Talk:Cuba/Archive 12

message: There's a line that some editors seem to be pushing and approach that completely misunderstands the concept of "opposing views".  Yes, differing views should be presented.  But not every fact has an opposing view, except in the most contorted and ideological sophistry.  If we say rhumba came from Cuba, we really don't need to present the "opposing view".  And likewise for the fact it's south of Florida.  Many facts that are social or political also have no sensible "opposing view"... and just presenting some fact that someone might take as a good thing about Cuba doesn't mean that we need some digression into a tirade as an "opposing view".
So Cuba has a 96% literacy nowadays (or whatever the referencable number is).  There's no "opposing view" to that (unless some serious non-fringe position existed that it had a 50% literacy or a 150% literacy like the SD seems to expect).  Sure, if estimates actually vary, we can say "95-98%" and footnote the various sources, or whatever.  It's not an "opposing view" to argue tediously about what might have happened in regard to literacy under some other regime, or whatever counterfactual.  It's not an "opposing view" to argue that the literacy rate "doesn't count" for whatever reason, it's just an editorial that doesn't belong here.  Symmetrically, it would be POV nonsense to write that "The 96% literacy rate proves the revolution is really great".  Our job is just to state the facts, readers can decide for themselves what "might have been" or "what it proves".  Similarly for health indices, or abortion rates, or whatever.
Even most of the stuff around form-of-government has no sensible "opposing view".  We don't follow the fact that Castro has been president, or that X% of legislators were PCC members, or whatever with some rant about how bad those facts are under the misleading guise that it's an "opposing view".  It's fine to say that such-and-such are the constitutional procedures.  And it's even mostly fine, if properly cited, to write that the de jure procedures are not fully followed de facto.  But adding at the end "and that's bad" isn't an "opposing view", it's just an editorial (and it's just as much an editorial even if it's a direct quotation). LotLE×talk 19:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just taken a look at the United States article, which itself contains a number of  POV edits seemingly designed to paint the US in an unneccesarily bad light. Unless editors get serious on encylopedic content then Wikipedia will fail. There's not a chance that a mainstream encylopedia would carry some of the sentences on the US page or others that are being trialled on this page. It makes you wonder what motivations people have for contributing at all. I just read "The United States is poorly educated in comparison to most developed countries"?!?--Zleitzen 02:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Desperately misreading "opposing views" 

message: This sentence had been in the article, and has gone back-and-forth a bit in the last day.  I think that with a good citation it's nicely informative, but not essential certainly.  What do folks think?
:The continuation of the existing regime was a disappointment to the anti-Castro exiles, who in the early 1990s believed that their return to their homeland, and to power, was imminent.
LotLE×talk 21:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The opinions and the effect of the Cuban exiles is the Elephant in the room around here. And, this issue deserves at least a sentence and really more.  BruceHallman 21:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though how many of those in Cuba wanted the same sort of change as those in Florida is questionable.  -- Beardo 06:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence on exile reaction 

message: It looks like Drogo Underburrow is intent on repeating KDRGibby's 3RR violation.  Not there quite yet, but I'll be sure to report it if or when he violates.  KDRGibby, appropriately, was blocked for a month—but that's mostly because of prior probation.  I assume Drogo's block would be for less time. LotLE×talk 04:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another case? 

message: Three revert rule violation on . : 
* Previous version reverted to: 23:39, 2006 May 14
* 1st revert: 00:05, 2006 May 15
* 2nd revert: 00:17, 2006 May 15
* 3rd revert: 02:42, 2006 May 15
* 4th revert: DiffTime
Reported by: ~~~~
Comments:
----
I don't want to brush against 3RR myself, if someone else would restore the most recent vandalism by Drogo, that would be helpful. LotLE×talk 06:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I hope everything has settled down for good!  I never knew there could be so much drama on wikipedia, hatemail and all..  And to think I was planning on working on a Cuban Sports sandbox (:  I think that Drogo probably made the edit under the impression that is was verifiable, and 5 seconds later found himself in the middle of that unfortunate recordbook edit war.  Myciconia 07:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Drogo Underburrow]]

message: The refs in this article is a complete mess, fix them to footnotes. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 03:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe Jaranda overstates the issue, mixed citation style is not per se wrong.  But I agree it's a good idea to move to m:Cite.php for the simple inline URLs.  However, as we do so, let's provide complete citation details and verify links.  Please use the  for the expanded details. LotLE×talk 04:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refs 

