Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:02, 15 April 2014

Biography C‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Puerto Rico C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Puerto Rico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to Puerto Rico on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Puerto RicoWikipedia:WikiProject Puerto RicoTemplate:WikiProject Puerto RicoPuerto Rico C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Bias?

I don't know which tag to add, but this is obviously a very biased article. Or should I say, "biased" article?

Article needs bias removed

I can't find the edit button on this page, but many biased statements need to be removed.

Artcile name

In standard Spanish nomenclature, the first surname is the principal name by which the person is known. Justiciasocial (talk) 12:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

A well, I fixed the move, but it seems to have been mostly a copyvio anyways. I've resored the original stub, but that needs vast improvement and sourcing. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

edit warring rude IP

can the edit warring IP who is calling people names come here now and discuss before you get blocked--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you please learn how to type proper grammar? Anyway, I provided a source which proves that clemency was offered on August 11, 1999. Not September 11, 1999. The source also proves that Oscar refused clemency. Despite this, Mercy11 keeps reverting the source and claiming that Oscar was not offered clemency. This is false. What's the problem? I'm just trying to add correct information. Read the source if you don't believe me.

http://www.tlahui.com/politic/politi99/politi8/pr8-30.htm --70.127.202.197 (talk) 12:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The problem is you continued to edit war rather than obey WP:BRD and came here first after he reverted you, and you were rude to him, wikipedia does not accept insults and personal attacks--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

This matter has moved to: here. Please follow the link if you wish to participate.

My name is Mercy11 (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC) and I approve this message.

Hi Mercy I can't get to it now from where I'm working but I'll read it later. --Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

POV in the "Political Prisoner" section

This section reads like it is a little one-sided. It should probably get a rewrite. NickCT (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I have removed your claim of POV tag and provided details in my edit summaries. My name is Mercy11 (talk), and I approve this message.

Reversal of edits

Reverted THESE edits by User: Froglich with the explanations provided my edits summaries, mostly due to violations of WP:NPOV and WP:V policies (also apparent unfamilarity with the "For year month day" template). These edits would require citations and compliance with WP:NPOV. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 13:13, 31 May 2013 (UTC), and I approve this message.

I was unfamiliar with the template, so you have that one. The POV in the article at present, however, is severe; and strays over into outright propaganda. How are we (as a Misplaced Pages article) arriving at the conclusion that a person convicted of bombings and armed robbery meets the definition of a "political" prisoner? As for taking the FALN reference back out of the lead, that's as odd as writing an article for Osama bin Laden which relegates any neutered mention of Al Qaeda or terrorism several pages down.--Froglich (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Entire article is POV.

I just came across this article and from just reading a few sections it is clear that it is very POV. Entire article needs to be rewritten.Neosiber (talk) 09:56, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Agreed; and the "other 12 prisoners" own articles are the exact same cut-n-pasted boilerplate propaganda.--Froglich (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The whole political prisoners section needs to be removed, it is incredibly biased. I would like more independent editors to chime in on the matter. From reading the talk page, it seems there is a lot of heated rhetoric so I would like for more editors to be involved. Neosiber (talk) 23:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Simply find sources to the contrary and put them in. Per WP:NPOV, that's how you neutralize an article you perceive to be POV. Removing sections that are properly sourced is not, according to , how you do it. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 03:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC), and I approve this message.

It's a little more complex than that, I'm hoping more independent editors chime in on the matter. Neosiber (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The article's glaring problem is that, rather than a serious bio-piece detailing the career of a pro-Soviet revolutionary bomber who fought to turn his birthplace into a Russian satellite during the Cold War, it is instead a sanitized puff-piece of pro-FALN sympathizer sound-bites (the majority of which frankly aren't that notable given that all criminals, no matter how heinous, have their less-than-credible supporters).--Froglich (talk) 09:26, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to do with it, so we should build a consensus, who votes to delete the political prisoner section? He isn't one, so it really doesn't belong on here. Neosiber (talk) 02:51, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I recommend dynamite. Kablooey. OK, more seriously: take the format of any decently-written (i.e., not encrusted with apologetics) article of a similar Cold War bomber or terrorist group, and re-write the article with a similar structure. Ruthlessly carve out the "barely notable" boosterism (leaving only the Clinton pardon).--Froglich (talk) 19:31, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure you understand the concept of WP:consensus in Misplaced Pages. If you are looking to remove perceived POV then you need to follow WP:NPOV. Have you followed WP:NPOV? Does it say that you correct perceived POV by consensus-building and/or vote-taking? As it stand now, WP:NPOV states "The principles upon which this policy is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, or by editors' consensus." My name is Mercy11 (talk) 15:53, 4 June 2013 (UTC), and I approve this message.

