Talk:Nationalist Party of Puerto Rico

Untitled
The Nationalists in the 30s, and 40s were much larger in percentage. The main reason why the numbers were somewhat deflated was because the Nationalist Party used the Natioal flag as their party flag, which made it easy for many of the populace who were illiterate at the time. However, on the eve of the election a law was quickly pased to say that the Nationalist Party was not allowed to use that flag. Radio stations, who were mostly owned by segments not in favor of independence, refused them any airtime to annouce the change in party flags.

Munoz won by a landslide, because Albizu, his main opponent was jailed. --128.59.143.41 06:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Title name
The name in Spanish (Partido Nacionalista de Puerto Rico) should translate to either "Nationalist Party of Puerto Rico" or "Puerto Rico Nationalist Party". The title and name used in this article, however, is "Puerto Rican Nationalist Party", which would be correct if the name in Spanish was Partido Nacionalista Puertorriqueño (Compare with Partido Independentista Puertorriqueño). Since the translation is incorrect, I propose moving the article to Puerto Rico Nationalist Party, with a redirect for the current title. Comments? Mercy11 (talk) 17:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Include contemporary events
Other events were happening than massacres - a US Senator supported a bill for independence in 1936, which was opposed by an influential Liberal leader of Puerto Rico. Truman, after the assassination attempt, still supported the drafting of a constitution for Puerto Rico and voting on it - it should be noted that 82% of the voters approved it. If such contextual facts are not included to present some larger idea of what was going on, this article appears too biased - only the list of Nationalist Party-identified outrages.Parkwells (talk) 20:25, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

A helpful note to editors
I posted this note several days ago, mostly for User:Parkwells' benefit, in the talk page of Puerto Rican Nationalist Party Revolts of the 1950s. In case Parkwells did not see it, I am posting most of it below.


 * 1) Parkwells requests the inclusion of "contemporary events." But there is no "contemporary" history, since the article plainly states that the PRNP ceased to exist nearly 50 years ago, in 1965. Perhaps Parkwells meant to say "contemporaneous" events - and this article is full of contemporaneous events, which are amply sourced and cited throughout the article.


 * Yes, I clearly meant other events happening at the time of those cited, by the context of what I wrote and examples given, such as Tydings' introduction of a bill for independence in 1936.

Parkwells (talk) 21:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) The 1952 "constitution" and "status referendum" with a "vote of 82%" was widely viewed as a farce, especially in the diplomatic community, since the referendum only offered a choice between the existing "colony" or "commonwealth." Neither independence nor statehood were on the ballot. If you ask 100 people whether they prefer to have their thumb cut off, or their pinky (but keeping their entire hand is not an option), then of course a majority will say "cut off my pinky."


 * Then provide cited source of who thought the 1952 vote was a farce. It took place, and apparently needs to be explained by more documentation from RS.Parkwells (talk) 21:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) With the passage of P.L. 600 (Public Law 600), President Truman "permitted" Puerto Rico to vote for a "constitution" which, under the tenets of the Foraker Act, had to be approved by the U.S. Congress. This "constitution" was then presented to the U.N. Committee on De-colonialization, as proof that Puerto Ricans were a "self-governing" people. This is self-serving, transparent, and patently absurd.
 * 2) It is absurd because as of 1898, in 1952 (the year of the "consitutional plebiscite") and continuing to the present day, U.S. federal agencies control Puerto Rico's foreign relations, customs, immigration, postal system, radio, television, transportation, Social Security, coast guard, maritime laws, banks, currency, tariffs, tax code, and defense. In addition, the Pentagon controls 9% of Puerto Rico's land and has four atomic missile bases on the island.
 * 3) It is not "biased" to present a set of facts in their fullest contextual setting. If these facts are unpleasant, or make anyone uncomfortable, it does not alter their status as facts.
 * 4) Any wholesale "editing" of these facts should be done with at least a minimal knowledge of U.S.-Puerto Rican history, and the available historical sources. Here are some of those sources:


