Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:04, 7 June 2007

St. John's University

Regarding "Revert to Neutral"

The article that the edit "Revert, Neutral Version" erases has been deemed unconstructive and slanderous by the discussion page. The "Neutral Version" should be the building block for the article. The slanderous article that you publish orders its sections: "Rankings", "Recent News", "Scandels", and includes primarily negative information about the university. Under the "Neutral Version" these subjects are still included in the article, but are listed toward the middle to end, where such information belongs. Items such as history, academics, programs, etc., should be listed toward the top of the article, as is the case with most Misplaced Pages articles concerning universities. Please allow the "Neutral Version" to be the building block for the St. John's article. The back and forth edits have become ridiculous. The "Neutral Version" gives fair acknowledgement of scandels, rankings, etc, but in a more appropriate section, and without slanderous intent. - Ticonderoga

-- what makes one version more neutral than another? is their a set order as to where informatino is supposed to be set according to wikipedia? slander is a civil charge. is there any information there that isn't true? 64.131.205.111 15:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

--Then I will use term malicious instead of slanderous. There is not set order that items should be listed, but the order should be gauged against the purpose of the article. What you are doing is similar to stating MLK was adulterous before mentioning he was an incredible civil rights leader. In my version of the article, all your facts are being preserved, but in a more appropriate manner. For the sake of civility, could we please quite this back and forth and just use the "neutral version" as the building block to the St. John's article? - 5/22/07, neutral version advocate

May 2007

This information is in the article. Read again. The article states: "Two of the country's former presidents Juan Bosch and Joaquín Balaguer, both had had parents who immigrated from Puerto Rico." Also you did not insert this information but undid all of my recent edits. Don't to this with an misleading edit summary or your edits will be undone. Regards. VirtualDelight 21:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

In response to your talk page "This information is in the article. Read again. The article states: "Two of the country's former presidents Juan Bosch and Joaquín Balaguer, both had had parents who immigrated from Puerto Rico." Also you did not insert this information but undid all of my recent edits. Don't to this with an misleading edit summary or your edits will be undone. Regards. VirtualDelight 21:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)"

Look at the history. You removed the information, but i reinserted it with the supporting evidence.

(cur) (last) 12:43, 19 May 2007 VirtualDelight (Talk | contribs) (36,676 bytes) (→Immigration - restore links, rm ironicaly as their Puerto Rican heritage is a fact while ironicaly is unsourced personal opinion)

I placed in information that wasn't personal opinion but confirmed fact. 64.131.205.111 21:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

Dominican Republic

Please discuss your edits on the talk page rather than continually inserting your point of view. I have no opinion either way as to whether the La Trinitaria could be considered a racist organization or not, but this has degenerated into edit-warring and is not acceptable. Thanks. -- LeCour 01:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

i've tried and will continue trying to move to the talk section. The trinitaria will be left out and brought to the talk section so that some type of process can be made. Also I'm going to try to find the origin of this source? Since it's been here as long as i've been editing. 64.131.205.111 02:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

La Trinitario funder actually admire Haiti, the reason for the separation was that simply didn't work out. If you want me find your source then I will, but can ask you, do you Spanish so I can find you what Juan Pablo Duarte wrote User:Avfnx

Look, I'm really trying to assume good faith and give you some good advice. Please stop! If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Discuss the issues of racism on the Talk page first. Then, once agreement has been reached, introduce it into the article. You'll need reliable sources, not just the occasional blog or travel website. Find newspapers, real magazines, books, anything reliable. Please remember that the threshold for inclusion of information in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth. I really don't care either way about the racism issue, but you really need to do your part and cooperate on the Talk page, not just inserting and reverting. If you bring up your points on the Talk page, I -- as an impartial third party -- will be happy to review them and provide assistance and advice. That applies to both sides of the issue. Thanks! -- LeCour 19:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• Apologies!!! I added the warning to the wrong user page. It was meant for here. Sorry! -- LeCour 20:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

User User:Avfnx and I have agreed that it is extremist in nature and it wouldn't be included. Please look at the talk page of the article. You may have misread something. 64.131.205.111 20:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Warning to User:71.255.247.181

Umm, that seemed a bit harsh for offense number one. Please assume good faith, especially on a first-time edit to an article. -- LeCour 01:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Your threat to block me

Did you not even read what I did? I fixed a grammatical and substantive problem with the text. I checked the source and found that the Misplaced Pages entry did not accurately portray the information from the source. Furthermore, there was a punctuation problem that made it impossible to understand. Now you've returned it to the way it was. Incorrect and with the wrong grammar.

