Talk:Ponce massacre

Untitled

This article has plenty of things wrong with it. I unfortunately lack the time and resources to completely correct the article, but as a Puertorican I have an interest in its refinement. The following is a list of some mistakes I've noted:

1. There is a complete lack of sources. This is particularly important because the article itself admits that different investigations have come to conflicting conclusions. As a result, it's necessary to cite where the information came from. I have a book that says there were nearly 100 injured and 19 casualties. This clashes with the uncited article, which says that 200 were injured.

2. The article contains gramatical nuances that indicate it was originally written by someone thinking in Spanish. This is fairly probable, and the only problem is the mistakes that has caused. The word "non-gubernmenatal" comes from "gubernamental" in Spanish, certainly gibberish in English.

3. The section regarding a man scribbling a phrase in Spanish in his own blood is regarded locally (in Puerto Rico) as a legend. That should be clarified unless there is a proper source claiming it as fact. Furthermore, there may be clashes within the article itself. Notice that it mentions the 7 year-old girl, Georgina Maldonado, and how she was killed. However, the victim list contains a "Georgina (7-year-old) Marquez Telechea". The names don't match. The previous person in the list is Ceferino Maldonado, which means there was probably a mix-up with the names. I can't correct it without a list known to be correct.

If whoever corrects this lacks a source, I suggest looking into the book "PUERTO RICO: Cinco siglos de historia" (in Spanish) by Francisco A. Scarano. He also cites other publications, so that can serve as a source for more sources to ensure the information is right.

Good luck. 206.248.71.155 06:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

On item #3 above, the event of the Puerto Rican man writing with his own blood " Viva la Republica! Abajo los Asesinos!" is registered on Page 381 of the book Latino/a Thought: Culture, Politics, and Society. By Francisco H. Vazquez. Lanham, Md: Rowman Littlefield Publishers. 2009. This can be visited at:

SEE HERE. Accessed on December 7, 2009.

It is also registered by Luis Fortuño Janeiro in Album Histórico de Ponce (1692-1963) Page 306. Ponce, Puerto Rico: Imprenta Fortuño. 1963. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

As for the 7-year-old girl's, her named is listed as "Maldonado, Georgina (a 12 year old girl)" in Projecto Salon Hogar (In Spanish) located at http://www.proyectosalonhogar.com/Enciclopedia_Ilustrada/Masacre_de_Ponce.htm. This information was also accessed on December 7, 2009.

Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 01:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The following link LINK HERE shows the "Viva la Republica! Abajo los Asesinos!" sign in question.

Mercy11 (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

( To be more specific on the above, the Nationalist cadet who wrote with his own blood is identified as "Bolivar Marguez" on page 398 of the above book by Francisco Vazquez.

Mercy11 (talk) 07:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC))

According to Jose Enrique Ayoroa Santaliz in La Masacre de Ponce: Breve relacion de hechos y algunos de sus personajes. Ponce Massacre Museum. March 2011, the full name of this individual is Bolivar Marquez Tellechea, and he was a militant in the Nationalist Party and a member of the Cadets Corps of the Party marching that fateful March 21, 1937, day. "He wrote, with his own blood, in the lower part of the wall of the Covento de las Hermanas de la Caridad, the phrase "Viva la Republica! Abajo los Asesinos!" Mercy11 (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup

I did a grammar-fix and tried my best to make it unbiased (the earlier version sounded too much like a Communist propaganda pamphlet). How does it look?

Cleanup Reply

It looks better than what was previously described, but it still is very light on source material (only one source for the article.) Additionally the article could use some fact-based expansion of the material to read more like an encyclopedic entry. To me it seems to be a series of poorly documented bullet statements at the beginning and also needs little corrections such as stating a person's full name before referring to them by title and surname only.

137.3.122.49 (talk) 19:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Ponce Massacre.JPG

This file is being considered for deletion here. --Jmundo (talk) 03:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits by Parkwells

Per WP:OR and WP:OR, sources must be cited: sourced material had been removed and replaced with unsourced text. Per WP:AGF, if any material is questioned, simply tag it with a CN tag and allow reasonable time for other editors to provide citations. Simply replacing text with unsourced text doesn't help anyone, particularly if the material is disputed. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 05:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

• Mercy, I agree. An enormous amount of editors' time is being devoted to restoring the sources, citations and information that were massively removed in the first place. Not a very collegial way to edit. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 07:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

More recent edits without prior discussion

Appropriate and fully sourced material, with citations provided, was recently deleted from this article without any notice or prior discussion on this talk page. This material was reinstated.

Please refrain from wholesale and massive editing, that is not preceded by at least a minimum of discussion on this page. Sarason (talk) 11:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Merge Museum article to this one

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Proposing merging Museo de la Masacre de Ponce =into=> Ponce massacre.

