User talk:Joelr31/Archive7

The FAR was closed and removed by UKPhoenix79 (talk · contribs) without Badlydrawnjeff (talk · contribs) indicating whether his concerns had been met, and without consensus of other reviewers. I've reinstated the nom and re-added the template to the talk page (it was simply removed, rather than changed to reviewed), and left a message to badlydrawnjeff (twice) to pls indicate if his concerns have been addressed. Going to leave a message for UKPhoenix next. Best, Sandy (Talk) 14:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Joel—This guy has just agreed to look at the article, so I'm emailing him the link now. Will let you know. Tony 00:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Friend, you've done a grave injustice. Albinomite is a great defender of the Castilian language, Spanish culture and traditions, and the Roman Catholic faith. I strongly urge you to reconsider. Do not dishonor your roots letting this block stand. ¡Arriba España, su heroica historia y glorioso porvenir!--Cupidon 19:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Friend, I beg to differ and plus you did not give him adequate warning, you must bear in mind he was new to wikipedia and had also suffered multiple ad hominem attacks from an obstreperous user known as sugaar and his self-described anarchic associate wobble, these two are unabashedly spreading dangerous and vile Communistic propaganda across wikipedia. Listen to your heart and do your glorious Christian-Hispanic heritage proud. ¡Arriba España, su heroica historia y glorioso porvenir!--Cupidon 11:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Be sure to check in on the FAR talk page - also, on Former featured articles, I'm not sure, but you may have mixed up Mark Antony and Aspasia?? Sandy (Talk) 23:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Joel I need a hand. On WP:GA/R, we've noticed an admin has passed several of his own articles for GA such as Graniteville train disaster, which'll probably be delisted by the time you read this. When I try reporting the user, the userpage link keeps appearing in red. Can you help? LuciferMorgan 22:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ignore this.. it's been resolved now. Apparently the criteria wasn't in place when they were passed. Thanks anyway. LuciferMorgan 23:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

See my comments here. Also, the new bot will require some sort of admin permission, if anyone ever does it. Sandy (Talk) 00:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

There is talk of a bot, so Raul asks that we give it time - but do bots have to run by admins only? [1] Sandy (Talk) 00:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

What problem do you have with an addition of the word "theory"?

I have not included any mention of creationism.

You are disingenuous and dishonest if you keep removing this addition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sparrows point (talk • contribs) 00:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Hi. I was wondering if you might have a look at List of palms of the Caribbean and see what you think of it. I am especially interested in what you think of the format - do you like the distributions the way they are formatted, do you think the comments at the end of the genus sections are useful (and do you think they would be better at the top of the section, or as they are at the end)? Thanks for your input. Guettarda 20:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to make sure you're following both discussions: this one started on my talk page (now archived, with Raul's input), after Bodyline and Hero of Belarus were re-promoted, and we got more complaints about having no FAC/FAR template;[2] and I suggested using the FA counter bot to count former featured articles. [3] Sandy (Talk) 17:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The Featured article and the Former featured article counters are done and installed - the only number that still has to be tracked is the repromoted articles on Former featured articles. Best, Sandy (Talk) 16:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Check out this entery in the Portal:Puerto Rico/Did you know

"That Puerto Rico is not a country, but is a Commonwealth of the United States?" and

"That Puerto Rico has never been a country?"

I don't know, but that doesn't make any sense to me. What do you think? Tony the Marine 06:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

An image you uploaded, Image:Carolina seal.gif, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 16:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Joelito, Feliz Año ! Where are you? Fauna of Puerto Rico is going on the main page on 10 January. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I notice from Sandy's talk you're on a bit of a break. Hope all is well and that you have a good new year. Marskell 07:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Joelr31,

Congrats for getting the Fauna of Puerto Rico page to FA status. It is a fantastic article! I am working on getting Ohio Wesleyan University to FA status. Do you have the time to take a look and let me know what you think? I noticed on your article even user Tony1 was very supportive. Great job! WikiprojectOWU 20:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

 

For those whose contributions and dedication to articles regarding Puerto Rico, above and beyond from what is normally expected, have helped provide a positive image of the island.

Joel, we haven't been in touch for sometime. I see that you have been very busy lately. I created special exclusive award and I can't think of anyone more deserving then you to be the first recipient of the award. Your wonderful articles on the Flora and Fauna of Puerto Rico are only an example of the excellent work that you have done.

