Talk:Panama/Archive 2

Statistics
Anyone know the source for these population statistics? World Bank? IMF? UNICEF? Article claims 3.232 million people, CIA World Factbook says "3,191,319 (July 2006 est.)". Also, article says population is 80% Catholic, CIA says 85%. Since article's stats are un-referenced, should we use citable CIA stats? - Eric 08:19-08:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What is the correct percentage of Muslims in Panama? This article says it's 4.4%, while the Islam in Panama article say it's 0.3%. Obviously, one of these is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.17.34 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, article says population is 80% Catholic, CIA says 85%. Since article's stats are un-referenced, should we use citable CIA stats? - Eric 08:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Both are absurd. There is no country in Latin Americ today in which 80% or 85% of the population are practicing Roman Catholics. In Panama, as in every Latin America coutry, the numbers of practicing Roman Catholics is declining and the number of Protestants, including Mormons and Pentacostals is growing expoentially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.72.210.100 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Comarcas and provinces
I corrected the information about Comarcas and provinces. It is necessary to correct the map. I found one that ilustrate the comarcas very well. It is necessary just to give it a format more similar than the ones used here in Wikipedia. It is available here. When I will find an official version from Contraloria or Tommy Guardia Institute I will upload it. --Dendrotech 18:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Improvement Drive
South America is currently nominated to be improved on This week's improvement drive. You can support the article with your vote.--Fenice 12:14, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject
In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Central America at WikiProject Council/Proposals whose scope would include Panama. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

For profit sites
I've eliminated the "non-profit" statement on the Panama Travel Focus and Panama Sights websites; these sites are clearly supported by advertising. I've also added Panamainfo, which is a similar site to these. (BTW, what are the guidelines for publishing for-profit sites on a Wikipedia country page? I'm new to this, and would like to abide by community guidelines.) 201.227.246.74 15:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You can find more information here. In general, external references to "for profit" sites are not a bad thing, but the content provided by them should be treated with caution. Non-profit sites are not necessarily free of POV information. The only real difference is that the motivation for the POV may not be money. SRICE13(TALK 15:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This says the "non-profit" was eliminated while actually the LINK was eliminated. Sure, there is google advertisement because quite frankly somebody has to pay the hosting bills and to that the "profit" barely pays the expenses. I see PanamaSights/FocusOnPanama being eliminated while there is a link to places like Panama1.com which actually makes a lot of revenue on advertisement. So either you eliminate all or be fair. Even WikiPedia is not non-profit, it receives donations and most definitely there is plenty of left over that can be considered profit. Lordofthings 12:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)LordOfThings
 * The "for profit" title of this discussion has confused the issue. The link should be removed not because it is "for profit" or even because it isn't a fine and useful website. The external link guidelines WP:EL are quite clear: Wikipedia is not a directory of pretty good websites. Panamasights is not an official website (which are given preference) and the information that it contains (roads, embassys, telephone numbers, etc.) can already be accessed at other official websites. The unique aspect of the website is the forum, but WP:EL is quite clear that forums should not be linked (for a variety of reasons.) For all of these reasons the link should not be readded. Nposs 12:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The above user Lordofthings has noted on his/her talk page that they are the owner of the sight. Adding links to your own site is a violation of WP:COI. Because of this, and for the reasons listed above (non-official site with information already available from official sources, plus the forum and advertising) I will be removing the link. I urge the user to not re-add the link to their website, but rather await further discussion from other editors. Nposs 13:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:3O response
Links to for-profit sites are of course allowable on Wikipedia. If they weren't, Wikipedia would have almost no external links or references.

However, objective neutrality and community consensus are paramount to Wikipedia. If there is any doubt about this claim, please see the Foundation Issues. In this light it should be clear that no editor should stand to make a profit by virtue of his edits to Wikipedia content. (Please note the exact wording of that sentence, as the way it is phrased is very important.)

Lordofthings: It does not matter what volume, what reason, or what method is associated with your profits from your website. The fact of the matter is that web traffic to your site generates revenue for you. Therefore it is a clear conflict of interest for you to add your link to Wikipedia.

If other Wikipedians come to a consensus that your website is appropriate, then it could be added back by other Wikipedians. However, it would seem by the discussion that there is substantial objection to your website in relation to your article. Again, as Nposs said above, that does not necessarily say anything about the quality or usefulness of your website, only about its appropriateness to this article based on Wikipedia generally accepted practices (also known as "guidelines").

That is my opinion on this conflict. I would be happy to follow up with this issue if you would like to discuss further, but I would encourage you to take what I have said seriously.

Cheers. - Che Nuevara 13:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
Undid vandalism by IP address 216.147.235.164.

I did this manually--how do you revert an edit?

