Talk:Isabel González/Archive 1

Archive 1

Please do not rewrite to express POV

First, Puerto Rico was "not" conquered by the United States. It was invaded by the United States and ceded by Spain. Militarily the Puerto Rican Campaign was inconclusive since a cease fire was declared.

Second, It is of common knowledge that if the protections of the United States Constitution do not apply it would also include the rights of citizenship.

Third, Do not delete a complete section which leads into the understanding of the "Downes v. Bidwell" case of 1901" which in turn is imperative to the understanding of the "Gonzalez v Williams" case.

Thank you. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no "POV" here nor has the article been "rewritten". I come to the article armed solely with my knowledge of US history and see a substantial number of details irrelevant to an article about Isabel Gonzalez. I have no objection to your interpretation of how Puerto Rico came into US hands, but it seems relevant to mention that there was a war that took place in that context. The article, as written contains numerous claims of imperialism, which are not only contested but are not relevant here and have been removed. Details regarding name changes to "Porto Rico" and back to "Puerto Rico" do not appear relevant to the discussion of citizenship for Isabel Gonzalez. Alansohn (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hello Alansohn, I do not mind your deletion of the word "imperialism", however it is a fact and not my interpretation of how Puerto Rico came into US hands. I'm surprised that you who are interested in history will fail to accept the fact that the United States was in an expansionism process during that period which we historians call imperialism.

However, I will post once again the section which you have continue to delete. It is important for the reader to understand why in the "Gonzalez V William" case "Puerto Rico" was referred to as "Porto Rico" and that it is not a typo. It is also important for the reader to understand the restrictions imposed by the United States on the commercial and shipping rights of Puerto Ricans which led to the "Downes v. Bidwell" case of 1901" which in turn influenced the "Gonzalez v Williams". I know that you are well intended and good faith so let's avoid an unwanted edit-war. Take care 22:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Tony the Marine (talk) 01:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

In fact, that period in US history is known for great debates against imperialism and trusts, and with great internal dissent, including two presidents murdered. Almost any historic academic work on the USA at the period defines it as imperialism, not as a value judgment, but as analogous to the same process in Europe, and an example of the USA coming of age as a nation after a brutal Civil War. Furthermore, the mentions of imperialism come form the source, if you want to contest them, please present sources that illustrate that there is a debate around this view. If there is, am afraid it is probably a fringe view, as the historical view of the period, regardless of school of historical thought, is that it was a period of imperialism. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 04:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Consider change the article name

Hello. How do you react to the idea of renaming the article to Gonzales v. Williams, Isabel Gonzalez case, or some other this that reflects the fact that this is not really a biography, but instead, and article about a landmark legal case?

Isabel Gonzalez, as a subject, is not notable on herself. Or better put, she is notable for her participation in just one event.

Indeed, I believe the only change necessary on the article text would be the first sentence, that instead of reading

Isabel Gonzalez (born c. 1882) was a young, pregnant, single Puerto Rican mother who helped pave the way for Puerto Ricans to be given United States citizenship ...

would be more like

Gonzales v. Williams was a landmark legal case that helped pave the way for Puerto Ricans to be given United States citizenship ...

Thoughts? --Damiens.rf 18:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

• I don't agree with a change of tittle. The article is intended to be about Isabel Gonzalez, a brave courageous young lady who stood her ground against the United States Government and the circumstances surrounding her which led to the landmark legal case Gonzales v. Williams that helped pave the way for Puerto Ricans to be given United States citizenship. Gonzalez was not a simple participant in the Gonzales v. Williams case, she was the Gonzales v. Williams case. Without her and her determination to fight an injustice there would have been no Gonzales v. Williams case. She was the Puerto Rican Rosa Parks, who continued to be an activist for Puerto Rican rights, but who is little known because her story is one among many which have fallen into the cracks of history only to be forgotten. There already is a redirect for those who only want focus on the case. Take care, Tony the Marine (talk) 20:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

• Do you guys suggest some source for improving the biographical aspects of this article? --Damiens.rf 21:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
  • The articles should cover her continued activism for Puerto Rican rights. Having not knowing about the matter and reading the current article, I got the opinion that she was a person notable for a participation in just one event. --Damiens.rf 13:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

None the less a notable person whose actions would be the begining of a chain reaction which would eventually affect the lives of millions of people. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Damiens, in any case, we might have to fork the article into one biographical article and another for the case. She is little-know politically, but not histographically, and her continued activism before and after the case warrant a biographical focus, as is customary when people become notable for one event but then enjoy continued notability.--Cerejota (talk) 01:24, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

• Would you guys support this fork? How should the non-bio article be called? Gonzales v. Williams? --Damiens.rf 03:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