This award, unlike a regular barnstar, will only be awarded to those who dedication to articles related to Puerto Rico has been above and beyond the call of duty. If you know of others who would merit such recognition please feel free to honor them. I fully trust your judgment.

Tu Hermano, Tony the Marine 01:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan suggested I message you with a concern I have. I've also contacted Marskell, but he is not available. A relatively new user, Diez2, has been delisting articles in FARC without discussing it with anybody who regularly contributes there. While most of the articles would probably have been delisted eventually, at least one was a bit contentious, and discussions were still ongoing. I messaged Diez2, and he replied he was involving himself in all maintenance areas of Wikipedia, and was doing it in order to learn how to delist. Additionally, he has been doing it in a haphazard manner, not taking all of the steps (removing the star from the article, delisting it from the Featured Article list, etc.). I have cleaned up all of the unfinished work, but feel that because FAR is such a sensitive area, it is a task that should be carried out thoughtfully. Can you look at the history of FAR, and the talk pages of myself and Diez2? Maybe I am overreacting, but as I said, I feel FAR is a very sensitive area of Wikipedia and want to make sure it is handled appropriately. Thanks. Jeffpw 20:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you back to full-time editing? Hope the new job is going well. I've just been closing everything under the assumption your time is limited, as you did while I was away. Cheers, Marskell 19:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

"I will never be back to full editing or to the level of editing before I started my job." That greatly saddens me! You will be missed in the mainspace. I hope for you it means new challenges in your career. I will see around the FAs anyhow, and I know you won't be able to resist looking at fauna articles (I was thinking of trying another animal FA, myself). Marskell 21:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. The guy in question is a complete fruitloop, but it's always good to get confirmation. Many thanks again. doktorb _words^deeds 06:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

¡Viva Puerto Rico Libre! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.45.64.120 (talk) 01:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Hey Joel. Per the discussions on FAR talk, we don't have to place the templates on the article talk page anymore. Simply move it to the archive and Gimmebot will take care of it with the Article History template. I believe the bot will also take care of the star on the article page, but am waiting to confirm that. We must still update WP:FA and WP:FFA. Marskell 06:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb2007 20:19 (UTC)

Hi. User:Marskell directed me to you because you're great with "taxa". Kakapo is on featured article review right now, and will be kept most likely. A lot of good work has been dumped into the article, but we're having trouble on the final copy-edit. Several users have given it a runthrough, but we are afraid that it's missing a final touch. Plus, there are some inline queries that someone like you might be able to address. If you could give it a pass, that would be great. Thanks! — Deckiller 14:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

So you removed my well-researched list. Why didn't the previous, messy, grossly incomplete list bother you? Actually, the list is only a start. It will be expanded to one or more tables with area and population figures. That is, unless it would bother you. If my contributions are not appreciated, I go somewhere else.--Ratzer 21:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

It's nothing personal but sections under construction are best kept out of an article until they are finished. Plus prose is better than bulleted lists. Joelito (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Please keep the discussion where it started. Nobody can follow it if you answer on my talk page. As to your response, I think I disagree with you on a philosophical level. It is my conviction that in Wikipedia nothing is ever finished. Anything can still be improved. Which means that there are only unfinished sections. An operational definition of "finished" will always be arbitrary. In addition, I find that a list, better yet a table, provides a better overview than prose. Why is prose better than bulletet lists then?--Ratzer 20:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Bullets interrupt the flow of an article. A well-written article does not need lists. Joelito (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Joel is right - the bulleted lists are too long and they break up the flow of the article. Have you considered making them into a list independent of the article? With respect to the "Under construction" sections - you shouldn't label a section as "under construction" in a Wikipedia article. On one hand, everything is "under construction" (and always will be), on the other hand, when you have a fairly "mature" article, small, under-developed sections aren't helpful and detract from the overall appearance of the article. Guettarda 23:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I concede to you guys. I did already move the bulleted list to an article of its own, which was a very good idea.--Ratzer 17:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Why did you delete see also section in Puerto Rico? why did you delete the political parties? Cjrs 79 05:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I figured that's why you did it, bt i figured it out a lot latter. sory. Cjrs 79 01:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Epa, Joel, the bot counters for FAs and FFAs have been busted for a LONG time, nothing is happening, tired of waiting for it to be fixed, see note on Marskell's page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello! I'm trying to raise Bird to feature article status from its present good article classification. Any suggestions or help would be appreciated............Thanks..Pmeleski 02:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

A new one. Any feedback appreciated. Marskell 12:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Joel. The Puerto Rico Article Assessment page is up and running. I created all the necessary categories and links, ran the bot, and it seems to be running smoothly. Do you mind checking it out?

