Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Puerto Rico

message: Trying to work with the list-article, i note that it was not organized by county (because there are no counties), nor was it clearly organized by municipality necessarily.  I want to check and understand some location moves and other edits, including:
1. Two items were moved from the Guayama municipality section:
* Faro de Punta de la Tuna
* Faro de Punta de las Figuras
to another section.  
* Punta Tuna Light is in Maunabo, Puerto Rico and  Punta Figuras Light is located in Arroyo, Puerto Rico.--Jmundo 01:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *Isabela, Puerto Rico is a municipality and Isabel Segunda is the town center of the island municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico.--Jmundo 01:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I see that Fuerte de Vieques is listed in Isabel II, apparently meaning Isabel Segunda.  And i was puzzled at first not to find any "Mulas" entry in NRIS, but the lighthouse article is set up nicely with an NRHP refnum which leads me to find it as "Faro de Vieques".  I'll revise this list-article and the lighthouse article to reflect the NRHP name, and set up a redirect from the NRHP name to the lighthouse article. doncram (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Oh, it shows up in the address for Fuerte de Vieques and for Faro de Vieques, as the town name "Isabel II, Puerto Rico".  It looks like it was just a data entry shorthand for Isabel Segundo then.... ah, Segundo = 2.  Thanks. doncram (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Yes, the lighthouse, as "Faro de la Isla de la Mona", has NRHP refnum 81000689, while the "Isla de Mona" has NRHP refnum 93001398.  They were listed in 1981 and 1993 respectively.  I am revising the two articles and adding "Isla de Mona" into the Mayaguez section of this list-article. doncram (talk) 22:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved them to Vieques, a separate municipality.  Humacao is the nearest large city.  I think all these move questions and more have been resolved in the list-article.  I am done here.  Thanks for listening... :) doncram (talk) 07:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location moves and other edits 

message: I started splitting the list into northern and southern sections, hoping to split by the line of the Cordillera Central mountain range, and to put Vieques with the north section since it is served by port on north, and so on.  Many classification errors apparent, as lighthouses off the south coast were included in northern municipality of Arecibo.  Will require fine-tuning to split out and assign places correctly.  
I may want to define northern vs. southern by a latitude line, perhaps 18 degrees north 8 minutes or so, which is to be picked to run north of Mayaguez and south of Utuado, cutting mostly along the Cordillera.  This will be somewhat arbitrary but very objective and explainable.  No rush in defining exact line, will just move obvious ones to north vs. south and leave some to be decided later. doncram (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, thanks so much!  I see that the http://www.puertorico.com/regions/ provides a city-finder drop-down bar that assigns each municipality to each of the six regions, exactly as needed.  PuertoRico.Com is just a private, tourist website, but this segmentation can still be used.  It happens that I have proceeded already to split the big list of municipalities by my own determination of "south and west" municipalities vs. "north and east" municipalities.  I decided the latitude line idea wouldn't work well, already.  The south and west chunk i split off lines up pretty well already with the south and west segments defined by PuertoRico.Com.  I'll revise further to exactly match up with PuertoRico.Com's definitions.  And then split the remaining using PuertoRico.Com's definitions, too, perhaps to put central and north together, and to put San Juan metro + eastern together.  Very happy.  Thanks again! doncram (talk) 00:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: i have realigned the southern and western regions.  The tourist region listing is working, I am following it except where it mixes in a couple non-municipalities (Mercedita, which is a part of Ponce, and Caja de Muertos, which is an island that is also part of Ponce). doncram (talk) 16:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting north vs. south, may use a latitude line 

message: The PuertoRico.Com site is not a perfect source. Some other departures:
*For the Eastern region, the tourist region it defines includes Las Croabas, Puerto Rico.  That is a notable village within the Fajardo, Puerto Rico municipality, but is not a municipality itself.
*Also the tourist region puts Guayama in the Eastern region by error apparently, it is between others in the Southern region.  Also it puts Maunabo, Puerto Rico in the East, while i put in south.  It does put Arroyo, further east of both of these, in the South. doncram (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: issues in division by region

message: For the record, the split i did before was to put NRHP listings in south and west municipalities:
*Adjuntas
    * 2 Arroyo
    * 3 Cayey
    * 4 Coamo
    * 5 Guánica
    * 6 Guayama
    * 7 Hormigueros
    * 8 Jayuga
    * 9 Juana Diaz
    * 10 Maricao
    * 11 Maunabo
    * 12 Mayaguez
    * 13 Ponce
    * 14 Sabana Grande
    * 15 Salinas
    * 16 San German
    * 17 Yauco
In North and east:
    * 1 Aguadilla, Puerto Rico
    * 2 Aibonito
    * 3 Arecibo
    * 4 Barranquitas
    * 5 Bayamón
    * 6 Cabo Rojo
    * 7 Caguas
    * 8 Canóvanas
    * 9 Carolina
    * 10 Ciales
    * 11 Comerio
    * 12 Corozal
    * 13 Culebra
    * 14 Dorado
    * 15 Guaynabo
    * 16 Humacao
    * 17 Lares
    * 18 Las Piedras
    * 19 Loiza
    * 20 Manati
    * 21 Naguabo
    * 22 Moca
    * 23 Quebradillas
    * 24 Rincon
    * 25 San Juan
    * 26 San Lorenzo
    * 27 San Sebastián
    * 28 Toa Baja
    * 29 Utuado
    * 30 Vega Alta
    * 31 Vega Baja
    * 32 Vieques
doncram (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: old division

