| Revision as of 20:09, 3 May 2016 edit74.199.72.214 (talk) →Review of Balance - all against Castro all the time, for the Revolution unless you mention Castro← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 04:54, 25 October 2024 edit undoDukeOfDelTaco (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,916 edits →top |
| (39 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|blp=yes|listas=Cruz, Rafael Bienvendio|1= |
|
{{WPBS|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography}} |
|
{{WPBiography|living=yes|listas=Cruz, Rafael Bienvendio|class=C}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=C}} |
|
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Cuba|class=C}} |
|
{{WikiProject Cuba|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=low|TX=yes|TX-importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|HLA=yes|HLA-importance=low|TX=yes|TX-importance=low|UTA=yes|UTA-importance=low}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|algo=old(90d) |
|
|algo=old(90d) |
|
|archive=Talk:Rafael Bienvenido Cruz/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive=Talk:Rafael Cruz/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|counter=1 |
|
|counter=1 |
|
|maxarchivesize=100K |
|
|maxarchivesize=100K |
| Line 15: |
Line 15: |
|
|minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I |age= |units= 30 days}} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
|
|target=/Archive index |
|
|
|mask=/Archive <#> |
|
|
|leading_zeros=0 |
|
|
|indexhere=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Scientist? == |
|
== Cuban Citizenship == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article subject's Cuban citizenship is referenced to several articles that do not, in fact, say that Cruz continues to be a Cuban citizen. They all agree that he was born and grew up in Cuba, that he was at one time a Canadian citizen, and that he is now an American citizen; but none of them state whether or not Cruz retained or renounced his Cuban citizenship at any point. I could not find any sources that confirm this one way or the other. It would not be appropriate to carry out ] to determine whether citizenship rules in Canada or the United States required renunciation of citizenship in another country at the time Cruz obtained them; at the same time, it would also be original research to interpret Cuba's citizenship rules as saying that Cruz is definitely a dual citizen. How best to resolve this? The sources don't support what is said in the article, but there don't seem to be any sources that could truly clarify the situation. Is the hypothetically ongoing Cuban citizenship really that relevant to the article? |
|
He called himself a scientist during some sort of speech and I cam here to see what kind of scientist. But it doesn't say... Does anyone know what he studied at UT? ] (]) 15:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:According to ref #10 R. Cruz received a degree in mathematics, and subsequently worked in IT. ] (]) 15:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
] (]) 22:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Credibility== |
|
== Pastor or not?... == |
|
|
|
Cruz also claims he was an anti-Batista revolutionary, but all the circumstances thoroughly researched fail to find any evidence of that. He could claim he was born on the moon, but it wouldn't belong in the article as fact.] (]) 22:45, 18 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Conditions for the issuance of a student visa in the 1950s included receipt of ongoing financial support and forbade working for wages. The minimum Texas wage at the time was $1.00/hour. It also included fluency in English as a requirement. The notion he could learn English by going to the movies is absurd. ] (]) 10:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
I do not understand why the material which laid out the various sourced statements as to whether or not R. Cruz is the pastor of a congregation was deleted. The information is sourced - to leave one statement or the other in the article without its related obverse gives the impression that the assertion is without controversy and that is not so. To delete one or the other from this article violates ] and is not encyclopedic. Perhaps the material could be more carefully crafted (keeping in mind any ] concerns), but the content should stay in the article in a more-complete fashion. |
|
|
|
:I note that this Misplaced Pages article identifies Cruz as a ]. He's never had any training for such a role. He's never had a congregation. Simply him calling himself a minister, doesn't make him one, any more than calling himself a frog would make him a frog. ] (]) 00:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
