Talk:Gabriel García Moreno

message: Added a POV tag. This is not the POV anyone in Ecuador has currently, beside the fact that it reads like a hagiography of the man. Perhaps if we get some interested Ecuadoreans with an actual history book on this? Diego001 23:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: Given the time frame and the bitterness that permeated that period of Ecuadorean history and, given the distorted perspectives on both sides of the Masons vs Catholic Church "saga". What is important is to realize from what perspective the article is written and  react to it accordingly. Alas, the violence was real. Sadly, the bitterness still remains.
:I have yet to find any truly NPOV reference to Gabriel Garcia Moreno in Ecuadorian historical material - the exception being a Spanish language 6th grade primer with a brief, raw historical account of his presidency.  Unfortunately, there's no date on the text, so I don't want to translate it wholesale and risk copyright violation.
:As for this text itself, it bears strong similiarity to my recollection of the St. Benedict Center website & American monarchist Charles Coloumbe's writings on Garcia.  I can't find originals to compare with the text however.--The One True Fred 22:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I doubt you will find a neutral historical description of the man an the times. 

message: If you really want this article to be "neutral" simply erase the last sentence.  The involvement of the Freemasons in Latin American politics is very well-know and acknowledged modern day historians.  One of the best books on the subject is Church & State in Latin America by J. Lloyd Mecham, published by the University of North Carolina Press.  By the way, the proper spelling of the country in both English and Spanish is Ecuador.
--Miguel 00:59, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Factually correct