Also, is there a proper place for me to report this vandalism?JeffKo427 19:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking of that situation. Depending on the nature of the vandlism, you can to a couple of methods. See WP:VAN for more information. Cheers. SRICE13(TALK 15:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

External link clean-up
This article has too many links, many of which do not pass the external link guidelines. Wikipedia is not a directory of links (see WP:NOT) - DMOZ is a directory of links, and in fact, the Panama dmoz directory is already linked. Commercial sites with limited additional encyclopedic content, directories, forums, non-official tourism sites really should not be linked. I'm removing several links. I encourage you to discuss any re-additions here before making any edits. Nposs 02:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I ended up removing more sites than I expected. Several were only tangentially related to the article. Links need to be directly related to the article. A general link to a site that might contain information about Panama, among other topics, violates WP:EL. However, there might be content on some general sites that could be worth deep linking. As far as the other links - most were highly promotional and filled with advertising. Nposs 02:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

According to Nposs, the external link that I included was "inappropriate." However, www.latinre.tv is anything but that. A free, IPTV channel about Panama is an interesting, visual, dynamic way to present the sights and sounds of Panama if one is not so fortunate to have already visited.

Furthermore, www.Panama980.com was deleted. Panama 9º80º is a travel and lifestyle magazine about Panama providing an array of well written articles. Why should these not be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msutherl (talk • contribs) 00:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for finally discussing it. Repeatedly adding the same link without discussion (even after it has been removed by other editors with justification) looks a lot like spam. I feel the link violates the external link guidelines (WP:EL) in multiple ways:
 * It is a general level url to a site not directly related to the article. (Links to be avoided #13). It is about real estate in Latin America - not specifically Panama.
 * Even when deep linked to the video about Panama (which would be a better link), the content is largely promotional and non-encyclopedic. Much of it is simply advertising. Links to be avoided #4: Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.
 * The content is primarily in video form. Links to be avoided #8: Links to rich media that require external applications to access the content.
 * Also, the site made my browser crash - a problem I very rarely have.
 * I don't see how this could possibly pass the external link guidelines. Panama980 might be worth reconsidering if anyone would like to discuss its merits. Nposs 01:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I apologize that it looked like spam. It is obviously not. I live in Panama and as a current resident, I find it to be value added, along with www.panama-guide.com, which someone discredited because of what was said on Noriegaville (Not exactly a "reputable" source). There are many, interesting sites with GOOD information about Panama. The home page of latinre.tv, for example, talks only about Panama and refers to other countries in the region only at the very very bottom. Futhermore, the videos are about the Panama Canal, the Cayuco Race, and other good information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.218.126.12 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Are there more specific urls to the videos you mentioned? The main page just shows videos of advertisements. Nposs 02:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Languages Distribution
The article naturally informs of the official language of Panama. However, I think information about the distribution of the spoken languages would be a good addition. My search for this information gave me a few results. The CIA World Factbook has this to offer about the languages of Panama: "Spanish (official), English 14%; note - many Panamanians bilingual." More info is also at. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.150.203.74 (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Real estate
"There are more than 105 projects in Panama City where neighborhoods are experiencing a huge increase in the number of buildings. In San Francisco there are currently 25 new buildings being built." where and when are these facts from; would it be better to just remove this all together? Enelson 16:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This whole section needs some work. There are no citations! The writing is clear and the style is correct, so this is really too bad. In my opinion, it's too relevant to the article to just remove it, but it really does need those citations.-Athaler 19:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Panama as a "world power"
There is a certain user who somehow has many different IPs contributing from Panama City, Panama. Other users, including myself, have reverted edits that state Panama can or will become a "world power". No matter what the excuse is, it is not sourced, there is no truth to it, and Panama is a Third World country, regardless of it high buildings and such.

Also, a not to contributors, do not remove the unreferenced tag on the page until all sources are cited  LaNicoya    •TALK•  04:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree. This is also an inherently POV description, and therefor not appropriate. These kinds of edits will be reverted and warnings will be issued. Notmyrealname 16:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Én la página en Español esto es una permanente batalla, ya que existen wikipedistas panameños que por ignorancia se arriesgan a especular con el desarrollo económico sin tener una referencia confiable. Todas estas incorporaciones sin referencia deben borrarse. --201.240.31.164 (talk) 05:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I´m agree with Lanicoya, I´m panamenian and I know that this false contributions just rest credibility to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.215.122.253 (talk) 21:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Marcha Real
Why is it that Panama is the only Latin American country in the English Wikipedia to have Spain's Marcha Real listed as a royal anthem, while all the other Latin American countries have no kind of royal anthem listed? I also looked in the Spanish version of the Panama article and it did not have any kind of royal anthem listed either. Why is it there on the English version, and why Panama and no other Latin American countries?

El Espanameño 15:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Population
I removed the section that said Panama has the smallest population of any country in Spanish Speaking Latin America, this is simple untrue, Belize has less than 10% of Panama's population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ (talk) Belize's official language is English.72.149.155.83 16:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

PEOPLE OF BELIZE SPEAKS ENGLISH, AND ENGLISH IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THAT COUNTY, SEE THE PAGE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.215.122.253 (talk) 21:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC) WRONG, according to the 2000 Census Spanish is the mother language of over 46% of the people of Belize, by far more than English. Spanish SHOULD BE AND WILL BE AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF BELIZE.
 * It doesn't matter if Spanish SHOULD be the official language of Belize. The FACT is that English is the official language, even though only 4% of their population speaks it. This is an encyclopedia. It deals with fact, not what you think should be. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Foreign Investors and Expatriates in Panama
A Legal Crisis Expatriates in Panama -- This story needs to be told.