Doesn't exist objection

Regarding THIS edit, obviously the citizenship must exist if there is a live article wikilinked to it. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 19:15, 2 September 2013 (UTC), and I approve this message.

More edits

If anyone can point to the court documents that would be helpful.

More details on the escape attempt might clarify why he was given more years. He passed on a list of supplies needed for a getaway including machine guns, dinamite, and grenades. The escape attempt would likely have caused many deaths.

There is also the question of why is he willing to accept parole now (though now denied) but did not take the clemency offer, with parole, before from Clinton.Rococo1700 (talk) 19:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Reinstatement of cite text and removal of redundant text

Cited text was removed HERE. It has been reinstated, per WP:V. Text was added HERE. It has been removed per WP:WEIGHT: it is redundant here - that's what wikilinks are for. Mercy11 (talk) 03:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Oscar Lopez Rivera was convicted of armed robbery and multiple weapons charges, this would be considered violent crimes

The citations use in the text make a point that no prosecuter was able to directly link Oscar Lopez Rivera to crimes that caused bodily harm, although the unstated context of his imprisonment is that as one of the bomb makers for the FALN, he was likely involved in the Fraunces Tavern murders. But lets stick to the facts. Armed robbery is a Violent crime. Oscar was convicted of armed robbery, therefore he was convicted of a violent crime. The statement: "López Rivera was never accused of any act of violence." is not true.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rococo1700 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 3 April 2014‎ (UTC)

Per WP:ISNOT, this is not a place for publishing original research. The statement is question is sourced and verifiable, plus cited from mainstream press which means it also passes WP:RS. Perhaps your point is valid. Perhaps there are two opposing viewpoints even by mainstream media. But there must be a WP:RS to support your point, and so far all there has been is your own personal opinion. If you can find a source that states what you are claiming then we can discuss your position; otherwise you are in violation of WP:OR. I am not saying I am in disagreement with the position that "Oscar Lopez Rivera was convicted of armed robbery and multiple weapons charges, this would be considered violent crimes". The problem is that there is no WP:RS for that statement - as such, the statement in the article prior to your edit was valid per WP:V. Mercy11 (talk) 18:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I love it when wikipedians speak in there words. It is not original research to say: Oscar was convicted of armed robbery. I cite the wikipedia entry that states armed robbery = violent crime. Hence Oscar was convicted of a violent crime.

In other words, the statement: "López Rivera was never accused of any act of violence." is false.

In addition, the CNN article you use to source that statement states that Clinton said "None of them were convicted of doing bodily harm to anyone." Again one could argue that this statement applies only to those granted clemency. Oscar was not granted clemency. Regardless, there is a difference between "causing bodily harm" and "never accused of any act of violence". If you aim a gun at someone during a robbery, you are not hurting someone physically, yet this remains an act of violence in the eyes of the law. Again I cite the sources in Violent crime.

I will add a statement to the effect that Oscar was convicted of armed robbery, a violent crime.refs The SAGE Encyclopedia of Terrorism, Second Edition, edited by Gus Martin, page 194 and Clemency for FALN members : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate, One Hundre Sixth Congress. 4.J 89/2:S.HRG.106-799. United States. Testimony of Donald Wofford, former FBI agent, page 26-30."

This is not primary research. These are cited facts by different sources. And I have already demonstrated that one of the sources you cite does not corroborate your claims. If you remove thisline, then we should resort to arbitration. Rococo1700 (talk) 03:54, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Per, WP:SPS, you cannot use Misplaced Pages to support your statements because Misplaced Pages is a self-published source. Also, "Hence Oscar was convicted of a violent crime...In other words, the statement: 'López Rivera was never accused of any act of violence.' is false" falls under WP:SYN: "Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources themselves". Your use of Misplaced Pages and analysis of the CNN article to arrive at a new conclusion is a violation of WP:SYN.

As to the new source you provide (The SAGE Encyclopedia of Terrorism, Second Edition, edited by Gus Martin, page 194 and Clemency for FALN members : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate, One Hundre Sixth Congress. 4.J 89/2:S.HRG.106-799. United States. Testimony of Donald Wofford, former FBI agent, page 26-30." ), those pages (26-30) do not mention the phrase "violent crime" even once. Further search HERE shows the phrase is never mentioned in the entire source in association with OLR or the FALN. As such your source is invalid and it has been removed, per WP:V.

