Talk:Panama

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Panama article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
SICA ZP
Latin America Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Central America, which collaborates on articles related to Central America. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Panama is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Peer review This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated Start-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Archive
Archives
Archive 1: 2004 — 2006.


Contents

[edit] University Project

I am sorry, I will try again. Please bare with me.

Greg

[edit] Geography: North or South America?

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

I think Panama would be considered in South America because it is connected to Colombia which is in South America. Plus it is nearly not as close to North America than it is South America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.66.101 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Gringos really don't know Panamá is part of Central America. Ignorants!!! --196.40.78.249 21:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Oh boy, this is so much fun!!!! Before you decide this you need to state your point of view.
Geographically, yeah, Panama is part of Central America, but if you want to allow only two Americas, then definitely it is part of North America, not South America. (Unless you mean SouthAmerica starts South of the Rio Grande).
Historically we had a lot more to do with South America than Central America. At one time, we ruled from mid Nicaragua downwards towards South America. On the other hand, culture-wise we had a lot more to do with United States than any other country.Panamanian likes and dislikes are very similar to those of the United States than any other Latin America Country. But economically, we are one with the world due to our nature as a place of forced transit.
Therefore, before saying where we belong, you will have to stablish what criteria you will be using.200.90.134.30 20:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
"ruled from mid Nicaragua downwards towards South America." Don't you mean mid Costa Rica downwards towards South America?  LaNicoya  •TALK• 21:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks you will never understand.

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

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

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

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

I'm a Panamanian too, and I'll clear this up. This problem exists because Spaniard colonists used the term "North", "Central" and "South" America to describe the 3 regions that compose an entire continent, which is called "America". You can see the differences in: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norteamerica (Spanish wikipedia) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America -- I know there was an explanation on one of the North America articles, but looks like it's gone now. But, I'd say that the article should state both explanations, because it might confuse people. (Like in this discussion)
Found it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas_%28terminology%29 Remmember that America for most English-speaking people means the Country, not the Continent. Estados Unidos de America is the name in spanish, not America. -- ...RuineЯ|Chat... 17:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
As a neutral observer (I don't really care how Panama is categorised!) I think the problem is actually caused by different definitions of the concept of a continent. Essentially in many parts of the world America is not thought of as a single continent, but as two continents - North and South. It seems from the map on the wiki page as if the division can be made at the Panama canal (although that might be just a bad drawing). This would not make Panama the only country in two continents - Turkey also has this feature, as does Russia. Of course other parts of the world define America as a single continent, or indeed Europe and Asia as a single continent. Duncan (talk) 15:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

Anyone know the source for these population statistics? World Bank? IMF? UNICEF? Article claims 3.232 million people, CIA World Factbook says "3,191,319 (July 2006 est.)" [1]. Also, article says population is 80% Catholic, CIA says 85%. Since article's stats are un-referenced, should we use citable CIA stats? - Eric 08:19-08:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

What is the correct percentage of Muslims in Panama? This article says it's 4.4%, while the Islam in Panama article say it's 0.3%. Obviously, one of these is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.17.34 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, article says population is 80% Catholic, CIA says 85%. Since article's stats are un-referenced, should we use citable CIA stats? - Eric 08:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Both are absurd. There is no country in Latin Americ today in which 80% or 85% of the population are practicing Roman Catholics. In Panama, as in every Latin America coutry, the numbers of practicing Roman Catholics is declining and the number of Protestants, including Mormons and Pentacostals is growing expoentially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.72.210.100 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comarcas and provinces

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

[edit] Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board

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

[edit] Improvement Drive

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

[edit] Proposed WikiProject

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

[edit] For profit sites

I've eliminated the "non-profit" statement on the Panama Travel Focus and Panama Sights websites; these sites are clearly supported by advertising. I've also added Panamainfo, which is a similar site to these. (BTW, what are the guidelines for publishing for-profit sites on a Wikipedia country page? I'm new to this, and would like to abide by community guidelines.) 201.227.246.74 15:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You can find more information here. In general, external references to "for profit" sites are not a bad thing, but the content provided by them should be treated with caution. Non-profit sites are not necessarily free of POV information. The only real difference is that the motivation for the POV may not be money.SRICE13 (TALK | EDITS) 15:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
This says the "non-profit" was eliminated while actually the LINK was eliminated. Sure, there is google advertisement because quite frankly somebody has to pay the hosting bills and to that the "profit" barely pays the expenses. I see PanamaSights/FocusOnPanama being eliminated while there is a link to places like Panama1.com which actually makes a lot of revenue on advertisement. So either you eliminate all or be fair. Even WikiPedia is not non-profit, it receives donations and most definitely there is plenty of left over that can be considered profit. Lordofthings 12:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)LordOfThings
The "for profit" title of this discussion has confused the issue. The link should be removed not because it is "for profit" or even because it isn't a fine and useful website. The external link guidelines WP:EL are quite clear: Wikipedia is not a directory of pretty good websites. Panamasights is not an official website (which are given preference) and the information that it contains (roads, embassys, telephone numbers, etc.) can already be accessed at other official websites. The unique aspect of the website is the forum, but WP:EL is quite clear that forums should not be linked (for a variety of reasons.) For all of these reasons the link should not be readded. Nposs 12:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
The above user Lordofthings has noted on his/her talk page that they are the owner of the sight. Adding links to your own site is a violation of WP:COI. Because of this, and for the reasons listed above (non-official site with information already available from official sources, plus the forum and advertising) I will be removing the link. I urge the user to not re-add the link to their website, but rather await further discussion from other editors. Nposs 13:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3O response

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

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

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

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

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

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

[edit] Vandalism

Undid vandalism by IP address 216.147.235.164.