A report was recently prepared by several respectable Panamanian attorneys who are devoted to the importance of the law in Panama and believe it is important to reveal how the blind ambition of a law firm is attempting to prevent the enforcement of the last will and testament of an American expatriate, who wishes to give $50.0 Million to benefit thousands of needy children in Panama.

While at the same time, with the backing of the same law firm, a well-known international bank that was determined to punish a customer who complained and reported the banks poor performance on the internet; was able to attach and completely freeze for 16 months so far, the bank accounts held in that bank by a Canadian expatriate, that are needed to finance that expatriates retirement in Panama. One of the acccounts was held by a Panamanian Charitable Foundation, supposedly sacrosanct under Panamanian law and its assets untouchable by legal process.

If the gift by the American expatriate to the poor children of Panama is prevented; $50.0 Million Dollars will go to one of Panamas elite and most powerful families. This gift is the largest legacy of charitable giving for this purpose in the history of the country.

THESE TWO CASES, PRESENTLY BEFORE THE PANAMA SUPREME COURT WILL ANSWER THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE PANAMANIAN COURTS CAN PROTECT THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF THE FOREIGN INVESTOR AND THE EXPATRIATES WHO CHOOSE PANAMA AS THEIR SECOND COUNTRY. OR WILL THESE PERSONS SIMPLY BE THE VICTIMS OF PREY BY A SMALL GROUP OF UNSCRUPULOUS AND UNETHICAL ATTORNEYS, WHO HARM THE CREDIBILITY OF SUCH A NOBLE PROFESSION?

Download full report in English: http://www.lucom-ninospobresdepanama.com/pdf/Lucom_Report_E.pdf Lucom 17:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?
Why does this page say that the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty was signed by "Mr. Captain Olimar—a French fry?" Is that vandalism?

MaxwellPerkins 05:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Lack of information and no mention of Illegal secession from colombia with US Military intervention
I really would like to know why Panamas relationship with Colombia was "an unstable relationship that lasted seventy three years." I would also like to know why, there is not more information about the illegality of Panama's secession. The US interference in Colombian affairs was completely out of order.--CharlesBronson18 19:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Removal of external link
I have removed the http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_13/issue_22/frontpage.html a couple times now. The website is full of Ads and such. -- LaNicoya  •Talk•   01:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

University Project
Hi my name is Greg Svishchov and I am a student at the University of Toronto. For one of my courses (Latin American History) my final project consists of contributing to existing Wikipedia entries. My research on the topic of the Panama-U.S. Bilateral Investment Treaty has been posted on this page. Please be so kind as to not delete this until after the New Year, once my professor has had a chance to grade my work.

I have pasted the following text on this page under the Economy section:

Bilateral Investment Treaty with the U.S.
The Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between the governments of the United States and Panama was signed on October 27, 1982. It was the second BIT ever to be signed by the U.S., with the Egypt treaty resolved only a month prior. The 1982 Treaty protects U.S. investment and assists Panama in its efforts to develop its economy by creating conditions more favorable for U.S. private investment and thereby strengthening the development of its private sector.

So how exactly is the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between the United States and Panama relevant to Latin American studies? Signed in 1982, the Panama treaty was the second BIT ever to be signed by the U.S., and the first BIT ever to be signed by the U.S. in the Western Hemisphere. This shows that Panama posed immense strategic and economic interests to the United States. It is safe to say that out of the whole Western Hemisphere, close ties with Panama were most important to the U.S., and the BIT between the two governments was an attempt to solidify these ties even further.

The presence of the U.S. as a strong hegemonic giant in the Western Hemisphere has been felt for a long time. The fact that Panama was the first nation to sign such an agreement with the U.S. clearly indicates the importance of this small nation to the world’s greatest power.

This economic significance stems from the Panama Canal which was built by the U.S. during the period of 1904-1914. Previously, if ships wanted to pass through the Americas, they would have to go all the way around the most southern tip of South America, the Tierra del Fuego, and through the treacherous Drake Passage. The Panama Canal connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans directly at the narrowest point in Panama, greatly reducing ship travel time. When previously a ship going from New York to San Francisco would have to travel for 20,900 kilometers, now that travel time would be reduced to 8,370 km.

The canal is of immense economic importance since it provides millions of dollars from toll revenue as well as a right to include and exclude any other nation or company from using it. The United States had complete monopoly over the Panama Canal for 85 years. However, the Torrijos-Carter Treaties signed in 1977 began the process of returning the canal to the Panamanian government in 1999 as long as they agreed to the neutrality of the canal, as well as allowing the U.S. to return at any time.[5]

Thus it can be clearly seen that the 1982 Bilateral Investment Treaty with Panama was very important for the U.S. because it strengthened economic ties between the two countries and improved their relations. This gave the U.S. another pretense to be involved in Panama’s economy and to keep a watchful eye on the Panama Canal.

Please do not delete this. Thank You kindly.