message: 1) Somebody please make a new archive. 2) start a new page 3)  write down the title of each chapter as they appear on the article. Comment only those sentences found in a particular chapter chapter. 4) don’t assume readers are stupid. Every single fact presented in the main text is followed by “explanations” meant to influence the readers. Since we have different POVs let’s present the facts as they are, and let the readers to make their own conclusions (e.g. suicide rates, life expectancy etc). Keep comparisons with other countries at minimum. It’s better to put things into context but this could be extremely misleading, keeping in mind you can chose your examples as you wish. If not possible at least keep comparing the same countries.--Anticom 04:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some good suggestions.  Looks like #1 has already been taken care of!  Something you can do is make a sandbox page in your userspace (perhaps at User:Anticom/Cuba).  Myciconia 08:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to add this text into the links. ""members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html" Democracy in Cuba: Issues & Answers by Dan Christensen- Very informative about the political system of Cuba and the arguments of the critics and includes good responses to those critisisms. (Only copied link works)." Teemu Ruskeepää 09:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Zleitzen recommended on my own talk page that "the Christianson link be available as a link the foot of that page, but not sourced within" What do you mean? I'd like to have the text (link directs to wrong page) among the links at "About Cuba" section. What about this? Zleitzen, please answer at the subject pages, not personal pages, thank you. Teemu Ruskeepää 11:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Anticom's idea n:o 4. Let's make a category hierarchy. Terms and consepts on one page and their complete details behind one link. Critic: People must be able to decide the credibility of things themselves, not through authoritarian leaders' will. Wikipedia should aim to make people aware and civilized of all the fact, and not just say what consepts are up by the pow's and other elite just then. The western media already represents this problem. Wikipedia needs to be an unrestricted source of information. Teemu Ruskeepää 09:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Okay, I have protected the page to stop this revert-warring.  You need to discuss on the talk page first before reverting another editor's additions like that, and if the additions are controversial, you should post them here first and try to reach consensus.  We've already received enough negative publicity for revert wars on this article (see the link at the top of this talk page), and I really do hope to see better behavior from all of you in the future.  --Cyde Weys 08:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No revert-warring 

message: The web site "Real Cuba" is presenting written and photographic material on the support of the upper class to Castro's revolution .
Other material presented discusses labor rights in Cuba during the first half of the 20th century. El Jigue 5-15-06
Sadly, the "Real Cuba" is a propaganda site which does not meet wikipedia's demand for verifiable sources. -- Beardo 06:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call it a "propaganda" site, but yes, it is clearly a site with heavy anti-castro bias (not without reason!). But this does bring up an issue: does it make it any less true or the written and photographic material and less credible? I suppose "Real Cuba" must present this evidence to a neutral party for examination and verification? Is that what "Real Cuba" must do? And if it is, who determines the "neutrality" of the third party they choose to authenticate the material? --Mcmachete 22:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose common sense helps here.  If a site devotes a page to make fun of Castros Parkinson's disease, chances are it is not credible.  Of course there is the wikipedia policy to go by as well.  Myciconia 03:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Real Cuba" is in fact "a site with heavy anti-castro bias", but how can you say that it "does not meet wikipedia's demand for verifiable sources"? They have a copy of a statement that comes from Luis Conte Aguero. He is a well known journalist in Cuba and was planning on running for Congress before Batista's coup ended his dreams. He is considered an expert in recognizing Castro's handwritting. He signed a statement stating that the letters on the "Real Cuba" website were indeed from Castro. Aguero also donated alot of his letters that he recieved from Castro while he was in jail to the University of Miami Cuban Herritage Collection. Evalle 18:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: MYTH THAT THE 'CUBAN REVOLUTION' WAS AN UPRISING OF THE POOR

message: Please delete the table. Reasons: 1) It’s ugly. Kills the look of the entire page. I haven’t see on any other WP page something similar (not that I read all of them). 2) It’s redundant. What is the point of the link you provide if you have the same table twice? 3) It’s propagandistic. Look, I understand the pro-Castro group is desperate to present Castro/communism in a triumphalistic way but this is not the most effective way to do it. Despite what you may believe I have no problem with presenting good stuff about Castro/communism as long they're real. And health (not everything) is one of the few good things that happen on that island for real. 4) Move the data to Table 1. It will have a bigger impact, plus will look good. 5) In exchange (Jesus, we’re negotiating now) I can tell you about a real achievement of Cuban health.--Anticom 04:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anticom, it is a shame to frame this with '...the pro-Castro group is desperate...'.  That label is not accurate.  Fixating on 'the enemy' is not the way to write an encyclopedia article. Consider that, perhaps, there is a middle ground? BruceHallman 15:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Health 