Also, I see you single-handedly edited the {{PuertoRicoproj}} template to conform with the Assessment guidelines. Your work was crucial for this thing to work, so, on behalf of the community, thanks for taking the time and effort. Cheers, man... you deserve it.- Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 01:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For his important yet uncredited contribution to the Puerto Rico Article Assessment process. Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 01:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, I know its a little late, but...

		The Fauna Barnstar
		For his invaluable contributions to the Fauna of Puerto Rico, List of Puerto Rican birds, and List of Vieques birds articles, bringing them all to Featured status. Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 01:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Both you and Mtmelendez have done a great job with the Article Assessment project. I remember that when I nominated you for adminship, I predicted that you would make a great admin. Little did I know then how right I was. Too bad that we haven't kept in touch. Tony the Marine 21:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Joelito, we need to talk. Please see the assessment talk page. You and Tony have brought a very important concern regarding consensus on the importance scale. I erred in trying to assess articles based on the importance scale and conventions when the scale is ambigous, at best. Since you and Tony are by far the most experienced editors in the project, I now feel you guys should review the conventions I posted before continuing. I've stopped assessing until this is settled. Sorry for the trouble. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I've responded to your well-founded concerns. Please check it out. I'll be back tomorrow to continue this discussion. Thanks. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 01:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Tony has recently nominated the Puerto Ricans in World War II article for Featured Status. You're one of the most experienced editors in the project, especially with featured articles, so would you mind taking a look and leaving your comments in its nomination page? Much appreciated. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 21:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi. If you feel that strongly about not including the EU on the population list, your opinion would be very helpful in the "List of Countries by Area" article here [[4]]. Thanks, Malnova 20:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Do u have more info? Is Kiara more famous 4 her singing or acting? Bc I dont think 'famous person' is appropriate as her page title. Many ppl are famous, which Kiara more famous for?_Lilkunta 04:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

*sigh* I know. This is a work in progress. I'm just trying to abide to the consensus reached weeks ago. The problem is in the template's code. I can't seem to figure it out. The harm isn't that big: if you revert my edits to the template, the assessment will jump back to importance, and since that is included in the article talk pages, it will automatically restore itself.

But I can't seem to change it to priority. I was hoping that the importance= and priority= commands would both categorize the article on the Priority scale, but it doesn't categorize them at all. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 01:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I don't have a problem with it either, but other users were pretty adamant about it as you can remember. I really don't care what its called as long as it inspires editors to get involved. I really appreciate your help, you know a lot more about this than I do. I'm going to revert my edits back to Importance-assessment so that the project keeps running smoothly. I'll take another look at the code, but I'll wait for your response before making changes. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 01:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

FYI: I've copied this discussion from both of our talk pages to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Puerto Rico/Assessment. It's more appropriate to continue the discussion there just in case other users wish to join. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 02:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

This article has received too much vandalism the past few days by anons and new users, especially blanking of content. Please watch it carefully, and consider temporarily protecting it when appropriate. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I've updated the page significantly, more in terms of templates and format than content. Could to please take a look to make sure everything is working properly? Thanks. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 04:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

A general check-in. Hope work and life are well for you. Cheers, Marskell 22:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you're well Joel and hope things sort themselves out soon. I've taken cougar to FAC. Rather accidentally, cats of the Americas has become my topic of interest. Marskell 21:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Joel. I found this featured article through the Cuba WikiProject, but I thought this also applied to the Puerto Rico project. I was thinking of tagging it as part of the Puerto Rico project also but I wanted your advice first. What do you think? - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 15:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