My main concern here is that the bio. of Isabel Gonzalez should not be decimated to an extent that it would end up in a AfD. For the non-bio article, Gonzales v. Williams would be fine. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure the fork is needed at this point, but it might later. I am not opposed in principle. However, before the forking, happens, I think the encyclopedic mission is better achieved by a biographical focus, rather than by case-law focus. I would support, as of now, a redirect of the case name to this article, in that spirit. --Cerejota (talk) 06:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

• I agree with Cerejota. I believe that would be the proper approach. A redirect to the case name was created in anticipation that there would be some people who would want to only focus on the case, thereby as the saying goes, covering all the bases. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

• I agree a split is feasible, but only if someone is going to do a good job of an article about the law case. I have marked Gonzales v. Williams with {{R with possibilities}}. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

• • This current article is already about the lawcase. The contentious point seems to be either we can get a biography on Isabel at all. The article says "Unfortunately little is known of what became of Isabel González". I don't think the poetic view of a woman with a "determination to fight an injustice" is encyclopedicly defensible. --Damiens.rf 11:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Biographical Info for Isabel Gonzalez

I am the great grand-daughter of Isabel Gonzalez. I have edited the Isabel Gonzalez page extensively, as some misinformation was published. I am also the person who added Isabel's Supreme court case information to the Chief Justice Melville Fuller wikipedia page.

That being said, I have tons of biographical information regarding Isabel if it is needed. I am curious as to who added to the page that Isabel "secretly married her fiance" a man from Statten Island? My records show that Isabel married my great grandfather, Juan Frnacisco Torres in 1915 (after having 5 kids, most of them out of wedlock). What documentation do you have that shows this secret marriage? What was the man's name? It was said that Isabel came from a very well to do family in San Juan. They had horses and we have family photo of Isable on her pet horse back in San Juan, as a young girl. I am looking for more information regarding Isabel's parents and their socio-economic standing in Puerto Rico during the 1880's, 1890's. Her parents were Severo or Sebero Gonzalez and Antonia Davila.

For what it's worth, here is the history of Isabels'children:

-Isabel's first child was Dolores Trinity Gonzalez, born in San Juan, Puerto Rico, October 20, 1900 (father unknown), and left behind with family in Puerto Rico when Isabel came to US in 1902. Although Isabel's mother, Antonia Davila, arrived in New York on May 18, 1903 to drop off Dolores to Isabel. Isabel was not able to care for Dora, as she was called, so turned her over to a Catholic orphanage. But in 1912, when Dora was 12 years old, Isabel took her out of the orphanage to live with her and step father Juan F. Torres.

-Isabel then immigrates to US in August 1902, pregnant with her second child, Eva Gonzalez Vinals, born on September 1st 1902 (father listed on Eva's birth certificate is Adolpho Vinals from San Juan, PR), and born a month after she arrives in the US. Later, Domingo Collazo and Herminia Collazo (Isabel's Uncle and Aunt) adopt Eva as an infant and raise her in their home. Eva later goes on to marry an important man named Miguel Delgado who she met in NY at a dance. Miguel was a governor or government official of some sort from Venezuela. But Eva died in 1937 in Venezuela from typhoid or something like that, and her tombstone is a beautiful full scale replica of Eva sitting down and reading a book. Name on tombstone is Eva Collazo ne Delgado Chalbaud.

-Isabel's third child was "Adolf L. Torres" born March 9,1907 or 1908 in NY (father unknown, perhaps a man with the last name Geiger, is the family rumor, a man that did not marry Isabel). Later when Isabel married Juan Francisco Torres, he adopted Adolf, and Adolf took his last name. Juan is not his father because Juan did not arrive in the US from Barcelona, Spain until December 1909. Isabel married Juan in 1915.

-Her 4th child was Grace Torres, born 7/27/1910 in NY (father is Juan Francisco Torres).

-Her 5th child was Juan Eduardo Torres, born 2/21/1912 (father is Juan Francisco Torres). Juan E. Torres is my grandfather.

Thanks for any information you might have to add to this page or share with me, her direct descendent. Belinda Torres-Mary (talk) 00:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I went into the Wikipedia page about the 'Jones-Shafroth Act' and edited the section about Isabel Gonzalez... added more detail about her case and how it was the precursor to the JSA, and also added the web link to link the page to the Isabel Gonzalez page. Belinda Torres-Mary (talk) 04:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

• I see that you are related to Isabel Gonzalez. I wrote the article about her because I believe her to be one of our unknown Puerto Rican heroes and our version of "Rosa Parks". It would be nice if you could provide a picture of her. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)