message: Several pages of text were deleted instead of being archived, the majority was nothing that I wrote and that I had nothing to do with.  
The lame justification was: "too much, to archive".  
I added all of this text to archive09.Travb 05:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Large amounts of text was deleted by user

message: Surely the page should have the protection comment - why was that removed ? -- Beardo 07:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By accident...an oversight...happens. Tag restored and everyone best yap about the problems here and not commence an edit war again.--MONGO 07:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  (I was visiting the in-laws and missed the excitement anyway). -- Beardo 07:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No - the problem is propagandising on both sides. -- Beardo 13:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Disputed points:
*The travel ban is to prevent US citizens from finding out how good it is in Cuba (needs source: probably pro-socialists?)
*The restriction is primarily to hurt the Castro regime economically
**"Their focus is not only illegal travel but illegal shipments of money to the island."  [Thanks to Bruce for providing this source.]
At this point, we have one claim without a source and one claim with a source. I suggest we put both claims in the article; and provide the source for the latter claim. Meanwhile, let's dig into the former claim. Maybe Bruce can find a source for that, too? --Uncle Ed 13:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You phrased item #1 around 'intent'.  Isn't 'effect', without regard to intent, as important?  BruceHallman 14:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uncle Ed, you wrote 'finding out how good it is in Cuba', which appears to misunderstand my point, which is rather: that US Citizens are prevented from finding out about Cuba first hand.  Good, bad or both.  BruceHallman 16:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Travel restrictions from USA to Cuba

message: Request for mediation rejected, per post here.   With the disputed '  sentence  ' presently omitted from the introduction, perhaps a need for mediation is moot.  Also, the second item to be mediated was civility, and at present, civility seems improved too. But, the third and fourth items involved respect for alternate points of view, and this still seems to have room for improvement.  BruceHallman 16:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediation rejected 

message: Some benighted soul (s?) removed the history of Cuban medicine, hospitals etc and left only not readily verifiable statistics from Cuban government sources  or from internation agencies which accept Cuban government statistics without verification.  El Jigue 5-16-06
:I think it's covered in the individual article on health in Cuba, El Jigue.--Zleitzen 17:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Cuban Health services

message: One finds that despite careful suggestions by a number of people including myself, very serious errors continue to have a presence in the article. For instance, one cannot help but notice the really erroneous description of the participants in the line up for the Batista aborted 1952 election.  This circumstance apparently caused by a plague of benighted souls, continues to make the Cuba article a laughing stock for the better informed. El Jigüe 5-16-0 6
:Surely the whole point of wikipedia is collaborative.  Are these "careful suggestions" being removed ?  Or are you expecting someone else to implement your careful suggestions ? -- Beardo 18:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: EJ - I guess that you cannot edit because you have chosen not to register.  Are all these people making careful suggestions unregistered, too ?  And I am afraid I don't really understand your point about the aborted 1952 elections.  What should the article say ?  -- Beardo 04:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Plague of Benighted souls

message: The Cuba-United States relations article is now open for business, it presently has some material taken from Cuban foreign relations so needs some work.--Zleitzen 14:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By coincidence I just meant to move "foreign relations" and "Castro and Soviet Union" from "Fidel Castro" in here. Teemu Ruskeepää 12:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you explain, Teemu. I'm not sure what you mean?--Zleitzen 16:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cuba-United States relations

message: Teemu removed this discussion:
Theater of the absurd 	 
			
Teemu Ruskeepää| writes: "Let's remove "Cuba’s relationship with the neighboring United States has often involved political conflict."" 	 
- 		 
"It doesn't belong in a short description of a country but in international relations. It also hyperemphasizes the conflicts and suggests that the government of Cuba is to blame. Teemu Ruskeepää 15:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, El Jigue. Though some self reflection may also be in order on your part, further up the page you are to be seen contesting the location in a photo with the photographer himself. --Zleitzen 01:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion removed

