Talk:Cuba/Archive16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hey I don't know where else to post this becuase this stupid site has no real help desk, but the Fidel Castro page has a post glued in the background of the page of a penis and a black guy getting lynched, which bothers me a lot. I don't know how to get rid of this and it's something that definitely shouldn't stay up. Can anyone get rid of it?

Contents

Less advised critics use their own non factual ideas of Cuban history and then claim Vandalism

Again it is highly probably that I will be blocked, for inserting information that while true is not flattering to the Cuban government. Just received the following:


  • Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Cuba. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Neobros 18:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


Apparently[[User:Neobros|Neobros] is not aware that even senior Stalinist Agent in Cuba Fabio Grobart said it was necessary to support Machado because if Machado fell conservative forces (he used less flattering terms).

citation for insertion

Massón Sena, Caridad 2004 (accessed 6-9-07) Dos visiones sobre el nacionalismo y las alianzas: Mella y Villena. Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de la Cultura Cubana “Juan Marinello”. La Habana, Cuba. http://168.96.200.17/ar/libros/cuba/marin/nacion.rtf. “ Según explicara Fabio Grobart a posteriori: “ Esta miopía política se reflejó también en una errónea conclusión que los dirigentes del Partido sacaron, de la justa apreciación de que sustituir a Machado por un gobierno de la oposición burgués-terrateniente significaba dejar a Cuba en su estado de semicolonia y a las masas populares en la misma miseria y esclavitud y que únicamente un gobierno de trabajadores podía producir los cambios radicales que el país necesitaba /.../Dicha a conclusión fue profundamente falsa por ser mecánica, por no basarse en un análisis correcto del desarrollo dialéctico de la situación y, esencialmente, por no tener en cuenta que las masas revolucionarias, enardecidas por la victoria sobre Machado y orientadas en su acción por una justa política de su vanguardia marxista-leninista, sí podría asegurar los cambios profundos, es decir, la realización del programa agrario-antimperialista, por el cual abogaba y luchaba desde su fundación el Partido Comunista.(22)” Reference 22 is Fabio Grobart, 1985, p. 93, This author also refers in this regard to Leonel Soto, 1977, vol. II, p. 8. Collaboration with dictators, who have few sincere allies offers advantages for infiltration of covert communists. CIA 1960 Communist influence in the Cuban government. “The objective of the Partido Socialista Popular (PSP-Cuban communist part…Its tactics, therefore are to conceal the membership, recruitment or reaffiliation of Party members who now occupy key positions in the government.” Following a Chinese model ”These secret Communist Party members are in close contact with known Communist Party members such as Blas Roca, Joaquin Ordoqui, Servero Aguirre, and Carlos Rafael Rodriguez, who establish public Communist Party policy and are in turn, in contact with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the international Communist apparatus.

end of this citation


It is common to attribute the fall of Machado to left wing forces this is simple not so, the ABC did far more to defeat Machado than any left wing group. Guiteras did a tiny action at La Gallinita (the place of the little chicken). Most of the action in Havana was done by the ABC which despite its reputation as being racist included a good number of black members. In the countryside Blas Hernandez was far more effective than Guiteras. El Jigue208.65.188.149 21:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


Since I am sure that Neobros will again delete the important material that I inserted and will place it here for safe keeping please read it, And make up your own minds. El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Machado was a Cuban nationalist and his regime had considerable local support despite its violent suppression of critics. However, it was during this period that Soviet intrusion into Cuban affairs began with the arrival in Cuba of Fabio Grobart. During Machado's tenure, Cubans gained greater control over their own economy and major national development projects were undertaken. His hold on power was weakened, by the lower demand for sugar because of Great Depression, the attacks first by War of Independence Veterans, and later on by secret organizations principally the ABC

ref inserted: Dutcher, Rodney (NEA) 1933 Machado Fights Terrorists With Terror To Hold Iron-Handed Foes: of "ABC” Copy Gangster Methods to Rid Island of Despot Who Has Ruled Since-1924 Syracuse Herald Friday evening, April 28, 1933. Front Page “Terrorism has been met "with terrorism in this unique outbreak waged mostly by students and young Intellectuals who brand Machado as a tyrant. On one side is the "ABC," secret terrorist, organization that has copied the methods ol gangsters in the fine art of assassination. On the other side are Machado's strong-armed and equally, ruthless secret police. Murder has followed murder in a series of spectacular killings. The Law of Flight Typical were assinations of Dr. Clemente Vasquez Bella, president ol the Cuban Senate and political ally of Machedo, and Capt. Miguel Calvo former head of the secret police Both were slain on busy throughfares, in daylight, by men who dashed past in autos firing shot guns. Many members, or suspected members of the "ABC" have been slain by the secret police in equally ruthless manner. Often, those killings have been defended on the ground that the victims preferred death to capture, though the evidence. In many cases Is not convincing. One police official alone is accused of 40 official assassinations. Police have also defended killings on the ground that the ley de fuga (law of flight) recognized the right of an officer to shoot an escaping prisoner. But, according to witnesses, prisoners have been released told to flee and then shot down they ran. Bombing has been common. Incendiary fires have destroyed much property. Great numbers oi political prisoners have been jailed. President Machado. whose life has been threatened many times, is heavily guarded by soldiers and machine gun crews in his palace. He rides to and from his country estate in a bullet-proof auto, under escort of soldiers armed with rifles and machine guns. NEXT: Cuba economic distress and America's vast stake on the IslanNext story is Van Paassen Sees Foreign War as Hitler Final Gamble Holds Nazi Course of Terrorism Is Camouflage for Lack of Policy Job Finding Failure Unemployment and Misery Grow With Every Day of Delay By PIERRE VAN PAASSEN Roving European Correspondent of The Herald Paris, April 23 end of reference insertion

Then during a general strike in which the communist party took the side of Machado, the Senior elements of the Cuban army forced Machado into exile and installed Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, son of Cuba's founding father, as President. In September, however, a second coup led by sergeants, most notably Fulgencio Batista, overthrew Céspedes leading to the formation of the first Ramón Grau San Martín government. This government lasted just 100 days, but engineered radical liberal changes in Cuban society and a rejection of the Platt amendment.