The statement that you removed HERE and again HERE, namely that "López Rivera was never accused of any act of violence", was sourced to THIS RS site. It states "López Rivera, de 70 años, nunca fue acusado por actos violentos." (English: López Rivera, 70 years old, was never accused of violent acts.) You removed a statement that was sourced to a WP:RS and you did so with edit summary based on WP:OR ("Removed statement that 'Rivera was never accused of any act of violence', since he was convicted of using force to commit robbery. That is violence."). You violated WP:V as well as ]. Your edits have been reverted per WP:V and WP:SYN. Per WP:V, "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be replaced without an inline citation to a reliable source". As such, you should not change the content of the article there again unless you can provide a valid source that directly supports your claim.

If you search for a good RS to support the claim that he was convicted of armed robbery, thus he commited a violent act, remember that being an accessory to armed robbery (accomplice) can convict you of armed robbery without you ever holding a loaded weapon on your hands and pointing it to others, and you seem to be assuming that sort of scenario. That scenario is quite different from, say, being the driver of a bank robbery's getaway car when all you are holding on your hands in a steering wheel, and I know of no law that categorizes driving a getaway car's as a violent crime. I am not condeming one or the other; I am saying that if he was convicted of a violent crime as you are claiming then it would had been reported as such by RS sources and you should have no problem sourcing it. Per WP:BURDEN, I have removed your edit on that regard.

Again, I am not objecting to the inclusion of the claim you are making that OLR committed a violent crime. The problem is that you are doing so without a citation. Your "Lopez Rivera was convicted of armed robbery, a violent crime" (HERE) comprises editorializing and that is a violation of WP:NPOV. Find a citation that states he was convicted of a violent crime and then it can be included. WP:V states that (paraphrasing) if he was convicted of a violent crime, then someone would had reported it as such. You cannot be the first one to report it in Misplaced Pages. That's a violation of WP:OR. Mercy11 (talk) 01:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your statements are false. They are based on sources that do not represent WP:RS and by only using unreliable sources for basing a conclusion that is not substantiated by the facts (the offenses for which ORL was convicted), your are violating WP:NPOV.

I have deleted your sentences as non-factual and replaced them with the following two sentences: Oscar Lopez Rivera was convicted of using force to commit robbery., which is considered a violent crime.

In your statement, you said “Per, WP:SPS, you cannot use Misplaced Pages to support your statements because Misplaced Pages is a self-published source.” I had attributed the Misplaced Pages the claim that robbery was a violent crime. Now I use the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the Department of Justice, that robbery is a violent crime.

I cite also from a DOJ statment of his parole hearing that he was convicted of using force to commit robbery. This comes from another reliable government site. Now therefore, Oscar Lopez Rivera was convicted of a violent crime. It stands to fact that to state that OLR “ was never convicted of any act of violence” is false.

Also your sources do not represent WP:RS . Your sources are not reliable. They violate WP:NPOV. The CNN source do not state what you claim. Your citations include:

• Primera Hora article about a protest for ORL’s liberty
• A “Free OLR site”
• A “National Boricua Human Rights Network” site
• An article about “Brooklyn Group Rallies for Release of Puerto Rican Political Prisoner”

The information in these articles is obtained from groups seeking OLR's release.

• The CNN article you cite does not state that ORL was not violent, only that Clinton said that they were not convicted of causing bodily harm. That is different from violence.

I have followed your rules and used a reliable source to state that OLR committed robbery and that robbery is a violent crime. This is not research, this is now fact. If you revert the comment then we need to have other editors involved. In order to prove the above statement wrong, you would have to find a source more reliable that the US Department of Justice that states that OLR was not convicted of robbery and that defines robbery as a non-violent crime in the United States.Rococo1700 (talk) 03:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• You need to reach WP:CONSENSUS for what you are trying to do. So far, you have none. I will concede on your "Don" skirmish. As for the rest, get consensus as many editors have chimmed in on this through the years and the version was stable as it was. Stop reverting to your own preferred version. You are violating WP:DISRUPT. Reverted your edits based on WP:RS, for your removal of sourced text. Your edits are WP:SYN. Mercy11 (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Just READ THE CASE, already

This is really quite simple. There is only ONE way to resolve this, without endless bickering over what "third party" sources state. That is to READ THE CASE ITSELF. Here is the citation:

U.S. v. Oscar Lopez et al., No. 86 CR 513 (N.D. Ill.).

Ironically, some people will call that "original research" and then INSIST on arguing endlessly on the differing (and thus mistaken) views and opinions of other "reliable" sources.

That is cyclical stupidity at best. Just READ THE DAMNED CASE.

