Talk:List of Puerto Ricans/Archives/2011/April

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I don't think there is much need of discussing this. Discussion has already taken place at policy level. WP:IG says: [..]the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images.

I don't see what a gallery adds to a subject which is "purely a list". Mayor of Yurp (talk) 09:31, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I think a general concensus (vote) on the matter by the article's frequent editors would be more valid than opinion. Let's take a vote on it.--XLR8TION (talk) 13:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

You're proposing a vote to evade policy? Has it been done before? If so, it would resolve a lot of disputes going around and around. Mayor of Yurp (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Ignore my comment above. From WP:VOTE: "We include text in articles based on such policies (in this case WP:IG) as verifiability and encyclopedicity, not based on whether the text (in this case a gallery) is popular among voters." Also, Wikipedia is not a democracy. Mayor of Yurp (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I can see nothing in WP:IG that would prohibit a gallery in an article simply becasue it is purely a list.My name is Mercy11 (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC), and I approve this message.

It's not because it's a list. Think: what does a gallery add to the understanding of this article? Does it show what Puertoricans look like? Puerto Rican people is there for that. Does it show that some notable Puertoricans are in the military, or good looking people, or anything else? A mere list of people is not supposed to do that, other articles are. Also, these pictures are already present in their respective article, they dont't need to take up any more space on the servers. Mayor of Yurp (talk) 10:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

It was cheesy of you, no -- actually -- bordering on cowardly, to bring out the article protection nuclear option when you couldn't stand up to a discussion by a couple of oppossing editors. Don't bother responding; I don't waste my time with your type. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC), and I approve this message.

Yes, you obliviously do. And declaring the conversation over right after attacking an opponent is the real cowardice. --Damiens.rf 03:04, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree that a gallery is not necessary in this article. Meanwhile I'd like to see the ad hominem attacks stop. ScottyBerg (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Name order

First names should go before surnames. It's the norm, see WP:NCP. Anyone object to this? Mayor of Yurp (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

  • I object. The names on large lists such as this are easier to find and organize with its current format. This list has used this format since it was first started and no one, but no one as objected to it and therefore there is no reason nor need to change it's format. Unless a consensus is taken with the proper notification in the Puerto Rico Wiki Project talk page, I recommend that it is left as is. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
    • I second Tony the Marine. Many editors are not aware of Spanish naming customs, therefore, Tony's system works perfectly. There is absolutely NO need to change this. If it's not broken, don't fix it.--XLR8TION (talk) 01:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
None of these arguments are convincing.
1) With the standard name order, it is just as easy to read the surname first if one wishes, as it of course would still be ordered alphabetically.
2) "I've been wrong since the start and I'll carry on being wrong" has never been a great way to respond to problems.
3) No one has objected so far perhaps because the list doesn't get many readers, or editors aware of the manual of style (this list got 11.281 views last month compared to 298.857 for the Puerto Rico article).
4) No consensus is needed for edits that follow guidelines.
5) I'm aware that some cultures place the surname before the first name, but as this is, we shall treat all names as they are treated in English. Furthermore, the naming convention is still the same at Erik Estrada is still, amazingly, Erik Estrada.

Mayor of Yurp (talk) 09:41, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Mayor of Yurp. Spanish naming conventions are irrelevant. See List of Spaniards, List of Mexicans etc. ScottyBerg (talk) 18:23, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I also agree. The English Wikipedia is meant for people that read in English, not for people that like to write in English about their compatriots. --Damiens.rf 22:40, 12 April 2011 (UTC)