Wow Neobros reverted in less than five minutes Ay vey! how some cling to their faith El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


Goodbye all. Apparently it is a crime to report on the very existence of the ABC and the fact that the communists joined with Machado in an attempt to block the strike that overthrew that Dictator. Notice I inserted a verifiable reference and that was ignored. Well I suppose I will be now blocked for ever. Neobros is already working on that....El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I've missed this talk page going through my watch list, so I'm sorry for not replying sooner. I assure you, I have no agenda regarding Cuba on either side of the fence, nor am I any expert on the countries history; However, as I added on your last automated warning in your Talk Page, unreferenced, large additions without any credible external sources do not belong here, this is an encyclopedia, not a debating hall. Without reliable sources to back you up, your opinions are just that, conjecture. If you obtain reliable sources to use with your data, then I will gladly allow it to remain as a valid contribution to the article, and apologize for the vandalism accusations. To clarify, I'm only interested in facts, not agenda. Neobros 22:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Neobros:

I am writing on this topic. Just view the citations (some from Castro government sources) on the cooperation of the communists with Machado. El Jigue

Massón Sena, Caridad 2004 (accessed 6-9-07) Dos visiones sobre el nacionalismo y las alianzas: Mella y Villena. Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de la Cultura Cubana “Juan Marinello”. La Habana, Cuba. http://168.96.200.17/ar/libros/cuba/marin/nacion.rtf. “ Según explicara Fabio Grobart a posteriori: “ Esta miopía política se reflejó también en una errónea conclusión que los dirigentes del Partido sacaron, de la justa apreciación de que sustituir a Machado por un gobierno de la oposición burgués-terrateniente significaba dejar a Cuba en su estado de semicolonia y a las masas populares en la misma miseria y esclavitud y que únicamente un gobierno de trabajadores podía producir los cambios radicales que el país necesitaba /.../Dicha a conclusión fue profundamente falsa por ser mecánica, por no basarse en un análisis correcto del desarrollo dialéctico de la situación y, esencialmente, por no tener en cuenta que las masas revolucionarias, enardecidas por la victoria sobre Machado y orientadas en su acción por una justa política de su vanguardia marxista-leninista, sí podría asegurar los cambios profundos, es decir, la realización del programa agrario-antimperialista, por el cual abogaba y luchaba desde su fundación el Partido Comunista.(22)” Reference 22 is Fabio Grobart, 1985, p. 93, This author also refers in this regard to Leonel Soto, 1977, vol. II, p. 8.

  • "by the lower demand for sugar because of Great Depression, the attacks first by War of Independence Veterans, and later on by secret organizations principally the ABC". I have found no evidence that Suger was the singular exporting reason for the Economic decline at the time. This section you replaced, "by the Great Depression, which drove down the price of Cuba’s agricultural exports and caused widespread poverty" seems to more factually reflect the event. Nor have I found any evidence that "the attacks first by War of Independence Veterans, and later on by secret organizations principally the ABC" had a great deal to do with the Economic decline. As a separate argument, the only data I can find pertaining to the ABC is as a short lived and badly organized terrorist group, not as you call it, a "secret organization".
  • Your only reference in your entire contribution is a long, over-sensationalized, and frankly badly typed extract from, what I can only faithfully assume to be, a factual newspaper article; If you have access to this article you would have been better off scaning or photographing it, uploading to a permanent source, and using that as a reference. I can quote an extract of a news paper article claiming I'm the son of God, it doesn't make that true, and defeats the point of a reference.
  • The only reference in your entire contribution, the newspaper article, simply states the existence of the ABC, and to my research the ABC have had little, or no impact on the history of Cuba; indeed, it took me several minutes of searching to find any reference of the group outside of your contribution.
  • Your second contribution to the article, while containing much of the same mistakes I've already pointed out, also cut into a link rendering it viod, removed a perfectly valid image and failed to close the reference you quoted.
  • And finally this citation you've posted in response seems to be almost unrelated to any of the data in your contributions. And doesn't dismiss the problems listed above.
Neobros 12:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


Revised insert on 1933 events

Machado was a Cuban nationalist and his regime had considerable local support despite its violent suppression of critics. However, it was during this period that Soviet intrusion into Cuban affairs began with the arrival in Cuba of Fabio Grobart. During Machado's tenure, Cubans gained greater control over their own economy and major national development projects were undertaken. His hold on power was weakened, by the lower demand for sugar because of Great Depression, the attacks first by War of Independence Veterans, and later on by secret organizations principally the ABC [1] the Senior elements of the Cuban army forced Machado into exile and installed Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, son of Cuba's founding father, as President. In September, 4th-5th 1933) however, a second coup (led by sergeants, most notably Fulgencio Batista, overthrew Céspedes leading to the formation of the first Ramón Grau San Martín government. This government lasted just 100 days, but engineered radical liberal changes in Cuban society and a rejection of the Platt amendment.

Then came the bloody events of the Hotel Nacional September 8- and November 8-9 1933 which culminated in the defense by and death of Blas Hernandez at the ancient castle of Atares in Havana, in which Batista loyal soldiers and radicals killed off much of their opposition [2] El Jigue208.65.188.149 12:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm rolling it back, again, this time without a warning untill we resolve this. Primarily for the reasons listed above, however you've also badly formatted your contribution, destroying the rest of the article. Neobros 12:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
As a reminder, the data is stored in the articles history, and is not lost; as such we can recover and improve on it if you wish. Neobros 12:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Neobros: Went back and checked my insertion did not appear to damage the article, and it was carefully referenced. Please explain. El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

As you can see on this [1], several of your tags weren't closed correctly, destroying the Notes [2] and expanding the article to the right by several inches.
I'm glad to see you're improving your sources, but you've left in the newspaper extract; Such a large, unverifiable citation ideally needs the source paper scaning or photoing, uploading to an external source, then referencing back here; Both for article quality and the Citation sections' well-readability.
Also, I'd still prefer if you left the economic decline section to point out the failure of Agriculture, as opposed to simply Suger; Suger, as I understand it, was only a portion of the Agricultural problems. If you think Organizations like the ABC and Independence fighters are worth a mention in the economic decline, I can't really disagree, they played a small part. But let's hold back calling the ABC a "Secret Organization", they're anything but the Illuminati ;-) Neobros 14:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


Yes I see that now tell me what to do with those "tag closing," the formating for these footnotes is so arcane I cannot tell what you mean. As to the secret nature of the ABC was essential to its survival in during the Machado era, and that term was used in newspaper accounts, would the word "covert" be more suitable.

As to the newspaper accounts they can be recovered from newspaperarchives.com would you be satisfied with the URL from there. However, this is a fee based source and that may cause difficulties....

The puzzling thing about the reputation of the ABC is that it is often labeled "fascist," and yet in included a good number of personages of "Black" or Sub-saharan African heritage. For instance Riera Hernández, Mario 1965 Historial Obrero Cubano 1574-1965 Rema Press Miami Florida http://www.cubarepublicana.org/dobook.php?folder=historialobrerocubano p. 100 Los adversarios del exclusivista ABC endilgan a este groupo el sambenito de anti-negro y mussolinesco. Señalaron los rojos en un volante del Comité Central del Partido Comunista, entonces orientado por Martín Castellanos, la siguiente acusación: “A titulo de señuelos el fascista ABC hace figurar en sus cuadros reaccionarios a los negros Armado León Ibáñez (Cabo Soto); María Ignacio Mareu, Pastor González y Matías Cañizares, en fallido apaciguamiento de una masa negra y democrática que combate a ese aparato del imperialismo yankista de Cuba”.

