Talk:Ospina Coffee Company/Archive 1

Feedback
Kindly please make your comments, suggestions and observations to this new article Ospina Coffee Company. Your contributions will be highly appreciated. Thanks. Best, Grancafe 20:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I have a few comments:

1. It appears that you have written an article about a company that you are in some way involved in. This is strongly discouraged by Wikipedia policy. See Autobiography.

2. I placed a template on the article to the effect that it cited no references or sources. You apparently tried to do so by citing other Wikipedia articles. Unfortunately, Wikipedia articles are not considered reliable sources for citations in other Wikipedia articles. See Reliable Sources. ("Wikipedia itself, although a tertiary source, should not be used as a source within articles, nor should any mirrors or forks of Wikipedia be accepted as reliable sources for any purpose.") If the articles you cited have reliable sources that they rely on and that are relevant to this article, you can cite those instead, or any other reliable sources as outlined in the policy. Additionally, you can link to the other Wikipedia articles, but this is not a substitute for other reliable sources. See Linking.

3. It is not clear from the article as it stands that it satisfies Wikipedia's notability policy, under which corporations are generally notable if they have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. See Notability and Notability (organizations and companies). Please add citations to coverage in such sources if they exist.

4. Much of the article is written in a tone and style that tends to promote the company. This is discouraged, and such content should be removed or, if notable, rewritten in a neutral fashion. See Spam.

The article has a number of fairly serious issues that need to be resolved. If they are not, the article could become a candidate for deletion.--Opus 113 (talk) 04:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your comments, observations and suggestions.

1. Yes, I am very involved with Ospina Coffee Company. This is what makes me the maximum authority to describe, narrate and write about it. Nobody knows it better than I do. The Company is 175 years old, and this is the first time that a serious article has been writen about it, although there is plenty of info and references out there, in the public domain.

2. This is my first article in Wikipedia and thus, I was under the impression that references from Wikipedia were much more reliable than any other.

3. As to the notability issues, the Company has received numerous awards and recognition world wide, such as in France, China, Japan, Taiwan and the USA. There are many articles published in books, magazines and newspapers. Please go to Google and search for "Ospina", "Ospina Coffee" and "Ospina Coffee Company" and you will find these information.

4. I do not undesrstand what you mean by the tone and style of the article. It is a cronological exposition of facts, names, dates and places. It is not a spam. They are undisputed facts!

You mention a number of fairly serious issues that need to be resolved. Kindly please point them out to me. Thanks, 04:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs)

Moved from main page
All references here are from the company itself. Ikip 21:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Same family? same company?
Ikip 22:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Coffee in Colombia, 1850-1970: An Economic, Social and Political History By Marco Palacios page 30.
 * 2) Cortes Conde By Carmen Cariola Sutter, Roberto Cortés Condé, Stanley J. Stein, Jiřina Rybáček-Mlýnková, Joint Committee on Latin American Studies. Page 423. section on book about coffee growing by Ospina Rodriguez Mariano.
 * 3) "The Ospina family in Antioquia" Labor in Latin America: comparative essays on Chile, Argentina, Venezuela ... By Charles W. Bergquist. Page 305.
 * 4) Mariano Ospina Pérez former president of Colombia?
 * Yes, this is the same family, same story, same Company! --Grancafe (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, okay. Ikip 01:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Other articles on the company
From Lexis: Ikip 16:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hispanic, November 2007, Spice; Pg. 19, A Feast For The Senses, Fernandez, Idy
 * "The history of Ospina Coffee is intrinsically linked to that of Colombia. It dates back to 1835, only a few years into the creation of the Republic, when Don Mariano Ospina Rodriguez, a coffee pioneere searched the mountains of Antioquia for the place to grow the perfect bean of coffee. He set up his plantation and went on to become president of Colombia in 1857. His son, Don Pedro Nel Ospina, carried on the tradition, not only by taking the reins of the coffee plantations, but also by taking reins of the country and being elected president in 1922. Mariano Ospina-Perez, grandson of the founder, went on to run the company, and also to found the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia, organizing the nation's coffee industry and making it one of the leading products produced in the country. He too became president in 1946."
 * Charlotte Observer October 29, 2006 Glad You Asked  Jeff Elder; Pg. 2a, 578 Words, Glad You Asked; Forget The Electoral College, Let's Get Out The Stratego Game, Jeff Elder (trivial one sentence only)
 * Charlotte Observer October 27, 2006 Main; Glad You Asked  Jeff Elder; Pg. 2a, Glad You Asked; Glad You Ashed About The Great Cigar Arsonist Legend, Jeff Elder (trivial one sentence only)
 * Charlotte Observer October 2, 2006 Monday Jeff Elder Pg. 6a, The Insider Who's That With Jeff? See Below.; Colombian Coffee News Percolatin', Jeff Elder
 * Charlotte Observer June 8, 2004 Pg. 4z, Observer Picks, Observer Staff
 * Charlotte Observer June 6, 2004 Sunday Business; Pg. 2d, Sports Network On The Way, Don Hudson
 * Charlotte Observer July 21, 2003 Pg. 12d, Business Almanac, Observer Staff
 * Charlotte Observer April 14, 2003 Pg. 14d, Business Almanac, Observer Staff
 * Charlotte Observer February 14, 2003 Pg. 1b, 679 Words, Gourmet Coffee Maker's Bet: Some Like It Steep; Beans Come From Charlotte Man's Family Estate In Colombia, Cristina C. Breen

More References
Book References

1. Informe del Gerente de La Federacion al Sexto Congreso Nacional de Cafeteros, Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, Junio de 1934, Colombia.

2. Brown Gold, The Amazing Story of Coffee, Andres Uribe C., Random House Inc., NY, 1954, Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-5793.

