User talk:Isinbill

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

Welcome!

Hello, Isinbill, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Contents

Talk:United States[edit]

It is never okay to edit someone else's comments, except to remove a personal attack. Please do not do it again. --Golbez (talk) 23:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010[edit]

Information.svg Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to the page User talk:78.48.103.92. Blank pages can confuse readers, and are overall not helpful to the Wikipedia project; furthermore, blanking a page is not the same as deleting it.

If the article you blanked is a duplicate of another article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalized, please revert it to the last legitimate revision. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please use the appropriate deletion process. Zhang He (talk) 23:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Information.svg Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button Button sig.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 16:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome toWikiProject United States[edit]

I just wanted to say welcome to the project. --Kumioko (talk) 22:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
.--Kumioko (talk) 02:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)


WikiProject United States History[edit]

Greetings, It was recently suggested that WikiProject United States History might be inactive or semiactive and that it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States.

I have started a discussion and will contact each of the active members for their comments and input on the suggestion. Please take a moment and add your comments to the discussion or feel free to contact me if you have any questions. --Kumioko (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration[edit]

US-NARA-Seal.svg
United States National Archives WikiProject
Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 21:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your editing and contributions to the Pedro de Ibarra page. We were pleased to find it and link it to our page. --Alvaro_Mexia (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey[edit]

NPPbarnstar.jpg

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello Isinbill! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

November 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Portuguese Argentine do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. andy4789 · (talk? contribs?) 19:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

List of Puerto Ricans[edit]

Sorry, but the instructions clearly state that "each addition to the list must also provide a reliable verifiable source which cites the person's notability and/or the person's link to Puerto Rico, otherwise the name will be removed." There are no exceptions and the rules apply to everyone. Therefore, the names of Deborah Aguiar-Vélez and John Rodriguez have been remmoved. You may add them once more with the references that are required. Tony the Marine (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Rudy Pérez[edit]

Hi, I have noticed you are the major contributor the article Rudy Pérez. I have found two major problems with this article in that it is not written in a neutral point of view, and some of the text is copied and pasted, with only very slight alterations to the wording. I would very much appreciate it if you can help me improve on the article. I would also recommend reading WP:NPOV and WP:C-P. Thanks! Kinkreet~♥moshi moshi♥~ 23:55, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Isinbill. You have new messages at Kinkreet's talk page.
Message added 01:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kinkreet~♥moshi moshi♥~ 01:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Peoples of the world[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Peoples of the world has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Night of the Big Wind talk 12:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Latin American music task force[edit]

Hello Isinbill! I've noticed your works on articles related to Latin American music. I would like to invite you to the Latin American music task force a collaborative effort which aims to create, expand, and maintain Latin American music-related articles. If you'd like to join, please sign up here. Thank you. Erick (talk) 23:21, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:Latin music members[edit]

Hello, I posted a message on WP:Latin music about a future collaboration between all members to bring Latin music to FA status. Please join in the discussion :) Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 22:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Classical music biographies[edit]

Please do not add infoboxes to articles on Classical musicians per Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music#Biographical_infoboxes. Thank you.MisterCSharp (talk) 12:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Nicaragua/Yemen[edit]

Thanks for editing the pages: Nicaraguan American and Yemeni-American. I will try to help making them better. Biol. Cons. (talk) 00:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Ethiopian American[edit]

wikipedia has many references that is not an excuse because all information must be referenced and verified as this is an encyclopedia. Just the fact that the history section needs references is what made that the label of references be placed in the article. All the information of wikipedia should be referenced. Meanwhile, Ethiopian students, most could have returned to Ethiopia but who emigrated because of war and poverty in their country are living in the United States until the situation in their country change, and are their descendants basically who founded the community of Ethiopian Americans. --Isinbill (talk) 02:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Correction: all information must be reliably and neutrally referenced. The fact remains, however, that everyculture.com is not a reliable source. It is self-published source, just like Wikipedia. As such, it makes no difference if the webpage is appended with references. Self-published sources in general are discouraged, especially with regard to material on living people (which would include Ethiopian Americans). Per WP:SPS:

Anyone can create a personal web page or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.[1] Take care when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else will probably have done so.[2] Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.

Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 13:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  1. ^ Please do note that any exceptional claim would require exceptional sources
  2. ^ Self published material is characterized by the lack of independent reviewers (those without a conflict of interest) validating the reliability of contents. Further examples of self published sources include press releases, material contained within company websites, advertising campaigns, material published in media by the owner(s)/publisher(s) of the media group, self-released music albums and electoral manifestos:
    • The University of California, Berkeley library states: "Most pages found in general search engines for the web are self-published or published by businesses small and large with motives to get you to buy something or believe a point of view. Even within university and library web sites, there can be many pages that the institution does not try to oversee."
    • Princeton University offers this understanding in its publication, Academic Integrity at Princeton (2011): "Unlike most books and journal articles, which undergo strict editorial review before publication, much of the information on the Web is self-published. To be sure, there are many websites in which you can have confidence: mainstream newspapers, refereed electronic journals, and university, library, and government collections of data. But for vast amounts of Web-based information, no impartial reviewers have evaluated the accuracy or fairness of such material before it's made instantly available across the globe."
    • The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition states that "any Internet site that does not have a specific publisher or sponsoring body should be treated as unpublished or self-published work."

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle[edit]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Yakut American for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yakut American is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yakut American until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.


Proposed deletion of Angolans in Brazil[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Angolans in Brazil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

modern-day migration appears non-notable in spite of common language; colonial past can be covered by Slavery in Brazil

Article was recreated after AfD deletion: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2008_December_23#Angolan_Brazilian. All accounts in favor of keeping were deemed sock puppets: Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Troy86.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —rybec 05:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Jean de Kindelan[edit]

Hi Isinbill - perhaps I can interest you in Jean de Kindelan as you have been the main editor of the Sebastián Kindelán y O’Regan article ?? Also, I have a need for an editor with excellent Spanish and perhaps good French to explore items that can be found via google but which I cannot understand well!! Jean de Kindelan (or Juan) was a Spanish Army Officer who served Napoleon in the Division of the North and was excluded from the plans to escape from Denmark in 1808 because of his pro-French opinions. ( We can easily read the Danish accounts!) Are you interested? or do you know of another Spanish speaker on English Wikipedia who might help? Thanks in advance Viking1808 (talk) 09:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Lalo Rios[edit]

Thanks, it was just a random adding sources to bios. Sure, happy to help add more info In ictu oculi (talk) 14:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Eritrean Americans[edit]