:<nowiki>Although some sources state that Cruz is a pastor of a church in Dallas,<ref>{{cite web|last= Jones |first= Russ |title= Christians Need to Be Politically Active Says Father of Sen. Ted Cruz |date= 2015-10-06 |website= Christian Press |location= ] |accessdate= 2016-02-02 |url= http://www.christianpress.com/index.php/us/politics/801-christians-need-to-be-politically-active-says-father-of-sen-ted-cruz |quote= Rafael Cruz, father of US Senator Ted Cruz, pastor of a Dallas church and director of North Texas-based Purifying Fire Ministries, said Christians need to be bold speakers for the truth of God and call upon God's people to be salt and light in the culture.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title= Senator Ted Cruz and Pastor Rafael Cruz |date= 2015-07-18 |
|
|
|website= The Family Leadership Summit |publisher= ] |accessdate= 2016-02-02 |url= https://thefamilyleadershipsummit.org/senator-ted-cruz-and-pastor-rafael-cruz/ |quote= Today Rafael Cruz is a pastor at a church in Dallas}}</ref> other sources say that he is not the pastor of any church.<ref>{{cite web|last= Rose |first= Cindy |title= The Fictitious Life of Rafael Cruz, Part 3: The Pastor Without a Flock |date= 2014-04-08 |website= All Things Democrat |accessdate= 2016-02-02 |url= http://www.allthingsdemocrat.com/2014/04/the-fictitious-life-of-rafael-cruz-part-3-the-pastor-without-a-flock/ |quote= Truth is, Rafael Cruz is not a Pastor anywhere but in his traveling road show.}}</ref> |
|
|
<ref>{{cite web|title= The Rafael Cruz Biographical Ruse |website= Caleb's Report |accessdate= 2016-02-02 |url= http://calebsreport.com/the-rafael-cruz-biographical-ruse-2/ |
|
|
|quote= No church is found listing Rafael Cruz as a pastor.}}</ref></nowiki> |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, ] (]) 00:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I have been unable to find any church listing him as on staff as pastor. He's ordained through the Assemblies of God, but not pastoring, as far as I can see. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 00:09, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::Agreed Winkelvi. R. Cruz does appear to be ordained by an Assembly of God congregation but "pastor" is understood to be someone in charge of a ''group'' of believers, a spiritual overseer of a church (again, a <u>group</u> of believers/Christians), R. Cruz is simply '''not''' the minister/spiritual overseer of a group or of a church or of a congregation. To assert that he is a pastor and then to cite a single possibly biased-source and to ignore the multiple other sources that state the opposite is unencyclopedic. ] (]) 00:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Well, kind of. One can still be considered/referred to as pastor if they pastored in the past. Just as one can be called "Governor" or "Mayor" or "President" or "Judge" -- the title is still valid and used as a form of respect for the individual. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 01:15, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::In this instance I am only referring to the case at hand, my point being that R. Cruz has never been the spiritual leader of a congregation/church, in my opinion the term should not be used to describe him. The best thing to do is to rely on what ] have stated about the man, to lay out both sides of the issue since sources apparently disagree and let readers make up their own minds. ] (]) 02:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::If Cruz refers to himself as a pastor and reliable sources do as well, then that's what we go by. ] is our threshold of inclusion. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 02:39, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Multiple reliable sources state that Cruz is '''not''' a pastor. If the Misplaced Pages article leaves this sourced information out, then the article is, in effect, denying the existence of this verifiable information. ] (]) 02:52, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::::And there are sources that say he is a pastor, referring to him as such. He refers to himself as such. He gives sermons in churches (that's something a pastor does, right?). We can note in a glance that Cruz is not currently pastoring a church, however, if the sources say he is a pastor, then the article should say he is a pastor. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 02:55, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Let me state this plainly. So far as I can tell, and according to the sources I have read/seen, R. Cruz has never pastored a church. Many people give sermons and speeches in churches, but that does not make every speech-giver a pastor. Both statements - Pastor, Not-Pastor - & sources that back those two verifiable viewpoints - should be included in a ] way within the article. ] (]) 04:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Article narrative jumps around chronologically == |
|
|
|
|
|
It would be better written if one section was devoted to chronology - in order - then other sections of apparent interest can follow (religion, politics, etc). Right now it's a mess!] (]) 15:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. its early life then personal life - early life extends to recent comments to son about regrets] (]) 20:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== '']'' allegations == |