and of course Batista, although he had considerable neo-Taino inheritance too, see for instance Argote-Freyre (p.40 and others) which discusses his covert activities with the ABC. El Jigue208.65.188.149 15:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I neglected to format the url correctly, it's fixed now. As a better explaination see [3], a temporary page correcting the tags, and a few small word changes you can see here [4]. As you can see in the Notes [5] it's still a bit long without external sources, but to be honest if those sources are diffucult to obtain, then we have what we have.
If you're happy with it, feel free to add it to the main Cuban page. I'll remove those warnings, and thanks for the contributions to the article :-) Neobros 15:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Neobros that was most kind and generous of you. Inserted section, it looks at least on first reading to be Ok. The 1930s in Cuba probably still need some details, such as the Hotel Nacional, the Atares actions, and the shooting of the ABC demonstration in 1934. I also would like to enter a brief note about the Cuban Navy sinking of a Nazi submarine during WWII. What holds me back is the matter of space. Perhaps there may be some reference to the Hotel Nacional somewhere around, perhaps in the Batista article....will check. El Jigue208.65.188.149 15:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Looking forward to reading it :-)
On another note, you may want to register with Wikipedia for future edits; As you could see by El C's mistaken reversion, us anti-vandals get a bit trigger-happy when we see un-registered users making successive large contributions ;-) Neobros 16:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


Thank you. However, El_C is quite familiar with my record. One visit to his Wikipedia home page suggests,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:El_C

but does not prove, that our conflict is ideological. A person I knew, a non communist 7-26 rebel in the War Against Batista, was falsely accused and executed by the Che Guevara. This one matter about which my book in progress is about, this is one of the reasons that I contribute here; but another stronger reason is my search for truth as "corny" as that sounds. El Jigue208.65.188.149 20:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone reverted you with an edit summary that read "see talk" and you revert without even an edit summary? You know better than that. Are you trying to be disruptive again? As for your book, please review our conflict of interests guideline. El_C 20:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

My book is written in an attempt to be as objective as possible, if that is a conflict with Wikipedia guidelines, please advise. El Jigue208.65.188.149 21:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The problem is the relationship between an author and their work, not really the work itself (i.e. may be raised by someone else). Thanks. El_C 21:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I do not follow your argument, so far as I see your personal page promotes your partisan views on the Cuba circumstance, and that does not appear to disqualify you. And yet in your view, my book in progress on Cuba, which naturally you cannot have read since you do not know who I am, does disqualify me. If you would be so kind please clarify this intriguing matter in detail. El Jigue208.65.188.149 21:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Disqualify me from what? I don't have yet-to-be-published book whose contents I'm trying to add to Wikipedia articles, and whose only focus is on adding these syntheses. I, on average, am the top fifth editor in every country article. El_C 21:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

El_C one may consider that it is less than wise to presume the content of unpublished book, when one neither knows the name of the author nor the nature of the book, much less to presume that my insertions in Wikipedia are taken from my book. While Wikipedia guidelines encourage the presumption of good faith. Some who do not subscribe to that guideline might interpret the content of your page as promoting a particular POV. Surely this is not correct. Although several other interpretations of the content of your page could be to taken suggest you are "false flagging" to collect a list contributors who subscribe to some ideological bent, or that you are simply trolling. Please assure me that none of these possibilities are true. El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

That "list," you just invented that, or does it actually exist outside your mind? Do you have evidence "that much of that El_C writes and many of those who El_C blocks , derive at least in part from his own political opinion," or are you just making this up as you go along? El_C 22:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Cuban Involvement in Africa

There is an important part of Cuban history missing in the history section. Cuba was actively involved in Africa for 25 years. Cuban Intervention in Guinea-Bisau and Angola was instrumental in ending imperialism in Africa and in the independance of Namibia. At the hight of their involvement there were 450.000 Cuban troops involved in a war against FNLA (supported by the USA and UNITA (supported by South Africa); very unique and no small feat for a little country halfway around the world. Cuba keeps the numbers of its fallen soldiers secret. Estimates go up to 10.000. This certainly left its mark on Cuban society. Sundar1 11:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sundar You are correct that is important. There are a number of descriptions on the web that talk about the actions for instance a Ciuta Canavale. However, they tend to be inaccurate. Are you sure about that 450,000 number? El Jigue208.65.188.149 13:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sundar Started a section on these matters. PS Cuba is not a little country see Churchill's statement at the beginning of the page. El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Maine redoux redoux

The section on the Maine while quite well researched from the Spanish point of view is not that commonly accepted. Thus I took the liberty of changing it slightly to reflect this circumstance. Please add and change as appropriate El Jigue208.65.188.149 16:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


Exodus

There is a new book out on the Cuban exodus:

  • Pedraza, Silvia 2007 Political Disaffection in Cuba's Revolution and Exodus (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics) Cambridge University Press, New York ISBN-10 0521687292 ISBN-13 978-0521687294 Which besides many descriptions of escape, and foiled escape from the Island )e.g. the sinking of tugboat 13 de Marzo" and the drowning of families trying to escape (pp. 256, 261, 279), includes such fascinating details as allegations that Marcus Rodriguez. commonly believed to have been the perosn who betrayed the Humbolt 7 survivors of the attack on the palace and eventually executed for this, may have been innocent p. 129

El Jigue208.65.188.149 13:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


I actually deleted the first paragraph of this outright. Hate to take umbrage in such a way, but this section needs a rethink from a far, far, far less biased point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.72.224 (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Cuban support for South Yemen

Apparently some are remise to recognize Cuban government intervention place such as South Yemen. For this reason I have reinserted Yemen into article and added the following citations:

Ramazani, Rouhollah K. 1975 The Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Vol. 3 Sijthoff & Noordhoof, Holland ISBN 9028600698 Mentions Cuban intervention in several different sections e.g. p. 75 “Just as the Soviet Union has sought the destruction of the Omani regime by proxy of South Yemini and Cuban support for the insurgents, the United States…” p. 115 “The Soviet Union indirectly intervened in the civil war in Oman by aiding the Dhofari rebels through Cuban and South Yemen.” Fontaine, Roger 1988 http://www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/bg655.cfm?renderforprint=1 “Third, the U.S. should consider ending its low-level diplomatic ties with Cuba THE EARLY YEARS OF CUBAN TERRORISM Cuban history is replete with examp les of terrorism, most notably in the early 1930s when groups of young Cubans struggled against General Gerardo Machado, who ran Cuba with an iron hand for nearly a decade beginning in 1925. Calling themselves the*ABC it is unclear what the initials stood for (This stood for the level of its cell structure A being the highest level B, the next etc El Jigue)), these young Cubans invented many of the techniques of modern urban terrorism (coordinated bombing, for example which Cuban advisers have passed on in scores of training camps around the world to thousands of Argentinians Brazilians, Chileans, Colombians, Ecuadorans, Hondurans, Nicaraguans, Salvadorans, and Uruguayans, to name a few in Latin America, and to Basques, Namibians, Palestinians West Germans, and Yemenis. ” El Jigue208.65.188.149 17:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

In addition, changed the title of minisection to Africa and adjacent Asia Minor. El Jigue208.65.188.149 17:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

Where did Cuba's name come from? It couldn't have come from the mouth of Christopher Columbus, who had named it "Juana". was it named for a person? after a native word? after a bunch of natives? — Rickyrab | Talk 23:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

From List of country name etymologies, the text says that the name came "From Taíno Indian "Cubanacan" — "centre place". In Portugal, some believe that the name echoes that of the Portuguese town of Cuba, speculating that Christopher Columbus provided a link. In portuguese and spanish, the word "cuba" refers to the barrels used to hold beverages." no source is provided for this info, though. — Rickyrab | Talk 23:39, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

"It is one of the few remaining Communist countries in the world."