3. The Ideal of the Practical, Frank Safford, University of Texas Press, 1976, ISBN 0-292-73803-X

4. Gobernantes Colombianos, Interprint, Ignacio Arismendi Posada, Bogota, Colombia, 1983

5. Colombian Coffee Sector Study, The World Bank, October 2002, ISSN 1657-5334

6. De la Unidad Nacional a la Hegemonia Conservadora, Hernan Jaramillo Ocampo, Editorial Pluma Ltd., Bogota, 1980

7. El Café en el Desarrollo de Antioquia, Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, Editorial Colina, January, 2000, ISBN 958-33-1279-7

8. El Café en la Ecrucijada, Evolucion y Prespectiva, Diego Pizano, Editorial Alfaomega, Bogota, August 2001, ISBN 958-682-192-7

9. Mariano Ospina Pérez, Un Hombre de Acción y de Principios, Miguel Angel Lozano, Fundación de Estudios Historicos, Misión Colombia, Funadación Mariano Ospina Pérez, Editorial El Globo SA, Bogotá, Colombia, November, 1991 --Grancafé 19:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

10. Ospina Supo Esperar, Jaime Sanin Echeverri, Editorial Andes, Bogotá, Colombia, Marzo de 1978 --Grancafé 19:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

11. Historia de Antioquia, Jorge Orlando Melo, Editorial Presencia Ltd, Medellín, Colombia, November, 1988--Grancafé 19:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

12. Crónica De Una Empresa, Ospinas y Cia, Pedro Miguel Navas y Guillermo Durán, Ediciones Antropos, Bogotá, Colombia, 1995 ISBN 958-33-0306-2 --Grancafé 20:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC) --Grancafé 20:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

13. Doña Bertha, Maria Clara Ospina, Planeta Colombiana Editorial SA, Bogotá, Colombia, 1998, ISBN 958-614-682-0 --Grancafé 20:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

14. El Bogotazo, Memorias del Olvido, Arturo Alape, Publicaciones Universidad Central, Editorial Grupo Comercial MARK, Bogotá, Colombia, Marzo, 1983 --Grancafé 02:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs)

Newspapers Articles

1. The Charlotte Observer, Gourmet Coffee by Cristina Breen, February 14, 2003.

2. The Charlotte Observer, The Observer’s Choice, Best of 2004, Tuesday, June 8, 2004.

3. The Charlotte Observer, The Insider, by Jeff Elder, October 2, 2006.

4. The Charlotte Observer, The King of Coffee in Exile by Jeff Elder, Sunday, March 16, 2008.

Magazines

1. Robb Report, Best of the Best 2004, Singular Essentials by Jessica Taylor, Volume XXVIII, June, 2004.

2. Target Trends Magazine, The Taste of Ospina Coffee, Shanghai, China, April, 2005.

3. Robb Report, Best of the Best 2005, Pure Perfection by SGS, Volume XXIX, June, 2005.

4. Uptown Magazine, Damn That’s Some Good Coffee by Thomas Carrig, Charlotte, NC, March, 2007.

5. Robb Report, Best of the Best 2004, Of Note by James Dimonekas, Volume XXXI, June, 2007.

6. Robb Report Motor Cycling, Haute Coffee by Jennifer Hall, Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2005.

7. Evasion’s International, Les Cafés Exceptionales by Rufus Willis, Paris, France, March, 2005.

8. SouthPark Magazine, Premium Blend by Lee Rohdes, Charlotte, NC, October, 2007.

Encyclopedic References

1. Wikipedia, Colombia, Mariano Ospina Rodriguez, Partido Conservador Colombiano, Pedro Nel Ospina, Mariano Ospina Perez, Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia.

2. Biblioteca Luis Angel Arango, Bogota: Mariano Ospina Rodriguez, Pedro Nel Ospina, Mariano Ospina Perez 3. U.S. Departament of State, Colombia, Ospinas 4. Coffee in Colombia 1850- 1979, Marco Palacios, Cambridge, Latin American Studies 5. Encyclopedia Britanica: Mariano Ospina Rodriguez, Pedro Nel Ospina, Mariano Ospina Perez 6. El Continente de los Siete Colores: German Arciniegas, 1965, Buenos Aires, Editorial Sudamericana 7. Historia de America: Rafael Maria Granados, 1953, Bogota 8. 1200 Años de Historia: Historia, relatos y Genealogia de los Ospinas, Mariano Ospina Peña, 2004 Bogota 9. Diccionario Biografici y Bibliografico de Colombia, 1926, Editorial Cromos Bogota 10. La vida del General Pedro Nel Ospina: Emilio Robledo 1956, Autores Antioquenos Vol 8, Medellin 11. Fundacion de Educacion Superior Mariano Ospina Perez, Nov. 2009 (en internet) 12. Biografia del Cafe: Malcom Deas, Agosto 2009

--Grancafé 19:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC) --Grancafé 20:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC) --Grancafé 21:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Moved to Talk
irrelevant on this page:

Far more is done on a coffee plantation than just growing and harvesting the fruit. When coffee cherries ripen, they must be picked almost immediately. The ripe cherries are hand-picked by harvesters and brought into the “edificio del café” (pulpery or processing plant). The next steps are: a) pulping, which is the removal of the beans from its surrounding fruit pulp or outer skin (exocarp), b) washing, c) fermenting, d) rinsing, e) sun-drying and, finally f) the removal of the parchment at the curing mill.

unnecessary detail:

As president of Colombia, he was also committed to social responsibility and reform and, to that effect, he created a financial institution (La Caja Agraria), the Social Security Administration, the Department of Labor and the Housing Credit Agency to help meet the credit, educational and social needs of blue collar workers, coffee growers, and other small farmers and peasants.