Hi. Kindly stop revert warring on the Eritrean American article. Your unjustified removal of the collage and images is unacceptable and smacks of WP:GOAT. Please desist from this. I would also like to discuss with you the validity of the so-called "North African American" neologism. If we cannot come to an agreement on this, I will nominate the page for deletion. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I do not think I'm doing any vandalism. I provided information that you deleted it and sustituiste other. However, one of the references that you used was the one I used for my information. You deleted it my information, and changed by another, using, among your sources, which I had used, when you could simply have deposited your information with mine without removing anything (why remove my information for re-inclusion you with your words?). I do not eliminated your contributions, which you you included after me, I just ask you to accept my contributions. You also say that my images are unacceptable, even having left three of the five that I included in the article. I really do not know what happens. And as the article of the North African Americans, I've just thought to call it North African in United States(this is just a topic that interests me and which I wanted to do an article).--Isinbill (talk) 19:44, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, you changed the text to indicate that most Eritreans arrived in the 1980s, when they actually arrived in the 1990s. It was specifically during the 1965-1991 period when most Eritrean immigrants in the 1980s. The bulk of Eritrean Americans as a whole actually arrived later, following the civil Eritrean/Ethiopian conflicts. Regarding the images, you removed the collage I created and replaced it with individual images, including some of people who are only distantly of Eritrean ancestry, are not born in Eritrea, have never lived there, and are not really a part of the Eritrean community abroad either. You also removed the community center and restaurant pics. That said, I agree that renaming the North African American page would be an adequate solution. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Now I'm not sure if I Should leave the answer here or on my page for you to read ... Qwanell Mosley and Nipsey Hussle, whose photos I included in the article, are people who have a parent Eritrean each. And I I repeat, you deleted it all the information I included to rewrite most of them with your words, basing on the same reference that I used. For that, it would have been better to accept my information, at least for the most part.--Isinbill (talk) 20:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Actually, what you indicated in several instances differed from what the link says. The most conspicuous example of this was when you wrote that most Eritreans arrived during the 1980s, when the link actually states that most who arrived during the 1965-1991 period specifically came during the 1980s (as opposed to the 60s, 70s, or 1990-91). This was probably a mistake, but an error all the same. Also note that the link is on the Eritrean population in one city, not everywhere. The wiki English was also sub-par, so I rendered it more encyclopedic. As for those two gentlemen, they are only partially Eritrean, were not born in Eritrea, have never lived there, nor are they really part of the Eritrea community abroad. The purpose of the infobox image area is to show notable representatives of the community, not just any person, famous or otherwise, who happens to have some Eritrean ancestry. Middayexpress (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Pictures of people that are only partially descended ethnic group speaks of an article (in the case of the pictures I got, 50%), located in the data box of the article, is something that is repeated in almost all wikipedia articles that talk about ethnic groups. That yu can see on items such as English American or German American. Furthermore, the fact that I've made ​​some mistakes does not mean you have to remove all information that I included and re-write it for the most part, in the item, in other words.--Isinbill (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Kindly stop arguing for the sake of arguing. Several bits of that material was actually wrong, as already explained. And yes, per WP:COMPETENCE, material should be written in proper English, and in a neutral, encyclopedic register, which I saw to. The fact that you didn't spell "North Africans in the United States" correctly only further demonstrates that proper English is an issue here. As for the pics, I never stated that peoples of partial ancestry should not be included on that basis alone. I said in my last line above that despite the fact that the gentlemen in question have some Eritrean ancestry, they are not representative of the community because they were not born in Eritrea, have never lived there, and are not really part of the Eritrean community abroad either. Ella Thomas, on the other hand, is representative because she was born in Eritrea and is an active part of the Eritrean diaspora as well. Also, please post your response if any here so that the discussion is all in one place. Middayexpress (talk) 20:49, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
No need to have been born or raised in the United States to be an Eritrean American, just that he descends from Eritreans, but has always lived in the U.S., as you put it in the introduction of the article.--Isinbill (talk) 20:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
With respect, that's a strawman. And for the second and last time, please remember to post any future responses here where the full discussion is found. No need to double post. Middayexpress (talk) 21:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok. If it is true the that you said, I think it's good for article, delete the information I adhered on it, if that information was bad spelling and should be corrected it, so as to enhance the interpretation that I made on some points of the source on which I relied. While the source, although basically it speaking of Chicago, the beginning of the article talked about the reasons for the Eritrean emigration and showed some data on their migration in the United States in general. These data were the ones I took (not the data of Chicago, because before you said that the references only spoke of a place). As for the photos, although I accept them as they are now (as thou put it), I do believe that an American that is 50% Eritrean can also feel very connected to Eritrea and joined the Eritrean American population (many Americans that descending only a partial origin still feel part of that origin, even some celebrities). Just want to ask you a favor: When you delete the information that I include in an article, do you can send me a message telling me and explaining the reasons for the removal please?, because this should not take me by surprise and disappointment, to see how my contributions (if are many) are removed without explication. Regards. --Isinbill (talk) 23:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I did inform you of what was the problem in my edit summary, and was the only one to do so. I also started this talk page discussion, so I don't see what there is to be surprised about. At any rate, most of that link was on Eritreans in Chicago. Your redaction of it was incorrect in spots, as already explained, and I fixed that. There were also grammar and tone-related issues which I adjusted. Lastly, I never said that someone of 50% Eritrean ancestry cannot feel very connected to Eritrea. If that had been my argument, Ella Thomas obviously wouldn't have been included since she too has a non-Eritrean parent. The difference is that she is nonetheless representative of Eritreans in the States because she was born in Eritrea and is an active part of the Eritrean diaspora as well. She's not just someone who happens to have some Eritrean ancestry. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 14:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I wanted to clarify that I meant that I only used the information from the beginning of the article Eritreans of Chicago, from the source of the Encyclopedia of Chicago, where he talked about the reasons for the emigration Eritrean and some general information about your precensia in the U.S., I did not use more data from that reference. Although that was the only one I used (I understood how you thought I was saying have used various sources and you just saw that). As for the correcting my spelling and sentences of the article based on that reference, I said that I´m agree in your made changes in the article to that it can be understood better and have a better spelling in it. So I have nothing more to object to that effect. Regards,--Isinbill (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library![edit]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
WorldDigitalLibraryLogo2.png
Hi Isinbill! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library![edit]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
WorldDigitalLibraryLogo2.png
Hi Isinbill! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 22:20, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

"Afro-Dominican" vs. "Black Dominican"[edit]

The issue is that in the Dominican Republic is inconceivable to say that "Afro-dominicans" are an ethnic group. The article was written to portrait the North American point of view of the races and ethnics, following the "One drop rule", which claims that all offspring of an African will always be African, but not all offspring of an European is European. That has nothing to do with the Dominican situation, and is nonsense to apply that in this article. I found remarkable that just 3 days ago, Listín Diario, the major Dominican newspaper, published about this issue: ¡Dominicano, no seas un color!

This article is about a Dominican ethnicity and it must be about what is for Dominicans that ethnic, because ethnics are a social contruct, not like races that are a scientific and a genetic construct. There must be an article about black Dominicans and another one about multiracial Dominicans.

The Afro-Dominican article was heavily biased and was abundantly about how "African Dominicans" reneged on their "blackness" and "preferring" their "white side". (Some biased sentences were changed by me, before I did the Move to Black Dominican)

An ethnic includes a cultural factor that race does not have. Because in the United States most of multiracial people where born to black female slaves and white male owners, they continued to dwell with blacks and where raised by blacks in places where they were rejected because of their "blackhood", and now they are known as "African Americans" too in that country, like non-mixed ones. But in the Spanish Empire, the situation was different. Most of racial mixture was a result of marriages where white parents in racial-mixed families gave to their children their education and transferred to them their culture.

The Spaniard anthropologist Claudio Esteva Fabregat, states in his work "La hispanización del mestizaje cultural en América" (The Hispanization of the cultural miscegenation in the Americas, page 35/43 in the PDF doc) that Santo Domingo is culturally a "predominantly European, with an strong African contribution and scarce indigenous contributions" nation.