While the Museum building has been designated into the National Register, I don't believe the Museum meets notability criteria outside this event. The Museum article's content is composed of only two paragraphs in one section near the end, while dedicating 12 paragraphs in 5 subsections to the Massacre as its "Historical Background". I believe it would better serve the reader if we have one comprehensive article about both topics. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 15:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

• The museum been covered in the past by more than a single source or two. It is also a popular visitor attraction judging by the number of travel guides that talk about it. I would disagree that mere NRHP listing is not notability enough. But, IAE, I see that this is not a museum put together by some people from the block or the local neighborhood, not put together by a group of die-hard nationalists, not even by the local municipal government. In addition the museum did not just start operating in the recent past. As a long-standing entity owned by the central Government of Puerto Rico and maintained for over 25 years by Puerto Rican taxpayers, it seeems to pass Notability just fine. Where I would agree is that the article needs more information of the museum's collections, on the museum's mission, on the circumstances surrounding the museum's establishment, etc. But these wouldn't be reasons for a merge; they are reasons for expansion. Which notability trait do you feel it does not meet? Mercy11 (talk) 17:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Just because the institution or museum has been around for 25 years and is subsidized by the government, it does not mean it is notable. However, this museum is notable as per above, but I question whether it merits an independent article. WP:PAGEDECIDE is what I'm after. While the Museum is notable, I believe it is better covered in the article about the event for which the museum is created; artifacts, documents, and the Museum's history can be better integrated into this article within the sections of the article. In fact, much of the Museum's historical background in that article can be made into a new section in this article called "Location", describing the significance of the massacre's location (NP HQ in Ponce), which is barely mentioned in the event article. Even if such a merge is not made, then I think we should move much of the Historical Background section of the Museum page over to this article, in order to balance the focus of that article versus this one. But if we can consolidate the information here, I think we will have a good comprehensive article about the event and the museum in a single page. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 18:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I am not assigning notability based on the over 25 years time; I was simply making an observation that the place has been supported by the Puerto Rican government for many, many years. Perhaps you did not understand my intention with the 25 years comment. I agree there's nothing magical about a 25 year anniversary. Hopefully that's clearer now.

That said, I would agree that the Museum article could benefit from some clean up in the historical background area, doing a better job of summarizing the events of the Massacre that are most relevant to guarding that part of history and to preserving it for future generations - fundamentally the mission of any museum. I have added the Main template to the museum article; that should help reflect this a bit. But I disagree with you that the museum does not merit a separate article. BTW, the location of the massacre was not the NP HQ, but on the street. I do not know of a single source that states that the police went into the NP HQ that day, but there are accounts that state that the police did go on the nearby streets hunting down sympatizers. There are also accounts stating they went into Santo Asilo de Damas looking for sympatizers. Were you thinking that part of the massacre took place inside today's house-museum? I am still not sure which of the 3 points at WP:PAGEDECIDE you are trying to apply here. Mercy11 (talk) 19:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

My point on the location was that the manifestations took place near the HQ, which then the event turned into the massacre. Also, the point I was thinking of is the first guideline "Does other information provide needed context?". THe museum article provides much more context on the event than on the museum itself, while much of that info (if not all, which is what I suggest) can be brought over here. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 20:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

• DO NOT MERGE. This Wikipedia has the Civil War Museum, the Civil War Museum of Philadelphia and Civil War Museum (Bardstown) as independent articles, and they were not merged into the Civil War article.

Similarly, the Gettysburg National Cemetery and Gettysburg National Military Park are independent articles, and were not merged with Battle of Gettysburg.

Similarly, the Edgar Allan Poe House and Museum, the Edgar Allan Poe Cottage, and Edgar Allan Poe National Historic Site all have their own independent articles, and were not merged into the Edgar Allan Poe article.

Even Elvis Presley was not merged with a separate, independent article Graceland, which commemorates "the home of Elvis."

The Museo de la Masacre de Ponce site has been landmarked and recognized by the U.S. government, which placed it on the National Register of Historic Places. It is a highly notable and historical site, with profound significance to people in Puerto Rico and on the mainland. We should not have a double standard here, recognizing all these other museums and buildings - and even Elvis Presley - with separate articles for all those separate museums and buildings, and deny the same recognition to The Ponce Massacre.

I know that Mtmelendez is editing from Puerto Rico, a colleague of Tony the Marine, and I saw your photo gallery (it's a great gallery)! I'm sure we can work through this. Thanks. Sarason (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds fair. Ok, then may I propose the following:

• Move certain info and references from the Historical Background section of the Museum article into the Massacre article. Include detailed location information in the Massacre article to talk about the significance of where it took place.
• Expand the Museum section in the Massacre article to include more information about it, with the main article tag, using the location significance as context for the creation of the museum.
• Reduce the size of the Historical Background section in the Museum article to balance it with the Massacre article.

Any suggestions are welcome. :) - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 14:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Rock Springs massacre which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)