message: This article is historically correct and its neutrality cannot be challenged simply because some people do not like the politics and viewpoint of Garcia Moreno. You can't re-write history just because you don't like it! How ridiculous is that? Moreover, every tyrant, totalitarian, manipulator, liar, oppressor and cheat that ever was, wants to re-write history in his own image.
To say, as does Mr Jidcom (who he?), "I don't know much about Ecuador history but it reads like anything but balanced. And those masons stories sounds like quack conspiracy theories" is a classic example of not liking the facts of history and so wanting to re-write them to suit oneself. That is not history. That is bunk.
Diego001 challenged the POV on the basis that it is not the view of ANY Ecuadorean. What? Does he know ALL Ecuadoreans? No, of course not. So his comment is exaggerated. Actually there are plenty of Ecudoreans who think Garcia Moreno a great statesman and wish that politics today were as honourably conducted as it was by him. So, Diego is simply wrong.
If anyone wants to challenge the POV of this article sincerely, and not out of emotional and ideological prejudice, then they must provide historical facts, sources and references - not just prejudice.
The next comment says that it reads like the writing of someone called Charles Coulombe. And? So what? How does that make it necessarily and automatically inaccurate?
Miguel wants the last sentence out i.e. that Catholic politicians owe Garcia Moreno a great debt. His reason? None! Again no factual challenge based upon sources or references. I suggest he read the biography of Garcia Moreno by the Hon Mrs Constable-Maxwell-Scott who lived at around the same time and who had access to original sources. There you will read of the extraordinary contribution of President Garcia Moreno to the development of his country. The reality is that the revolutionaries did not like him because he was Catholic, monarchist and traditional - not because he was a bad governor. They wanted power and money; he wanted justice, peace and freedom. Read the books; get the facts; see the truth - don't invent it! An encyclopaedia is not for registering your private prejudices.
Garcia Moreno supported the Jesuits which also incurred the wrath of the revolutionaries. Anyone who has seen the film "The Mission" will get a glimpse into the Jesuit "Reductions" built to protect the Indians from the slave-traders. The reality is even more amazing than the film as you can discover for yourself by reading "The Lost Paradise" by Philip Caraman. The reason that "anti-clerical" revolutionaries hated the Church, and particularly the Jesuits, was because many of these same anti-clerical revolutionaries had got rich from slave-trading themselves and resented the Church's protection of the Indians. Within a few years of the founding of the New World, the Spanish monarchy had issued the Laws of Burgos which forbad the enslaving and degrading of Indians. The later "Recopilacion de las Leyes de Indias" of the Spanish Habsburg kings extended the protection further. This is partly why the same revolutionaries were also anti-monarchist.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Almost everywhere in Latin America that the secularists, revolutionaries and masonic sects took over, the masonic latifundistas grew fat and rich and increased their land-holdings and the poor were gradually reduced into the "favelas" and "callampas" that they live in today. Read "Blood-drenched Altars" written in 1933 by Bishop Francis Kelley, the Bishop of Oklahoma, or "The Lawless Roads" by Graham Greene and see what the revolutionaries did in Mexico, particularly the monstrous brute at the head of the government, Plutarco Calles. This was done, by the way, with support from fellow masons in the USA and with money, arms, guns, planes and equipment from the Yankee government, orchestrated by the US Ambassador to Mexico and friend to the brutal Calles, Dwight Morrow.
Get used to it Yanks: the US government in those days bank-rolled rotten oppression in Latin America. You may not like to hear that but I'm afraid it's true. This was the result of the infamous "Monroe doctrine" in which the Yankee government regarded Latin America as its own backyard to do with as it pleased even though they were ruled by Spain and Portugal, not America.
The final comment comes from a person calling himself Mindstar who might better be called "mindless" since his only contribution is to say that the article is "outrageously" POV and reads like a "sycophantic biography" without providing one jot of evidence to support his statement. Again, he does not like the story therefore he presumes it is untrue.
This is a textbook definition of bigotry, folks!
The life of Garcia Moreno was an heroic one. It was also a very productive and useful one. Moreover, he was a martyr to his country assassinated by those who wanted to enrich themselves at the expense of the poor (don't believe me? Read Mrs Constable-Maxwell-Scott's book and see for yourself!).
There is no real challenge to the neutrality of this article. No contrary evidence is provided. It is therefore a fake and fraudulent challenge based only upon bigtory and an ignorance of the facts of history.
Please remove the POV challenge until you can provide a genuine one.
James B.
:James, I would like to point out at that, at the same time, there is no proof that Roman Catholic politicians in Latin America owe Moreno a great debt. With no citations on this article, talk of Freemasonry could quite seriously be considered a conspiracy theory, and it is not a completely unviable concern - although, personally, I am aware of Masonic influence in nineteenth-century Latin America, and may try to find some citations for it. However, until said citations exist, the ideas of Masonry are on the grounds of suspicion. Another point I'd like to make is that this article reads favourably of Moreno; there is no question that Moreno is unconditionally supported by the author. On Wikipedia, neutrality is key; you state facts, but you don't add opinions, even if it's something like glorifying Mother Theresa, or demonizing Adolf Hitler. Unfortunately, you must never take a stance for or against any individual person. Finally, many of your comments are irrelevant to this discussion, and it is proper etiquette to sign your posts. Soviet Dolphin 01:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is accurate and historical. Stop abusing the POV system! 