Nacho Mailbox ★ 22:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


Well, the way that that article is written is to meant that Afro-Dominicans are an ethnic group, also there is an Ethnic Group’s infobox in that article; I try to correct the article’s misconceptions, but you undid the changes I made, so I tried to explain to you why I did those changes. It is not that you did actually said that, but you made me think that you might have thought so, or that you just could have been confused, because much of the article suggests that racial blacks and racial mulattoes are of a same ethnicity (like in the United States). Nacho Mailbox ★ 00:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png I saw your recent edits on people groups in various places and I think you're doing a good job! Rosiestep (talk) 00:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Nonsense edits at Template:Asian Americans[edit]

I noticed your recent edit to the template [1]. Your edit is marred with WP:OR and is far too unconcise for a template. For example, for footnote 1 saying "The Middle East is geographically in Asia; According to the US Census Bureau persons in any of the original people of the Middle East are White American" is more than enough for a template. Claiming the "The term "Asian" is officially used by the USA governmment [to] refer to the racial populations originating from East Asia ([from] Pakistan to the Asian Pacific)" is completely original research, as no one (or at least no one sourced) call Pakistan East Asian. Also, dragging in discredit racial typologies (i.e., Caucasian) is just wrong and confusing (and this is in part because the government is using them wrong as well); for example, South Asians like myself are cranially categorized as Caucasian (though the genetics disagrees to some extent) yet we are Asian and recognized as Asian. Please use the talk page before attempting to revert back. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Isleños[edit]

Hi. I noticed that the Isleño American article you've been working on is starting to get a little long. It's great that you've collected so much information. I'm not sure if it is a good idea or not, but what if you could create separate articles on Isleños in Louisiana, Isleños in Texas, etc? That way some of the information could be moved and the main article on Isleños in America would be trimmed a bit. Is this a good suggestion? Thanks. Solar-Wind (talk) 10:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


Colonial and Mexican Governors of Texas[edit]

Hello! I wouldn't mind doing some, just have to find the time ! DLS Texas (talk) 19:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

(Thanks for your contributions in the articles about Texas history! I wanted to ask you if you would want to publish some article of colonial governors of Texas (List of Colonial and Mexican Governors of Texas). I think all (or most) them should have articles in Wikipedia because they were governors of this place. So, I posted many of them because before there was almost no colonial governor of Texas who had articles on wikipedia and I am interested in this theme. I was wondering if you wanted to help me by publishing some of them. Thank you.--Isinbill (talk) 19:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC))

Disambiguation pages[edit]

If you are going to create or edit disambiguation pages, please familiarize yourself with the Manual of Style for these pages. In particular, all disambiguation pages should contain a {{Disambiguation}} template, and should not be placed in Category:Disambiguation pages manually; see the note on that category description page. When not one, but two, other editors pointed out that Brazo (disambiguation) was inconsistent with Wikipedia standards, you should have discussed the issues rather than simply undoing their edits without any comments. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


WikiProject Lagos[edit]

Please join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Lagos! -- M2545 (talk) 15:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Demographics of Nunavut and Yukon[edit]

I just noticed the two tables you added to Nunavut and Yukon. I had to remove both as there were errors. There are three indigenous groups in Canada and they are collectively known as Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Aboriginals consist of First Nations, sometimes referred to as Indian and listed by Statistics Canada as "North American Indian", the Inuit, formerly known as Eskimo, and the Métis. These three names are not interchangeable. For Nunavut you forgot to update the source from Yukon. It should have been this. In the Nunavut table you put First Nations but that is incorrect. The majority of people in Nunavut are Inuit with very small numbers of the other two groups. You also put a total number of 50,415. However, the total population of Nunavut is on 29,325. Stats Can allows for multiple response so the line listed "Aboriginal origins" may include people who say they are Inuit-British. You can't add the Aboriginal origins, the Inuit and North American Indian to get a "First Nations" total as they are already included. For the Yukon you seem to have added Aboriginal origins and First Nations, which as per the Nunavut table is incorrect. Also the total population from all the ethnic groups listed there added up to 60,445 which is larger than the total population of Yukon. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 20:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Malik Shabazz. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Spike Lee, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Togolese American may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • born on African soil to have been enslaved in the United States when slavery was still lawful) and arrived to [[Mobile, Alabama|Mobile]] from [[Dahomey]] in 1859.<ref name="FerrisJMC">"Question

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Uniparental markers[edit]