Greg Svishchov 02:31, 31 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Rather than keep the page static, it may be preferable to give your professor a reference to the archived version of the page you edited (which won't ever be deleted from teh archive): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Panama&oldid=174971866
 * Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for the interest and contribution to Wikipedia! --TeaDrinker 02:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Hector Lopez
Can anyone tell me if this is Hector Lopez. Please drop a note on my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

John Darwin
This article should mention John Darwin the man who fled to Panama after faking his own death by drowning after dispearing in a canoe and who fled to panama. This wasa major story in the UK and probabally in panama too. 90.242.158.170 (talk) 18:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Um, no. This is an article about Panama. It is not a collection of news stories that have nothing to do with the country.Notmyrealname (talk) 20:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

History
On this page's section on history, it goes straight from Pre-Colombian Panama, to its independence. Its colonial history with Spain should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.196.86 (talk) 00:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

USA has no participation on Panama's independence from Colombia.
I have reverted this edit, submitted, I assume, in good faith, because it needs substantial editing and I don't know this field at all. Could someone work on this? -- Mwanner | Talk 20:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's pretty clearly a piece of historical revisionism. I wouldn't worry much about trying to get it included. Kww (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Should have added a section, but ... Reference to "The Association of the Dead on December 20" should be removed. It is only found as 'The Association of the Dead of December 20th', and only then as referenced in a documentary movie -- most hits are on IMDB. 166.128.161.189 (talk) 13:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Many history books do claim that the US blocking did assist Panama's gaining independance. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

A unique geographical feature?
I've read that Panama is the only place in the world where one could watch the sun rise over the Pacific Ocean and set on the Atlantic. Is this factual? And I think that there should be at least some brief description of the Provinces and regions in the primary article, seeing as there is some basic info for all the other related articles within this one.

-Alan 24.184.184.177 (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * According to Geography of Panama, "From Cerro Jefe, near Panama City, it is possible to see both the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean from the same location. This makes Panama the only place in the world where you can see the sun rise in the Pacific and set in the Atlantic." Unfortunately there's no reference, but if the mountain is high enough it's plausible on the map, which shows the Pacific's Gulf of Panama to the east, and the Atlantic's Golfo de los Mosquitos to the west. Art LaPella (talk) 01:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

West coast
The article mentions "the surfing areas of the west coast". Here is a map of Panama's surfing areas. They're all over, and anyway Panama has a north coast and a south coast, not a west coast. Art LaPella (talk) 00:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the name.
Who first supplied the name "Panama", when, and what is it supposed to mean? --76.202.247.117 (talk) 02:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Punctuation and Internal Links
After listening to a podcast of an old show that was broadcast during the US Invasion of Panama, I decided to read up on it here. The next evening (tonight), I decided to read the page dealing with Panama itself.

After reading only the first two paragraphs, I realized that whoever wrote this did not have a very good handle on correct puctuation, especially proper use of commas, semi-colons, and colons. I have a suspicion that some of the text may have been translated from Spanish, and so would explain the errors.

I have started a complete edit of the page, but I am specifically limiting my edits to syntax and punctuation. So far, I have only re-written one line, but I have made sure that I just re-arranged the parts of the sentence and did not change its meaning or spirit. I am also going to start putting brackets in where I can to create internal links to pages that already exist here on the site.

Both of these should make it much more readable, and also easier to explore more information about mentioned topics. I hope everyone will agree that these changes would be beneficial to the page.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.211.8.149 (talk) 00:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Relevant sources
I think I'm going to be working on this article in the coming days, maybe with GA as a goal. I'm pasting sources I think look good here. If I move on to other topics, others should pick up where I left off! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * History:
 * The history of Panama / Robert C. Harding. / Greenwood Press, 2006. / 031333322X - this looks like the best book available in English, but probably not as good as the Spanish sources?
 * Historia general de Panamá / Alfredo Castillero Calvo. / Comité Nacional del Centenario de la República, 2004. / 996202580X - probably the best comprehensive national history? in five volumes. maybe a little overkill, and obviously not in English.
 * Panamá, cien años de República / Comisión Universitaria del Centenario de la República. / Manfer, 2004. / 9962608392 - also in Spanish, maybe a bit more manageable (500pp), only covers last 100 years of history

history section - sources - possible bias
Reading the history section, specifically the "Separation from Colombia" subsection, I am struck by what seems to be a ridiculous lack of sources and citations, as well as biased statements. The entire section lacks even one source and is extremely POV - for instance, speaking of Torrijos' government, "Torrijos' regime was harsh and corrupt", and "Torrijos' death in 1981 altered the tone but not the direction of Panama's political evolution" ... really? Says who? No citations, that's for sure, and whether his regime was harsh and corrupt certainly isn't for someone to declare all by their lonesome, without citing corroborating evidence of said harshness and corruption. Oh, and mentions of human rights abuse? Where's that coming from? Citation, please, otherwise you could be making it up for all I know - and misleading a whole lot of people.

Further, we have this excerpt... "On December 20, 1989, President George H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. military into Panama to 'protect U.S. lives and property, to fulfill U.S. treaty responsibilities to operate and defend the Canal, to assist the Panamanian people in restoring democracy, and to bring Noriega to justice.'" That is a direct quote, but there is no citation. Furthermore, there is no mention of even the possibility of their having been controversy about the United States invading another sovereign nation - or of any information about the invasion itself, other than what seems to be a stock U.S. Government POV press release quote. What is Wikipedia coming to when there are not different points of view presented, and when people feel it acceptable to write their own interpretation of history without even bothering to cite?