Ospina Rodríguez’ ideas and activities in the 1820s and 1830s indicated that he already conceived of technical education as an important instrument for economic development and general social improvement.

His teachings and instructions found particular successful application in the Ospina Group of coffee “Haciendas”, which in the early part of the XX century included the following plantations: -Jonas, belonging to Mariano Ospina Vásquez, with 400,000 coffee trees, in Fredonia. -El Amparo, belonging to Tulio Ospina Vásquez, with 150,000 coffee trees, in Fredonia. -El Castillo, belonging to Rafael Ospina Vásquez, with 150,000 coffee trees, in Fredonia. -La Carolina, belonging to Pedro Nel Ospina Vásquez, with 150,000 coffee trees, in Yolombó. -Pité, belonging to Tulio Ospina Vásquez, with 100,000 coffee trees, in Fredonia. -Monitos, belonging to Bernardo Ospina Vásquez, with 100,000 coffee trees, in Amagá. -San Cayetano, belonging to Tulio Ospina Vásquez, with 100,000 coffee trees, in Fredonia. -Santa Rita, belonging to Tulio Ospina Vásquez, with 70,000 coffee trees, in Venecia.

, including “El Ranchito” in Medellín, “Monterrey” in Urrao and “Normandía” in el Retiro and, helped his two younger brothers to manage ”El Amparo” in Fredonia and “Zuláibar” in Santa Rosa.

In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá. Due to the vast knowledge and experience acquired by Mariano Ospina Pérez in the coffee industry, as a result of running his own coffee business, he was summoned by the Minister of Industry Francisco J. Chaux and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Pérez was elected President of this Fourth Congress. At the adjournment of this Congress, Ospina Pérez was elected, by the unanimous vote of the delegates, as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934.

In 1954, during the election of members of the Board of Directors (of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia), Mariano Ospina Pérez, who served as President of the Republic from 1946 to 1950, was elected and installed as President of the Board of Directors. His return to the Federation marked the reappearance of one of Colombia's greatest coffee names, in an active role, in the History of Colombia's coffee industry.

Removed Paragraphs
Hello Flowanda, I just noticed the changes, deletions and adjustments to the article. Thank you very much for your most valuable help and contributions. I am an amateur in these matters, and thus, I truly appreciate your insightful work. Nevertheless, I am not convinced of all the deletions you made. I don't agree with a few of the changes and deletions, but most important to me, the section on the Colombian Coffee Federation was cut down from 7 paragraphs to 5, omitting the history of 1930 and 1954. This deletion is unfounded, in my opinion. Both paragraphs are substantiated and the reference comes directly from Mr. Diego Pizano's book, who is currently one of the top Executives of the Federation.


 * "In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá. Due to the vast knowledge and experience acquired by Mariano Ospina Pérez in the coffee industry, as a result of running his own coffee business, he was summoned by the Minister of Industry Francisco J. Chaux and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Pérez was elected President of this Fourth Congress. At the adjournment of this Congress, Ospina Pérez was elected, by the unanimous vote of the delegates, as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934.[40][41]"


 * "In 1954, during the election of members of the Board of Directors (of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia), Mariano Ospina Pérez, who served as President of the Republic from 1946 to 1950, was elected and installed as President of the Board of Directors. His return to the Federation marked the reappearance of one of Colombia's greatest coffee names, in an active role, in the History of Colombia's coffee industry.[23][42]" 42. ^ El Café en la Ecrucijada, Evolución y Perspectivas, Diego Pizano, Editorial Alfaomega, Bogotá, August 2001, Page 31, ISBN 958-682-192-7"

In my opinion, these two paragraphs are essential to the story, not only because it emphasizes the knowledge and experience of Mariano Ospina Pérez in the coffee industry, which he successfully acquired by running his own coffee business. The History of Ospina Coffee Company an the history of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia are profoundly interrelated and, as most historians (Andres Uribe, Jorge Melo and Diego Pizano) truly and properly point it out, they are almost one and the same. They are so interwoven that one story cannot be separated or isolated from the other.

Why would these two paragraphs be removed? Specially if they are substantiated by the Federation itself? Why was the reference of "El Café en la Ecrucijada, Evolución y Perspectivas, Diego Pizano, Editorial Alfaomega, Bogotá, August 2001, Page 31, ISBN 958-682-192-7" completely removed? I might be wrong, but I see no purpose or meaning. I would like you to please reexamine these two paragraphs and reincorporate them to the article. In my humble opinion, without these two paragraphs, the story and the History will not be complete.

One more thing, when reviewing and reconsidering these two paragraphs, please keep in mind that five prominent members of the Ospina family and Ospina coffee were heavenly involved in the creation, organization and administration of the Colombian Coffee Federation. They were Mariano, Pastor, Tulio, Rafael and Mariano Ospina Perez. The Federation exist because of their acumen, vision, conscience, knowledge and experience obtained in running their family coffee enterprise. There is no other family, group or business in Colombia so directly and decisively involved in the establishment of this institution. The Federation exist because the Ospinas and their coffee enterprise. The Federation is a direct byproduct of Ospina coffee and perhaps the greatest achievement of the Ospina family in favor of the coffee industry of Colombia and the coffee growers. Accuracy also requires completeness and wholeness.

Please allow me further elaborate here. What I am trying to convey and stress with these two paragraphs is the fact that if the Government, the Federation and the coffee growers of Colombia trusted Mariano Ospina Pérez to run the affairs of the nation’s coffee industry, it was because of his experience, knowhow and successful achievements, proven in the handling of his Ospina coffee business. These two paragraphs are not my words. These are direct quotes from the sources and references. It is essential to explain that his unanimous election to these positions was due to his administrative and entrepreneurial successes in his private coffee business and personal affairs.