message: I'm trying to clear up how this guy's full name should appear.  In Spanish, surnames with matronyms tend to follow a regular pattern: Name, Father's Surname, Mother's surname, Father's mother's surname, Mother's mother's surname, and so on.  The use of "y" tends to throw a wrench into the works since it can alternatively connect two words into one surname or seperate a surname from a matronym (the latter practice is fairly common among the older generations in Ecuador based on my own experience, but I can't find anything online to back it up).  I've never seen "y" connect matronyms past the first one.  From what I can tell, the name should now read Garcia (father) Moreno (mother) Gomez (father's mother) Moran de Buitron (mother's mother).  I'm reverting the last edit that dropped the Gomez and added y's, but someone please correct me if I'm screwing up the correct conventions, or if the longer form of his name without the Gomez is somewhere attested to. --The One True Fred 18:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Hi, mi name is Pedro, I'm using my friend's username, and it was me who changed the name that was given to García Moreno.  I am Ecuuadorian, and am a descendant of José García y Moreno, older brother of Gabriel.  In Spanish, it is generally convened that one has two surnames, father's and mother's.  They are usually separated by the word "y", which means "and".  The use of "y" is today somewhat archaic and denotes an aristocratic touch.  Sometimes, to indicate nobility, many surnames are placed together, showing the person's descent from many families instead of only his father's first and his mother's first surnames.  For example, the different branches of the House of Bourbon would add hyphons to their paternal Bourbon last name to denote their ancestral belonging to another noble house, and then add their mother's name: for instance, Princess Maria de las Mercedes de Borbón-Dos Sicilias y Borbón-Orleáns (mother of King Juan Carlos of Spain), both her parents were members of the house of Bourbon, but her father to the branch that was tied to the House of the Two Sicilies and her mother to the branch tied to the House of Orleans.  
In the case of García Moreno, as I aded some time ago, he was descended on his father's side from Castillian gentry, but on his mother's side, he was descended from a very distinguished Spanish noble family, which is why he would prefer to omit his father's second last name and include his mothers: García y Moreno y Morán de Buitrón or García y Morneo-Morán de Buitrón.  Although it is usually so (for example, it would be incorrect to write "García Moreno y Morán de Buitrón"), the "y" does not necessarily have to go between a paternal surname and a maternal surname, but rather it is used to separate long lines of last names.  For example, the full name of the Duchess of Alba is something like Cayetana Fitz-James-Stuart y de Silva y Álvarez de Toledo, etc.  
In strict genealogical terms (according to Spanish heraldry), your approach is more correct, but Garía Moreno preferred to have his mother's second last name and omit his father's added at the end of his name, and many people have done or do similar changes to their names to denote belonging to particularly distinguished families.  For example, the son of a peasant and a princess would like to include more of his mother's last names over his father's.Andres brown 12:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  García Moreno's Name 

message: Hi, this is Pedro, I finally got my own user, but it's new so I don't have much.  Anyway, I've changed the last names back to "García y Moreno y Morán de Buitrón".  I just checked about the "y" and you were right, they are usually placed to separate paternal from maternal surnames, which means that if you wanted to include your four last names, they would not necessarily be in strict genealogical order.  This means that the name would be "García Gómez y Moreno Morán de Buitrón", or something to that effect.
Anyway, I used the name that has been traditionally been kept in my family: "García y Moreno y Morán de Buitrón", which is not exact in genealogical terms, but that García Moreno himself coined.Pejotif 13:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm willing to take it on good faith that the name's passed down your family this way, but I expect someone else will come along and re-edit it since it's not cited :/ --The One True Fred 19:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gabriel García Moreno. 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/20080517084915/http://www.presidencia.gov.ec/modulos.asp?id=38 to http://www.presidencia.gov.ec/modulos.asp?id=38
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) 07:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In article is written:
:Under his administration, Ecuador became a leader in science and higher education within Latin America.  In addition to the advances in education and science, he was noted for economically and agriculturally advancing the country, as well as for his staunch opposition to corruption, even giving his own salary to charity.The Nineteenth Century Outside Europe, p. 326, Taylor & Francis
These all are things of progressivism and not of conservatism! - I corrected. Sapienti sat.--Stebunik (talk) 21:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: 
... or populist, or liberal, or nationalist, or cosmopolitan. He founded the Conservative Party and was criticised for his conservatism, and he's in any ase not known for progessivism, which he fought.
--Socius sociologicus (talk) 20:38, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservatism or progessivism 

message: I've never heard of that title, nor have I found any source fot it. Perhaps a mistranslation of Duque de Santa Fe?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Socius sociologicus (talk • --Socius sociologicus (talk) 20:40, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duke of the Holy Faith? 

message: In particular, I am concerned that two sections of this article are not encyclopedic in tone: Legacy and Political climate and assassination. 
I have little-to-no knowledge of Ecuador or García, but these sections, especially, do not read like dispassionate summaries, although they may be completely accurate in . Signs of even-handedness are there, too, but the phrasing is just too subjective, to my mind. For example, 
This does not strike me as appropriate for WP. To be fair, it goes on to give the other side of the coin:  And there's this brilliant summation / apologia (not to mention some mind-reading, thrown in):
That said, no idea where to even start, but if others have thoughts, comments, ideas, please speak up. I was so startled by this article, that I have not yet even looked at the sources used or previous discussions on Talk. I have tagged both sections for NPOV, though. AukusRuckus (talk) 05:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral expression concerns