Talk:Eddie Perez (politician)

Puerto Rican or Puerto Rican-born
_ _ Antonio, while i think your change from
 * an American Puerto Rican-born politician

to
 * a Puerto Rican politician

was a pretty bad edit, i'm far more upset by your summary,
 * If you were born in Puerto Rico there is no such thing a "American Puerto Rican" for you

This is not the "Antonio Committed to NPoV Martin" that i thought i knew! _ _ I would absolutely respect that statement, made by you and applied to yourself or even to your close friends. _ _ (As a statement applied to any public figure (except one who is your close friend), it is the height of arrogance. Now, i grant that almost all political statements are necessarily the height of arrogance, and making them is part of any political process where arrogance doesn't get you thrown in jail for more than a week. So i have a certain degree of respect for someone saying it as an expression of a political view. But that's also not what matters here.) _ _ What matters for WP is that it is not a statement of fact, but of attitude, and even if it is an attitude of 99% of ethnically Puerto Rican people who are born in Puerto Rico, it is still PoV. It cannot be a valid reason for an edit. I'm not going to ask you to say anything by way of disavowing your implication that that statement could offer any justification for an edit, but you've parked an enormous elephant in the living room, and i'm not going to ignore it. You have put an outrageous reason for an edit into the nearly unalterable history. You've convicted yourself of making an edit with clear PoV intent, and put yourself in the position where almost anything you further you say about the subject has to overcome the presumption that you are still pushing the same PoV. _ _ While the old language happens to be from my edit i'm not trying to suggest it is the only reasonable wording. Rather than restoring it, i'm working on an edit that attempts to respond to some of the acceptable reasons you could have given for the edit. I think it is reasonable for me to insist, under the circumstances, that you work on this talk page toward a consensus wording, and refrain from editing this article as it pertains to ethnic or nationality issues until there is a consensus here on any proposed edits to it by you, that have an ethnic/nat'ty thrust. --Jerzy•t 15:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

_ _ For the interim while we seek consensus (and as my first proposal for a long-term wording), i've made the article open with
 * Eddie Alberto Perez (born 1956 or '57) is a Puerto Rico-born politician. As of 2006 he is mayor of Hartford, Connecticut.


 * He was born in Corozal, Puerto Rico (and by that fact, holds American citizenship). In 1969, at the age of 12, he arrived with his family in Hartford.

_ _ There is enuf confusion about Puerto Rico's exact status among even American Anglos that i am convinced Antonio's wording would mislead many non-Puerto Ricans, around the world, and leave them uncomfortable about their grasp of how someone not described as American holds public office in an American state. I would normally say that "Puerto Rico-born" standing alone in the lead sentence of a bio of someone who's making their career in the US but outside Puerto Rico was still too misleading. In this case, the mention of the city and the state in the next sentence eases that problem, and may make it reasonable to leave the word "American" (or "U.S.") for all the way in the third sentence. (But i would welcome a smooth wording that got it into the first two, but didn't seem to be drawing conclusions about how American and/or Puerto Rican he feels.) _ _ The distinction between "Puerto Rican" and "Puerto Rico-born" IMO makes a big difference:
 * IMO, "American Puerto Rican" hints strongly at the parallels of "American Navajo" and "German Jewish", which i would use intending a short hand for e.g. "is eligible for only an American passport and is of Navajo ethnicity"; outside of that structure, i find "Puerto Rican" ambiguous among birth-place, residence, ethnicity, and "would want only a Puerto Rican passport, if only such a thing had any use in getting you thru immigration-control anywhere but in Cuba, if there". --Jerzy•t 18:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

HOLD UP
Wait a second. His gang activities serve as a foundation for his platform today? Reading the next sentence it becomes clear that this is not what was originally said here; maybe there's a sentence missing. I have no idea what it's SUPPOSED to say, so I won't edit it, but please someone fix this.

From Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

 * This is the continuing problem with this article. My changes included portions of all the links referenced above. However, facts and reality aside, libelous statements continue to be posted not because any of the bots or humans have a clue about the content, they just need someone to follow their process to get to a "neutral article". Folks if you can source outrageous claims, do so, if not give it up. Don't defend the libel and slander of someone else because it was there six months ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.107.151 (talk) 01:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with the removal of unsourced statements. However, you should not add more unsourced statements at the same time that paint a halo over his head. I am willing to compromise on the lowest common denominator; we can remove all information that is both contentious and unsourced, leaving a shorter but more neutral article. Does that sound fair? -- Explodicle (T/C) 14:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is another link that helped him win re-election in 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.107.151 (talk) 01:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Racist and unsourced information
Folks, this page has been filled with racist and unsourced information on a regular basis. It needs to be watched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.107.151 (talk • contribs)


 * So you're OK with just removing everything contentious and unsourced as I specified above? -- Explodicle (T/C) 16:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Arrested, shouldn't add lines sentence by sentence as mews breaks
He was arrested today...and I see people are adding line by line each event that uinfolds, so that it reads the same way as if you were reading it on msnbc.com. Wikipedia is not the place for breaking news; the notable events should be added, but they should be in the tone of an encyclopedia, and match the rest of the article. I edited the last paragraph so that it sounds more like the rest of the article instead of like a breaking news article. 162.136.192.1 (talk) 19:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Pleading guilty to receiving bribes and criminal attempt to commit larceny in the first degree by extortion
Apparently user 2602:252:D91:E650:1006:1361:4BC3:27F2 does not feel that Eddie Perez ever pleaded guilty to receiving bribes and criminal attempt to commit larceny in the first degree by extortion, this is plainly false. In addition their claim that "The sources cited do not support any claim Perez had a state pension or he was re-charged after the Apellate Court ruling. If you make the claim read your sources” is false on its face, even a cursory look at the Article’s titles can show that this isn’t true. See https://www.wnpr.org/post/state-judge-revokes-pension-convicted-former-hartford-mayor-perez https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-eddie-perez-pleads-guilty-20170831-story.html http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wnpr/files/perez_pension.pdf https://www.wtnh.com/news/crime/ex-mayor-pleads-guilty-avoids-prison-in-corruption-case_20180322094731367/1068302896 https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-eddie-perez-pleads-guilty-20170831-story.html for more. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 02:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Pardon?
I'm looking at this revision, and I can't verify that he received a pardon. Is this breaking news that I'm not able to find, or is this just not true? — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 00:55, 27 November 2023 (UTC)