Please realize the close relationship between Ospina Coffee, the Colombian Coffee Federation and the Ospinas, in particular the leadership and administration of Mariano Ospina Perez. The Federation exists because the Ospinas and Ospina Coffee and not the other way around, Ospina Coffee because of the Coffee Federation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs) 12:17, 7 February 2010.


 * "... it emphasizes the knowledge and experience of Mariano Ospina Pérez in the coffee industry". It is not the business of Wikipedia to emphasize anything. Wikipedia isn't interested in impressing us with Ospina's knowledge and experience either for its own sake or for the sake of explaining to us just how truly fantastic Ospina Coffee Company is. This is an objective encyclopedia, not the company's promotional brochure. If the company has a website, then that is the place where a grand, overarching story like the one you are weaving ought to be.


 * I've suggested to you several times that an (objectively written) article on the Ospina family might be warranted to carry the broader history of that dynasty. There, every single thing you might write about the family would be about the article's topic. Here, when you include this material on the family's activities outside the company, it may well have a bearing on the operation of the company over the years, but it is still not about the company.


 * "What I am trying to convey and stress with these two paragraphs is the fact that if the Government, the Federation and the coffee growers of Colombia trusted Mariano Ospina Pérez to run the affairs of the nation’s coffee industry, it was because of his experience, knowhow and successful achievements, proven in the handling of his Ospina coffee business." Another place this might belong, besides an article on the family, is in the Colombian Coffee Federation article. If the article were to mention the selection of Ospina as the head of the federation (I don't know whether it already mentions this, I haven't read it), it would be reasonable to mention (if you could cite a reliable source) that his qualifications included having successfully operated the family's company. But that would be a brief observation, not something that would run for paragraphs and paragraphs.


 * I'm concerned that despite all the efforts I and others here have made to discuss with you the problems involved in writing about a subject with which you are passionately involved, you continue to try to make this article into something that the conflict of interest guidelines were designed to prevent.


 * —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest, sourcing and edits since AfD was withdrawn
This article now bears little resemblance to the edited version that caused the withdrawal of its AfD in December 2009. The same editor who created the article, then asked for help when it was in danger of being deleted, has been pretty much the only editor to expand the article back into a poorly sourced, overly promotional article.

As pointed out by the AfD's nominator, the creator's user page indicates conflict of interest issues as he identifies himself as related to the company's founders and owners.

He's also asked for help multiple times.

Please help edit and source per reliable sources that are accessible (i.e. English), can be easily checked or verified, don't violate copyright (i.e. article text copied by nn websites), and aren't promotional shorts or overly dependent on primary sources (such as books). Flowanda | Talk 09:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * When providing sources about a subject that is not inherently English, such as this one, and said sources meet the standards for reliable sources they can be used. There is no accessibility requirement in the reliable sources policy nor is there a requirement that sources be in English. Your claim that the sources are not valid because they are not in English is spurious at best, being in Spanish does make them any less unreliable. If you wish to verify them, try Google translate, it does an excellent job of translating page in a language other than English. Instead of challenging the sources based upon their original language, could you please present valid policy based reason that would support your position?


 * Remember, (from WP:COI) Closeness to a subject does not mean you're incapable of being neutral, now there is obviously more to the policy but the main contributor seems to have taken the proper steps outlined in that policy to insure that the article has been redone so that it is neutral. As this article stands now, the author has gone out of his way to insure the subject is correctly cited and that it meets the standards for inclusion. He seems to have negated any conflict of interest issue by writing an article that easily meets the standards of neutrality and asking others to review it so that it is properly formatted, constructed and written. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 09:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It's possible that he believes he's made it neutral, but he hasn't. He has, for example, restored several times material that I and others have deleted, whole paragraphs and a whole section that has nothing whatsoever to do with the article's topic, because he is trying to convey his grand tale of the triumph of this family, and he has done so after the problems with this material have been explained to him multiple times. It is very clear that his editing activities are driven by his personal interest. —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Clarity concerning family business and company
According to its history, the company has only been in existence since the early 2000s and is based in the United States. I can find no references to the company name other than the few from product listings and regional articles and none in what little I could see from the article's book references. The family has a long and interesting history and influence in the Colombian coffee industry, but notability can't be inherited or renamed. Flowanda | Talk 09:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your response. Regarding the caption Ospina Coffee Company, you very well know that this is the English version and translation of Ospina Café. You are right that you are not going to find any reference to Ospina Coffee Company prior to 2000. The earliest reference to Ospina Coffee appears in print in 1862 and quoted in The History of coffee in Guatemala, Regina Wagner, William H. Hempstead, Cristobal von Rothkirch, Villegas Editores, Page 61-69, Bogotá, 2001, our reference #12. When I wrote the first article it was captioned “Ospina Coffee”, but someone changed it to “Ospina Coffee Company” and I had no objection to it. Although, I would prefer to call it “Ospina Coffee”.


 * Now, regarding references, as you may see by the reference listing bibliography and further readings, there are only a few in English. Of 30 references we have cited, only three are in English. The rest of them are in Spanish, and these are just the ones in print. We have hundreds of manuscripts in the family’s archives and libraries in Colombia. Most of these manuscripts and original works are available to the public at the Mariano Ospina Pérez Library and Fundacion Mariano Ospina Pérez in Bogota, Colombia (http://www.fmop.org/)(http://ospinas.net/fmop.htm). If it would be of help, I could make pdfs of the Spanish books and references. Or if there is a better way, please advice. I am still in the process of recompiling further reference material.


 * Now, regarding the history that you find in or website it only makes reference to our operations in the United States. From 1835 until 1979, Ospina Coffee Company was only dedicated to the growing, cultivation, harvesting, processing, shipping and exporting of coffee beans throughout the world. We were forced to relocate the Ospina Coffee headquarters to the USA in 1992 after the kidnapping and assassination of Lisandro Ospina. Also, Alfonso Ospina, former Chief of Staff of President Belisario Betancur and CEO of Ospina Coffee had been kidnapped and assassinated by the FARC guerrillas in 1986. These kidnappings and assassinations forced the relocation of Ospina Coffee headquarters to the USA by recommendations of the Colombian and US Governments. Although we initiated operations in the USA back in 1980 with our first market research, feasibility studies and planning, it was only until the early 2000s that we established the first corporations in the USA. Our first imports, roasting packaging, distribution and marketing in the United States only happened during 2003, after we had incorporated 7 subsidiaries of the mother house, which are: Ospina Coffee Company, Inc., a Nevada corporation, Ospina Coffee Company, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, Ospina Coffee Company International, Inc., a Nevada corporation, Ospina Coffee Company International, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, Ospina Coffee International, Corp., a North Carolina corporation, Ospina Coffee Company North America, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, Ospina Coffee Company North America, LCC., a North Carolina corporation, Ospina Coffee Company North America Distribution, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, and Ospina Coffee Company North America Distribution, LLC., a North Carolina corporation. These corporations only refer to our import, roasting, packing, distribution and marketing operations in the USA. This history does not refer to our operations in Colombia since 1835 or to any of our other operations worldwide.


 * I hope I have answered your questions and concerns. I am doing my best to improve and better my article, and I am grateful that I have found editors like Doc Quinatana, Ikip and Largoplazo to help me with this complicated process. I extend my gratitude to you as well for your help. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 02:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * PS. I made some edits and additions to my prior response for better illustration and clarification. Most truly, --Grancafé (talk) 16:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * In the end, this article has survived one afd, I see no issue with notability concerns after we've gotten it cleaned up. Doc Quintana (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The AfD was withdrawn when the article was reduced to this. The article has been again expanded by the original COI editor into a poorly sourced (i.e. not easily checked) promotional article. Flowanda | Talk 03:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, most of it looks fine now, due in large part to the work of Ikip. I concur it wasn't acceptable as it was, but it's been cleaned up. Doc Quintana (talk) 05:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Impact on the Colombian Coffee Industry
This is the proposed section to be reintroduced into the main article. I hereby request the collaboration of knowledgeable and expert editors to review, correct, add or modify it in order to properly post back into the main article, where it belongs. Thank you very much for your help and fine cooperation.

[1] Mariano Ospina Rodríguez entered the cabinet of President Pedro Alcántara Herrán in 1841, as Secretary of the Interior (1841-1845). Ospina Rodríguez’ ideas and activities in the 1820s and 1830s indicated that he already conceived of technical education as an important instrument for economic development and general social improvement.

[2] In August 25, 1920, the First National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá, presided by Epifánio Montoya, Alfredo Vásquez Cobo and Don Tulio Ospina Vásquez. This congress laid the foundation for the successful organization and establishment of the Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (English: National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia).

[3] The Second National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Medellín in 1927. Two sons of Don Tulio Ospina Vásquez, Rafael Ospina Pérez and Mariano Ospina Pérez, were among the delegates of the province of Antioquia. Rafael Ospina Pérez presided over this Congress, which created the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia.

[4] In 1928, after the Second National Congress of Coffee Growers had created the Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, the first regional committee was established as the “Comité de Cafeteros de Antioquia”. Mariano Ospina Pérez was its first President, and the first registered member of the association.

[5] The first Board of Directors of the newly organized Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia assembled in Bogotá, in August 3, 1929. Its first members were Mariano Ospina Vásquez, Alberto Camilo Suárez, Gabriel Ortiz Williamson, Carlos Caballero, Jesús del Corral and Mariano Ospina Pérez, the greatest dignitary in the History of the Federation, for whom the organization of the national coffee industry was one of his most serious and ambitious concerns.

[6] In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá. Due to the vast knowledge and experience in the coffee industry, acquired running his own coffee business, Mariano Ospina Pérez was summoned by the Minister of Industry, Francisco J. Chaux, and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Pérez was elected President of this Fourth Congress. At the adjournment of this Congress, Ospina Pérez was elected, by the unanimous vote of the delegates, as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934.

[7] In the election of members of the Board of Directors in 1954, Mariano Ospina Pérez, who served as President of the Republic from 1946 to 1950, was installed as President of the Board of Directors (of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia). His return to the Federation marked the reappearance of one of Colombia's greatest coffee names in an active role in the industry.

[8] Under Mariano Ospina Pérez' aegis, the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia successfully consolidated the nation's coffee industry and promoted it in the world markets to great effect. Colombia became the largest producer of prime Coffea arabica coffee in the world. He laid a very solid corporative foundation, and today, the Colombian Coffee Federation congregates and supports over 500,000 independent coffee growers and small farmers.

I look forward to your comments, suggestions and recommendations. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 03:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I have added numbers to the paragraphs to facilitate any further discussion, for example, to make it easier to refer to an individual paragraphs rather than the section as a whole. --Grancafé (talk) 03:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