This page needs someone that is actually from Panama to do some serious revision, instead of someone writing imperialist apologisms... it's incredible how one-sided this section is.

Nigh70wl (talk) 23:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to address some of the above concerns by providing links to the New York Times transcript of president Bush's address, as well as provided references to Panamanian literature (historians) on the subject. A more diverse literature review would be a welcome addition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediascientist (talk • contribs) 11:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Geography: North or South America?
So, under which category would Panama be best organized in other wikipages? North America or South America? - User:Ancanus 07:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I think Panama would be considered in South panama was of the many places that world war 2 took place in the capital
 * Gringos really don't know Panamá is part of Central America. Ignorants!!! --196.40.78.249 21:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I am Panamanian and nobody here is wondering how the Panamanian consider themselves:

First. America is a continent, not a single country between Mexico and Canada, so we are not talking about two continents, it is just one. (If we have a country in the middle of Europe and its name is United States of Europe, are them the only one Europeans? Or what if is United Stated of Africa? Are they the only one Africans?) This problem about the rest of the Americans and the Unitedstaters (to use one of the several available names) is under a long discussion in Alternative_words_for_American.


 * There's also several alternative names for Latinos. Citizens of the US are Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.122.145 (talk) 13:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Second. Panama is part of Central America. It is the group of seven countries in the isthmus: Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama. The seven countries has strong positions together on environmental forums in United Nations, FAO, ITTO and work these topics in a very harmonic way under a regional organism called Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo. So, we no have doubts where be belong to.

Third: South America ends in the border between Panama and Colombia, not in the Panama Canal. --Dendrotech 17:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Fourth; The Americas is composed of two continents-North America and South America. Latin America is a region of North America. Cut the Unitedstaters crap. Citizens of the US ARE Americans. You're Americans too? Great. The more the merrier. I couldn't care less. BTW What are you going to do when (not if) you hear a tourist from the U.K. say *I hate those f****ing Americans?LLLOL  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.122.145 (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh boy, this is so much fun!!!! Before you decide this you need to state your point of view.


 * Geographically, yeah, Panama is part of Central America, but if you want to allow only two Americas, then definitely it is part of North America, not South America. (Unless you mean SouthAmerica starts South of the Rio Grande).


 * Historically we had a lot more to do with South America than Central America. At one time, we ruled from mid Nicaragua downwards towards South America. On the other hand, culture-wise we had a lot more to do with United States than any other country.Panamanian likes and dislikes are very similar to those of the United States than any other Latin America Country. But economically, we are one with the world due to our nature as a place of forced transit.


 * Therefore, before saying where we belong, you will have to stablish what criteria you will be using.200.90.134.30 20:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * "ruled from mid Nicaragua downwards towards South America." Don't you mean mid Costa Rica downwards towards South America?  LaNicoya    •TALK•  21:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks you will never understand.

America is a greater continent, while central, south and north america are sub continents, if we talk about normal continent, then we are american and when reffering to american it can be a usa resident, a panama resident, anything in america is called american.

Officialy, since Panama is divided by the Panama Canal one part is fully mounted on one sub continent with Eastern Colon and Eastern Panama, Darien, and San Blas archipielago being south america and the western hemisphere being north america. when both continents combines they form a little, yet imperial continent, Central America.

In conclusion, we can be called americans as well, and we are part of Central America (at least the whole country) though you can split the two Panamanian territories and make each one have its own continent. 201.218.72.39 05:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

As a Panamanian I believe Panama is geographically neither North nor South American. It is Central American, since its part of the Caribbean Tectonic Plate. Notice that America (The continent; and I shouldn't put this disambiguation) is actually 3 Tectonic plates. By the way will someone change the "States and Dependencies of Middle america" section title to "States and Dependencies in Central America & the Caribbean" as well as remove Mexico from the list. Any Takes? Alex Oct. 9, 2007


 * I'm a Panamanian too, and I'll clear this up. This problem exists because Spaniard colonists used the term "North", "Central" and "South" America to describe the 3 regions that compose an entire continent, which is called "America". You can see the differences in: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norteamerica (Spanish wikipedia) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America -- I know there was an explanation on one of the North America articles, but looks like it's gone now. But, I'd say that the article should state both explanations, because it might confuse people. (Like in this discussion)


 * Found it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas_%28terminology%29 Remmember that America for most English-speaking people means the Country, not the Continent. Estados Unidos de America is the name in spanish, not America. -- ...RuineЯ|Chat... 17:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As a neutral observer (I don't really care how Panama is categorised!) I think the problem is actually caused by different definitions of the concept of a continent. Essentially in many parts of the world America is not thought of as a single continent, but as two continents - North and South. It seems from the map on the wiki page as if the division can be made at the Panama canal (although that might be just a bad drawing). This would not make Panama the only country in two continents - Turkey also has this feature, as does Russia. Of course other parts of the world define America as a single continent, or indeed Europe and Asia as a single continent. Duncan (talk) 15:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The division in Panama (particularly the Canal) is "man-made", not nature made. In reality there is no division and it is one country, as it was before someone decided to dig through it for transport. As for the US, its official name is the United States of America, not America. The founders knew America was a continent, unlike some of their current countrymen. Panama's locale is in the central portion of the Continent, therefore, it is in Central America. Sentrix (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