Before I start, let's just get a couple things out of the way:

1. Yes, I'm well aware that there aren't that many left.

2. Yes, I'm well aware that many people believe that the Communist system in general is flawed.

3. And, more unimportantly, no, I'm not Cuban, nor related to anyone from Cuba.

However, I'm having problems with this statement. Let me quote it one more time:

"It is one of few remaining Communist countries in the world."

Alright, I'll start with the small matters: First of all, "it" has a name...it would be better to just refer to it as "Cuba". Second of all, there are more than a "few" Communist countries in the world, and also rather a lot of Socialist countries, but I really think that should fall into the same category. Third, basically saying "Cuba's ALMOST the only remaining Communist country in the world" sounds rather like U.S. propoganda from the '60s, as if reffering to Communist countries as in "They'll all crumble...any day now...". Basically, I find that this statement could have cleverly hidden weasel words and could be incinuating Anti-Communist POV, as if written by a staunch Republican. I actually think it would be better to say:

"Cuba is in a minority of countries in the world which are still one-party, Communist republics."

Well? It makes more sense, it could contain no possible bias (on either side), and it tells the truth. Far better for this article than the previous statement. 172.189.200.211 23:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Since 'communist countries' are those loyal to the continuity of the third Communist International, I personally have no problem with the original phrase - 5 is a few, and with the majority of those transforming into state capitalist republics, the taken implication that they are a dying breed is hardly contraversial. That said I'd blend the two and say "Cuba is one of the few remaining one-party, Communist republics." MichaelW 18:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Truth hard to find in Cuba, press panel says

An interesting article came out today in Sun-Sentinal showing how difficult it is to get information out of Cuba http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/cuba/sfl-flbpress1016nboct16,0,1631791.story

El Jigue208.65.188.149 01:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW who is that person who keeps erasing complete sections



Cuba is not a small island as Churchill who had fought there knew

Again we have the less than enlightened view that Cuba is a small island, a matter of some concern since this phrase is repeated ad nauseum. Saying that Cuba is a small island does not make it so, for Cuba is 766 miles long, and Churchill having fought there at Iguara in 1896 knew this well. Thus I have reinserted: Winston Churchill considered Cuba to be a "...large, rich, beautiful island..." Churchill, Winston S. 1951 The Second World War, Volume 5: Closing the Ring. Houghton Miffin Edition. Bantam Books, New York No ISBN or other number provided. P. 606 “Prime Minister to Foreign Secretary 5. Feb (19)44. Your minute about raising certain legations to the status of embassy. I must say that Cuba has as good a claim as some other places –“la perla de Las Antillas.” Great offense will be given if all the others have it and this large, rich, beautiful island, the home of the cigar, is denied. Surely Cuba has much more claim than Venezuela. You will make a bitter enemy if you leave them out, and after a bit you will be forced to give them what you have given to the others.” El Jigue208.65.188.149 17:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

One notes the dissenting opinion of contributor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/207.151.245.218 however, this seems to be the only contribution from that source. El Jigue208.65.188.149 15:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Grammatical Error

I know that the first sentence of the section about the spanish view on the Maine incident is grammatically incorrect. Problem is, I'm not skilled enough with grammar to fix it. Can someone please fix it? Luigi "Kurai" III 15:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I've made a section out of the whole Maine incident and reshuffled the text, hopefully to improve the flow. MichaelW 17:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Michael the main analysis presented here is extreme and apparently derived the Spanish Government's point of view and is not counterbalanced by the findings of numerous other investigations. See Samuels, Peggy and Harold. Remembering the Maine. (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995) a more balanced text, for details. Thus although I have left the present text as is and unchanged, I have labeled it "an alternative view" El Jigue208.65.188.149 00:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed text about the Maine Incident

I removed the below because the source appears to be a random web site. Published professional historians would be much more appropriate. If there are "fringe" theories about the attack, their notability needs to be established and they need to be put in context. The removed text also has POV problems. -- Beland 19:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Even McMorrow [3], who concludes that it was most probable but not proven, that Cuban rebels caused the explosion, is forced to speculate on unknown plots and mechanisms.[neutrality disputed] For instance McMorrow’s hypothesis relies on complete rationality of the Spanish Weylerites: [neutrality disputed]

  • “Thus, there seems to be a strong argument for Weylerite guilt based on their hostility towards the United States, and evidence of intention to attack the MAINE in particular. However, such an act against an American warship would have been a foolish move for a group of Spanish nationalists who were trying to maintain Spanish colonial rule over the island, for the same reasons that would have made it a foolish move for the Spanish authorities.”

and suicidal actions on the part of the Cuban rebels:

  • ”Alternately, a basic mine could have been brought to the side of the ship by a swimmer and directly triggered by the same person in a suicide attack. Thus, it seems most likely that the Cuban rebels were the guilty party because they had the most to gain from the incident.”

Neither complete rationality of the Weylerites nor suicidal actions by Cuban rebels have basis in historical fact.[neutrality disputed]

Beltran

  • Point 1 the web site you maligned is the most respected web site on the Spanish American War.
  • Point 2 only if genocide can be considered a rational point of view, can the Weylerite actions in Cuba be considered rational
  • Point 3 to consider that the Cuban rebels, who were consummate and cautious guerrillas, were suicidal is deviating from objective reality.

El Jigue208.65.188.149 19:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


List of significant military actions during colonial times

   * English landing at Guantanamo (Cumberland)by Admiral Edward Vernon 1741
   * English Conquest of Havana 1762-1763 [2][12]
   * Annexionist actions Narciso Lopez1850, 1851
   * Ten Years War 1868-1878
   * Guerra Chiquita 1880 Antonio Maceo Calixto Garcia
   * War of Independence 1895-1898

Added list El Jigue208.65.188.149 19:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Blank statements without details have not useful purpose

A blank statement e.g. section too long, needs editing, etc. without explanation serves no useful purpose. Such a notice should be followed by some description of the perceived flaw. El Jigue208.65.188.149 13:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Need to compare present to previous conditions in Cuba

It is necessary for balance to compare economic conditions before and after Castro, instead of lambasting past conditions and then white washing Cuban conditions for the last almost fifty years. Thus, in the Carlos Prío Socarrás section of this page, I have inserted:

  • The influx of investment fueled a boom which did much to raise living standards across the board and create a prosperous middle class in most urban areas, although the gap between rich and poor became wider and more obvious.” [4] However, during the last almost fifty years of Castro government rule, the good economic conditions of urban areas decayed, and the level comfort as judged by foot rationing of the whole populations rural or urban became far worse. [5]

El Jigue208.65.188.149 19:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the last sentence as the comparison is completely unnecessary in an historical description of events. Mind you I do like the idea of foot rationing. El J caught on the hop perhaps? MichaelW 01:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Militant activist keeps white washing Castro government actions

Militant "Frank Pais" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Frank_Pais (who is apparently unaware that the real Frank Pais was anti-communist and betrayed to Batista by Vilma Espin, self-describes as:

  • "Proud Argentinian political scientist, an ex-pat. Strong interest in Cuban politics, anti-fascism, beer brewing, Chilean history, human rights, international economics, and the saxophone. ¡Vivan las islas Malvinas!"