That's why I wanted your advice, since I was considering the same thing. But I thought that maybe by tagging under WP:PUR some of our members might get more involved, which is why I'm leaning towards tagging. I'll put it under our project, but I won't present it as one our FAs. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 22:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Sir, there was absolutley no reason for you to revert my edit to evolution. You have no exuse for that. Some aspects of Evolution are fact. Some are Theories. Stop pushing your point of view please. It is against wikipedia policy. Peace:)--James, La gloria è a dio 23:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey! The Puerto Rico Portal page has been revamped with additional content, including a Selected series of Articles, Pictures, and Biographies related to Puerto Rico. However, maintaining a Portal is no easy task. As a member of the WikiProject Puerto Rico, please consider helping out in one of the following tasks:

• You can add Puerto Rico current events and news to the In the news... section as they occur.
• You can participate in the discussion of Nominations for content nominated to Selected status.
• You can nominate content for Selected status in the Nominations page.

Your help and contributions are greatly appreciated. Enjoy the Portal! - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 03:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This is an automated message for all WikiProject Puerto Rico participants.

Ahhh... much better. I prefer your method now, which doesn't clutter up the talk page. I was simply following the method used by the Architecture Portal, but incorporating it into the WikiProject Template not only reduces space, but presents the notice of "Selected" and the Portal with the Puerto Rico WikiProject, which emphasizes their close relationship.

I'm just going to edit the wording of the caption you incorporated, since as the Portal is working now there is no daily or monthly article queue. As the Portal expands with more articles, then we'll probably have to use that method. But in any case, I appreciate your help. It's hard to maintain a Portal by oneself, a task I know you had for months. I hope more people get involved in the Portal, especially in the Nominations page. Otherwise, I'll just keep working on it until it's almost self-maintainable. I know I'm getting there... Peace. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 11:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yo man, I am currently contemplating the option of creating a Task Force inside WikiProject Puerto Rico to focus on the improvement of articles concerning the island's municipalities, just wondering if you might be interested in joining said project in the near future. -凶 22:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool all advice and suggestions are welcome, I am creating it after San Juan reaces FA, thanks for your time. -凶 00:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You do and have done a very fine service at Wikipedia. Don't doubt it for it a minute. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. Marskell 17:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I am willing but am really busy in real life. I need an additional 2 weeks to start. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Surprise! History of Puerto Rico has been selected for presentation on the Main Page for Monday, June 18, 2007 (tomorrow!). My congratulations to all editors who helped bring this important Puerto Rican topic to FA, especially to Joelito. But don't celebrate yet. There's two important things we should do:

1. Review the article. Since it became FA, it has received extensive edits from users, and therefore may need copy-editing and MOS-adjustments for presentation. Some users related to the Main Page-selection process have already made many edits, and we should continue their good work to make sure the article is pristine.
2. WATCH IT!! Given the Main Page's exposure (millions view it every day), FA articles which are presented there get viewed by many people, including vandals. Please watch the page carefully, reverting vandalism as you go. I've seen Main Page articles get overwhelmed with vandalism, and since many more people keep going to it on the Main Page, we don't want them to see a vandalized article. This is a 24 hour task (as long as its presented), and requires the collaboration of the entire Puerto Rico WikiProject.

Well, gente, take pride that on June 18, Puerto Rico's history will be presented on the grandest of pages in Wikipedia. Peace! - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 10:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't want to add cite tags so close to the mainpage date (wish you'd had more notice on this date—two days is tight), but I did see some things that should be cited, and it might be good to focus on that area before it goes up. Is the fact that the slave population was lower in PR than other islands cited? I saw other similar things that will probably generate cite tags when it goes on the mainpage. Can those of you who have the sources do a last pass for citation needs ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Joel, I won't be able to go through this completely, but it seems like it's still in fine shape. I hope your rollback muscles are in good shape for the TFA. There's an awful lot of redlinks in the Struggle for autonomy section. You could create pages for the political parties and redlink the names of members inside them. Marskell 19:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Darn it. I put a list of sentences that may need citation on my talk page, but lost it all. That's what I get for trying to let my kid teach me how to use tabs. Can't teach an old dog new tricks. I'll start over now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

May need citation:

• This was the beginning of agriculture-based economic growth, with sugar, tobacco and coffee being the main products. (No citation on that entire paragraph, so I can't verify this is when economic growth based on agriculture began.)
• The integration of immigrants into Puerto Rican culture and other events changed Puerto Rican society. (Not sure it needs a cite, but sounds opinion-ish without a citation.)
• The majority of the population was illiterate (83.7%) and lived in poverty. The agriculture industry—at the time the main source of income—was hampered by lack of roads, rudimentary tools and equipment, and natural disasters such as hurricanes and droughts. (Does that text come from the citation on the previous sentence?) It was another source, now identified and included... Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
• As a result of the Grito de Lares political and social reforms occurred toward the end of the 19th century. (Without a cite, it could sound like opinion; according to whom were the reforms a result of Grito de Lares?)It did sound a bit OR..., I added citations while changing certain phrases to adhere to POV. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
• Health conditions were poor with high rates of infant mortality and numerous endemic diseases. (And, sentence seems out of place?)
• The effects on the economy were devastating as millions of dollars were lost due to the destruction of the majority of the sugar and coffee plantations. (I think the hurricane people always cite dollar figures; they may pick up on this.)
• As a consequence of the Jones Act and the establishment of elections, a new political party, the Partido Nacionalista de Puerto Rico (Puerto Rican Nationalist Party), was founded on September 17, 1922. (As a consequence of ... again, could sound like opinion if not attributed to someone.)
• Later, in 1937, police opened fire at a Nacionalista de Puerto Rico (Puerto Rican Nationalist) Party parade, known as the "Ponce Massacre"; 20 people were killed and 100 wounded. (Usually important to cite numbers of dead and wounded; I think that's the MilHist tradition anyway.)
• Currently more than 2 million Puerto Ricans live abroad. (definitely should be cited, and currently should be changed to "as of" date ... )
• Muñoz Marín's development programs brought some prosperity for an emergent middle class. (Could sound like opinion unless cited.)

Someone elseMarskell already added a cite needed on the slavery sentence I saw earlier. Sorry to dump this on you :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem, wasn't your fault ... I thought I saved the copy just in case, but I'm not that good on the laptop, and when I got an edit conflict, hit back, it was gone. Saludos, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Strike away; I don't feel strongly about that list, just trying to avoid mainpage problems. I'll do ref cleanup at another time, so you can work without edit conflicts. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

This is confusing:

This brought about changes that are still in effect: the name of the island was changed to Porto Rico (the name was changed back to Puerto Rico in 1932) and the currency was changed from the Puerto Rican peso to the United States dollar.

Still in effect, but changed again seems contradictory; were there other changes (besides peso-dollar) that are still in effect? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Just helping out where I can. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Joel, how you doing, been working on various PR articles with colleagues and we've done a pretty good job i believe, we always have discussed most “major” changes, but now I'm concerned about your removal of stamp image with out consulting with the explanation that ...stamps are usually not PD, I have gone to great lengths to provide high quality (legal) images for all articles, images add another dimension to all pages and by the way, what's PD?

And secondly, why did you move picts to right, most great articles have images balanced out, makes articles more interesting, less monotonous and enhances layout , check this award winning article Leonardo da Vinci, regards ~ Moebiusuibeom-en 02:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The reason I changed the cover image for Watchmen is because that older US cover isn't used anymore. It just doent seem right to me to use an out-of-date cover image. But thats just me...:|

Josh B

Here again you come and make structural changes in History of Puerto Rico without consulting, it seems that you think that you have ample experience in Wikipedia in its processes and procedures and that your decisions reflect, I may agree on that, BUT STOP BEING SELFISH, I have ample experience on design layout, have surfed Wikipedia throughout, am an internationally known graphic designer and i believe you're making a mistake “DICTATING” what articles should look like visually, i have collaborated throughout Wikipedia and have enhanced many articles with image placement and layout, I have also created many high quality Wikipedia articles trough out the World and for Puerto Rico, please consult any of our colleagues, I must admit that we did stumble along the way but always things got straightened out and I have also made mistakes, and what is that about “having left and right-aligned images does not look good at all resolutions (especially left-aligned images)”, HOGWASH! it seems that you have not researched other articles, witch i have sent you a link, I'm very disappointed of your actions, and furthermore, have you seen what the articles we're working on looked like three months ago, A MESS, please consult anyone, We've gone to great lengths to be what we are today, and we got more to go, where where you three months ago!, totally disappointed @ your actions, please explain! Moebiusuibeom-en 03:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, maybe i should have written, “Joel, I disagree with the changes you've made, let discuss them” – Moebiusuibeom-en 17:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I will comment about this since it was brought to my attention, I will start saying that I trust Joelito's edits on History of Puerto Rico a 100%, he was one of the mayor contributors in bringing this page to Featured Article and is a experienced editor. Now I have to agree with Moeb that since we are all aiming to improve these pages sometimes changes in format might be discussed or explained. But don't let that latin blood boil, we are all working to improve the Puerto Rico pages and we must be focused, if we start having internal trouble our goal will crumble with petty diferences, there are my two cents regards for both of you. -凶 01:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Man I just wanted to know if you could take up where I left on San Juan's FAC, I have been attending all points so far but I have to leave and I won't be available for at least four days, I came to you because you have previous experience in this and Tony might be busy with his schelude, I hate to lay such a big weight on you so I don't blame you if you don't want to do it, just attemping to do what I can to prevent future points in the FAC to go unattended and have it closed, anyways thanks for your time. -凶 23:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