 * Thomas Aitken Jr., Luis Munoz Marin: Poet in the Fortress; Signet Books, 1965
 * Cesar Ayala, American Sugar Kingdom; Penguin Books, 2010
 * Mini Seijo Bruno, The Nationalist Insurrection in Puerto Rico - 1950; Editorial Edil, 1989
 * Rich Cohen, The Fish That Ate the Whale: The Life and Times of America's Banana King; Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2012
 * Manuel Maldonado Denis, Puerto Rico: A Socio-historic Interpretation; Random House, 1972
 * Ronald Fernanzez, Los Macheteros; Prentice Hall Press, 1987
 * Juan Gonzalez, Harvest of Empire; Penguin Books, 2011
 * Stephen Hunter, American Gunfight; Simon & Schuster, 2005
 * A.W. Maldonado, Luis Munoz Marin: Puerto Rico's Democratic Revolution; Editorial Universidad de Puerto Rico, 2006
 * Sidney W. Mintz, Worker in the Cane; W.W. Norton & Co., 1974
 * Sidney W. Mintz, Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History; Penguin Books, 1985
 * Marisa Rosado, Pedro Albuzu Campos; Ediciones Puerto, Inc., 2005
 * Federico Ribes Tovar, Albizu Campos: Puerto Rican Revolutionary; Plus Ultra Books, 1971

This list is not exhaustive. Several of the above sources were cited in a number of the Puerto Rican history articles. I encourage any editor, particularly those who are not familiar with Puerto Rican history, to consult these sources before imposing major changes on articles that have been written collaboratively, by dozens of editors, over a period of several years. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 07:39, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The list is useful and should be used as sources by editors.Parkwells (talk) 21:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It is being used. I encourage you to use it, as well. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 19:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Double standard of editing
I find it odd, Parkwells, that within the past 24 hours you made seven edits which added significant amounts of completely unsourced factual information to the Charles Herbert Allen article. That article had no citations and, after your seven edits, it STILL has no citations.

The entire article is completely unsourced.

I see no concern about this on the article's talk page, from you or anyone. In fact, the Charles Herbert Allen talk page is empty as of 12/25/2012.

This article (Puerto Rican Nationalist Party) had 30 citations before you ever interacted with it. Yet you quarrel with this article. The double standard is glaringly evident. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 07:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Will follow up on your comments - probably searching for cites, but I had a basis for it. Was trying to identify other people of the period, but must have failed to mark the Allen article on my watchlist.Parkwells (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Added cites to Charles Allen article.Parkwells (talk) 02:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Corrected Lead
Have put in this wording: <> I was trying to learn more about this movement; the lead formerly said that after Rio de Piedras and Ponce massacres, Albizu Campos withdrew from electoral politics, but he announced withdrawal after the first and before that second event, according to the facts here.Parkwells (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion of Allen
The tone of this does not seem to fit the encyclopedia - "His business acumen improved" when he returned to the US; Allen's ...was in keeping with Roosevelt's doctrine for the Caribbean. If these are from sources, they should be credited. Also, "installed himself as president" of the sugar company - I think this position is selected or hired. People may have wanted him because they thought he could get them business, but individuals don't appoint themselves as presidents of independent companies.Parkwells (talk) 02:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, I thought "sugar baron" usually referred to a person who owned a lot of land developed as sugar plantations; it appears Allen was in the sugar business, but does not say he owned any agricultural land in PR, yet his photo is labeled "first sugar baron in Puerto Rico". Sugar was being grown and processed long before he entered the scene. I imagine the first sugar barons were ethnic Spanish, likely as early as the 18th century. Parkwells (talk) 02:13, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * According to a June 1915 NY Times article, Allen became President of American Sugar only in 1913 (after being Treasurer starting in 1910), and was resigning that year - announced in June 1915. Ribes Tovar appears to be overstating Allen's role in relation to the Puerto Rican economy given his short term. Parkwells (talk) 03:19, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Evidently you did not read the Ribes Tovar book, nor any of the books listed above for you on this talk page (over a year ago), and twice for you on the Pedro Albizu Campos talk page. If you had read it, you would know that Allen resigned as governor in 1901 and headed straight to Wall Street, where he joined the House of Morgan as vice-president of both the Morgan Trust Company and the Guaranty Trust Company of New York, through which he built his sugar syndicate in Puerto Rico. By 1907 this syndicate, the American Sugar Refining Company, owned or controlled 98% of the sugar processing capacity in the United States and was known as the Sugar Trust. By 1910 Allen was Treasurer of the American Sugar Refining Company, by 1913 he was its President, and by 1915 he sat on its Board of Directors. He built the largest sugar syndicate in the world (currently known as Domino Sugar) and his hundreds of political appointees in Puerto Rico provided him with land grants, tax subsidies, water rights, railroad easements, foreclosure sales and favorable tariffs.


 * But since you didn't read the material, you do not know this.


 * You are also selectively quoting from the NY Times article. The article is very short, so it is difficult to miss the information therein . This Times article clearly states that Allen was the Treasurer of the American Sugar Refining Company in 1910, President in 1913, and on the Board of Directors in 1915.


 * Repeated and reductive edits made to this article, without any prior discussion on this talk page, are unconstructive and were restored where appropriate.Sarason (talk) 02:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)