Hi. Please stop suggesting that certain African American individuals are descended from specific African nations. No one knows this for a fact. It's just speculation based on uniparental markers like Y-DNA and mtDNA, which are not ethnically let alone nationally exclusive. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The DNA analysis is one of several resources used by scientists and historians (included Colleges) to learn the origins of the Afro populations of the Americas (along with old records of slaves, linguistic and cultural studies of certain groups of African descent in places like the Caribbean, etc. .). In fact, this has been particularly important in populations of African origin in northern Colombia. It was possible to establish genetic relationships of the black population from there about certain stocks of certain parts of Africa. Although this population proved to be very blended, also indicated that certain genetic differences had a black population to another. That is, some of these communities were partly descended from other ethnic people, because they had their genes. Some of their African genes (which they referred to certain ethnic groups) were more distant than others. It was clear, for example, that many Afro-descended were descendant of people of the current Namibia because they possess certain genes of some places from there, but they were very distant genes. So the question was yes really slaves were exported to Colombia from day-present Namibia or whether they were ancestors of slaves exported there. It was clear about their Namibian origins, but it was not in regards to how they came. They believe they probably were not exported from Namibia but African slaves carrying genes of people from certain places from there because their ancestors came from there. With this they tried to explain their Namibian genes.
All human peoples of the world who live for generations in a given location develop certain genes that are characteristic only of that place. For example, it was discovered that Canarian people in general, we had developed certain genes that also had the Guanches and that were found only in the Canary Islands (along with genes carried by the Guanches and Europeans, mainly Iberian). Thus, the genetic resource has become an essential element in knowing the origins of certain populations. While it is true that DNA analysis may have errors and should be studied carefully, but are reliable from official view. While, over time, as they improve the procedures and measures used to study the DNA, will be more reliable. I'm not entirely fio analiss of DNA but can bring us at least, partially, to certain origins of black populations. By the way, some people whose photos you deleted it, are people who know their origins because they were the ones who had their grandparents or great-grandparents or because this was spoken in their families for generations. Furthermore, in the Caribbean, there are many ethnic groups whose cultures remain African origin and they are aware of their origins, although they have not done DNA analysis to find out (after it is verified and confirmed by certain historical studies, with certain differences. For example, in Jamaica the idea that Jamaicans are descended mainly from African Akan people slaves of present Ghana and the Igbos of Nigeria is widespread, but historical records show that it is backwards. Both peoples were effectively the main ethnic groups to be exported there, but the Igbos dominated over the Akans). For now, I prefer to keep photos of African Americans in the articles that talk about the people of whom come supposedly their ancestors.--Isinbill (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I realize that. However, uniparental marker tests are not able to determine the specific ethnic group which an ancestor may have belonged to since Y-DNA & mtDNA haplogroups are not ethnically exclusive [2]. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I read the reference you leave. The fact that African Americans show genes from various African locations is normal, because the slaves came from various African ports and were exported to the Americas. Eventually they and their descendants were mixed and the ethnic diversity of African Americans grew increasingly. Think, for example, in Americas, in places such as Venezuela, there were slave revolts, but these riots were formed from the sixteenth century by slaves from the same ethnic group, because there were people buying more slaves in the same ethnicity. This made the European traders changed the formula and that from that time bought slaves of different ethnicities, different cultures, so that the relationship between them was very weak and thus save the riots. Slaveholders also married their slaves on the slaves of other people, though their ethnicities were different. In the sixteenth century there were many slave revolts but most of them were riots specific ethnic groups (eg Yoruba revolt in northern Brazil in the first half of the sixteenth century). There came to actually having riots blacks together regardless of their ethnicity until the late eighteenth century, when Europeans had forced the slaves, regardless of ethnicity, to blend together (although surprising that in the case of Latin America, the most black people that was revealed in the nineteenth century were descendants of slaves while recent slaves were not revealed - as in Brazil, Cuba and Puerto Rico remained slaves exported, although illegally, after which the United Kingdom had prohibited trafficking slaves in the world). So I never thought that that African Americans had only one or two seemed to indicate origins as DNA analysis, and always supported that people ought to have ancestors from different parts of Africa. The origins indicated in the analysis of DNA would only some of its origins.
There were many slave kingdoms in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans, hence the huge ethnic diversity in the African American population and the great mix that this had for centuries. On the other hand, one of the people mentioned in the article said that DNA samples had indicated that partially descended from slaves from Mozambique. Think that Portugal had already occupied its shores in the late fifteenth century and especially in the late sixteenth century, the date on which the merchants of the then European kingdom began to buy slaves in Mozambique (until then, they had bought slaves mainly kings and aristocracies of Ndongo kingdoms (in northern Angola) and the Kongo kingdom, and Guinea Bissau, Cape Verde and Sao Tome and Principe (archipelagos that were populated by Portuguese and slaves of the places mentioned above). Although, they also got some slaves of the Coasts of the slaves (eg Ashanti). Mozambike was one of several places in Portugal which served its slave trade in the sixteenth century. Many slaves from there were exported to Brazil and the Portuguese slave traders sold many Mozambicans to other European traders. Such slaves were mixed with the population of the places that came (although in some places they left certain ethnic groups that have survived to the present, as is the case of Makua in Cuba). They sold slaves to the Spanish, Dutch, French and English. Mainly Portugese sold slaves Mbundu and Kongos, but also from other African places. The fact that African Americans have ancestors Mozambicans is not surprising, really. But those tests are unreliable when there are African Americans who said they have ancestors in places such as the Central African Republic and Zambia, for example, who had no relations with Europe until the late nineteenth century (although they may be descended from African slaves who were descended from people those places).
In short, not much I distrust the DNA analysis, so I think people saw that they had ancestors in certain parts of Africa, possibly they had reason (although they only partially descended from them, unlike what many of them believe). Regards--Isinbill (talk) 00:00, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Understood. The thing with uniparental markers is that they are generally not ethnically circumscribed. This means that while the chances of African American males carrying paternal haplogroups that are common among males in West/Central Africa is indeed high, the tests won't be able to identify much beyond that. That is, they won't be able to pinpoint which specific ethnic group from which particular area may have contributed that lineage. So while Chris Rock was apparently found to belong to the B2a1 paternal haplogroup, we can't tell which particular ethnic group the ancestor of his who contributed that lineage hailed from since it's the most widely dispersed haplogroup B subclade in West/Central Africa. We can hypothesize that that ancestor was probably from the Cameroon area since the haplogroup is apparently pretty common there. However, this tells us nothing about the paternal haplogroups of Rock's many other male ancestors on his mother's side. That said, have a look at this chart [3]; notice all of the other ancestors in the middle whose lineages are not counted in these uniparental tests (whether Y-DNA or mtDNA). This is what Gates et al. mean when they assert that the uniparental tests aren't particularly informative beyond general regional provenance information and for only some ancestors at that. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 16:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
I don´t know if you know Spanish, but the web page about of the DNA analisys of the Afro Colombian population, if is possible, you would should read it, because that web page indicates the presence of certain genes only existing in certain African ethnic groups (and not in other ethnic groups, not even in the places where they lived) in the Afro Colombian community. The idea provided by Conclusion is interesting because much sums everything explained by researchers before, even pointing out that groups had contributed to the genetics of Afro-Colombian communities studied: http://www.academia.edu/1035303/Variaci%C3%B3n_dental_no-m%C3%A9trica_y_el_tr%C3%A1fico_de_esclavos_por_el_Atl%C3%A1ntico_la_ascendencia_biol%C3%B3gica_y_los_or%C3%ADgenes_geogr%C3%A1ficos_de_una_poblaci%C3%B3n_afro-colombiana Variación dental no métrica y el tráfico de esclavos por el atlántico: la ascendencia biológica y los orígenes geográficos de una población afro-colombiana (Nonmetric dental variation and the slave trade in the Atlantic: biological ancestry and geographical origins of Afro-Colombian population). The page, pershap, can be translate en Internet putting the name of the same page en Google seach (well, reading that page is just a recommendation). Regards.--Isinbill (talk) 18:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
I realize that certain genes are mainly found in only certain ethnic groups. However, the links in question aren't on such ancestry-informative markers (e.g. sickle cell alleles). They are instead on uniparental markers (Y-DNA & mtDNA), which aren't ethnically circumscribed. It's just weird seeing Chris Rock called "Cameroonian American" on the basis of one of his various Y-DNA lineages (if it were based on autosomal DNA, though, that would be another matter). Like all males, he actually has several such paternal lineages, including that of his mother's father, that of his paternal grandmother's father, etc. The genetic test Rock took only identifies his father's paternal lineage. It's a bit like suggesting that certain U.S. immigrants from northern Cameroon are "Spanish American" on the grounds that many males from that part of Cameroon carry the same R1b paternal haplogroup as many Iberians and other Western Europeans. See what I mean? Anyway, it's no big deal as far as I'm concerned. Just don't be surprised if an actual Cameroonian later balks at Rock being passed off as one of his/her compatriots. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Duda[edit]

Hola usuario Insibill, reciente mente me metí en la wikipedia hispana, y me di cuenta que la información que puse en mi pagina Italian immigration to Guatemala, algunas cosas las pusiste en tu pagina hispana Inmigración italiana en Guatemala, y no hay problema, solo que me gustaría saber donde conseguiste algunas informaciones ya que la referencia La ciudad es como tu, Cumple no encontre informacion sobre: Enrico Felice, quien conquistó la selva de Izabal, estableciendo cortes de madera y cultivos, así como Acchile Borghi, que modeló en bronce la primera estatua de Barrios en San Marcos y el león de Los Altos. Solo es una duda, gracias :) --ElreydeEspana 19:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

No necesitas hablarme en ingles, también soy de España :), saludos tío

Zenaida Manfugás[edit]

Will the citations for this article ever be posted?66.74.176.59 (talk) 04:56, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Quisieras colaborar[edit]

actualmente estoy creando paginas de inmigracion por pais, y necesitaria tu ayuda, ya que necesito a alguien que entienda mi idioma, esperare tu respuesta (ELreydeEspana) 6 del 12 del 2014, 15:26 (UTC)