message: *"What is striking about defectors’ accounts is their consistency, which is impressive because they originate from independent sources, who have had dissimilar access to the structure of power, and whose testimonies cover different events and stages and have been collected over a long period. 
*"Since the 1990s Fidel Castro is said to have a fund called “Fondo de Divisas del Comandante en Jefe,” into which 15% of all hard currency revenues generated by Cubans overseas—trainers, artists, professionals, technicians, and so on—is deposited"
*"in the 1980s Fidel Castro received suitcases full of hard currency as “gifts” for his birthday each August 13"
*"Jesús Marzo Fernández reports that he witnessed a birthday party for Castro in the 1980s when a prominent government official gave Castro a suitcase with US$10 million."
*"Manuel de Beunza, who managed Cuban businesses in Canada, reports having on one occasion personally delivered US$2 million to Fidel"
*"a meeting in the late 1960s with Raúl Castro, at the time when del Pino was in charge of the commercial airline Cubana de Aviación. Raúl instructed him to open a bank account in Zurich, Switzerland, to deposit all the fees received from foreign airlines for air passage over Cuba. The accounts were opened in the names of Vilma Espín, Raúl’s wife, and Rodolfo Fernández, the right hand man of Celia Sánchez, Fidel’s longtime friend and confidant"
*"Castro allegedly makes loans from his overseas “reserves” to the national economy to cover hard currency shortfalls at an interest of ten percent,"
*"Fidel’s daughter, Alina, mentions several “Protocol Houses” used for dignitaries and friends of Castro, information that is confirmed by other defectors.56 The long list includes anywhere from 25 to 37 homes57 all over the island; many are said to be used only occasionally for shortrest periods during travels throughout the island or to entertain guests. These include a number of recreational residences at beaches and in the countryside, ranches, hunting grounds, specialized fishing and cattle reserves, a shrimp breeding facility, and luxuriousunderground bunkers outfitted with the latest technology.58 Some have their own electric generation and water plants, sophisticated communications’ command facilities, and enjoy amenities such as pools, tennis courts, marinas, and even golf courses."
*"Among Castro’s overseas properties is said to be a castle in Austria,59 and large ranches in Galicia, Spain; Monterrey, Mexico; and near New Delhi, India."
*"The involvement of high-ranking Cuban government officials in international drug trafficking under the orders or with the knowledge and acquiescence of the Castro brothers has been long alleged. Consistent reports abound from former regime insiders, members of Colombian and Mexican drug cartels, from intelligence officials of the former Soviet Union and its satellites, and from journalists, governments, and even world leaders—including the Presidents of the United States and Colombia."
*"Fidel’s approval was won with the argument that it would not only weaken the United States, but also bring in funds for international subversive activities and hard currency for Cuba.64 Rodríguez Mernier relates that drug trafficking became a substantial source of hard currency revenue for Fidel Castro.65 Major Florentino Aspillaga explains that millions of dollars in cash delivered by Cuban intelligence agents to Castro were to be deposited in his Swiss bank accounts “in order to finance liberation movements."
*"Roberto Ampuero, a Chilean revolutionary who in the 1970s married the daughter of Cuba’s Attorney General, in a biographical novel depicts the privileged lifestyle of a select few in Castro’s inner circle. Ampuero soon became disaffected with the Cuban Revolution as he witnessed rampant corruption by the Cuban political elite living in the mansions of those who had fled the country, with servants, drivers, and plentiful access to food and all sorts of consumer goods while the Cuban population was under strict food rationing and material deprivation. See Ampuero, op. cit."
Just some morsels. Read the best details in the article. :) Ultramarine 03:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Off topic.   This article is about Cuba.  BruceHallman 13:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Fidel Castro is not synonymous with Cuba, the article is about Cuba.     BruceHallman 18:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And the actions of a dictator in power for nearly five decades have not greatly affected Cuba?  While they may not be synonymous, the are very closely related. El Cubano 18:25, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what?  Plenty of things have 'greatly affected' Cuba during these five decades, why single out just one?  I am sorry to see people with an anti-Castro objective using the Cuba article to further that objective.  Why cannot the Cuba article be just a Cuba article?  Admit reality, the essence of the 'fight' around here has been: Shall the Cuba article be a surrogate for an anti-Castro article.  BruceHallman 19:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By that line of reasoning, we should omit the Soviet support of Cuba.  That has also greatly affected Cuba.  But then, we wouldn't want to use this article as a surrogate for anti-Soviet sentiment.  It is clear that you are so biased yourself that it doesn't matter what anyone says, since you will just perceive it as an anti-Castro attack of some sort or another. El Cubano 19:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon me.  The title to this section is Castro's Corruption, not a big leap of logic to see it as anti-Castro.  BruceHallman 22:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK.  How about we change it to "political corruption in Cuba"?  How about "Castro's contributions to the improvement of the human race"?  The article is about Cuba.  Castro has been the dictator there for close to five decades.  That sort of makes him a very important fixture in the history/politics/culture/etc.  What I cannot understand is the problem with presenting facts about Castro's actions and the consequences of those actions.  Seeing as he is the head of state, those things definitely have a place in an article about said state.  In this case, it seems difficult to separate the two things without doing a disservice to the reader. El Cubano 23:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe they are addressed on some scale on the Castro page. To be honest with you El Cubana, there isn't a chance of any of these accusations making it onto the Cuba page. Even the Italian or Russian pages don't mention corruption by the Government. And I can't see how bizarre claims that Castro owns a castle in Austria really compare. --Zleitzen 23:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK.  I have not read the articles on Italy or Russia.  If similar information is ommitted from those pages in favor of discussing it on the page relating to the specific leader, then I think it would be consistent to do the same here.  I joined the debate late, so my insistence may have been a little misplaced.  El Cubano 00:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Tienes razón.  Pero eso no pasa solamente aquí en este artículo.  En cualqier lugar que hay gente, encuantras los que ignoran lo que no le conviene. El Cubano 19:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Nice try El Jigue, but there is only one non negotiable rule and that is NPOV. We all have to abide by it best we can. --Zleitzen 18:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but his point is that "facts" are ignored when they don't fit with someone's agenda.  I agree with NPOV as a tenet of Wikipedia.  I disagree with ignoring facts under the guise of NPOV.  That is essentially what is happening.  Facts are being ignored because they are perceived by some as "anit-Castro" and we can't have that becuase it's not "NPOV".  El Cubano 19:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's to do with "facts" being ignored - it's more to do with context of the Cuba page. The UK site doesn't have any of the many criticisms of the British monarchy, and of course it shouldn't. Ultramarine has also posted this on the Castro page, which is the more appropriate place. It's up to the editors there to decide what to do with it. --Zleitzen 19:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a point.  However, the effects of Castro's corruption are definitely on topic for the Cuba article.  If the criticisms of the British royal family were based on actions that head terrible consequences for the UK as a whole, I would expect that the topic be treated in the UK article. El Cubano 19:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Castro's Corruption 

