe "Commonwealth" as a "status". Thus I have changed the classification to "United States/Territory", which is factually correct regardless of POV, and described July 25, 1952, as the date for the "Commonwealth Constitution" rather than "Commonwealth status". We can all agree that the constitution was promulgated on that date. Many, including the SCOPR, don't agree that a "status" different from territorial status was created on that day.Pr4ever (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

See http://www.ramajudicial.pr/ts/2015/201tspr25.pdf

On June 9, 2016, in Commonwealth of Puerto Rico vs Sanchez-Valle, a 6-2 majority of the SCOTUS determined that Puerto Rico is a territory and lacks sovereignty. That is now the law of the land in the United States of America.Pr4ever (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

See http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-108_k4mp.pdf

Left unsigned by Pr4ever 10:54, April 19, 2015
Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 13:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The edits I made today are based on the fact that after Sánchez Valle on June 9, not even the Popular Democratic Party leaders claim anymore that Puerto Rico's status changed in 1952. PROMESA, approved coincidentally in the House that same afternoon, and signed by POTUS on June 30, destroyed the concept of "self-government" in PR, requiring federal approval for many things PR did autonomously on its own (hot off the presses: http://caribbeanbusiness.com/crim-has-no-money-for-january-payments/ ) and gave the Federal Oversight Board the power to nullify laws enacted by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. Once again, thanks, User:Caballero1967|Caballero/Historiador]][[User_talk:Caballero1967 | ⎌ Pr4ever (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2017

President is longer Obama, it is now Donald Trump. Let's update. 2602:306:BCC9:EAE0:71F3:BC8:BC4B:AECC (talk) 03:57, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Done JTP (talk • contribs) 04:18, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Is the Governor called Ricky??

The article about the Governor is Ricky Rosselló

I did a google search and virtually no source uses the name Ricky. However, Ricardo Rosselló will also take one to the Ricky Rosselló page.

There are more editors here than at that article so am asking here:

@—DIYeditor and others: Would you agree to my deleting the Ricky Rosselló article and creating a new one, exactly the same content, but with a new title: Ricardo Rosselló Peter K Burian (talk) 21:15, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

No, because that would be very bad. Articles can be moved. Never delete the text from one article and copy it to another, because then we lose the history. --Golbez (talk) 22:11, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, I would "move" the article. Peter K Burian (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Religion. PEW RESEARCH counts Puerto Ricans NOT living in PR

The chart re: religion -- and some of the content that I have deleted -- were said to be based on a 2010 Pew report. http://www.globalreligiousfutures.org/countries/puerto-rico#/?affiliations_religion_id=0&affiliations_year=2010

OK, I found it (2010): 69.7% Catholic, under 1% Orthodox Catholic, 25.1% Protestant, 1.9% other Christians. That seems very high for Catholics but that is what Pew claimed back then.

The 2013 PEW report that I also found provides for 2013 data BUT they surveyed only Puerto Ricans living in "the 50 states and DC". Some were not even born in Puerto Rico. See below. I'll bet the 2010 report did the same. The religions affiliation of those who stayed in PR may be quite different.

2013 ... The people surveyed by Pew however, consisted of Puerto Ricans living in the 50 states and DC and may not be indicative of those living in the Commonwealth http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/15/hispanics-of-puerto-rican-origin-in-the-united-states-2013/ quote=Puerto Ricans in this statistical profile are people who self-identified as Hispanics of Puerto Rican origin; this means either they themselves were born in Puerto Rico1 or they were born in the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia or elsewhere, but trace their family ancestry to Puerto Rico. Peter K Burian (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

"American era" AND Is Puerto Rico a Colony?