Oh, muchas gracias, por ahora pienso crear Inmigracion en Costa Rica, pero por la hora si quieres la hacemos manana, buenas noches (ELreydeEspana) 6 del 12 del 2014, 20:26 (UTC)
Discúlpame por molestarte, pero realmente necesito a alguien de habla española y que este acá en esta wikipedia, me gustaría que si revisaras mis paginas y me tradujeras mejor el ingles, ya que yo no tengo mucha practica, y si quieres algo a cambio, dímelo, gracias (ELreydeEspana) 19:23 15/12 (UTC)
El problema con el caso especifico del idioma es que yo tampoco soy muy bueno en inglés. Sé leer más o menos en inglés pero los artículos que publico necesitan corrección por parte de otros editores porque aun cometo muchas faltas y mis expresiones en inglés a veces no son las correctas. --Isinbill (talk) 19:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rudy Pérez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglophone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Central Asian American[edit]

Template:Central Asian American has been nominated for merging with Template:Middle Eastern American. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

What does your use of 'stressed' mean in terms of a military career? :)[edit]

Hello, Isinbill,

You've authored at least a few articles about Spanish colonial governors of Florida - and Texas? (You thanked me for my editing of Enrique White, I believe.) I've been baffled by your use of the word 'stressed' when describing a man's military career; this appears in multiple articles. Just thought I'd bring to your attention that:

In [American] English, the term stressed usually means either "emphasized" (as a transitive verb; as in, They stressed to us the importance of being on time) — or in recent decades, often having a negative flavor — as either an adjective (She's so stressed at work, or is "stressed out" at work) or sometimes as an intransitive verb (He is stressing about his job interview). This more negative use refers to excessive worry, strain, pressure, fatigue, etc.

I think you probably meant something like "excelled," didn't you?

This is the first time I've posted on anyone's Talk page. No rush on your reply; it seemed like you needed to know that your meaning is unclear.

Thank you,

Floridasand (talk) 09:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding non-free images[edit]

Hello Isinbill! On the Rudy Pérez, you added pictures non-free images of album covers that are already used on their articles. Per WP:NFCC, you must include a rationale on the non-free file pages. Non-free images cannot be used in more than one articles without a proper rationale. In regards, Erick (talk) 18:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

South Sudanese American[edit]

Hi Isinbill. I notice that you've made some edits to South Sudanese American in the past. I'm not sure if you realise, but the editor who created this article did so by copying the text of Sudanese American and replacing the word "Sudanese" with "South Sudanese" throughout the article. I realised this when I spotted the same issue at South Sudanese in the United Kingdom. MaronitePride has stripped out the material that isn't specific to South Sudanese in that article, and I've done the same with South Sudanese Australians. However, with this American article, it's harder to do because you've obviously worked to improve the text. It's a bit harder to tell what material in it does actually apply specifically to South Sudanese without checking all the sources. Is there any chance that you might be able to help figure out what should be removed? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Juan Moya Article[edit]

Hey Isinbill! I ended up changing the addition of "on the Mexico side" because the sentence previously states the Juan Moya was a "captain of the Mexican centralist army" therefore specifying that he was fighting on the Mexican side (because a Mexican captain wouldn't be fighting for Texas). Therefore, I believe the addition would be redundant. Great work on the article though! It's great! John Vitzileos (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

NRHP infobox[edit]

I removed the NRHP infobox from two articles that you had recently added it to, San Buenaventura de Potano and Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe de Tolomato. That infobox should only be used for places listed on the National Register of Historic Places, as it has several side effects such as listing the article on maintenance lists, for example, in a list of articles that don't give a valid NRHP reference number. Generic1139 (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Martínez de Baeza[edit]

Okay, Isinbill, let's give it a try. I will number the items that I think need revision, and ask you for your opinion of them.

1. "His sole purpose as governor"—This seems to read his mind. We need to describe his actions, not his thoughts. The Rick Hendricks article (by the way, thank you for retrieving it!) attributes this idea to France V. Scholes (Note 2). I may be able to see the Scholes article in my university's library; in that case we could cite it directly. Even so, I would suggest replacing "His sole purpose" with "His main activity".

2. "was to exploiting labor for Hispanic settlers and, especially, for the Amerindians"—I would want to say "was to exploit the labor of the Hispanic settlers and, especially, that of the native population."

3. "(who were slaves, along with Africans, in the Spanish colonies)"—I'm inclined to delete this entirely. If I understand correctly about the encomienda system, it differed in some respects from the arrangement that is traditionally called slavery as the latter applied to Africans. Also, if I understand correctly, there wasn't a significant number of African slaves in N.M., and so it is outside the subject of this article to refer to the slavery of Africans.

4. "paying little attention to his duties in the province (as to maintain peace in the region between Amerindians and settlers)."—I suggest "paying little attention to his duties as governor in the province, such as that of maintaining peace between settlers and Native Americans."

5. "to gather pine nuts"[1]—I see that Hendricks's statement about pine nuts is linked to Scholes. If I can get my hands on the Scholes article, we can cite it directly.

6. "and (to) trade in manufactures"—It's not clear why trading was a bad thing.

7. Perhaps "to trade in manufactured goods".

8. "specifically with furs, fabrics and cotton blankets"—I suggest "specifically in furs...", in parallel with "trade _in_ manufactured goods".

9. "which was fabricated" > "which were produced". (Just avoiding the clash with the noun "fabrics".)

10. "negotiate with other nations" > "negotiate with other pueblos" (to mirror Hendricks's word).

11. "Thus, a worker received in exchange of his work a very low wage."—I don't see the "Thus" relationship. I suggest replacing this sentence with "Workers were paid a very low wage."

12. "The Amerindians should to work every day, even on holidays (in which the population celebrated religious events)."—I suggest "The Amerindians had to work every day, including religious holidays."

13. "In late 1636, the governor had already manufactured enough to send to south of New Spain in nine wagons for the purpose of finding trade opportunities."—I suggest "By late 1636 the governor had produced enough to send nine wagonloads of goods south in search of trading opportunities." I don't want to say "New Spain" because that seems to _include_ N.M. (as described in New Spain).

14. "the parcels and money needed by the Puebloan Amerindians"—What are the parcels, and why are they needed by the Indians? In the corresponding part of the Hendricks article I see "encomiendas", and that term is okay to use in English (Wikipedia has Encomienda). I suggest "...explained that the necessary encomiendas and allotments of tribute from the Puebloan Indians had been established to pay for military escorts for the missionaries". I realize that this echoes the wording of Hendricks, but I think it's necessary to explain why "military escorts" are needed.

15. "conversion to Christianity should to be made of apostolic way and never use military force to get it."—I think I understand this, but I'm not sure how to express "apostolic way". Perhaps "should be accomplished by persuasion, and never by means of military force."

16. In the last sentence of that paragraph I would insert "Meanwhile": "Meanwhile, Martínez de Baeza wrote a series of reports containing false information about certain individuals of the clergy in order to discredit them in the eyes of the viceroy of New Spain." Kotabatubara (talk) 16:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with these suggestions. My English is bad still, but these sentences and words can well replace the sentences and words I wrote in the article (as is the case of the parcels, which can be replaced by "encomiendas" if this term is more appropriate, or "nations" for "pueblos" because the Spanish of New Mexico traded with other Native people, rather other nations), because this is the same but with other words. In other way, I just think that the source indicated that Baeza had only a goal in his legislation because him, by example, could write that.--Isinbill (talk) 16:31, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I have made the changes that I suggested above.

Also, I have seen the article by Scholes, and I see that it is the source of some of the wording that confused me. For example I see that Scholes refers to the 9 wagonloads going "to New Spain" (but, as I said, I'm not repeating it because Wikipedia defines New Spain in a way that includes New Mexico and the other U.S. states that were part of Mexico at the time). The word "apostolic" also is from Scholes; I'm not sure whether it is a technical term of the Church, so I have kept it, with a brief phrase of (I hope, accurate) explanation. I will add the direct reference to Scholes soon. Kotabatubara (talk) 23:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. The true is that the article need more references (that I think).--Isinbill (talk) 12:47, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I corrected a couple of typographical errors and removed the "Copyedit" tag. Kotabatubara (talk) 15:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Enough is enough[edit]

I am getting weary of fixing these numerous articles you create, the better part of them written in what would kindly be described as illiterate English. I realize that many of them are several years old, but no one else seems interested in investing the large amount of time and effort it takes to figure out just what the hell you're trying to say and re-writing it in intelligible English, to fact-checking your frequent misinterpretations of the original English sources (and even some of the Spanish ones), and to hunting down your additions of material with references to unreliable web sources.

It is extremely frustrating to spend hours editing one of your articles, only to discover you've copy and pasted long passages of someone else's copyrighted work, or copy and pasted very lightly edited Google translations (often not so good and barely intelligible themselves) of copyrighted material in Spanish.

It is even more frustrating to spend many hours working on one of these articles to produce a text that is written in clear English with reliable sourcing, and finding some satisfaction in that, only to discover that you've just added reams of more non-encyclopedic content written in garbled English. It is very disheartening.

I know you yourself invest much time in creating these articles in good faith, except for the copyright violations, but frankly, the text of most of them before rewriting is not up to Wikipedia editorial snuff.

The only recourse I see is to either give up and let you go on your merry way writing and expanding substandard articles that reflect badly on English Wikipedia, or to request that an admin take a look. I'm requesting an administrative review. Carlstak (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Long ago that I copy not the information of other web pages (and when I did it, was of accidentally way), except pages in Spanish (I only translate it, because in Wikipedia it can be allowed, but it is not allowed copy articles in English, so I have understood). In other way, in Wikipedia, although I do recognize my English is bad, I learned many English worlds and expressions reading and writing in Wikipedia. Since my first editions in Wikipedia, my English improved, although my articles still are difficult of understand (but this paragraph did not copy of Google Translate, while that in the past I would copied it of translator, although my spelling is still bad). In addition, in the last year I learned to differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources (except in few exceptions), so that the previous years I posted more articles based in unreliable sources that in the last year (although I saw that some of my last articles have some sources unreliable). In addition, about the Juan Leal article, the information that I included after your editions, is the information that you deleted because it copied of the sources, but I recovered it, explaining with my words the text. In other way, I understand you don´t want double-revise my articles because they are many and they are poorly written, but I put the label in them for other users, if they wanted, could correct them, because I wanted that these articles to be understood and I am worried about this idea. I am conscious my articles have a serious problem with the spelling and long ago that I have not posted no article.--Isinbill (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
In addition, Section "Enough is enough" should not be on the discussion page the Juan Leal's article, but on my talk page, because it speaks of the articles I posted as a whole, not only speak the Juan Leal's article (by the way, actually Wikipedia articles are of the entire community, not just the person who publishes them (by the standards of wikipedia), unlike what you indicated before (with the sentence "your articles"), so them can be improved for the Wikipedia community). This was an mistake that you did (this I think, because I don't know if it was just that or you try to humiliate me, with this public commentary in one of the articles I posted).--Isinbill (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
@Isinbill: I posted my complaint on the Juan Leal talk page because that is where I finally grew exasperated enough to respond directly to your editing. I've spent so much time trying to improve articles you've written, that encountering once again content you've copied and pasted, not to mention all the other improper editing, just set me off. You say that it was accidental, but I keep finding whole sentences elsewhere that you've copied and pasted verbatim without quotes. For example, you put in the Pedro Menéndez Márquez article: "Menéndez Márques anticipated that the Indians might attack any force that tried to return to Santa Elena, so he and Miranda took from St. Augustine a strong prefabricated. He and his 53 men were able to erect it in." which doesn't even make sense, but obviously was copied and pasted from a source that itself apparently copied and pasted from an older source which said, "Menéndez Marqués anticipated that the Indians might attack any force that tried to return to Santa Elena, so he took with him from St. Augustine a prefabricated fort that he and his 53 men were able to erect in only six days." Besides, a simple link to a reference source without making clear that the text was copied verbatim is not enough attribution.
You've been editing on English Wikipedia since April, 2010 and you've created 282 articles, yet you still haven't learned basic English grammar, verb tenses, or pronoun gender and number, as demonstrated above. Your spelling is the least of it. One would think that after all this time, you would have absorbed the basic principles through simple osmosis, if you lack the will or desire to learn them. I tried to educate you a little in the edit summaries, but you kept making the same errors in your recent edits. It doesn't matter how many new English words you've learned in the process, the problem is that you were writing for an audience that's looking for accurate information written in intelligible English, and the articles you've created don't provide that until they've been completely rewritten. I think almost all of them that haven't been curated should be deleted, sad to say, as they are not encyclopedic, and frankly, they are an embarrassment to English Wikipedia.
Despite your professed desire to improve Wikipedia, those articles are a detriment to the project, not an improvement. As Diannaa said, your English is not good enough for you to be adding text to any articles, it places the burden of cleanup on other editors whose time could be better spent doing other work. Even if you don't add any more text, fixing your prolific creations represents a mountain of labor for someone like me who hates to see such error-filled content on Wikipedia, and I seem to be the only editor at all interested in correcting them. It's puzzling to me that someone who obviously cares about the subject matter should write articles so hastily and sloppily put together. I'm amazed someone didn't stop you a long time ago.
Regarding text translated from Spanish, I quote from Wikipedia:FAQ: ""Unless copyrighted images and text meet Wikipedia's non-free content allowance, we can't use them or create "derivative works" of them. That means we can't translate too much from a copyrighted foreign language source to include it here..."
And yes, I know very well that no editor owns an article, I called them "yours" because until I came along, the great majority of those you've created had almost no editing done by other editors, except that done by bots and editors fixing spelling errors. Carlstak (talk) 01:42, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyright violations[edit]

Hello. I am Diannaa and I am an administrator on this wiki. User: Carlstak has posted on my talk page, as he has noticed that there's problems with your editing. Thank you for the work you have done so far on this wiki. However, there's a couple of concerns. Firstly, I don't think your English is good enough that you should be contributing on this wiki rather than on the Spanish wiki. It's not reasonable for other people who may not have access to the sources to feel obligated to clean up your additions so that they are intelligible and of a high enough quality that they can be retained. Secondly, and most importantly, you have been adding copyright material, some of it quite recently, for example this edit only a few days ago. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Isinbill. I see you have been quoting from copyright material and putting it in italics. Please don't do that any more. Please only add content that you have written in your own words. Please go back through your contributions of the last few days and re-write or remove anything that you have copied from copyright material. Thank you, -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

¿I can not write "According to this author ..." and copy what he said as a date? Because under the rules of Wikipedia, if you can quote phrases, indicating that they are copying. Even the law allow do this.--Isinbill (talk) 20:29, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
You are already in trouble for repeated copyright violations, so no, don't do that. Please write all prose in your own words. It is not necessary to quote other authors at all. -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:55, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Manuel de Cendoya article[edit]