message: Now that all 289 NRHP listings are completely listed, it would be good to check all for how names appear.  I've put, into each of the three list-articles, a note: "Names of places given are as appear in the National Register, reflecting name as given in NRHP application at the date of listing.  Note, the National Register name system does not accommodate Spanish á, ñ and other letters."  So currently the list is pretty much what is "official" according to the NRIS system, but that is just a database that has its limitations.  The document about NRHP place names from Puerto Rico, mentioned in another discussion above, can be viewed as providing better official names.  It could be good to cross check all names against that.  And note changes here and/or at wp:NRIS info issues. doncram (talk) 21:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As expected, the main issues with the current revision are the accents. San Germán, Rincón, Mayagüez (umlaut) and Manatí are missing them. - Caribbean~H.Q. 18:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And so are Juana Díaz, Comerío and Loíza. - Caribbean~H.Q. 18:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross-check of names 

message: I notice rearrangement by User:Mercy11 to reorganize into regions a different way.  What is better about this partition, though?  It's now stated that this is by the "official Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Learn about Puerto Rico - Regions,[1] and it is presented in five groupings".  But the link is to a tourism .COM site, like the previous partition was based on.  I don't see where the tourism site is identified as being more official than any other.  Mercy11, can you comment please? doncram (talk) 05:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don, the http://www.gotopuertorico.com site is the official website of the Puerto Rico Tourism Company, the official corporation of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to foster tourism in the island. I know a quick glance at the web address in the article will discover it does contain the "tourism" just before ".com" and this might mislead some people digging in. However, the ".COM" you are pointing out is the url, the "file structure" if you will, of the website, and not the website name itself. So no, this site is not just another commercial tourism website. (BTW, if you want to "see where the tourism site is identified as being more official than any other" site, check out the bottom of their page at http://www.gotopuertorico.com/ .) Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 16:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for replying (and thanks for your other work recently on this system of lists).  The wikipedia article Public corporations of the Government of Puerto Rico is interesting and I see it includes this company in its list, but it is an unsourced entry.  The wikipedia article does not establish that the company belongs on that list, or that it is more official than other tourism companies.  I certainly had already reviewed their webpage and considered in particular the bottom, where it is stated "Copyright © 2009 Puerto Rico Tourism Company . All rights reserved. Site Map PRTC La Princesa Bldg. #2 Paseo La Princesa Old San Juan, P.R. 00902 Approved by PR Elections Commission # CEE-SA-08-9638 ".  That does not suffice to show that it is an official company either: it suggests that something about the webpage was approved by an Elections Commission.  I don't know what the Elections Commission has to do with anything about webpages though.  But how is this different than saying that any U.S. pharmaceutical company is part of the U.S. government because its products are U.S. FDA-approved, or saying that that any company which hires people in the U.S. is part of the government because their personnel policy stated in their ads is that they are U.S. Equal Opportunity-Commission compliant.  Note, I am not objecting to using the different system of regions that this website provides.  That seems okay to me, even if this tourism company is not more official than the other one whose regions I had used.  There is an issue in how to describe why this system of regions is used, and whether or not it is official in some sense. doncram (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I further see that there is a Compania de Turismo included in Government of Puerto Rico Organizational chart (Spanish) linked from the public corporations article.  I suppose that is this one?  I think the Tourism company article needs some improvement and the public corporations article needs some clarifying and reference improvements, too.  I am still a bit confused about use of the term public corporations, which in other context applies to all firms which are publicly traded on any U.S. stock exchange, and which have nothing to do with the U.S. government except for being regulated and taxed by it. doncram (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A quick answer to your first question, yes "Compania de Turismo" is an official agency of the government of Puerto Rico created by law in 1993 ( official website). --Jmundo (talk) 18:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I too had wondered what the Comision Estatal de Elecciones had to do with PRTC, and had in fact included a note to that effect in my msg above, but took it out at the last minute for the sake of brevity.  I am as clueless as you. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 22:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  rearrangement into different regions 

message: I've noticed that there are many black-and-white photos which have been uploaded which are NOT public domain, but rather appear to be copyright violations.  While many U.S. government photos of lighthouses and of buildings are public domain, such as all covered in the Historic American Buildings Survey or the Historic American Engineering Record, there are many photos NOT in the public domain.  In particular, there are photos of most NRHP-listed places included with their NRHP applications, and the documents and photos are accessible at the National Park Service's NPS Focus system.  BUT, for the most part these ones are NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN, and it is a copyright violation to upload and use them.  I've given some notice about that at one recent uploader's Talk page.  However, everyone interested in NRHP places in Puerto Rico needs to be aware of the potential problem.  I'll watch here to see if there might be any questions. --doncram (talk) 14:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue was all resolved;  a bunch of photos became acceptable by OTRS submission of copyright allowance, and others were deleted i think, all a very long time ago. --doncram 03:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright violation for many photos added to these NRHP articles 

message: Hey, would it be possible to bring the coverage up to U.S. nation-wide average of 50.3%, for percent of NRHP articles completed.  See "NRHP PROGRESS". --doncram 03:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the current PR percentage? Do you have a count? Mercy11 (talk) 01:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Hey 50%?