COI editing needs to stop
References to previous versions and editors of this article don't make the current version acceptable. Source all information to recognizable, reputable, mainstream sources meeting WP:RS that can be checked online and in English, or take up your issues at a relevant noticeboard. I'll be happy to help find the right one. Flowanda | Talk 09:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's Have a Proper Forum to discuss these Issues
Thank you very much for all your advice, guidance, help, efforts and recommendations. I do NOT wish to have any sort of altercation or confrontation. I have tried to make my contributions based on historical facts and information available in the public domain. I have not posted my own words, thoughts or opinions. They are mere historical and undeniable facts, taken from reliable and accessible sources, mainly History books and industry publications. I know that most of these sources are in Spanish, and thus, I have offered to present copies or pdfs of the same for review. Nevertheless, there are some pretty good and reliable sources in English as well. I may not have quoted or referenced them perfectly, but they are there, accessible, reliable and easy to find and read. I have also requested several individual editors, groups and task forces to review and proof-read the article. I am not insisting or pushing for biased thoughts, ideas or opinions. I am only interested in facts and neutral and truthful information. This is precisely why I have insistently asked for help and invited contributions and editors to participate in the discussion and project. What I do not appreciate is the unfounded and unjustified mutilation of the article. I welcome, invite and ask for independent, neutral and experienced editing help, specifically from those from academia, historians and well versed editors. I apologize if my level of writing, contribution and editing is not at your same level. I would like to take these issues to the proper forum for discussion and resolution. Thank you very much. --Grancafé (talk) 00:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You ask people to contribute to your article, and to give you "independent, neutral, and experienced editing help", and then when they do, you call it "unfounded and unjustified mutilation". It's amazing that you would say that given that we have explained over and over the very good reasons and valid justifications for the edits, and I think your dissemblance shows a good measure of bad faith on your part. I'm gathering that the reason you're unhappy is that the result of everyone's comments and edits is that the article is not what you would like the article to be. It's entirely possible that what you would like the article to be isn't consistent with what a Wikipedia article should be. While the company is unquestionably an appropriate topic for a Wikipedia article, it just may be that another forum would be more suitable for the particular article that you seem determined to write about it. This isn't a criticism: a laudable article on Wikipedia wouldn't appear as-is in Smithsonian or Travel and Leisure, and an article that would go well in Esquire wouldn't be suitable for The Christian Science Monitor.
 * I want to point out that while you keep talking about all the sources that you have, the comments I've made to you have had little or nothing to do with sourcing, but have had to do with its lofty and glorifying tone and its frequent digression from the article's topic. —Largo Plazo (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I invite you to a constructive dialogue
First of all, I wish to apologize to anyone I have offended for my lack of experience in editing and for any improper use of the English language; it is not my native language. I also wish to apologize for any inconvenience caused by my mistakes or infractions as to the protocol, rules and procedures of the Wikipedia organization. This is due to my lack of knowledge and training, but never in bad faith.

As to the use of the term “forum” you might be correct if it is used in reference to the place or venue of discourse. But “forum” also refers to a court or tribunal, usually of public opinion. What I meant to say was, that perhaps we should invite other participants into the discussion. Perhaps we should invite other editors with vast experience and knowledge, mainly in the areas of History, anthropology, sociology, economics, encyclopedic works, world trade and alike. I am only interested in the historical facts and the socio-economic impact that Ospina Coffee has had throughout the many years over the coffee industry in Colombia, and lately over the world. That’s all. If someone else wishes to rewrite the article, which is fine with me, as long as the true facts remain intact. But not to rephrase half truths; it has to be just the truth and all the truth. I have no objection to the editing, deletion or mutilation of embellishments, distortions or bias opinions. To the contrary, I ask for and welcome them. What I do object to is the removal of undisputed, fundamental and essential facts and findings.

I thank you once again for your patience, help and understanding. Believe me, I do not wish for any sort of altercation or confrontation. Rather, I wish for a civilized and constructive dialog. Thanks. --Grancafé (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * PS. Furthermore, Flowanda and Largoplazo have deleted much of the article on the grounds of digression. You might have your point of view, certainly different than mine. I am not advocating a narrow view, but rather a broad and deep view. For example, if one is writing an article about Harvard University, I find it most appropriate to analyze and describe the impact that its teachings have had upon the multitude of world leaders that have studied there. Alumni such as Philip W. Anderson, T. S. Eliot, Walter Gilbert, Al Gore and Henry Kissinger, just to mention a few. To write about its alumni is not a digression, to the contrary, it is a comprehensive and holistic and imperative task. And this is why I have suggested reintroducing the whole section on the Colombian Coffee Federation under the caption of “Impact on the Colombian Coffee Industry”. I think it is not only right and just, but fundamental and essential to a proper article of notability. Thanks again. --Grancafé (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A mention of Al Gore's attendance at Harvard belongs in the article about Harvard. The details of his upbringing, his wife, his children, his father's service in the Senate, his own service in the Senate, his vice presidency, and the Supreme Court Decision denying him victory in the 2000 election would not. The article about Harvard is about Harvard, not about Al Gore. The article about Ospina Coffee Company is about Ospina Coffee Company, and not, by extension, about all the other activities in the lives of the people who founded and operated it. Those details may belong in articles about those people. Readers who are interested in knowing about those people's backgrounds to see how they may shed light on those people's involvement in the company, are capable of clicking the links to the article on those people. —Largo Plazo (talk) 08:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It occurs to me that it wouldn't make any sense to put the paragraphs that you've written under the heading "Impact on the Colombian Coffee Industry", because, as I said before, none of those paragraphs says anything about the company. It doesn't even say anything about the company's influence on the Colombian coffee industry. It talks about the activities of some of the people who were associated with the company as they pertain to the Colombian coffee industry.
 * It also occurs to me to note once again that your concern here is with impressing everybody with the sheer importance of this company. A Wikipedia article doesn't exist for the purpose of impressing anyone with anything. It must not be written with a view toward convincing anyone of everything. If you put facts about the company in the company's article, facts about the Coffee Federation in the article about Coffee Federation, and facts about the individuals in articles about those individuals, and have the articles effectively hyperlinked, then anyone looking for the big picture will get the big picture, and then it will be up to them to draw their own conclusions. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Let’s continue our dialog
I thank all of you for your patience, understanding, zealousness, good faith and endurance. I suggest that we continue our dialog, like Jeremy and LargoPlazo have so requested, in one page which I consider to be Talk:Ospina Coffee Company the most appropriate. If this is not the correct page, I have no objection to doing so in another one. Thank you very much. --Grancafé (talk) 03:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Big Picture
I am trying to convey that there are two ways to view an idea or concept, the myopic and narrow view and the broad and wide angle. I am proposing to reintroduce into the main article the entire section (here above) entitled “Impact on the Colombian Coffee Industry", to reveal how Ospina Coffee has influenced and impacted both, the national coffee industry and the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia.