It's great that you are keeping an eye on the site, but going around and calling valid input "vandalism" without even responding to the content isn't helping the end result. And threatening to block me was really uncalled for. The information that I am removing is biased and anti-Dominican,hence it should be considered vandalism .Please refrain from adding your political ,cultural ,and social views to the article .Its very obvious where your views lean toward ,do not use Misplaced Pages to mis-lead and release false information. from 68.239.134.45

I never threatened to block anyone ,you probably have me mistaken for another user .Also,false information was the wrong term to use . The proper term is mis-information. from 68.239.134.45

Please refrain from name calling and personal attacks. This is against wikipedia policy. I am not inserting extreme nor slanderous information. I am not anti-dominican in any manner. Utilizing sources such as the Dominican Institute at CCNY would not be considered to be anti-dominican. Anything concerning that article would be better spoken about at the talk page of the article. 64.131.205.111 17:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Mis-informed and baised

Well then I apologize , I was not aware that I was name calling or personally attacking anyone.However, most of the text I originally removed came from biased and anti-Dominican sources.The text under the "Creation of the Republic" is in-accurate ,the source does not support this text "In 1822 Haitian liberation forces unified the entire island under a free government of color, ending 300 years of colonial domination and slavery. Roads were built; school curriculums were changed from a Spanish view to a worldview. Institutions of European colonialism were also phased out, and replaced with ones more representative and respectful of Taino and African culture. Land was redistributed communally and individuals who had benefited from the Spanish invasion and domination of the island were rightfully expelled ."].The text cannot be found on the website.Also,This describes the Haitian occupation as a liberation (sound familiar?),its an overwhelmingly biased peace of text.Part of the text under the Immigration section of the article "Most Haitian immigrants work at low-paying, unskilled labor jobs, including construction work and household cleaning. Current estimates put the Haitian-born population in the Dominican Republic as high as 1 million; slightly less than the illegal Dominican born population in the United States and Puerto Rico." is also in-accurate ,according to www.census.gov there are 1.1 million Dominicans in the United states both legally and Illegally .It is a well known fact that most Dominicans in the U.S.A are in the country legally."Compared to other Latino groups such as Mexicans or Puerto Ricans, Dominican population movements are relatively new. More than 98 percent of the 810,201 Dominicans legally admitted to the United States between 1931 and 1998 arrived after 1961. The statistics suggest a sudden and steadily increasing tide of immigrants from the Dominican Republic in the past four decades. By the 1980s, Dominicans had become one of the fastest growing segments of the foreign-born population in the United States. In the 1990s, the Dominican exodus continued unabated and diversified its regional destinations to new places in Europe, Latin America, and the Caribbean, as well as North America. Sizeable Dominican communities now exist in Italy, Switzerland, Canada, Panama, Aruba, Martinique, and St. Thomas. Again, the folk term los países seems particularly apt to capture the wide dispersal of the Dominican diaspora."[[http://migration.ucdavis.edu/ceme/more.php?id=19_0_6_0 ]]Also,under in the text of the Immigration , "Although Dominican economic groups have called for amnesty for Illegal Dominicans living in the US" this claim is also baseless .

Ask the person who placed this information in. in 2 paragraphs what are you stating? This too broad and would be better divided into sections. 64.131.205.111 00:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Look

Dont talk damn bullshit about me citing information. First of all get a damn account. I have to much experienced for you to be talking crap. I am tired of the stupid vandalism made by annonymous accounts in the DOminican Republic article, and if you dont like my editing suck it DAMN it!Get a damn account and then yout talk crap!(and if you interested on seeing my experienced jobs see the Santo Domingo Article which i made it almost by myself)EdwinCasadoBaez 01:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Get an Account

Dont blame me for vandalism that i didnt do and now u want them to block me!!great Job Buddy!!as i said before try getting an account and now being annonymous!I am expert in Dominican topics and you just come up to my talk page saying to cite my reference!!omgEdwinCasadoBaez 01:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

User:edwincasadobaez

You cant be reverting things without the concent of others... dont care who you are but you can revert or undo stuff with concensus...I think you dont know anything about the Dominican Repulic and am sorry to say that!You cant be adding things without knowing and taking information out of sources that are not accurate!!