OK firstly, please spare everyone the "ignorant American" lecture that you people seem to find necessary to post here. Last time I checked Americans and "gringos" weren't the only people who use English Wikipedia. Secondly, according to the Wikipedia entry on Continents, in English-speaking countries "North America" and "South America" are separate continents. So for the purposes of ENGLISH Wikipedia, "America" is not a continent, that's Latin American terminology. So to all the "I'm Panamanian"'s posting here, don't impose Latin American terminology on English Wikipedia. Even if it is the Panama page. Panama is in North America, and there really isn't any point debating a fact. Just look in any 2nd grade textbook or atlas. Smh. 149.4.115.3 (talk) 13:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * intro"is the southernmost country of both Central America and, in turn, >>--&#91;&#91;user:史凡&#124;Shifan&#93;&#93;&lt;small&gt;&#91;&#91;User talk:史凡&#124;&gt;&#39;&#39;voice-MSN/skype&#39;&#39;me!&#39;&#39;&#39;RSI&#39;&#39;&#39;&gt;typin=hard!&#93;&#93;&lt;/small&gt; (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)North America. <=ONEview-takoutORxpand[inBODYofentry

Okay, first of all, Your reference to a textbook is nill because textbooks vary widely from country to country and even State to State in the USA. I went to United States schools and was Always taught that there is a North Central and South America. Technically the whole thing is one big continent, the only seperation is the panama canal, which man made. But from my travels I have noticed that most people recognize a north, south and central america. Europe is techically the same landmass as Asia, so why does it get its own continent? The reason is more social than geographical. It really doesn't matter what you call it,its easier to point out a section of the earth if you have general regions. America is huge. And as to the United States citizens being called americans bugging people, its understandable. But there really is no good name for citizens of the USA. in reality could not the people of the "United States of Mexico" be united staters? lets stop spreading the hate around, isn't there enough already? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangemangoez (talk • contribs) 19:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Population
where is the citation for the Population number used in the infobox, the CIA fact book has another number see here, either we provide a citation or we change to that number

M aen K. A. Talk  08:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Majority of history section reads like it was copied from a research paper
I'm having a hard time finding the difference between actual parenthetical statements and obsolete (at least, by Wikipedia feature standards) in-text citations. Just putting this out there. --64.5.15.92 (talk) 18:28, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Birth certificate
How to I obatin my birth certificate I lost mine.........? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.165.214 (talk) 23:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Deleted section
I removed this content because it's unsourced and needs improved writing.

===Sports===

''Their are many recreation sports played in Panama these include Soccer, Baseball, Boxing, Volleyball, Basketball, among others. Their are several hall of fame athletes from Panama such as 4 divison Boxing Champion Roberto Duran who many consider one of the greates Boxers of all times, Rolando Blackman, Baseball Hall Of Famer Rod Carew, and Mariono Rivera''

SamEV (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

--- ==Religion===

The government of Panama does not collect statistics on the religious affiliation of citizens, but various sources estimate that 75 to 85 percent of the population identifies itself as Roman Catholic and 15 to 25 percent as evangelical Christian.[2] The Bahá'í Faith community of Panama is estimated at 2.00% of the national population, or about 60,000[3] including about 10% of the Guaymí population[4]; the Bahá'ís maintain one of the world's seven Baha'i Houses of Worship in Panama.[2] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) claim more than 40,000 members.[5] Smaller religious groups include Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Episcopalians with between 7,000 and 10,000 members, Jewish and Muslim communities with approximately 10,000 members each, Hindus, Buddhists, and other Christians.[2] Indigenous religions include Ibeorgun (among Kuna) and Mamatata (among Ngobe).[2] There is also a small number of Rastafarians.[2]

SamEV (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Panama´s GDP
I modify the IMF's GDP figures, to the World Bank. I hope I have caused problemsTravieso94 (talk) 19:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No problems, sorry to inform you. I Rv to IMF estimates, because they are the standard for countries infobox. Salut, -- IANVS (talk | cont) 19:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

panama didn't idependent from colombia, we separate from colombia is diferent
PANAMA didn't Independent from Colombia, we separate from Colombia it's diferent —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.41.186 (talk) 00:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

False sentence in the article
This sentence of the article is false, since Camino Real and Camino de Cruces are two different route. See Spanish article for more information... "The route became known as the Camino Real, or Royal Road, although it was more commonly known as Camino de Cruces (Road of the Crosses) because of the abundance of gravesites along the way." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.34.151.146 (talk) 23:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board
I would like to announce the establishment of the Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board. Anyone with an interest in the Caribbean is welcome to join in. Guettarda 1 July 2005 04:09 (UTC)

i am new and dont know what to do
yo wadup people i am dangerous not im just new and a complete noob and dont know what to dotmanawesome--174.28.212.75 (talk) 03:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Cities and towns
Does Panama have any cities or towns? A little list would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.189.221 (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Template Broken
Problem Fixed Xhavnak (talk) 16:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC) If it was supposed to be as it was(displayed as text) please refert the change.