You are not getting the idea. I gave you the example of Harvard University and its alumni. You responded saying that those are to separate issues. I don’t agree with your opinion, but I admit that it was not a very good example. So let me try again. Please go to the webpage of Harvard University (http://www.harvard.edu/), then go to their page called Harvard and the Community (http://www.community.harvard.edu/), and then go to their section on Economic Impact (http://www.community.harvard.edu/economic_impact.php). There you will find an in-depth, comprehensive and exhaustive article covering this most important and relevant matter.

Now, you tell me why Ospina Coffee is forbidden and disqualified to present its socio-economic impact on Colombia’s coffee industry and in particular in regards to the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia? I truly believe that we must invite community members from academia, scholars, historians, economist and sociologist to participate in this discussion. Perhaps I am not the person most qualified to write this article due to my language and encyclopedic limitations, but the historical and socio-economic facts of the matter are undeniable, most relevant and fundamental. This is why I have insistently invited other well versed and trained editors to participate in this project. Don’t you agree? Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 01:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You are missing the point. Harvard University is perfectly free to go on at extreme lengths about any topic they want to on their website. They are free to use their website to promote their university in any way they want, enthralling the public with its wonders, sharing all kinds of fascinating histories about its glorious alumni. They can have a Harvard Community website and a Harvard Alumni website and a Harvard Research website and anything else they want.


 * This is Wikipedia. It's an encyclopedia. It is not the Harvard University website. It is not the Ospina Coffee Company website. It isn't Forbes Magazine, it isn't Travel and Leisure Magazine, and it isn't a book you are writing. It has articles on topics, and each article is supposed to be directly about the topic. I am not making this up to give you a hard time, I am explaining to you the guidelines that exist. These guidelines have already been pointed out to you. You may not like them. That doesn't matter. What I don't understand is this: there are plenty, plenty of places where you could publish the broad-reaching tale that you want to weave—the company's own website, an article for a magazine, a book—so why are you so concerned that this is not the place for it?


 * Moreover, I have already told you several times: there is no reason why the material in question can't be on Wikipedia. But it belongs in the pertinent articles. It's as simple as that. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I have added numbers to the paragraphs (above) to facilitate any further discussion, for example, to make it easier to refer to an individual paragraphs rather than the section as a whole. --Grancafé (talk) 03:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I will concur with you that paragraph [1] may better fit in another article, such as the biography on Mariano Ospina Rodríguez. If you agree, I will transfer it to that page and we will not discuss it anymore for this article. Your comments please, --Grancafé (talk) 03:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Upon further reflection and analysis, I will further concur with you that paragraphs [2], [3], [4], [5], [7] and [8] may better fit in another article, such as the biography of Mariano Ospina Pérez or the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia. If you agree, I will transfer them to the appropriate pages (some are already transferred) and we will not discuss this issue anymore for this article. Your comments please. --Grancafé (talk) 04:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding paragraph [6], I still have doubts. It might fit in this article as it makes reference to Ospina Pérez' knowledge and experience running his private coffee enterprise, which gave hin the qualifications to run the highest office of the coffee industry in the nation. Your thought please. --Grancafé (talk) 04:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * One last remark. Thank you very much for your fine collaboration and input. I will say it again, I am not interested in conflict or wrestling. You obviously have more wikipedian experience than I do. Thus, I am willing to learn and be a good editor. This does not mean that I am recanting as to my believe regarding the relevance and significance of addressing the socio-economic impact of Ospina Coffee over the Colombian coffee industry and the Federation, but perhaps there is a better and different way to express it. I look forward to your comments and I apologize for any misunderstandings, my shortcomings and my lack of experience. Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 03:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Material added after most of this talk page (which I've restored) was deleted
The content and notability of this article needs to be reviewed and edited as the majority of this article was written and edited by an editor with a stated conflict of interest.