@Isinbill: Could you please lay off editing the Cendoya article until I've finished my work fixing it? Your English is still off, and your edits are conflicting with mine. Give me a day. Thanks. Carlstak (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok.--Isinbill (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Categories for the DR[edit]

A quick note to explain two reverts: look at the code, particularly to the flag in a category that professes Dominican identity. Moreover, could you lead us to where is the discussion about this category imposed on our articles? Thanks Caballero/Historiador (talk) 07:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

The diffs are here: 1, 2. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 07:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

@Caballero1967: Simply, the Cocolo and Samaná American groups are Dominicans (although of English-creole and African-American descent). So, I thought they should are in the template of "Dominican peoples", which I included in these articles.--Isinbill (talk) 14:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
  • The way it is now, it is fine. The way you had it before, the wording was not the best, and it had another's country flag. I saw how you fixed it. It is fine now. Look at this conversation here. Thanks. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 14:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
By the way, I don't know why it is inadequate to put the template "People of the Dominican Republic" in the "Cocolo" and "Samana American" articles. Both are Dominicans, although their ancestries, culture and languages are different.--Isinbill (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Nobody is saying that. My complaint was that it had a Honduras flag instead of a Dominican, and ( more subjective point) the wording may not have been the best for the Dominican society. But the way it is now, could not be more perfect. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
When I added these template in these articles, you deleted it (but you maintained it in the other articles of Ethic groups of Dominican Republic)...--Isinbill (talk) 15:33, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────*Yes, I reverted it, but for the reasons I explained above. Lo revertí porque lo que tú pusiste tenia la bandera de Honduras y porque nunca se había llegado a un consenso sobre el cambio de titulo. Lo que tú pusiste en las paginas dominicanas se refería a etnias y ascendencias. Mientras que en el pasado se usaba "Dominican People." Cómo le espliqué a ""Abrahamic Faiths" mi oposición a ese título está basado en dos puntos. Como dije arribita, primero, en que ya había uno en uso ("Dominican People"), y que el nuevo título que se estaba sugiriendo enfatizaba las diferencias. El título que está ahora (que era también el antiguo), es más inclusivo. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 16:22, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Dominican pages[edit]

Isinbill, I assume you mean well, but I am going to ask you to limit your contributions to the Dominican pages (particularly those dealing with abstract issues like race and history) to text you may have written several times over and consulted with others about it. In trying to collaborate in writing WP articles, you need to consider your strengths, your learning objectives, and the overall purpose of the piece. I suspect that like most Wikipedians, you want to make meaningful and helpful contributions, and at the same time grow personally. The main benefit of writing in a group is that we receive feedback from others, and I am always hoping for constructive feedback on my writing. However, IMHO, the text you have just inserted in the article "Afro-Dominicans (Dominican Republic)" has obscured its significance. I will revert these comments, but not with the intention of brushing you away, but with the hope we could collaborate better. The best articles grow out of a deliberate collaboration among editors.

An option: to open sections on the article's talk page where we could discuss the issues you have in mind (in English or Spanish) and explore alternatives texts that you could then include in the article (or suggest others to do). For example, you wrote the following sentence: "Moreover, Haitians did feel the Dominicans as a distinct people racially, culturally and linguistically, while banned them to practice their customs." I suspect you meant to say that during the time when the entire island of Hispaniola was a single state, Haitians thought of Dominicans as a different group because of their language, race, and culture. The way I just reworded it, is one possibility among many, and an example of what other editors (including me) could explore together in the article's Talk Page.

In addition to matters of language, we could also discuss key historical factors that are, for example, misconstrued in this very sentence. For instance, Haitians did not see Dominicans as a distinct racial group. Everybody in Haiti, including Dominicans (except a few who considered themselves Whites because of a complex set of reasons), was Black (Colorism is not the same as racism, btw). For the most part, people themselves created the lines of separation. During this period, the large majority of Dominicans considered themselves Haitians, even when they spoke only Spanish ("Spanish-speaking Haitians"). Those who were bilingual (who were a good number of them because most males joined the army), had multiple identities, and were seen as such by the Haitian authorities (the number of Dominicans generals who climbed from below in the Haitian army is surprising). The point is that the sentence I chose as an example generalizes and thus misleads readers. Our task as historians is not to perpetuate the same ideas and concepts that have printed the images of people from the past in unchangeable and simplistic categories, but to understand, as best as possible (close to the primary sources) the complexities of their experiences, which often means to challenge current paradigms. The sources you choose, in large measure, determine the way you write the article. So, please, if you want to join in learning and writing about these topics, do so, but in collaboration and consultation with others. Please, let me know. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 13:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