Why isn't this in line with the section right above it that says "Spanish colony"? Everyone but a minority within the opposition party on the island now agrees it is a colony. The United Nations says it's a colony. Even Congress and the Supreme Court say it's a colony. If we want to reamin "neutral" we can start by changing Spanish colony to Spanish era as well. The idea that Puerto Rico isn't a colony isn't taken seriously by anyone any more.--2602:304:B013:6180:7439:8CC5:D685:48EE (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Is the US trying to settle Puerto Rico? If not, it's not a colony. I wouldn't personally oppose it if you changed "Spanish colony" to "Spanish era" but it was a colony at that time wasn't it? —DIYeditor (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
They are trying to settle Puerto Rico, yes, at least as far as the United Nations or any authority on the subject is concerned. There was that whole sterilization campaign- that and other factors took our birth rate from 5 to 1.64 over the course of 70 years. Then there's Operation Bootstrap. But don't take my word for it, take the UN's, most Puerto Rican's, most experts on Puerto Rico's and at this point the US government's word for it.--2602:304:B013:6180:2516:14EC:A355:9273 (talk) 00:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
I think you are confused by the sometimes hyperbolic use of the word "colony" which is not in line with its correct meaning. Colonies in this sense are settlements of people from the parent country, not merely possessed territories. It would not be appropriate to use politicized hyperbole in a section heading. —DIYeditor (talk) 01:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
"a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country, typically a distant one, and occupied by settlers from that country." Checks out to me. The UN says it's a colony.--172.58.97.68 (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

You should not make a broad statement like "The UN says it's a colony" without providing a link to a site that proves your point.

I did some research and found some useful info: https://nacla.org/article/puerto-rico-united-nations written by excellent sources

The United Nations General Assembly may review the ques­tion of Puerto Rico’s colonial status next year, thanks to a resolution passed in June by the Special Committee on Decolonization ............. [before 1953] The island originally appeared in UN files in 1946 in Resolution 66 (1), which described it as a “nonautonomous territory,” thus requiring the United States to submit an annual report on social and economic conditions to the secretary general, as required by Article 73 of the UN Charter. ..... [by 1953] largely as a result of U.S. hegemony within the United Nations—Resolution 748 (VII) approved Puerto Rico’s commonwealth status, noting that the “Puerto Rican people had exercised their self-determination,” that the country had “achieved attributes of political sovereignty,” and that “the requirement of providing information to the General Assembly will end.” [NOT SURE WHY THEY CALL IT A COUNTRY, BUT MOST OF THE OTHER PLACES RE: DECOLONIZATION ARE COUNTRIES]

... [1960 discussing all place not fully independent] ...“steps must be taken to transfer all the power to all the peoples and all the territories which have not gained their independence.” This led to the creation of what is now known as the Special Decolonization Committee.

1978, the committee heard presentations defending independence, continuing the commonwealth, and U.S. statehood for Puerto Rico, and for the first time all parties agreed that a colonial relationship existed and that the status question had to be resolved.Peter K Burian (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

UN, Part 2 of dicussion ... 20 JUNE 2016 https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/gacol3296.doc.htm
The Special Committee called on the United States to move forward with a process to allow the Puerto Rican people to take decisions in a sovereign manner, and to address their urgent economic and social needs, including unemployment, marginalization, insolvency and poverty.
'''Decolonization''' yhe undoing of colonialism, where a nation establishes and maintains its domination over dependent territories. ... "the withdrawal from its colonies of a colonial power; the acquisition of political or economic independence by such colonies."
BOTTOM LINE: While I never think of Puerto Rico as a colony, the UN certainly seems to. Peter K Burian (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Part 3: '''Political status of Puerto Rico''' Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory of the United States, which according to the U.S. Supreme Court's Insular Cases is "a territory appurtenant and belonging to the United States, but not a part of the United States within the revenue clauses of the Constitution." The basic question regarding this issue is whether Puerto Rico should remain a U.S. territory, become a U.S. state or become an independent country.
in 2016, The United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization called for the United States to expedite the process to allow self-determination in Puerto Rico. Internationally, the people of Puerto Rico are often considered to be a Caribbean nation with their own national identity