Reference to (quoted in Jane 1988)
Re: Panama ..."that "although dense, every (village) has a different language and they don't understand one another" (quoted in Jane 1988) describe the ethnographic phenomenon of scattering and diversification of peoples that had inhabited the isthmus for several thousands of years."

What is the specific information relating to the reference to "(quoted in Jane 1988)"? This passage from Wiki is a very often-quoted line.

Thanks, Tim Roufs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.161.52 (talk) 16:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Pro-US bias
The caption to a photo saying "Though Panama suffered heavy economic upheavals under the brutal PDF regime, it has managed to rebuild its economy as one of the fastest growing in the world" is biased and inaccurate. The illegal American invasion caused far more damage and economic upheaval than the PDF regime had.203.184.41.226 (talk) 06:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Politics of Panama
Please expand this section. Missing informations about local governments and elections. Very thanks :) --Human. (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

In the section "Ethnic groups" you have the following label: 70% Mestizo 14% Zambo 10% White 6% Amerindian

People of African decedent do not like the label "Zambo" it is a negative slur and if you could please change it to be more respectful. Thanks in advance. Ingridjordan (talk) 18:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Tourism in Panama
Hi! It would be great if you could create this article: Tourism in Panama!

Perhaps you can draw some inspiration from Tourism in Brazil. :) Thanks & all the best, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Do all countries have their own tourism pages? Danotto94 (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Products Exported by Panama
I removed the picture "A proportional representation of Panama's exports" from the Currency section because it is no longer representative of the present situation, e.g. Packaged Medicine is now just 7% instead of 28%. The latest version can be found at https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/pan/. If anyone wants to reinstate the picture I suggest using the latest version instead. 61.14.175.114 (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The 1989 invasion section is not enough neutral -- Edited
This article is not enough neutral in the 1989 invasion section, where it makes no mention of the bombing of Panama city and it doesn't cite enough sources

Sources:

Blum, William. Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II, Common Courage Press, 2008

Peck, James. Ideal Illusions: How the U.S. Government Co-opted Human Rights. Metropolitan Books, 2011.

The Panama Deception. Dir. Barbara Trent. Empowerment Project, 1992 documentary

George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, 2003

EDIT: I edited the 1989 invsion section, which seems to refer very closely to the following document. Some images are shared, too. The document is indicated as a source

http://www.roatan.com/About-Locations/Panama.pdf if this is the case, then some lines about the military intervention were cited with modifications.

This part: "The bombardments during the invasion caused the displacement of 20,000 persons"

was changed in:

"the intervention caused the displacement of 5000 persons"

with the 20,000 displaced persons reduced to 5000 and the original "bombardments" replaced by "intervention".

you can check it in the following link, a shot of the page that I made before my final edit of the article:

http://postimg.org/image/bz25tw5p7/

or

http://img219.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=818805671_panamawikicropped_122_885lo.jpg

Also this:

"The economic damage caused by the invasion and subsequent civil disobedience has been estimated to be between 1.5 and 2 billion dollars"

in the article was instead:

"The economic damage caused by the intervention has been estimated to be between 1.5 and 3 million dollars"

with the 2 Billions reduced to 3 Millions

also the source cited (http://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/Panama%20Imperialism%20and%20Struggle.htm) says:

"The economic damage caused by the invasion and subsequent civil disobedience had been estimated to be between $1.5 and $2 billion balboas, which would be comparable to US dollars"

This part: "Although described as a surgical maneuver, the action led to civilian deaths whose estimated numbers range from 400 to 4,000 during the two weeks of armed activities in the largest United States military operation to that date since the end of the Vietnam War."

was not included

An original statement of the article affirming: "Most Panamanians supported the intervention" has been edited and now is "Many Panamanians supported the intervention" since in one of the two sources cited ( http://www.hrw.org/reports/1989/WR89/Panama.htm#TopOfPage ) there is no mention of an undisputed support of "most" of the Panamanians--. In the document cited as reference is stated that:

"The occupying forces had produced abundant material for the press on military aspects of the operation and on the generally sympathetic response of the Panamanian population, but there was still no count of civilian casualties or any serious exploration of the circumstances in which civilians died."

Flagellis (talk) 17:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Panama
Cyberbot II has detected links on Panama which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://marinelike.com/en/vessels/flag-143/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 21:51, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Panama
Cyberbot II has detected links on Panama which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://marinelike.com/en/vessels/flag-143/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Panama
Cyberbot II has detected links on Panama which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://marinelike.com/en/vessels/flag-143/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Panama
Cyberbot II has detected links on Panama which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://marinelike.com/en/vessels/flag-143/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Panama Canal Zone
What was the area of Panama north and south of the Canal Zone? I know the zone is 553 mi2, but I cannot find anywhere the area that was north of the Canal Zone, and south of the canal zone. I cannot simply divide the remainder area (28,640mi2 - 553 mi2 = 28087 mi2) because that would be inaccurate. Does anyone have any information on that? --James (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Panama. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.pa/secciones/informacion/significado.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Tax haven
Funny, especially considering the recent leaks, that the words "tax haven" appear nowhere in the article. --Sigmundur (talk) 06:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Agree - it's a major event in the global perception of the country, obviously important to maintain neutrality but some reference to the events is a vital addition Seeinggreen (talk) 04:13, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