@Caballero1967:I'll tell you in Spanish for you to know to what I exactly referred with this sentence: Yo indiqué que los haitianos hicieron sentir a los dominicanos racial, cultural y lingüísticamente diferentes a ellos debido a su trato con esta población (por algo usé la palabra "feel"). Eso leí en la fuente. Supuse que esto fue porque los haitianos son mayoritariamente negros, mientras que los dominicanos son mayoritariamente mulatos. Así, los haitianos le darían importancia a la ascendencia europea de la mayoría de los dominicanos. In other way, I think the article must be spelling and grammar corrected. So, I thought that replace "while forbidding them to them use their customs" for "banned them to practice their customs" was a good option.--Isinbill (talk) 15:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Isinbill, I am curious about the source you consulted, not because it says anything unique, but because I want to suggest a point about sources. You did not cite any in your edits. El tema que traes está entre los más controversiales. La posición sociopolítica del individuo afecta, en gran medida, el punto de vista de sus comentarios. Por supuesto que la idea es ser lo más neutral posible, pero cuando hay tanto envuelto en el tema, es difícil de separar la identidad personal del material de estudio. Sin embargo, se ha estado aglutinando un grupo de académicos (la mayoría en la diaspora, pero no todos) interesados en estudiar y escribir sobre el tema de la Española durante el periodo post-revolucionario en un contexto de mutua crítica y ayuda. El sin numero de disertaciones (tesis) que han salido sobre el tema a raíz de estas colaboraciones han cambiado, radicalmente, las posiciones y presunciones que teníamos sobre asuntos desde la identidad hasta el uso de recursos naturales (como la madera, etc.).
You made reference here to a source, which implies you are reading with interest. Si me dejas saber los temas que te interesan (dentro del marco de la historia temprana Dominico-Haitiana), compartiría lo último que se ha escrito sobre eso. Una forma de literatura super importante es la reseña-ensayo, lo que se llama en inglés, Review Essay. Estos ensayos resumen el estado actual de las investigaciones sobre algún tema en particular. Mi sugerencia (como te dije arriba) es que discutamos los asuntos antes de entrar en guerra editorial. Y ante todo, el uso de las fuentes.
For what you explained above, I think you DID NOT read the source incorrectly. The two main issues I had with what your contributions to the article were, first, the language (it was unclear and grammatically incorrect), and second, the simplification of historical reality. Granted, the majority of books and articles, particularly those written before 2000, would share your assumptions. But the new research has deviated, significantly, from the conventional thought that pitted Dominicans against Haitians as the most fundamental social status of the island in the first half of the 19th century. Now we know, better than ever, that the nationalistic rhetoric, started by the "Father of the National History," José Gabriel García and climaxed by Trujillo's intellectual elite, has profoundly shaped Dominican historiography to the point that you cannot use much of it as authoritative sources anymore (with few notable exceptions).
Among the few specialists, there is little doubt that the majority of Dominicans saw themselves as Haitians and that the road to the concept of national identity, as it reached 1844, was bumpy, irregular and never linear. In other words, the nice little official narrative that shows Dominicans under a type of slavery during the time of the "Haitian Occupation" is simply wrong, even when a group of distinguished Dominican scholars today continue to uphold it. As I explained in the opening post here, color, at this time, did not define race as we see it today (however, colorism and class divided Haitian society). Haitians were invested in an anti-White supremacist project, and they would not have favored White (or lighter) Dominicans. In fact, the opposite is closer to the truth because Haitians reacted violently at the sight of Whites exercising their racial privileges. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 16:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
I know that the Haitian rejected to the white people. If you notice, the text about the perception of the Haitians regarding the Dominicans is in the section about racial discrimination. I put that phrase to indicate that this was one of the reasons for the rejection of blackness in many Dominicans: Haitians did not treat good the Dominicans because they consider them as partially descendants of Europeans (and they rejected the white people). So, the Dominicans would began to feel themselves different to the Haitians, whom they considered blackest that the Dominicans. This is a of the reasons that were shuffled to try to explain why many Dominicans consider be different to the black, although most of they are mulattos. This difference conception of themselves regarding the Black I did not only read it in the source. Many years before, I had in my high school, in my class, a Black Dominican girl who rejected Africa and she be considered white (although his mother and his cousin were also black). Therefore, I found it relatively easy to accept what I read about the rejection of many Dominicans to be black. With this, I do not say that I accept the slavery in Dominican Republic by Haitians as a occurred fact, if this is rejected by most of the currently Historians, I just said that the rejection of Haitians toward whites (and mulattos) I already knew, and that's why I indicated in that section.--Isinbill (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Isinbill I do not think you are reading me well, and I might be reading you incorrectly too. You are presenting my views too simplistic. The example you are giving appears to me as anti-Haitianism and anti-afro-centrism, which is a development that outgrew from the US occupation of Haiti (1915-) So, I will write this portion completely in Spanish hoping we both could find common ground.
Hay que hacer una diferencia entre la forma como el dominicano común piensa y se siente hoy en día a la forma cómo los habitantes de la porción que hoy en día es dominicana se sentían y pensaban durante el periodo de la ocupación (1822-1844). También tenemos que hacer una distinción en la forma cómo nosotros hoy pensamos en cuanto a las razas, y cómo la gente antes diferían de acuerdo a su propio contexto. De tras de esto está algo básico en el estudio crítico de la historia: las ideas cambian y la gente del pasado pensaba diferente a nosotros en muchas maneras, y que la forma cómo se ha interpretado un evento o fenómeno no es garantía que es la forma más cercana a los textos de fuentes primarias. Cada generación ha interpretado el pasado desde una visión particular a sus experiencias. Entre las cosas que quería decir arriba es que este cambio natural de paradigmas en generaciones ha sido aún más brusco y profundo con el tema de Haití y de la RD en los últimos años. Pero que hay muchos dominicanos que se arraigan a la interpretación nacionalista y racial para preservar sus privilegios (la mayor parte de las veces esto ocurre instintivamente).
En cuanto al primer punto: Mi intención era explicar que, durante este periodo (1822-1844) los que vivían en el lado que hoy es dominicano tenían varias ideas de su propia identidad, y que no fue hasta más entrada la época cuando hubo un numero crítico de burgueses que se comenzaron a sentir "dominicanos" (muchos historiadores dominicanos empujan la fecha lo más atrás posible, por supuesto). El otro punto: tú estás mal interpretando (como la mayoría de los blancos han hecho) el rechazo de la supremacía blanca cómo si fuera un rechazo del blanco mismo. Son dos cosas diferentes. Cuando yo dije que los Haitianos estaban invertidos en una campaña en contra de la supremacía blanca, no impliqué que los dominicanos más blanquitos fueron humillados simplemente por su color. En esto estoy opuesto a lo que tú escribiste. Aunque la mayoría de los escritos anteriores simplificaban el tema de esa manera, hoy en día los especialistas saben que fue más complejo, así que no podemos generalizar más. Yo estudio varios casos de dominicanos de ascendencia pura española que fueron individuos de mucho poder y respeto en la política en Puerto Príncipe, y no hay indicación alguna que el color de su piel halla sido un factor para bien o para mal. Si comparamos las sociedades de aquel tiempo, Haití se acercaba más al ideal de la universalidad humana que cualquier otro país del mundo. Y yo no estoy solo, en este punto. Léete, por favor, la tesis de Nesbitt aquí, a Dubois aquí, a Jenson aquí. Aún Maingot, el critico numero uno que viene de la escuela vieja es iluminante aquí. Yo le he dedicado casi dos décadas al estudio de este tema y he publicado sobre esto también. Creo que podrías entender, entonces, porqué mis estandares son altos. Caballero/Historiador (talk) 19:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
@Caballero1967: If you are a expert in the Dominican History of 19th century, I think your help would be very helpful to improve the article, adding latest information, update, about the theme. I am studying History, but I still am not a Historian and I think your help would very important. --Isinbill (talk) 11:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Isleños in Louisiana[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Isleños in Louisiana requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://america.pink/islenos-louisiana_2120190.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa I sorry, but the article was not a copy of any web page. You might have realized that through the article references. The "source" that you indicate copied from Wikipedia (indeed, this "source" only includes copied information of free web pages. All the information of this online encyclopedia is a copy of such pages. This indicates the page in question). For that reason my article had the references from where came its information since its first edition, while the page that, according to you, was copied by me, have no reference. You might have seen it for yourself if you had watched the first editions of my article, with their references, and had compared with the page that according your opinion was copied by me.--Isinbill (talk) 23:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Comparing the quality of the prose with what you have produced elsewhere leads me to believe that the article was copied from the website rather than being a Wikipedia mirror. If you wish to pursue this further, the place to go is WP:deletion review. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
No, my article was edited by different people and the article YES is original and this was written slowly. A portion of the article (Texas, Louisiana and Florida) was originally written in the article of "Isleños" (it was written by others). In this article I added more information for months, based on many sources. Eventually, I decided that maybe I could already do an article with the information of the Canarians of United States, that was in the article and was wrote by different users (part of this information was written by others; part was written by me). I asked for advice on the talk page and users agreed. So I published the article "Canarian American". After publication, over time, I added more information based on more sources and creating different sections (for example, in the article of the "Isleños" was spoke about the Canarians from Texas, Louisiana and Florida, but I incorporated to article of "Canarian Americans" the sections "Culture", based on a book that I have in my house). Later, I posted the article "Isleños in Louisiana" based in the "Isleños in Louisiana" section of the "Canarian American article". Some information of the article you can find on several page back in the "Isleños" Article History (Historial del acticulo). Obviously I deleted the most of information of the "Isleño" article about the Canarians in United States to post it in the article of the "Canarian American" and after in the article of "Isleños in Louisiana". I did Not copy from any source. In the article "Isleños in Louisiana" you could check the sources from which the information comes. The source that you think I copied simply have no references, and its content is based on other websites, as it was indicated in the page "about" of this source. The removal of an article with the false excuse that is a copy of a web page is totally unfair, because that is not true.--Isinbill (talk) 00:35, 8 January 2016 (UTC)