Peter K Burian (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Even this UN use is, apparently, political hyperbole. A colony has settlers from the parent nation. Puerto Rico is not a settlement of people from the US. Even if the US asserted absolute ownership of PR it would not be a colony. The UN using the term colony is not a superior citation to dictionaries on the meaning of the word. We aren't citing the UN anyway, we're talking about a section heading. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:07, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@—DIYeditor
QUOTE A colony has settlers from the parent nation. And Puerto Rico did not? The US bought it from Spain and moved some Americans to the island. 90+ percent were not Americans however.
How is that any different than other Caribbean islands where 90% of the population was indigenous + Africans who arrived to be slaves. The other 10% were from Spain or Britain. Until those islands gained independence, they were called colonies by everyone.
Simply saying all Puerto Ricans are now American Citizens does not mean that the territory has ceased to be a colony. Until it has full independence, sovereignty, is it not a colony? See Jamaica example below.
 ====United States unincorporated organized territory (1900–1952)==== The United States and Puerto Rico began a long-standing metropolis-colony relationship.  Truman R. Clark. Puerto Rico and the United States, 1917–1933. 1975. University of Pittsburgh Press. Page 129.

  ===Plebiscites on statehood or independence=== Governor Ricardo Rosselló is strongly in favor of statehood for Puerto Rico. "Colonialism is not an option .... It’s a civil rights issue ...

    ==United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization=== Since 1953, the UN has been considering the Political status of Puerto Rico and how to assist it in achieving "independence" or "decolonization". In 1978, the Special Committee determined that a "colonial relationship" existed between the US and Puerto Rico.  López, Ana M. (2014). "Puerto Rico at the United Nations". The North American Congress on Latin America. The North American Congress on Latin America. Retrieved February 21, 2017.

What has changed since 1978? (In 1978, the Special Committee determined that a "colonial relationship" existed between the US and Puerto Rico.)

Peter K Burian (talk) 13:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

QUOTE A colony has settlers from the parent nation. —DIYeditor
Example of a colony: Jamaica
 ...a possession of Spain until 1655, when England (later Great Britain) conquered it and renamed it Jamaica. Under British colonial rule .... Jamaicans predominately have African ancestry, with significant European, Chinese, Hakka, Indian, and mixed-race minorities. I.E. NOT MANY OF WERE BRITISH BACK IN THE 1600s AND TODAY, THE VAST MAJORITY ARE NOT DESCENDED FROM THE BRITS  .... By the beginning of the 19th century, Jamaica's dependence on slave labour and a plantation economy had resulted in black people outnumbering white people by a ratio of almost 20 to 1. ...  The island achieved independence from the United Kingdom on 6 August 1962
Jamaica was a colony until Britain gave it independence as a sovereign nation. The Referendum section of Puerto Rico confirms that PR does not have independence nor statehood. So how is it not a colony? How does its status differ from that of Jamaica prior to August 1962? Why does the UN say there is a "colonial relationship" between PR and the US? Peter K Burian (talk) 13:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
1 a : a body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state <a colony of settlers> -Merriam-Webster
1A country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country. -Oxford
Presumably the UN and governor of PR use this hyperbole because it can be grouped with the historical colonialism by European countries and is a pejorative label. This is not in line with the traditional meaning of "colony" or the dictionary definitions. Oxford and M-W both agree that the traditional meaning stands. Examples of marginal cases do not change the basic meaning, and PR is not really on the margins of this. Colonies involve a migration and settlement. Perhaps the wikipedia article on the US should be changed to "The Empire of the United States" because some people have (frequently) called it imperialist, and subheadings and text throughout changed to reflect this interpretation? It would be more reasonable to call the US an empire than to call PR a colony. Not every territory acquired by a country (or empire) is a colony. You could try to show that a preponderance of reliable sources refer to PR as a colony, however sources that use a word out of line with its definition and historical meaning are not going to be found very reliable are they? —DIYeditor (talk) 21:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country. Are there no Americans who were not originally from PR living there? The US took it over; some folks moved to PR. Again, how is that any different than Jamaica before its independence? In both cases the people already living there stayed; some people from the new owner arrived.

Anyway .... Not sure where we are in this discussion. At no time did I refer to PR as a colony. I just quoted the UN re: how to assist it in achieving "independence" or "decolonization". In 1978, the Special Committee determined that a "colonial relationship" existed between the US and Puerto Rico. Whether we agree or not, the UN is a valid source. Are you planning on deleting that cited content? Peter K Burian (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

An anonymous user without a Wikipedia account, changed the heading American era to American colony. In spite of the fact that this is clearly controversial, as discussed at length in this Talk topic re: colony. I have reverted that edit. Unless we get consensus for such a change, it cannot be allowed. See Wikipedia:Consensus Peter K Burian (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Colony? Get consensus before making edits on controversial issues

Someone changed the heading American era to American colony. In spite of the fact that this is clearly controversial as discussed at length in the other Talk topic re: colony. I have reverted that.

While I do feel that Puerto Rico is very much like a colony, and while the UN speaks of a "colonial relationship", there is strong disagreement. User 2602:304:B013:6180:A58F:9868:6893:F655 does not even have a Wikipedia account. So basically he is Anonymous. OR has a User account but did this edit without logging in so we cannot determine who he is. 

  If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.

Achieving consensus WP:CONACHIEVE Editors usually reach consensus as a natural process. After one changes a page, others who read it can choose whether or not to further edit. When editors do not reach agreement by editing, discussion on the associated talk pages continues the process toward consensus. Peter K Burian (talk) 13:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The History of Puerto Rico never calls it a colony. I added the content there about the UN's comment about "colonial status" but the article does not say PR is a "colony".
  Puerto Rico continues to struggle to define its political status. Even though Puerto Rico was granted the right to draft its own Constitution, approved in 1952, it remains an unincorporated organized territory of the United States. Its ambiguous status continues to spark political debates which dominate Puerto Rican society.

Peter K Burian (talk) 14:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 23 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:02, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Per capita debt?

How is $70 billion in debt, divided by 3.4 million people only $12,000 per capita? Unless my math is way off or other parts of the article are wrong, the debt is over $20k each. Cheers! Kenaxelds (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

The confusion seems to go a bit deeper than the arithmetic. The information was added with this edit here, which was sourced to Debtwire (via Forbes). The problem is -- the Debtwire article placed the "tax-supported" debt at $53 billion and nowhere mentions a figure of $70 billion. And if you take the $53 billion figure, and then assume that Puerto Rico has a population of 4.4 million (not 3.4 million), you'll get the $12,000 per-capita number. So something here is clearly wrong with both the source and with the transfer of information into the article. Probably, the best way to address this confusion is to find a better source. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Follow-up The same curious figure appears in the article on the debt crisis. Because I assume that the folks there will have better access to reliable information on this matter, I've raised the question there (at Talk:Puerto Rican government-debt crisis#Per-capita debt in January 2017). NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:22, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Why is the main US flag not the Hawaii flag next to the twin city Honolulu?

Puerto Rico itself has it's own flag not the main US one next to it. - Jacob's Crackers (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Race is not the same word as Race is not the same word as ethnicity

Someone removed the word races from the article and inserted ethnicities. But that is not a synonym.

AND the title of the section is Multiracial so, clearly, it is about race. | 3.3% | Multiracial Americans|Two or more races

Multiracial is defined as made up of or relating to people of many races.[1] Many terms exist for people of various multiracial backgrounds. While some of the terms used in the past are considered insulting and offensive, there are many socially acceptable modern terms that multiracial people identify with. These include mixed-race (or simply "mixed"), biracial, multiracial, multiethnic, polyethnic, half, half-and-half, métis, creole, mestizo, mulatto, melungeon, criollo, chindian, dougla, quadroon, zambo, eurasian, hāfu and pardo.

An ethnic group or ethnicity is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences.