"The United States intensively encouraged the Panamanian separatist movement." Quite literally, Teddy Roosevelt attacked and said "I took it." That's "intensively encouraged"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.190.67 (talk) 14:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

US Invasion + Manuel Noriega
I've slightly changed the section about 'Political culture'. It was repetitive and a little biased. It was basically saying that, after US invasion, Manuel Noriega was ousted from power and democracy was back, but without saying anything about the Noriega's connections to the US Government/CIA. Or say it all (repetitive) or take it out. I took it out (a little). Here is the edit: Pustumia. Feel free to manifest divergent opinions. (talk) 22:01, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Demography
The demographic data is a bit messy. The latest census is 2010, not 2016. Reference links lead to irrelevant numbers. Somebody with understanding of Spanish is welcome to retrieve the correct data from Panama statistics site, meanwhile I'm putting UN estimates with sources. Demmo (talk) 18:25, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Panama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091013113646/http://www.redfrogbeach.com/panama.html to http://www.redfrogbeach.com/panama.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:12, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Pre-Columbian period section needs work
This is a pretty sketchy and confusing section. For instance, our article says that "... These evolved into significant populations best known through their spectacular burials (dating to c. 500–900 AD) at the Monagrillo (archaeological site), and their beautiful Gran Coclé style polychrome pottery." But the early Monagrillo culture seems to have nothing to do with the much later Gran Coclé culture.

Oddly, the Precolumbian history section at the History of Panama article is even sketchier.

I'll come back to this as time permits, but it would be better if someone who actually knows something about Panama's prehistory took this on. Hopefully, Pete Tillman (talk) 04:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Gold and Power in Ancient Costa Rica, Panama, and Colombia 2003, might be useful although it's pretty verbose & wandering. --Pete Tillman (talk) 06:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The Gilcrease Collection and Gran Coclé 2011 is a nice illustrated guide to this collection, with some generalizations to (at least) Veraguas. Well-written, interesting and many nice color photos. I'll add this to the Gran Cocle article.

Natalia Kanem
Dear Wikipedians! I am currently working on an article for the German-speaking Wikipedia about the Executive Director of UNFPA Natalia Kanem, who is from Panama. Can someone contribute information about birth year, family background and youth? I would be very grateful for your support! greetings Fritzober (talk) 22:56, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not an Etymology section, it's Toponym
Etymology is the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history. Toponym refers to a place name, especially how it was derived from a topographical features. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.37.58 (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Transcontinentality
This page currently states that Panama is transcontinental. Elsewhere on WP, we have

The real head-scratcher here is that both the claim that Panama is transcontinental and the bolded claim cite the same source, which is a very old page that needs some version of flash to run. Current pages from the same website don't take a definite position, but would appear to favor non-transcontinentality of Panama. The exact location of the boundary between North and South America is not widely agreed upon, so it might be better if the lead of the article didn't include the "transcontinental" designation and mentioned the ambiguity in the geography section. —&#160; Retroflexivity ［talk&#160;❘&#160;contribs］ 21:44, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion for section on science and technology
Hi, just a suggestion, many country articles have sections or subsections for 'science and technology', this could be a section on this article as well.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 10:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I very much agree with this, there should be a "science and technology" section, there is a lot of activity in this regard in the country that should go there. AteneaZ3 (talk) 03:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ethnic groups
The issue of ethnic groups should be reviewed and cross-checked with national statistical censuses. These data are incomplete. They also do not include the various indigenous ethnic groups in detail, which are an important part of the population. AteneaZ3 (talk) 12:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Request edit, Semi‐protected status of article?
Why is this article semi‐protected ? I did a search of the talk page archive and couldn’t find anything. Was there edit warring ?

I think the languages section needs work. Request edit to mention that some Panamanians speak English and/or English-based-creoles, being the descendants of immigrants, to Panama, from English-speaking and EBC-speaking Caribbean islands

2601:1C0:5300:BED0:29F0:8042:8209:4FC8 (talk) 00:17, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree on the language issue, and there are other topics that need to be reviewed and updated. AteneaZ3 (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Panama Product Exports (2019).svg

Religion section
The first paragraph reads, in part, "The Jehovah's Witnesses were the third largest congregation comprising the 1.4% of the population, followed by the Adventist Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with the 0.6%." The third paragraph reads, in part, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) claims more than 40,000 members. Smaller religious groups include Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Episcopalians with between 7,000 and 10,000 members,..." This seems to be a discrepancy. If the LDS church has more members, then how could the Jehovah's Witnesses be the third largest congregation.  I don't know what the correct answer is, but something seems to be wrong. Bilbo Scoopins (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)


 * True. I will dive into the Stats and see if I can find a citeable set of figures BoonDock (talk) 02:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Request translation
The end of the section Transportation is written in Spanish. Can someone who is fluent in Spanish translate? Youngrubby (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2023
Felix.j.najera (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

the supreme court, of panamá Reject. the use of cryptocurrencies. so the information of the legals status of the cryptocurrencies. Is old and wrong. https://www.laestrella.com.pa/economia/230714/corte-declaro-inexequible-proyecto-ley-regula-criptomonedas

please actualized the information.
 * ✅  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  17:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)