They are things in this page that bug me and just because you have sources from Hispaniola.com it doesnt mean is true! People have written that 90% of dominican are african ancestry wich is not true and Some said that "Spanish" was a left over from spain while others say "La trinitaria was a Racist secret union"(Not true and is embarrasing to hear this in a encyclopedia) which is not true either.Please make me a favor and do not use annoynimous IP adresses. Make a real account becuase thi is bugging me out and am going to revert your edit too!Dont Revert my edits without asking me because i have a lot of knowledge in my countrys topics, if you dont believe see My articles!EdwinCasadoBaez 23:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Am not harrasing your page!!i am discussing something and telling you to stop reverting my edit the same way you done it for the past 3 days!if you dont agree with what somebody writes dont delete it but actually discuss it...and dats what you havent done over here!and then yesterday you acussed me of vandalism without realizing that reverting somebodys edit can be considered vandalism!EdwinCasadoBaez 02:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Look at all the messages you left to me and the tone. That is harrassment. Please cease from contacting me unless you're on a talk page of an article 64.131.205.111 03:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

making sense 64.131.205.111 01:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

May 2007

Not every edit made by other editors is vandalism. You might be getting a bit too caught up in this article. -- LeCour 05:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

COULD YOU PLEASE STOP HARRASING MY PAGE BY SENDING ME LIKE 20 WARNINGS/second..You are getting my talk page ful of warnings so stop it!EdwinCasadoBaez 05:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Warnings for every incident of personal attack 64.131.205.111 05:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Your addition of the "Crime" section was deleted not because it wasn't cited, but because it is POV. If you are planning to do major changes (like creating a new section, please discuss it on the talk page).Dominican 18:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE DONT NOT REVERT EDITS!!!Let Other wikipedians reach consensus about what should stay and what should be removed...YOU REMOVE EVERY SINGLE EDIT I MAKE!I AM GOING TO TALK TO AN ADMNISTRATOR FOR THAT IF YOU KEEP DOING IT!64.52.120.98 19:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)(User:EdwinCasadoBaez)

unless you sign in, I won't know if you are edwincadado. you could be a random user stating that you are him. 64.131.205.111 20:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Well yes it was me..You are reverting my edits and everybody else edits here in wikipedia..Thats not funny looking and then you Say that i'm the one that should get blamed!!!You should watch out with your revertions because i placed references on each of my edits and the u revert them!!!not cool!EdwinCasadoBaez 21:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

DDP and 3nis

Even thougth is a gang in the United states in not crime related to DR...The crime they do is outside DR so that means they not part of the crime that goes on in DR...Some of the youth in this gangs are from other nations not only DR. Anyways we should write in the crime section only crimes that involve the NATION OF DR not gangs that impose violence out of DR. 3nis and DDP are nowhere to be found in DR so why have them there! You should put them in the Crime Section of NYC or In the Crime Section of Boston,etc but not in the Dominican Article! Do you understand what am trying to say? EdwinCasadoBaez 04:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Archive undo

It's true there are conversations going on, but most of the dicussion page is already concluded discussions, only a few points remained inconclusive. The talk page is getting too large. We need to archive some of that really soon. Dominican 22:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Block me then

There different number on how many people so make sense to put the lowest number and say over. Like i said before im not going argue w/ you but i will work around you. And don't worry i will have new information on the immigration so your propaganda will stop. Read and you see there different number. And they were many reason why USA supported Trujillo, what u wanna name only one in () how about we name them all in (). Expand it if you want but don't drop it in () Avfnx 05:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Possible Racist text

In 1838 Juan Pablo Duarte the son of a Spanish born merchant, formed along with Spanish descended Ramón Matías Mella and Francisco del Rosario Sanchez founded a racist secret society called La Trinitaria created to overthrow and undermine any government run by people of color. Driven by a belief in white supremacy and a desire to create a counter-revolutionary white-catholic run state, the Trinitarios declared independence from Haiti on February 27, 1844 . Drawing inspiration from St. Dominic's Order of Preachers responsible for the murders of hundreds of thousands of Jews and Moors during the Spanish Inquisition, The name Dominican Republic was chosen as a testament of white supremacy over individuals of color. This victory inspired other white supremacist movements in the western hemisphere, notably the Ku Klux Klan. The victory of La Trinataria also inspired significant parts of the plot of D.W. Griffith's famous silent movie "A Birth Of A Nation" in 1915. In 1937 around 30,000 Haitians were killed in order to "whiten" up the country. for discussion 64.131.205.111 07:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Convo

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dominican_Republic&diff=next&oldid=131235242 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dominican_Republic&diff=prev&oldid=131157287 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dominican_Republic&diff=prev&oldid=131158496 links http://www.bartleby.com/65/sn/SntoDom-city.htm This seems to be more of a historical context. http://countrystudies.us/dominican-republic/4.htm http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/46402.pdf 64.131.205.111 07:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

why not

that what the article says so why not put it, you making seem like there was only one reason; if you give one reason why can't other reason be put in

Couple of things

First, if you're going to be issuing warnings to people and utilizing the noticeboards, now might be the time to finally register an account. An anonymous IP is not the medium to conduct these things in.