message: :The Cuban government operates a national health system and assumes full fiscal and administrative responsibility for the health care of its citizens. Historically, Cuba has long ranked high in numbers of medical personnel and has made significant contributions to World Health since the 19th Century. According to World Health Organization statistics, life expectancy and infant mortality rates in Cuba have been comparable to Western industrialized countries since such information was first gathered in 1957.
::See main article Public health in Cuba
WHO merely collects Cuban government data and publishes it without verification.  As to comparisons with Western industrialized countries, Cuba was there once but is there no longer.  El Jigue 5-25-06
:Nice try El Jigue, but what about the American Public Health Association who say pretty much the same thing. Their study is based on the fact that they were "able to travel freely within Cuba and to make observations in local communities, hospitals, clinics, research institutes, and the first national sanitarium for HIV patients. At several of these sites, we arrived spontaneously, without prior notification. In some instances, we entered into discussions with individuals who had opposed various aspects of Cuban governmental policies"--Zleitzen 23:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Health

message: you might as well add this to the Catergory:United States. Now it is just U.S. rhetoric like everything else on the Internet.
:Twenty-four times! Myciconia  05:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started work on the Cuba-United States relations page - adding some background history etc - I've copied the "present relations" section from another page so that aspect needs a lot of work. Hopefully that may take the weight off the main page. I appreciate that many users from the US appear to have a different take on the central subject matter of Cuba for obvious reasons. For many outside the US, Cuba is a popular exotic holiday location where the politics is peripheral, even my own 72 year old mother went on a package trip to Cuba last year - in the UK Cuba is now a very popular honeymoon destination! So there's obviously a vast difference in perceptions of the island and no single view should dominate.--Zleitzen 12:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Interesting links El Jigue.--Zleitzen 15:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jeez  how many times does this article say "United States"