This useage of scientific terminology is not racism as Anonymous claimed. Peter K Burian (talk) 13:07, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Puerto Rico is a subsidiary of the US Gov't

The government pays for puerto rico's debts. Therefore it is a subsidiary, the Government subsidizes puerto's cost — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetechwizard21 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

The history section is really awkward, and there needs to be more on Hurricane Maria.

Hurricane Maria is a major event in Puerto Rico's history, yet there's only a single mention of it, and in the weather section of all places.

More broadly, due to the awkward structure of the history section, there's no way to easily add references to recent events. The statehood question should be split into a separate section, and history section should focus on just that, the history of Puerto Rico. Surely there's more to Puerto Rico than whether or not it becomes a state? 183.83.82.167 (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)


I agree. There should be a major section on Maria, with a possible link to it's own page and possibly put both arguments regarding the efforts to help PR- one being that it is slow and the political corruption, followed by what the president of US and the governor of PR believes that good efforts are being made. We should also edit that page on a daily basis considering that this is a recent thing and many people do not understand the severity of this situation. Considering it's been a month I thought it would have more than a sentence. I will also get on this as well.

As for the political status you are right, it should have it's own section and only have brief mentions of it (like the referendums and the political party). But I also think that because this is an important, controversial and very prominent topic in PR I guess that's why they put it there. -E — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.230.217.119 (talk • contribs)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

San Juan, not Ponce, is the capital of Puerto Rico!

This is an edit done with malicious intent and must be reversed immediately, as it may mislead unsuspecting readers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loumelwins (talk • contribs) 18:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2017

Change Puerto Rico's capital from "Ponce" to "San Juan" Loumelwins (talk) 19:03, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done I fixed the vandalism. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Post-Maria rebuilding efforts

Would a section on efforts to rebuild the island infrastructure after Hurricane Maria make good sense? At this moment, much has been aggressively written about the topic, and IMO it's a very interesting subject for continuing research. MaynardClark (talk) 18:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Puerto Rico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2018

KIDDOANDRE (talk) 20:35, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Recovery Efforts:

To this date, there are many people still affected by the hurricane. Some people still don't have running water and power, with this said there are many people in need. Many think and say that the US helped with the empowerment of Trump as United Stated of American governor but that is not true.

Tourism The tourism industry is committed and continuing sharing the beauty of Puerto Rico and providing excellent service to visitors. Tourism certainly took a big hit the first months after Hurricane Maria, but hotels, communities and organizations have been hard at work restoring tourist areas in order to continue offering guests fantastic experiences. Most of the hotels are fully operational, various resorts are still closed but began taking reservations for later dates. And for the most art the tourism area is restored. There is a need of money within our country.

"El Yunque took the number one spot for Best attraction, USA today readers made it #1 and it certainly deserved to get that spot honoring all the years it brought magic to all that visited. Hurricane Maria destroyed our beloved rainforest, it will take many years to recover, it is currently closed. As soon as it opens we encourage visitors to go in order to see a world class attraction come back to its glory. For updates on hurricane recovery, how you can help and areas open, visit official website."

 Not done It is not clear what you want changed. You would need to be very specific and it would need to be backed by multiple sources outside of Wikipedia. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Maria death toll

An independent investigation ordered by Puerto Rico's government estimates that 2,975 people died within six months as a result of Hurricane Maria. The findings were issued by the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8A0:7AE6:3F00:ACCF:4B6:634F:2E8A (talk) 18:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Language issue

Spanish is a de facto formal working language in official documents and government transactions and is one of the most widely spoken and written languages. The vast majority of Puerto Ricans do not use English regularly in 2000, the local government, in collaboration with federal government in the United States, conducted a census to find out the most prevalent and widespread languages ​​among the population. 71.9% of Puerto Ricans spoke English at low and small rates. It was also found that 85.6% spoke in a languages other than English, such as indigenous people (most of whom use Spanish as a second language to speak and talk). Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 07:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2018