Second, you really need to back off a little. Accusing everyone who edits the article of being a sock of Platanogenius is not constructive, and all your reverts are starting to come across as an attempt to WP:OWN the article. Most of these users are not socks, and you are increasing their frustration level a lot, so it's hard for them to be civil. In particular your handling of EdwinCasadoBaez is bordering on wikistalking. I understand you want to help the article, but you're not helping anyone if you end up getting reported for harassment yourself.--Rosicrucian 12:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets were found and confirmed to be sockpuppets a number of users were banned as well . Although the platanogenius account came up inconclusive it did not mean that sockpuppets weren't used. I stayed on it and was proven right less than a day later. I haven't done anything on Edwin's page but tag him for warnings. Nothing else. In fact I was first harrassed on my talk page by him after he made a number of personal attacks and was banned . I have maintained an NPOV and will continue to do so. 64.131.205.111 08:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I've told him to wait out his ban, as it's upheld by two admins and there's not much I can do about it. He is having these outbursts because he is very frustrated with the continued reverting of the article. I imagine his wikistress is through the roof right now, and nothing is really served by baiting him until he blows up. And again, I would recommend that you get yourself a normal account. It gives people a face to deal with and a sense of accountability.--Rosicrucian 19:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

That wasn't the only article

the thing is there no fact on that, remember even you did a research...I did a research. I would done what u said but that wasn't the only article he did in...s/he did in Dominican founding father as well. I consider that vandalism more then anything, I looked he's history that all does try spread that. But hey good looks, hope forward working w/ you, I know me and you have different point of view but that reason i want work with... we not doing the same thing but we after the goal, so we need find not to agree, but to work. I like to say sorry if i ever got out hand anytime. I really think we making ground, making the article better...AvFnx 14:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I would like you help me asking for protection on the three founding fathers of DR, and have that statements in birth of nation taken out. Or at least show me about how do this thing. AvFnx 07:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Do not threaten me, I do not scare

You threatened to have me blocked for editing a grammatical error in the Dominican Republic article. That is unfortunate. I will continue to fix grammatical errors when I find them because I don't like reading them. Good luck.

this article is clear...

This article http://www.grassrootshaiti.org/Events/Protest%20Terror%20in%20DR.html is clearly anti-Dominican, not going argue with the number, cause no one really knows. But can you please remove this article. Seem you in to this part of history can you find a article how the whole thing started cause Haiti killed some agents of Trujillo and Dominican on the border where tire of the cattle getting rob...and how Trujillo only had pay Haiti government for the act. AvFnx 07:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not justifying it, that something that shouldn't happen. The reason my point is if you read what really happen it shows that both government are wrong, Trujillo for doing massacre, and the Haitian for not backing up it people. The robing cattle that how Trujillo tried tell the world that it was the civilian doing that. While he was promoting himself as Dominican defender. Let me make something clear, most the problem that DR has is cause Trujillo...people getting kill by the cops, like nothing happen, and so many more things is from the culture Trujillo/Balaguer did. I have lost family members in the hands of Trujillo, last thing i would wanna make him look good. The thing I don't about the article at the end, it doesn't Haiti should have a army but a militant group. AvFnx 16:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

uh

who said this is edwinCasadoBaez?69.119.127.181 06:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

Where did i personally attack you, hey i know your game get everyone that stand in you way blocked. Well ima give you the pleasure to do you. Now no one going stand in you way turning the article to your Anti-Dominican point of view. Take that as personal attack if you want, but you start the whole thing calling me racist...when is you that have a racist point of view. I know what i am and what my people are, I don't need prove to the world nothing. If we done so much wrong to the Haitians tell you government and you people bring it on, we have the 2nd larges army in the Caribbean. Prepare for Haiti invalidation, this not Dominican of the 19th where we only defend our self, we more then ready take to new level. Run you propaganda, do you...cause people like you wikipiedia losing credibility...you wanted your personal attack there you got it. When Haiti was rich all they did was invade Dominican Republic, now that poor still invading Dominican Republic only now that peaceful. Remember something not Dominican fault Haiti people can't run there country...point blank if they don't like how they been people welcome them in Dominican Republic, they can go home. If i didn't like how USA treat me i would go home, I have a country, USA not my country...so i don't go out in the street burn the flag. And remember something Dominican flag has the bible and the cross that very disrespectful and we got treat them more rights then Dominican, feel lucky that we don't do like the Americans and send ya right home. If they refuges like some country tried say, like the government said how i take X ammount how much you going take...no one in the world said they would. Dominican don't get treat nice by our government what make you think Haitian are going too. Like i said the article all yours...Dominicano De Pura Cepa PrAAAAAAA AvFnx 00:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)