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

Also, is there a proper place for me to report this vandalism?JeffKo427 19:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking of that situation. Depending on the nature of the vandlism, you can to a couple of methods. See WP:VAN for more information. Cheers. SRICE13 (TALK | EDITS) 15:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External link clean-up

This article has too many links, many of which do not pass the external link guidelines. Wikipedia is not a directory of links (see WP:NOT) - DMOZ is a directory of links, and in fact, the Panama dmoz directory is already linked. Commercial sites with limited additional encyclopedic content, directories, forums, non-official tourism sites really should not be linked. I'm removing several links. I encourage you to discuss any re-additions here before making any edits. Nposs 02:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I ended up removing more sites than I expected. Several were only tangentially related to the article. Links need to be directly related to the article. A general link to a site that might contain information about Panama, among other topics, violates WP:EL. However, there might be content on some general sites that could be worth deep linking. As far as the other links - most were highly promotional and filled with advertising. Nposs 02:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

[edit] Languages Distribution

The article naturally informs of the official language of Panama. However, I think information about the distribution of the spoken languages would be a good addition. My search for this information gave me a few results. The CIA World Factbook ([2]) has this to offer about the languages of Panama: "Spanish (official), English 14%; note - many Panamanians bilingual." More info is also at [3]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.150.203.74 (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Real estate

"There are more than 105 projects in Panama City where neighborhoods are experiencing a huge increase in the number of buildings. In San Francisco there are currently 25 new buildings being built." where and when are these facts from; would it be better to just remove this all together? Enelson 16:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This whole section needs some work. There are no citations! The writing is clear and the style is correct, so this is really too bad. In my opinion, it's too relevant to the article to just remove it, but it really does need those citations.-Athaler 19:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panama as a "world power"

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

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

Agree. This is also an inherently POV description, and therefor not appropriate. These kinds of edits will be reverted and warnings will be issued. Notmyrealname 16:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Én la página en Español esto es una permanente batalla, ya que existen wikipedistas panameños que por ignorancia se arriesgan a especular con el desarrollo económico sin tener una referencia confiable. Todas estas incorporaciones sin referencia deben borrarse. --201.240.31.164 (talk) 05:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

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

[edit] Marcha Real

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

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

[edit] Population

I removed the section that said Panama has the smallest population of any country in Spanish Speaking Latin America, this is simple untrue, Belize has less than 10% of Panama's population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.161.25.244 (talk) 07:19, August 26, 2007 (UTC) Belize's official language is English.72.149.155.83 16:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

PEOPLE OF BELIZE SPEAKS ENGLISH, AND ENGLISH IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THAT COUNTY, SEE THE PAGE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.215.122.253 (talk) 21:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


>> May 18, 2008 there is an update on this case. Here is an upated 33 page report showing a pattern of gross abuse of Panama’s civil law system. Here is a copy of the "overview" of the report:

The following is a Report of a list of legal abuses committed against the Estate of Wilson C. Lucom (R.I.P.), its beneficiaries and in particular, Richard S. Lehman, Esq. as the Executor of that Estate. The abuses against Lehman were committed in order to remove him as the sole Executor of a Panamanian Estate and to nullify the Last will and Testament of Wilson C. Lucom.

The Report discloses a plan to illegally nullify and defeat the Last Will and Testament of Wilson C. Lucom (“Lucom”), which left the bulk of his $50.0 Million fortune to feed the malnourished and starving poor children of Panama. The defeat of this gift would then result in the $50.0 fortune passing to one of Panama’s most elite and powerful families, the children of Hilda Arias and their attorneys, Hector Infante and Edna Ramos (“the Arias Group”).

Since Lucom’s Last Will and Testament could not be defeated in the Panamanian courts of law, the only way to steal this precious gift to Panama’s poor children was to get rid of Lehman. Lehman was appointed by the Panamanian Court as the sole Executor of Lucom’s Will. Therefore, he was the only person with the legal authority who had sworn an oath in Panama to protect the poor children of Panama.

The Report clearly shows not only a gross abuse of Panama’s civil law system which has resulted in the complete inability to administer Lucom’s Estate for 20 months. It will show a systematic use of the criminal legal system to resolve civil cases by the threats, terror and personal and financial ruin of the opponent.

It will show a legal system where one lawyer with impunity can file more than 13 fraudulent criminal allegations against Lehman in one year accusing him of crimes he never committed; the issuance of two illegal arrest warrants against Lehman in Panama and the issuance of two illegal indictments against Lehman. All of this as a result of the corruption of at least one and possibly two Panamanian Prosecutors.

The most recent attacks on Lehman and his lawyers resulted from the corruption of several Panamanian police agencies. In January of 2008 Lehman and his main Panamanian counsel, Victor Crosbie, were illegally listed as Red Notice criminals of the highest order by Panamanian Interpol. Then Lehman’s counsel was falsely arrested by Interpol in Columbia and Panama.

http://www.lucomchildren.com

Here is direct link to the 33 page report: http://www.lucom-ninospobresdepanama.com/pdf/E-LegalAbuse_lucom.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucom (talk • contribs) 20:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Foreign Investors and Expatriates in Panama

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

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

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

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

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

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

[edit] Vandalism?

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

MaxwellPerkins 05:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of information and no mention of Illegal secession from colombia with US Military intervention

I really would like to know why Panamas relationship with Colombia was "an unstable relationship that lasted seventy three years." I would also like to know why, there is not more information about the illegality of Panama's secession. The US interference in Colombian affairs was completely out of order.--CharlesBronson18 19:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of external link

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

[edit] University Project

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

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

[edit] Bilateral Investment Treaty with the U.S.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please do not delete this. Thank You kindly.

Greg

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

[edit] Hector Lopez

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

[edit] John Darwin

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

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

[edit] History

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

[edit] panama

[[Image:Insertformulahere]]