In the second paragraph in the introduction, there is a bit of redundancy in the following sentence: Spanish and English are the official languages, although though Spanish predominates. Either the word although or though need to be taken out. -184.56.76.66 (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC) 184.56.76.66 (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 01:51, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Puerto Rico MOS

Is there a guideline relevant to spelling Puerto Ricans as full Spanish names with accents, or removing them for English readers? In ictu oculi (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm an english-only reader & this is English Language Wikipedia. Would be best to have things here written in english. There's Spanish Wikipedia for spanish written text. GoodDay (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Amazed to see you're still flying the anti-diacritic flag GoodDay. But silence here indicates that WP Puerto Rico is dormant. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm not amazed that you're still flying the pro-diacritics flag In ictu oculi. Yes, this WikiProject is dormant. GoodDay (talk) 15:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
WP:UE says to use English but that it's OK to use (the marked up name with the weird characters that English readers are unfamiliar with), if that's what the sources show. Namely the https://permanent.access.gpo.gov/gpo35934/cph-2-53.pdf US Census] shows barrio names with the accent marks.--the eloquent peasant (talk) 00:55, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Cost of Living

Updated section to include 2018 study regarding impact of Jones Act on Puerto Rico. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WJF3 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 27 August 2018 (UTC) It's goddamn expensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.225.126.71 (talk) 19:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Footnote 264

Footnote 264 misquotes Article IV of the United States Constitution. Where it says "colony", it should say "Territory"; as follows:

"The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.38.54 (talk) 22:18, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done Led8000 (talk) 14:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Mantecados Nevada

An ice cream truck is the original Franklin482 (talk) 19:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2019

Line in the second paragraph "Puerto Rico's unique heritage, culture, and natural beauty has made it a top tourism destination." is unsourced and unverifiable puffery. It should be removed unless there's a specific basis for the claim, in which case it should be made more concrete and sourced. Wikipedia isn't a travel agency brochure. 146.115.171.118 (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done NiciVampireHeart 21:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2019

Celticsouthern (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Congressional legislation

On June 27, 2018, Jenniffer González-Colón, Puerto Rico's non-voting member of Congress, introduced the Puerto Rico Admission Act of 2018 (HR 6246) to Congress to admit Puerto Rico as a US state. The legislation would create a taskforce to repeal or amend any existing laws that have unequal application between Puerto Rico and the several States to phase in equality for Puerto Rico. Under this legislation (if passed), Puerto Rico would become incorporated (from its current unincorporated status) while equality with US States is phased in and Puerto Rico would fully become a US State by January 2021. The bill introduced into the House has bipartisan support with 37 cosponsors, including 22 Republicans and 15 Democrats. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon is the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico. The Resident Commissioner is elected by the people of Puerto Rico to serve in the US House of Representatives but does not have full voting power, due to its unequal status as a US territory. The legislation cites the two referenda Puerto Rico voted on in favor of Statehood to call on Congress to admit Puerto Rico as a State as an expression of the will of the people in the territory.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. B dash (talk) 05:11, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2019

Please correct the references in the intro paragraph and in the attached footnotes relating to the so-called Anglicisation and the so-called errors in ref to the old spelling of Porto Rico by noting correctly that they are simply old or former Spanish usage. Porto with a stressed o is simply old Spanish and is still used by many Hispanophones to this very day. It is not an error. Thank you. Vasquez Rocks 2019 (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC) Vasquez Rocks 2019 (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 15:17, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Population of 1812 from 1812 source

The historical population table should be reviewed. The current source is from a website called "Welcome to Puerto Rico". Yet, I found a reliable source on archive.org that documents a very different population for 1812. See here. Population for 1812 should be 79,662. As it stands, the rest of the population data around that time must be incorrect if we use the 79,662 # for 1812. Currently the numbers around 1812 on this article show:

  • 1800 155,426 +121.2%
  • 1815 220,892 +42.1%

--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 03:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Puerto_Rico/Archive_5&oldid=1027113346"