Talk:Cerro Maravilla Incident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cerro Maravilla Incident article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

Article policies
Good articles Cerro Maravilla Incident (reviewed version) has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.
Peer review Cerro Maravilla Incident has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Puerto Rico Cerro Maravilla Incident is part of WikiProject Puerto Rico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the people, history, language, and culture of Puerto Rico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help with the tasks listed below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Please do not substitute this template.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

This article has been marked for accuracy dispute for the following reasons:

[edit] Accuracy dispute

It was later known in a P.R. Senate investigation that the two activists were enticed into bombing a TV tower on top of Puerto Rico's Maravilla Hill by an undercover agent, Alejandro Gonzalez Malavé.

I'm not familiarized with the case, but for the sensibility of it, the accusations, and the body implied as investigator, there should be a reference to back up the article and the above text.

- Maio 01:27, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

This case is too complex and convoluted and can not be described accurately unless actual transcripts from the hearings are presented verbatim and explained (these should be available to the public). What makes this case especially complicated is that there were two separate Senate hearings prosecuted by two different independent counselors several years apart. To add further complication, the case never really had a clear-cut ending and many of the main participants in the events of Cerro Maravilla were either jailed or assasinated.

- --Tranka 00:45, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm one of the victim's (Carlos Enrique Soto Arriví) youngest brother and I grew up with this case since I was twelve when my brother died. The allegations that they were going to blow up the Rikavisión (Channel 7) tower was proven false during the hearings in the 80's. All they were carrying were charcoal, charcoal fluid, and guns provided by the undercover agent. Their intentions were to deliver a message about Puerto Rican independence that day. It was proven that both Rosado and Soto had been disarmed and then executed by testimonies of the cab driver, Julio Ortiz Molina, and by some of the police agents involved, including the one who shot Soto. See "Murder Under Two Flags: The U.S., Puerto Rico, and the Cerro Maravilla Cover-Up" by Anne Nelson and Manny Suárez's "Réquiem en el Cerro Maravilla."


This case is huge and requires more information, however I can't seem to find any. I added the "stub" and Citation needed markers to see if anyone is up to the task.Mtmelendez 15:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

There!! I did some research and posted the article as neutral and with as many references as possible. I hope it clears the matter. Mtmelendez 20:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

To the brother of Carlos Soto: I'm deeply sorry for your loss, but for the sake of Wikipedia all references point out that they were going to blow up the towers. I'm going to add the fact that the official intentions have been disputed. Additionally, feel free to post a picture of him in his article and this one, it would be a great contribution to Wikipedia. Mtmelendez 21:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

After reviewing the article I believe that it passes all of the Good Article criteria. The article is well written, and uses its sources to avoid WP:OR, and WP:NPOV problems. The best way to improve it, I would say, would be to find additional sources to support or qualify the current ones. While there are plenty of in-line citations they rely on a fairly small pool of major sources. Eluchil404 13:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

    • Agreed. Its a good article but due to the controversies sorrounding it, may need additional sources. Can anyone find sources to the PR Senate investigations reports, they should be a matter of public record, right? - 69.19.14.18 17:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)