Talk:Republic of North Peru

Untitled

You do realize you're ripping off the article Andrés de Santa Cruz, don't you? What's the point of having a new article just to repeat what's already been said... And BTW, Orbegoso didn't execute Salaverry, it was Santa Cruz himself. --Victor12 14:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Moved to Republic of North Peru. —Centrx→talk • 04:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Nor-Peruvian Republic → Republic of North Peru … Rationale: English names should be used as this is an English language encyclopedia. The name presented is neither in its original form nor an established convention. Propose renaming to North Peru or Republic of North Peru. -- Domino theory 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The discussion here also includes Talk:Sud-Peruvian Republic#Requested move.

Survey

• Support, as per nomination. -- Domino theory 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support move to North Peruvian Republic. --Soman 06:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support move to Republic of North Peru. --E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 09:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support move to North Peruvian Republic or Republic of North Peru, whichever translation more closely approximates the Spanish form. Just get rid of the language hybrid form. -  AjaxSmack  05:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

• The page has already been moved once to North Peru, but was later moved back citing that if North Peru was used it would be confusing since there is also a geographic concept of northern Peru. The name form "Nor-Peruvian Republic", which doesn't seem to be used anywhere else, has yet to be supported by any external sources. -- Domino theory 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• The question is, what do sources refer to it as? Are there any English language sources that refer to this republic? Don't just come up with several newly conceived names. —Centrx→talk • 01:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Question of an old historical map of parted Perú

Hi

I found old maps about parted Peru of 1838 e.g. on

http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/historicalmaps/southamerica/1831-1850.html

Well, there are 2 old maps on this webside of the Alabama university, one of 1838 and one of 1839 with it's old border lines which do NOT correspond to the new map of parted Perú which is shown on the main website, and I was astunished within my research for maps of parted Perú that this new map was also published in a big Peruvian newspaper, and it seems it's wrong.

Perhaps there is somebody who can make a research for a good old historical map of parted Perú.

Sincerely Michael Palomino (talk) 19:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Some of the maps shown in your link are obviously incorrect, though I think that the lesson to learn from them is that the area was disputed by various countries (Particularly Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia). However, Peru was the one who held "control" (which is a highly controversial term as Peru really only had minimal control of the region) over most of the disputed region either through popular support (as in the case of Tumbes and Jaen) or military force (As in the case of Iquitos). The map shown here at this WP article is quite correct.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Peru did not hold control over the area and had recently lost a war with Colombia about said holding control over the area. The border until 1859 was at the Marañon, not at the Putumayo.