Is now deleting material underfalse pretenses, his last deletion (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cuba&diff=168376700&oldid=168353402) claims lack of source. on examination this claim proved false. El Jigue208.65.188.149 21:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

A somewhat less than flattering note

Just receive a somewhat less than flattering note apparently from 71.101.58.229 to my talk page at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:208.65.188.149&diff=cur

the note reads:

  • The above comment is more garbage by the ultra-right fascists of Miami. To: El Jigue: You are a comemierda. That is the reason you can not go to Cuba. Your brothers and sisters inside the island reject you. Stay in Miami, you piece of SCUM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.58.229 (talk) 21:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the lady/gentleman in question is referring to:

"One of the matters in discussion in official circles in Washington DC is when, after the Castros leave the scene, will the succeeding Cuban government be responsible for the Castros' vast foreign debts (in excess of 40 billion dollars). One of the factors is that if the Castros' can be considered foreign agents (e.g. given Raul Castro's training in the Eastern Block countries, and Fidel Castro's speech at the funeral of Fabio Grobart etc) then the 1898 Treaty of Paris applies, and the Cuban people are thus absolved of any responsability for this debt. El Jigue 11-24-06"

El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Footnote 81

Footnote 81 has nothing to do with the assertion it is supposed to prove! Someone recommend a fix!

TuckerResearch 07:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Claiming data was ideological citations were removed

This citation (see below), which is by the same author as previous cite, and presents balanced, factual and data was removed. In other words the citation that describes good urban conditions but poor rural conditions during the Prio administration, is left unqualified by necessary comparison to bad urban and rural conditions in present day Cuba.

  • However for necessary comparison, during the last almost fifty years of Castro government rule, the good economic conditions of urban areas decayed, and the level comfort as judged by foot rationing of the whole populations rural or urban became far worse. José, Alvarez 2000 Rationed Products and Something Else: Food Availability and Distribution in 2001 Cuba in Transition 11 pp. 305-322 http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/asce/pdfs/volume11/alvarez.pdf “To blame the U.S. economic sanctions for the existence of a rationing system of basic food products is not a very intelligent argument to justify Cuba’s socialist system. It is an admission that Cubans cannot even produce what grows very easily on Cuban soil. If one lists the food products that have been rationed since 1962, it becomes evident that almost all of them were in abundance before the 1959 revolution. Granted, all Cubans were not able to consume a wide variety of products because the instrument for rationing was the price system. But even after the rationing system was established, there have been periods in which the abundance of several products demonstrated the feasibility of returning to a stable and ample supply of food products. I remember the proliferation of a chain of government stores called FrutiCuba devoted exclusively to the selling of numerous fruits and vegetables in the mid-1960s. The existence of the free farmers’ markets in the 1980s, the free agricultural markets after 1994, and the new food outlets described below testify to the ability of Cuban farmers, now including urban inexperienced farmers, to produce abundant food supplies despite the U.S. economic sanctions, that could do away with the food rationing system. It is interesting to recall that, when the Soviet bloc was subsidizing the Cuban economy to the tune of five billion dollars per year, food was still rationed in Cuba.”

It is POV to select citations to attempt prove a point El Jigue208.65.188.149 15:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't select the references. I simply removed an out of context contemporary comparison and the attached reference. If you want to make of this page more of an ideological battle than already exists, then perhaps you would like to insert contemporary comparisons throughout. They do not belong in an historical description and this particular inclusion is clearly driven by the POV you bring to the page. I'm sure those of us more sympathetic to the Cuban revolution could have a whale of a time putting in comparisons which reflected well on current developments, as you could do the opposite. MichaelW 13:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


A somewhat less than flattering note

Just receive a somewhat less than flattering note apparently from 71.101.58.229 to my talk page at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:208.65.188.149&diff=cur

the note reads:

  • The above comment is more garbage by the ultra-right fascists of Miami. To: El Jigue: You are a comemierda. That is the reason you can not go to Cuba. Your brothers and sisters inside the island reject you. Stay in Miami, you piece of SCUM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.58.229 (talk) 21:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the lady/gentleman in question is referring to:

"One of the matters in discussion in official circles in Washington DC is when, after the Castros leave the scene, will the succeeding Cuban government be responsible for the Castros' vast foreign debts (in excess of 40 billion dollars). One of the factors is that if the Castros' can be considered foreign agents (e.g. given Raul Castro's training in the Eastern Block countries, and Fidel Castro's speech at the funeral of Fabio Grobart etc) then the 1898 Treaty of Paris applies, and the Cuban people are thus absolved of any responsability for this debt. El Jigue 11-24-06"

El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Cuban government partisans on attack yet again

Cuban government partisans on attack again, deleting data on present conditions, falsely alleging that it is a personal attack on a living person. Ignoring the fact that the present Cuban goverment has been in power for almost fifty years, and thus must bear responsability for present conditions in Cuba. El Jigue208.65.188.149 21:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Until you plausibly justify the inclusion of contemporary comparison in historical descriptions, I will remove it - and if necessary ask for arbitration. This is not, as I pointed out above, an ideological attack, but an issue of structure within Wikipedia. I'm curious about this false allegation - I suspect you are getting the fronts you are fighting on mixed up. I, who deleted the present day data, made no such allegation. MichaelW 05:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It's good to see El Jigue being more cooperative on these Cuban related articles. GoodDay 15:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Video on Cuba's hospitals

Footnote 30 links to a Fox News report. Given the ideological slant of this channel, can this be in any way considered a reliable source? 82.69.28.55 09:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes! Fox is no more ideological than CNN or the BBC or the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. There is no such thing as "objective."

TuckerResearch 20:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Desperate attempts to whitewash Castro's record

Several wiki-personas are desperately attempting by every means, and spurious excuse to delete material that is unfavorable to the Cuban government (see immediately above "Video on Cuba's hospitals"). Matters slated for such a whitewash, include:

  • the shortage of food in Cuba for the last 47 years or so.
  • that the Castro brothers have been in power for almost fifty years
  • foreign adventures of the Cuban government
  • that Subcomandante Marcos, the Cuban government trained agitator in Chiapas, Mexico, assumes the role of an indigenous Maya, but since he has an appearance far more consistent with majority European heritage. has to cover his face with a ski-mask.

These wiki-personas suddenly appear with a very short Wikipedia record, or a very short record on Cuban matters. This could be taken to suggest that they are either ad hock personas conjured up for this very purpose, or persons new to this Cuba page.