By the way...the case states, and OLR was convicted, of seditious conspiracy to overthrow the authority of the United States. Not armed robbery. Sarason (talk) 07:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Just READ THE PAROLE COMMISSION REPORT already

The Parole Commission report is set forth by the United States Department of Justice, the government agency that prosecuted the case US Parole Commission. As I stated before and as it states in this verifiable and reliable source: Lopez, who has been incarcerated for 30 years, was sentenced to 55 years’ imprisonment following his August 11, 1981 conviction for seditious conspiracy, use of force to commit robbery, interstate transportation of firearms and ammunition to aid in the commission of a felony, and interstate transportation of stolen vehicles. The offenses arose out of his role in Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional Puertorriqueña (“FALN”), a Puerto Rican nationalist group whose activities included over 100 bombings in which six (6) people were killed and others maimed.

Setting aside all the other concerns mentioned above, and focusing on this one conviction: use of force to commit robbery, I have clear, unrefutable documentation of a conviction for robbery. Your use of the word cyclical stupidity only reflects your inability to marshal facts in support of your argument. I can also write in Capital letters, and that does not give more credence to my statements. I do not waver in my conclusions. OLR was convicted of a violent crime

I agree that this needs to have outside mediation. Again, the references used to substantiate the statements in the article are not reliable, and they fail to address the simple, straightfoward statements I have set forth:

• OLR was convicted of use of force to commit robbery.
• Use of force to commit robbery is a violent crime.
• OLR was convicted of a violent crime.

I have reliable evidence to the statements above, this is not research. This is fact. Please link to similar facts or more reliable sources that refute the statments above, and then your arguments will carry weight.Rococo1700 (talk) 21:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Mercy11 - WP:OWNERSHIP

Glancing through the history of this article, I'm a little concerned there might be some ownership issues relating to Mercy11's edits on this page. The number of tendentious revisions over the years is a little disturbing. Any uninvolved parties want to comment? I'm not sure what the appropriate venue is to prevent this behavior. NPOV boards? NickCT (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Inviting comments from Wikiproject Criminal Behavior editors about dispute regarding violent crime

Hi all, this is regarding a dispute over the usage of the words violent crime regarding the conviction of Oscar López Rivera. While it has been shown that Oscar López Rivera has been convicted of bank robbery, the dispute is about whether it can be added that he is convicted of violent crimes. As WikiProject Criminal Biography was not added to the talk page of the article, I am doing so, and opening this section to invite comments from editors of this project. Please be brief and concise in your comments and refrain from personal attacks -Wikishagnik (talk) 03:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Nationality field in the infobox

Corrected entry in this field. Per definition, Nationality and Citizenship have different meanings. Mercy11 (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Nationality entry should reflect facts. Puerto Rican Citizenship is a controversial denomination. Certainly there is zero, I mean zero, acceptance to OLR having Puerto Rican citizenship except in his own mind, and that of Mercy11. He was living in United States, as an American Citizen, when he was convicted of the violent crimes including using of force to commit robbery. Clearly it would be a benefit for OLR to claim foreign citizenship, since this might make his conviction questionable, since the embassy of his nationality was not contacted. He would prefer to be known as a prisoner of war, but alas that is not the reality. And you can not use your beliefs and biases to make it so. It is a fanciful whim, with no certain documentation from any government that he has Puerto Rican citizenship. Mercy11, if you alter my editing, this violates Misplaced Pages guidelines, and I will ask that you be banned from editing this entry. You have not provided a shred of evidence that any government has granted OLR Puerto Rican Citizenship. You state above that Nationality and Citizenship have different meanings, but then enter a form of citizenship in the nationality entry. This is not valid. You can not revert entries without basis. If you have a citation that shows a copy of the original certification of OLR prior to his conviction. He can renounce his US citizenship, but until his incarceration is complete, he is considered a US citizen. Rococo1700 (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Controversy elsewhere is no reason for radical changes to this article. Per WP:IBX, I have restored the contents to its previous description. Per WP:TPG. if you think Puerto Rican citizenship is a controversial denomination, you should bring it up at the Puerto Rican citizenship Talk Page, not here. Please make your case on the Puerto Rican citizenship talk page where editors watching that page will see your comments. Mercy11 (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

1. US Parole Commission, statement on denial of Parole in 2011.
2. Beaureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice.

• C-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class Puerto Rico articles
• Low-importance Puerto Rico articles
• C-Class Puerto Rico articles of Low-importance
• Unassessed Crime-related articles
• Unknown-importance Crime-related articles
• WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles