Talk:Puerto Rican Day Parade

message: This should be moved back to "Puerto Rican Day Parade" or "National Puerto Rican Day Parade".  It should remain capitalized, as it is the official title of the event, according to the website. --DDG 21:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... I disagree. That's the name of the org that runs it: N.P.R.D.P. The "parade" is lowercase. - CrazyRussian[[User_talk:Crzrussian|talk event when talking about it independently of the organization in that case.  News sources like CNN here say: "... last weekend after the National Puerto Rican Day Parade.".  Do you see other sources that give the name of the parade in lowercase? --DDG 16:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I concede your point per all but one entries here: :Category:Parades_in_New_York_City. I'll move it after the copyvio is cleared out. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: The Central Park post parade attacks were major news in New York. Why no mention here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.255.164.244 (talk) 13:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently removed because of inadequate cites -- WP:CITE -- see this older version .IMHO we should re-add content about this, correctly cited. -- 66.230.200.145 21:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. This parade is not the gentle parade this article makes it seem to be. 66.171.76.138 14:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I also agree. The information was relevant and notable, it should be put back into the article.Sullynyflhi 17:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "incidents" additions are very one-sided and there are questionable motives as to why they were added.  Much of the content that was added isn't supported by the references used, so that's being removed, and a great deal of it was taken out of context.  While the Hispanic Society did refuse to march behind the Latin Kings, the content that follows is spun.  150 Latin Kings were arrested, but completely without incident and weapons, they were marching without a permit.  A police officer cut his hand while making an arrest in a situation not involving a Latin King, yet somehow its worded as a Latin King "slashing" him but not fatally. People are making the incident to be more violent than it really is, crime occurs during New Year's Eve in Times Square, St. Patricks Day Parade, and Mardi Gras, but there's no point in listing every single criminal instance on those pages of wikipedia.  If this article didn't involve Puerto Ricans, no one would be intent on adding content with such a spin on it.  Central Park was deplorable and inexcusable, but it was a one-time occurance. 74.230.193.91 05:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central Park Attacks 

message: The comment about a Law and Order episode has a few spelling mistakes as well as capitalization errors, not to mention a lack of linkage to the Law and Order wiki article.Sciencegeekb6b3 20:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television Episodes 

message: This article should always have a NPOV and there should be no references to any specific commercial television stations as this is an encyclopedia and not a billboard endorsement. Furthermore, the article should be written about the parade in general and not about any specific year. I have made changes to this article twice and an unregistered user and committed unconstructive edits that have just made me revert the previous edits. Please stop adding commercial references and contrtibute to the article in a neutral point.--XLR8TION (talk) 16:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Commercial references

message: Please discuss any objections to material presented in the article here. Deletion of sourced material can be labeled as vandalism. Please utilize this forum to address your concerns regarding the artcile. Many thanks!--XLR8TION (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is based on the prosecution of those involved. On that note, I can't see why an act that actually took place after the Parade by unrelated ethnic groups really deserves mention in the article.  166.147.120.174 (talk) 22:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy Section

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Puerto Rican Day Parade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140909052508/http://www.prpcchicago.org/ to http://www.prpcchicago.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521034107/http://gothamist.com/2007/06/09/pr_1.php to http://gothamist.com/2007/06/09/pr_1.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170716025435/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20170602/midtown/oscar-lopez-rivera-puerto-rican-day-parade-fraunces-tavern to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20170602/midtown/oscar-lopez-rivera-puerto-rican-day-parade-fraunces-tavern
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "After public and corporate backlash, Mayor De Blasio had announced that López Rivera would not be honored at the 2017 parade[30] but, in the end, the U.S. Bronze Star honoree was honored and kicked off the Parade celebration." 
For one thing, the word "honor" now appears twice in the same sentence. But more to the point, it seems kind of partisan. The fact that he served in Vietnam is probably a useful thing for a reader to know if they're trying to decide what side of the controversy they fall on, I admit. Nevertheless, it's a fact that feels outside of the scope of this article. At the very least, it's outside of the scope of the sentence that it's in. I checked the first source and it's only briefly mentioned, by the way. The other source is a video which I don't want to watch. I'm not going to fix it myself right now because it's touchy politics and I'm new here. It's possible that I've misunderstood something, although I don't see how. Anyways, if no one responds to this saying I shouldn't change it, then I'm gonna change it. Benevolent Prawn (talk) 06:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The "honor" word twice does make the sentence appear poorly redacted and something like "Bronze Star recipient" would had been a better choice. I don't see any partisanship but with "the Bronze Star" part but I have changed it to "the Puerto Rican activist" which is what his WP:LEAD says. Mercy11 (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Does it make sense to mention the Bronze Star here?