El Jigue208.65.188.149 02:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I suspect that El Jigue is a collective persona and the current inhabitant of the shell is new to the scene. Anyway whoever you are - will you please engage with the actual reason for my deletion - that contemporary comparisons do not belong in historical narratives, (at least not in Wikipedia, which is not a student essay - compare and contrast...), instead of simply replacing the original sentence, amusing typo and all. MichaelW 07:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Michael W. You allege, based upon some secret rule (see Animal House's Dean Wormer, double secret codicles) that "contemporary comparisons do not belong in historical narrative." This would be an action similar, to the teaching of history in second Batista (1950s) dictatorship, when narrations of then relatively recent histories (1930s) were omitted from school curriculums, since they would place Batista in an unfavorable light. Thus, while your point of view is interesting it is invalid, since even were some such secret Wikipedia rule to exist it would not apply since Fidel Castro has passed from power, if not quite yet from life... and he has moved to what you like to call "historical narrative." El Jigue (now alleged to be some kind of multiple diety)208.65.188.149 15:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No secret rule, just common sense. I've got no objection in general to time spanning comparisons, but they are the stuff of historical debate not description. A section about one time period should stick to that period. In this case it is irrelevant that a later government was, as you claim, just as incompetent. The section in question is entitled _After WWII_ and covers 1945 - 1952. Your insertion of a criticism of the Castro period is not motivated by an interest in clarity but by your obsessive desire to cast the worst possible light you can on the Cuban Revolutionary period. You are so much in kneejerk mode that you have persisted in replacing the foot/food typo. I'm not the fanatic round here. MichaelW 16:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


Michael I will move section to later period.... Oh by the way I read your discussion section...

it does seem somewhat less than impartial on Cuban matters... El Jigue208.65.188.149 18:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The temptation to be sarcastic almost overcame me. My sympathies, unlike yours, do not prevent me from trying to help make these Cuba pages as balanced as possible. I've spent enough time living and working on Cuba with a range of residents from pro to anti communist to know that your stance presents a bleak caricature of the reality. The way that you took my 'I suspect that El Jigue is a collective persona...' and translated it into 'alleged to be some kind of multiple diety' speaks volumes about your paranoid and inflated sense of your own worth, not to mention an over-hasty use of 'Save page'! MichaelW 19:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Michael, for making my points even more manifest. One would presume that since you work in Cuba you are an employee of the Cuban Government and thus not eligible to contribute to this page. El Jigue(bleak caricaturist of the Cuban reality)208.65.188.149 20:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You presume wrong - here 'have spent' is past tense and work can be voluntary. Your points are blunt and bent and as manifest as American destiny. MichaelW 02:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Cuban employees are absolutely allowed to contribute to this article, exactly the same as you. We don't prohibit people who live in Cuba or work for their government from working here, we encourage them for their specialist knowledge. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Photographs of a dead Castro are in circulation

Excellent photographs of a dead Castro are in circulation, they are either extremely high quality montages or the real thing. El Jigue208.65.188.149 23:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Apparently they are excellent fakes done some time ago see http://lacrudarealidad.blogsome.com/2006/12/28/fidel-castro-ha-muerto/ El Jigue208.65.188.149 00:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Since they're not a reliable source, they've no place in the article. GoodDay 19:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


UH!!!!!!!!! I already said they were faked what gives. El Jigue208.65.188.149 01:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

What gives is the usage of 'talk pages'. This stuff is just more gossip and has no place here. What must myself and others do to make you understand that? DON'T ADD GOSSIP ON TALK PAGES, PLEASE. GoodDay 21:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, If you have no 'intentions' of adding things to the article - Don't post them here (talk pages). GoodDay 21:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
We certainly cannot include pics of an allegedly dead Castro when he isn't dead. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

El Jigue

Por favor, El Jigue, pueda acabar con esta actitud que traigas aqui. Somos un enciclopedia y esto quire decir que todos los editores aqui necesitan traer una actitud de neutralidad a este articulo, o sea que no debemos pensar que Castro es correcto o incorrecto, que es heroe o que es dictador. Hay muchos foros donde uno pueda discutir Castro y su influencia sobre Cuba pero wikipedia no es un foro. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


SB: Looks like there is another attempt to ban me, and continue to whitewash the record of the present government. Neutrality does not mean being neutered. Let me repeat the record shows that Castro is an autocrat. It would be far wiser if more time were spent on adding pertinent material to the page rather than trying to whitewash the record of the present Cuban government El Jigue208.65.188.149 16:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Where do you draw the erroneous conclusion I want to ban you? Nobody wants to whitewash the record of the current government in Cuba, least of all me, but nor should it be blackwashed. The record shows that Castro invokes strong and differing reactions from adoration to blind hatred, you may be bale to continue posting but you cannot use wikipedia to push your agenda any more than Castrosits can so you are wasting your time. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
EJ, what must we do to get it through your head - It's not what you're gossiping that troubles us, it's that you're gossiping period. Stop obstructing the talk pages Please. Perhaps it's time to start having your gossip colums deleted. Since apparently, you're being uncooperative about it. GoodDay 20:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Since EJ has no respect for Wikipedia's policies on talk pages, perhaps we should start deleting his postings everytime he posts blogs/gossip. GoodDay 20:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


I think any off topic edits could be removed, if El Jigue wisheds to edit here and his edits appear off topic he needs to be explaining why they are on-topic. For instance I fail to see how fake pics of a dead Fidel could possibly help the article; there are forums and blogs for that kind of thing. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Howabout a 'committee of three editors' to monitor EJ's postings, the postings that are pure gossip get deleted. PS- Though I agree with EJ about the reliablility of Communist sources - that doesn't call for the talkpages to be used as a 'political platforms' for EJ's views. GoodDay 21:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
PS- What gossip will EJ post next? It's been reported Raul Castro twisted his ankle, while undercover skiing in Austria or It's been reported Fide Castro jumped a burgler at a restaurant, saving the workers; yet dressed as Groucho Marx etc etc. GoodDay 21:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Cuban "diplomats" attempt to browbeat French journalist into silence about human rights

  • "Havana refused for years to allow U.N. envoys to visit and investigate alleged rights abuses in the country, claiming that such missions would violate Cuban sovereignty."

