Talk:Puerto Rican Campaign

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Puerto Rican Campaign has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
September 9, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

Pending changes[edit]

This article is one of a number (about 100) selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Penfding changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC).

Battle of Fajardo[edit]

This section is growing out of proportions with the rest of the article, yet the sections on battles of Yauco, Coamo and Asomante, which were more crucial to the Campaign than Fajardo's, have summaries that are considerably shorter that what Fajardo's has become in the last few days. Is there a reason for this sudden disproportion? Consider also that the article has been GA for many years. Perhaps users User:Barnabywoods, User:Marine 69-71 or others could comment. Mercy11 (talk) 13:13, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree. The Battle of Fajardo was a minor incident. What I did is reduced it's content 9summerized it) and then created a page dedicated solely to the battle with all it's expanded information (see: Battle of Fajardo). Tony the Marine (talk) 19:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

The "Aftermath" section[edit]

There's a great deal of material here that really falls outside the scope of the campaign. If I may, I'd suggest moving much of that into an appropriate article, such as History_of_Puerto_Rico, if it isn't already covered there. Thoughts on this? LibertyHiller (talk) 23:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I concur. Hammersbach (talk) 18:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)