This is what the article looked like when it was nominated for deletion. This is what it looked like when the AfD was withdrawn. The majority of editing before and after by User: Grancafe shows no deviation from his stated conflict of interest. Flowanda | Talk 10:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Dispute Resolution
There is no conflict of interest here. That is your misguided opinion. My utmost interest is the truth and the undisputed, undeniable and well referenced historical facts. The interest of Wikipedia, academia end the community are above your interest or mine. This is why I have insistently invited other well versed and trained editors to participate in this project. I truly believe that we must invite community members from academia, scholars, historians, economist and sociologist to participate in this discussion. Do you think it is time to take this matter to Dispute resolution? Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 11:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * For perhaps the fifth or sixth time that I'm pointing this out to you: you can recount the undisputed, undeniable and well referenced historical facts in articles about the topics to which they relate, instead of trying to squeeze them all into an article to which they don't relate. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You have a conflict of interest by definition since you are associated with the company and related to the people of whom you are writing. It is blatantly obvious from your own user page: "I am the eldest of the fifth generation of Ospina coffee lovers, entrepreneurs and community leaders from Colombia, South America." If you don't see this, then perhaps you don't understand what "conflict of interest" means. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not trying to squeeze anything in. Did you read my response to you from last night? Please ask Flowanda what did she do with it. I clearly stated that I was no longer pursuing the insertion of fundamental, relevant and most significant soicio-economic impact of Ospina Coffee over Colombia’s coffee industry or the Federation. Is that not clear enough to you? Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 13:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. It looks as though you're agreeing with me now that a whole bunch of paragraphs do belong in other articles, and not in this one. So why are you still arguing and complaining? As for Paragraph 6, "It might fit in this article as it makes reference to Ospina Pérez' knowledge and experience running his private coffee enterprise, which gave hin the qualifications to run the highest office of the coffee industry in the nation." Wikipedia has no interest in convincing readers of anyone's qualifications. AGAIN: WP:SOAPBOX. —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I did agree with you, to a certain extent. That is exactly what I said last night. I am not complaining now. I think my statements from last night were very agreeable, cordial and clear. What I do not appreciate is being accused of having a slanted conflict of interest or agenda. I am objective, neutral and impartial. Thus, if this accusation persists, we will have to take this issue to Dispute resolution. I don’t see any other way to move forward. Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 13:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You do have a conflict of interest. It isn't an accusation—it's a fact. Moreover, it's been reflected throughout much of the parts of the article that have been deleted, and in your discussions. There were a lot of signs of bias, including all the WP:PEACOCK language I told you about early on. —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding paragraph [6], I am not arguing, discussing or persisting. All I did was to ask you about your thoughts. That’s all. You replied: “Wikipedia has no interest in convincing readers of anyone's qualifications” and that is sufficient to drop the issue. I asked for your advice, and that is all I needed. Thanks. There is nothing more to discuss regarding paragraphs [1] through [8]. Now, as to the COI accusation, how should we proceed to resolve this issue? Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 13:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * There's nothing to proceed with. You have a conflict of interest. What in the world makes you think there's anything you can do about it? As I already noted, you proclaim it on your own user page (though it would still be a fact even if you didn't). —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, I have to overwhelmingly agree with Largo Plazo, this article has an extreme conflict of interest and is über biased, there are some claims that clearly fall under Avoid weasel words like "... as the Colombian Ambassador to the United States, he highly promoted the nation's coffee industry" and absurd claims like President Nel Ospina "greatly advanced the national railway system to facilitate and increase the commerce and export of coffee". As a Colombian wikipedian, I have come to the realization of the overtly unnecessarily over-patriotic Tone which many sources on Colombia have, which force the reader to take in Ignacio Arismendi Posada et al's works with a grain of salt. Furthermore the "Further reading" is a collection of mostly unnecessarily further reading, I mean, it is not called 'Every reading available, things like "Historia de America, Rafael Maria Granados, Bogotá, Colombia, 1953." cannot be expected to be a further reading on THIS article, likewise for the lablaa articles on the Ospinas, yes they mention coffee but nowhere they mention Ospina Coffee Company, for all we know those articles talk about some other company and would be a better further reading in the Presidents' articles instead of here. mijotoba (talk) 01:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help
Hi LargoPlazo, I just noticed the editing work that you did to the Ospina Coffee article. Thank you very much for your help. I do appreciate your experience in editing and your proficiency in the English language, both in grammar and composition. You obviously have a less passionate literary style. I don’t know your cultural background, but I am sure you understand that Latinos are more passionate than Anglo Saxons. Thus, I am grateful for your help and contributions. This is precisely what I have been asking so insistently, the editing help of an experienced Wikipedian. To the changes you made, I had to re-introduce the name of "Pedro" Nel Ospina. "Pedro" is his first name and "Nel" is his middle name. We either call him Pedro Nel Ospina or General Ospina. Nel Ospina just doesn’t sound right. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 05:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * PS. I also re-introduced the name of "Tulio" Ospina Vasquez, because there are two Ospina Vásquez referred to a few paragraphs above, Tulio and Mariano. I think it is necessary to identify which of the two Ospina Vásquez is the father of Ospina Perez. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * There was no offense or insult intended. That is not my nature. To the contrary, I try to be graceful and grateful. I did not mean that you were incapable of writing a passionate article; what I meant was that there are significant differences in literary styles and expressions between Latinos and Anglo Saxons. That’s all, and that's true. Please don’t feel offended by this fact of life. We all have different talents and gifts; that is the beauty of diversity. And finally, I do mean it when I say thank you. We do have differences of opinion and that is why it is important to discuss this kind of issues. That’s what makes the difference between civilization and barbarism. Thanks again for your help and contributions. Best,--Grancafé (talk) 06:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Why do you keep carrying on the same conversation in multiple places? Simply removing my side of the conversation when you copied and pasted your side of it from my talk page, as you've done this time, doesn't solve the problem. Please stop this. Since you have insisted on having this here, I might as well let everyone know that in my part of the conversation, I scolded you for resorting to ethnic stereotypes and, no, they aren't justified no matter how pretty you try to make them sound. I also pointed out to you that all the edits and explanations that you're graciously and abundantly thanking for me now, I also gave you three weeks ago and, before that, six weeks ago, and you thanked me just as profusely then and then went ahead and ignored much of what I had told you and restored material that others had removed for good reasons.
 * Besides that, I am restoring, above, the contribution to this page by another editor that you removed without justification. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:45, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I had posted the paragraphs starting at line 390 last night (at 06:17, 14 February 2010), because I considered important to be on this page. I DO NOT APPRECIATE YOU cutting and deleting my postings on my talk page. Thus, I thank you for restoring it. I would also appreciate if you tone down your belligerent tone. I don't think it is necessary or productive. Thank you, --Grancafé (talk) 17:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Webster's Timeline History
There is an item in the reference section: The Ospinas, Webster's Timeline History... This page is, according to Google, the only mention of this work on the Internet. In addition, Webster's Timeline History may be a useless pile of garbage. Examine this review of another item in the series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.94.128 (talk) 01:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)