El Jigue208.65.188.149 16:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

And? . Thanks, SqueakBox 17:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


SQ Thank you since your response merely reinforces my argument. El Jigue208.65.188.149 18:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Er you have lost me there. What precisely is your argument? That we ditch neutrality and turn this page into an anti-Castro page? The problem with that is that anyone can edit and the pro-Castrosits won't allow that to happen. We need Freedomwarrior and Ejercito Rojo fighting over the Fidel article the other day, sigh! I am here as an encyclopedia writer and what inter\rests me is a neutrality that incorporates both the pro and anti- Castroists. Take a look at my user page and you will see I am not biased in favour of Fidel. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

SQ This is merely an example, of a very large number of incidents, and here one can clearly see that Castro is a dictator since only dictators try to inhibit by coercion, rather than manipulate, the press overseas in this way.... Darn it they have been beating up people in Geneva for some time. Don't you remember the Calzon incident, El Jigue208.65.188.149 19:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality demands we include both sides, ie the pro and anti-Castroists. Me, I am on the side of the King of Spain but here at wikipedia I am not here to express my views but to help write a neutral encyclopedia. What this means is your stuff can go in if there is other stuff to balance it (not the fake pics of course but the reasonable, well sourced stuff. I think the Calzon incident passed me by. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


Objectivity is not a balance of pro- and anti-Castro but the evaluation of factual data

It is my opinion that factual data is not obtained by trying to achieve a balance of pro- and anti-Castro view points, but by attempting to evaluate each factual event on its own and in context. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 16:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Well that is your opinion. But our neutrality policy states that all notable views need to be presented. What is not going to happen is that we present either the pro-Castro or the anti-Castro viewpoints as the exclusive viewpoint. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
The facts are not that clear, either...Karpeth (talk) 00:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Huge refs

Several references in the history section including multiple paragraphs of the source material. I've removed them, since this is really not the appropriate place, and suggest that if people feel it's important to have access to these particular paragraphs that they be moved to Wikisource. Natalie (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

So, having looked at the notes section, someone made extensive additions to the history section and added an equal amount of content to the references themselves. These long references are much more in the style of endnotes in a book and seem inappropriate in an encylcopedia article, but since there are so many of them and I know Cuba can be a hot topic, I wanted to check with more regular editors of this page before I trim all the refs. Is this in response to some conflict about veracity of sources? If not, I don't see what purpose these extended notes serve, other than to clutter up the refs section. And as I said in my earlier comment, quite a few of these things would be eligible to move to Wikisource. Natalie (talk) 17:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Was forced to restore material deleted

It is very destructive, almost akin to vandalism,to engage in massive deletions with the only briefest explanation. These changes ignored years of discussion and left the article with a decided pro-Castro bent. It might be wise for Ms Erin to be more prudent until she learns more about Cuban history. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 19:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Continued disrespect of Wikipedia policies on talk pages concerning bloging/gossiping, must not be tolerated. GoodDay (talk) 20:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Firstly, familiarize yourself with WP:AGF, sooner rather than later. I shortened an excessively long note in an infobox (which are supposed to be brief) and removed unecessary subheadings. If you feel that the information I removed from the box is so vital as to be necessary for the article, maybe you should put it somewhere else in the article, instead of the infobox. I fail to see how this leaves the article with a "pro-Castro bent". I'm restoring my removal of the unecessary subheadings, since you have not addressed that at all. I can only assume you restored them accidently in your rush to revert me. Natalie (talk) 20:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Almost 50 years of censorship in Cuba

There has been almost 50 years of censorship in Cuba, this has wide ranging effects on the perception of Cuban matters. Outside of Cuba some academic activists have been attacking and in some cases were able to deny tenure to other academics who have non-Castro view points. Communist party activists world wide have been promoting a spurious view of Cuban data. Cuban archives are only available to those viewed with favor by Cuban government, thus one has to be cautious about data generated in this fashion. El Jigue20:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

If one doubts this, ask a simple current question:

What year was recently deceased. former chief of Cuban armed forces staff and interior minister, Sergio del Valle Jimenez born?

El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 20:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless the above posting has anything in it, to be added to the article (with citations)? It must be viewed as a personal complaint blog -- I recommend it be deleted from this talk page (if that's the case). GoodDay (talk) 20:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GD So you want to remove the reality of Cuban censorship, and verification of that reality. Would it be malicious of me to suggest that this request of yours merely supports this point. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 20:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless the above posting has anything in it, to be added to the article (with citation)? It must be viewed as a personal complaint blog -- Again, recommend it be deleted from this talk page (if that's the case). Note - that editor in question continues to ignore requests to stop bloggin/gossiping on talk pages. Thus showing no respect for Wikipedia's policies. GoodDay (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Add to article, if source is 'reliable'. GoodDay (talk) 20:53, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GD the reliability of this source is a matter of opinion, since, the material is taken almost verbatim from an official Cuban Government source the periodical Granma. Apparently even the Granma staff does not know the birthdate of an important Cuba official. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 21:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

For AP report taken from the same source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071116/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/obit_del_valle_1

Again, if sources are reliable? - add General de Valle death to article. If sources are not reliable? Please remove mentioning of it at this talk page. Tak note: Editor in question continues to ignore Talk Page policies on Blogging/Gossiping. GoodDay (talk) 21:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GD Make a Sergio del Valle Jimenez page and then we can talk about it. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 21:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GD guess what a page on him showed up within the last few days. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 21:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you at least try to assume the good faith of other editors and act civil? Your attitude is not particularly conducive to a collaborative work. I think you'll find you have a much easier time here. Natalie (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Natali, whom are you speaking to, me or EJ (I'm assuming me). GoodDay (talk) 21:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. I'm actually speak to EJ. Natalie (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Tis' alright. I've been trying to reason with EJ for almost a year. Recently (due to fear of languistic barriers), I had somebody contact him in Spanish concerning usage of 'talk pages'; but apparently it's been futile. Therefore, I've taken his subsequent bloggings as being uncooperative. GoodDay (talk) 22:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GD Subsequent is the most commonly accepted spelling. Bloggins one can presume is somebody from the Shire in Middle Earth. El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

El Jigue, I'm asking you nicely, yet again, to treat your fellow editors with respect. Your attitude on these pages is incredibly uncooperative and you have not responded to anything I've said to you. You've also reverted me twice without explanation. I will not revert back, as that would be edit warring, but you might find WP:OWN and WP:EW helpful. If you continue editing in the manner in which you have been editing today, I can almost guarantee that you'll be blocked again, and probably for longer this time. Natalie (talk) 01:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Natalie Erin planning a purge of "anti-Castroites"=

It would seem that Natalie Erin a real newbie on the Cuba page is planning a purge of "anti-Castroites" El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 04:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


Take this example from her talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Natalie_Erin

Hi, Natalie. Here is bibliotecario galio from the Spanish Wikipedia. The user you are talking about used to be active on es:, as seen on his contributions log while being 205.240.227.15, but seems to have disappeared since I blocked him on May 7. He hasn't signed as El Jigüe nor edited with his current IP, 208.65.188.149. Fortunately, that's all what I have to say. There are, however, some rabious anti-Castro users, but only a checkuser can provide some evidence. Regards, 24.232.175.140 (talk) 02:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