What do you think of the following edits by User:EBLM? Have you even heard of this before?

• Estate of Basilio Lopez Martin - article about how Basilio Lopez Martin, a wealthy 18th century businessman came to own 90% of all Puerto Rican lands, as well as parts of California and Mexico. The website, which is only a primary source and apparently the property of the article's author, alleges the estate of such man was lost and "stolen by the administrators at the time" (by adminsitrators, the user means all branches of Spanish government at the time). Apparently, some of his current descendants are trying to obtain all that land back. Go Figure. This article was speedily deleted, and then recreated. This prompted adding this info to the following articles:
  • 9 edits to Puerto Rico:[5]
  • 2 edits to History of Puerto Rico: [6] [7]

What do you think of it? - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 11:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

That's what I thought. Thanks for the assurance. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 09:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I see that you recently deleted the link that I only recently added. I believe that it is a legitimate link for the following reasons:

1. Many other places (cities and countries) have links referring them to travel guides which are useful for that area, as they contain information regarding that area which is not included in the article. Hence there should be no reason why my link to the Rough Guides website should be any different. Unlike many others, the Rough Guides website does not have extensive advertising on it, but rather, it provides a large degree of useful travel information.

2. As you are probably aware WikiTravel has a number of external links referring people to their own travel guide. In the San Juan example, I added an external link as Wikitravel has failed to do so for this location. Surely if adding external links can be done to a series of other locations such as New York by Wikitravel, it should not be restricted for less well known places?

3. The fact that there are links to Wikitravel would suggest that information regarding travel is considered to be appropriate for the Wikipedia website.

I fully understand that there is a need to prevent people from merely advertising on Wikipedia, as this is not it's purpose. However, I hope you will agree with me that in this example, it is not a matter of advertising, but of providing a highly important link that is legitimate as it has a basis in precedent.

Kind regards,

Markrushmore 15:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)markrushmoreMarkrushmore 15:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Puerto Rico Newsletter Year I - Issue 1 - June 2007
Hello, Joelr31. This is the WikiProject Puerto Rico Monthly Newsletter for June 2007. Enjoy!
News The first issue of the Wikiproject Puerto Rico Newsletter was delivered! Please help with the newsletter by suggesting content to be included on the newsletter by leaving a message on Boricuaeddie's talk page. Special thanks to R Delivery Bot and its operator, R, for delivering this newsletter. Eljohnson15 joined the project on June 22. Welcome! Portal:Puerto Rico was revamped with additional content, including Selected series of Articles, Pictures, and Biographies related to Puerto Rico. Please help maintain the Portal. Thank you, Mtmelendez, for all of your help with the Portal! History of Puerto Rico, one of our Featured articles, was displayed at the Main Page on June 18. Thanks to all of the users who helped by reviewing and improving the article and reverting vandalism done to the article during its display. Special thanks to Joelito for all of his work on the article. Special thanks to Mtmelendez for keeping us updated on all things related to the project. See or edit the current tasklist here.	Users who helped with this newsletter: Boricuaeddie Useful links: Project main page The project to-do list Portal:Puerto Rico

You are receiving this newsletter because you have signed up for WikiProject Puerto Rico. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, please contact User talk:Boricuaeddie. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 18:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC) .