El Jigue208.65.188.149 (talk) 04:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, El Jigue, I wandered over to Spanish Wikipedia to see if you had been conducting the same article ownership there. Hardly sinister, especially considering I found that you've been blocked at EsWiki for the exact same type of tendentious POV-pushing you perform here. Hardly sinister. Natalie (talk) 04:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Once again, when EJ is pressured into following Wikipedia rules; when asked to not use the talk pages as a political platform (by poluting it with blogs/gossip)? -- He accuses editors of being pro-Communist and suppressers of the truth; I think Wikipedia has put up with EJ long enough --He shouuld be permanently banned. PS- Isn't it ironic? EJ plays the freedom fighter, yet continues to have an autocratic attitude. GoodDay (talk) 16:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
IMO we should purge both pro- and anti- Castroites POV pushing comments as we are encyclopedia writers who do not buy into either the pro or anti agenda. Thanks, SqueakBox17:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, a politically charged article like this, should be as neutral as possible. GoodDay (talk) 18:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Just to clarify having an opinion on a subject is completely normal, we don't mind pro or anti Castoites editing here whaty we mind is them using wikipedia to push an agenda, it is possible to edit an article and talk page neutrally in spite of having an opinion. Thanks, SqueakBox 18:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Tough time to say. Cuba is in a transition. There's still no "Middle class" developing in Cuba , so one can say it is still Communist. However, reforms in some areas in terms of elections are beginning to develop. Just give Cuba time it will happen on it's own. Outside intervention makes the officials there clamp down and reverse the clock. CaribDigita (talk) 15:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Well I imagine it does have a small middle-class, not least the party members, and a lack of a strong middle-class is a classic sign of a third world country. Thanks, SqueakBox 15:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Socialst Nation or Communist?

You decide. Ellomate (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

There's no difference.Freedomwarrior (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


Socialist, Communist would mean no free enterprise at all.

CaptinJohn (talk) 15:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Wrong. Also, no country would call themselves communists without having reached the final phase. if you don't understand, read the manifesto... Karpeth (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Here we deal with referenced material, we don't read the communist manifesto and make an educated guess. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I believe you misinterprented me. Communism is what commies are trying to reach, going on the path of socialism. To define Communism, you would need to go to the source after the latest purge, and that would be Marx. Noone has ever defined Communism in a way that any decent politician would attribute to Cuba. In layman terms, however, Communism could refer to cuba, as the president is a proclaimed Communis't'...Karpeth (talk) 18:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The so-called difference between the two terms dates to Lenin, not Marx and Engels. For instance, here is what Engels writes about the Communist Manifesto: "Thus the history of the Manifesto reflects the history of the modern working-class movement; at present, it is doubtless the most wide spread, the most international production of all socialist literature, the common platform acknowledged by millions of working men from Siberia to California." If the two terms were not used synonymously as I contend, he would've described the Manifesto as the most "international production of all communist literature" and not "the most international production of all socialist literature." I can pluck out countless other examples in Marx and Engels works where communism and socialism are also treated synonymously...Freedomwarrior (talk) 02:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Class privilege

I have just read the Class privilege section below:

While the form of government of Cuba is theoretically opposed to class privilege, preferential treatment exists for those who are members of the Communist Party or who hold positions of power within the government. Housing is in short supply in Cuba and most Cubans live in circumstances that can only be described as poor. Access to better housing is reserved for those favored by the Cuban government. Access to transportation, work, housing, university education and better health care are a function of status within the government or the Communist Party. [6] [7] For instance, in order to enter university, students are required to pass an entry examination to show they possess the basic knowledge required. In order to take this examination students need a letter from the Committee for the Defense (CDR) CDR of the Revolution vouching for their "political and moral background". It is reported that often people are unable to take the examinations because their letter from the CDR was unfavorable. In one case a student was not allowed to take the examination as the letter stated that he "had friendly relations with elements who wished to leave the country".Human Rights and Education

The first refernece (6) seems to be some sort of online discussion about Fidel Castros personal villa. The second reference (7) is about labour rights. The third (which is stuck in as a link at the end of the section is someones blog. Since only one of the references actually mentions university admission, and that is a blog about somes friend I think the whole section should be removed but before I do that I wanted to give fair notice. If anyone disagrees then please say!

John

CaptinJohn (talk) 14:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

A strict interpretation of the sourcing rules would say that you are right - any information that is not supported by a reliable source should be removed. You may consider searching for some reliable sources before removing the section, but I don't think that is required. The burden of proof is on anyone wishing to add information. You may also want to check the writers of the blogs, just in case they are prominent people - blogs written by people considered experts in their field can be considered reliable sources. Natalie (talk) 20:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

There are other sources that can be cited on that matter, I will add them shortly.Freedomwarrior (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks for finding some other sources. Natalie (talk) 04:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
The new sources are good but I am still pretty dubious about the old ones. What do people think?
Also, does anyone know how "Hard" this political test is? Is it that a significant number of people cant get permission to go to university just becuase they/their parents are not party members or is it that most people pass as long as you dont go around talking loudly about the wonders of capitalism? Im not saying that any descrimination is right or that there is none (there almost certainly is). Its just that the article says that it "Often" occurs and so far there is only one case and that comes from our Cuba Dissident Blog reference.
Thanks again for the better source.
CaptinJohn 14:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
According to people I know who has been on Cuba, it is those who openly oppose the regime. I can't get this as a verifiable source,<sarcasm>But I could make a blog and state that, thus a valid source!</sarcasm>
Karpeth 15:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I love the <sarcasm>! I am thinking that this section might be better off rewritten to say that althought there is no cash cost of attending there are restrictions on people of "questionable loyalty" to the revolution (or who are related to them). If we can get sources we could say that this often, sometimes or seldom prevents someone from attending. Also Id put it under education rather than where it is and call it something like "Educational Access Restrictions" as this is not so much about class as it is about compromising on admissions priciples.

What do people think?

CaptinJohn 16:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

That seems fine, and jibes with the information we have that is sourced to something reliable. I think moving it to the education section also makes a lot of sense. Natalie 16:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Done. Hope this is ok with everyone

CaptinJohn (talk) 13:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems necessary to point out that discrimination regarding university entrance is the norm rather than something that only happens on occasion. In general, only those deemed to be supportive of the system - either by being party members or by being vouched for by a CDR are allowed into the University system. Happened to me, happened to at least six or seven other childhood friends. This isn't anything new and I'm wondering what all the hub-bub is about concerning the paragraph. Were folks under the impression that this was not so? Seems like pretty common knowledge although I suppose maybe I am not as familiar with the opinions or assumptions made by those without experience on the island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.224.35 (talk) 19:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow. You cuban, or just slander? It seems that you are a new yorker, and that means that either you acctually fall under the category of antirevolutionaires, or less propably a non-anti-revolutionaire who live in new york. I know what I believe, as I know people who've been there... Karpeth (talk) 23:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Anonymous, we need a reliable source attesting to the information you've shared before we can include it. Whether or not this situation is commonly known in Cuba and/or the exile community, Wikipedia cannot accept your word as to its accuracy. You may find the policy on verifiability helpful. Natalie (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Remember, it's a new yorker. Most exiles are floridaeans. 01:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Karpeth (talk)
Well, they never said whether they were an exile or not. What they did say is that this is common knowledge among those with "experience on the island". That could mean a lot of things, but it suggests to me that they are talking about the Cuban population and the Cuban exile community. They may or may not be part of those groups - there is really no evidence either way. And really, it seems kind of irrelevant - no matter who the anonymous person is, we need a reliable source to verify their information before it can be included in the article. Natalie (talk) 19:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)