|
|
|
|
|
The following comment was offered to support putting negative allegations against Cruz in the article and these negative allegations are being made by the National Enquirer. I have repeated them here for all of the editors of this page to read: |
|
|
:::He is being linked to LHO / Camp street. HE was residing in NOLA at the time, no other credible name has been offered as person seen with LHO on still and motion picture and until such time as he gets a judgement against NAT ENQ my link should remain on the above page |
|
|
|
|
|
:::http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/ted-cruz-scandal-father-jfk-assassination/ |
|
|
|
|
|
:::I am not vandalizing this page, just updating with new credible info. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 05:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:::In the edit summary: ''(adding association with Lee Harvey Oswald as printed by National Enquirer. This credible allegation should remain on Wiki page until Cruz attains judgement against said publisher)'' |
|
|
:::::Let me point out that the comments above do not follow Misplaced Pages rules for a biography of a living person. Allegations like the ones made by the Enquirer must be supported by a reliable source and the Enquirer is not a reliable source. Also, the comments above are clearly wrong about removing challenged negative information from an article. The editors claims, incorrectly, that the Enquirer allegations MUST stay in the article until Pastor Cruz goes into a court and gets a judgement against the Enquirer and then, and only then, can the allegations be removed from Misplaced Pages. Well, that is not even close to what the rules are. Jimbo has made it clear that we err on the side of caution with living people. We don't put in allegations hapharzardly and then wait for court decisions. That is simply not true. I would encourage the editor review: ] and ].--] (]) 16:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:The National Enquirer occasionally reports things that turn out to be true, but that does not mean we treat them as a reliable source. ] (]) 16:26, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:] ] The Washington Post occasionally reports things that turn out to be true as well, but I could point to numerous stories in the "real" press that were / are complete fabrications - Janet Cooke from the WAPO won a Pulitzer for her fabricated story. National Enquirer was nominated for a Pulitzer on the John Edwards story that no one wanted to touch. Therefore, again, I respectfully submit that the NE link to LHO on Cruz page remain. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::That's not going to happen unless you find a better source. The examples you gave are noteworthy because they are contrary to usual practice for both publications. That doesn't change which one is generally considered a good source. ] (]) 21:09, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::: ] The article is notable for appearing in print across nation, the NE has done some diligence on this, can you please suggest or find another acceptable source? ] <small class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 21:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::Allowing insinuations that a living person has something to do with the JFK assassination is the very reason Misplaced Pages has a BLP policy. We are not going to go down that road again without some really good sources. See ]. ] (]) 21:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::] see ]. If the information is true then more reliable sources will quickly cover the story. At that time we can discuss how to add it to the article. Until then I strongly urge that you do <u>not</u> try to re-add it again. Edit warring negative material in a biography can result in an administrative block. ] (]) 16:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: ] Hey, ] ] now covering this story. Credible enough? There exists undisputed photographs of Cruz protesting in favor of ] in Austin (can you please find that photo and add to Cruz page? Not sure how to do it but I can give you link here - http://cdn.havanatimes.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/PadreTed-display-300x215.jpg), Cruz at some point subsequently moves to NOLA and gets hired by Bush front company Zapata Oil. Lets make some news here guys! You cant keep denying that this DESERVES to be on this page, and is being picked up as a story by CREDIBLE news sources. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::::: Can anybody find the Cruz pro-Castro interview in The Daily Texan circa 1959? I am showing link above to the undisputed photo of Cruz @ UT protesting in favor of Castro. Why is this not on his page? As far as credibility goes its coming straight from the horse's mouth. This puts Cruz firmly in the same milieu as LHO / Camp street / Zapata Oil. Instead of threatening to block me about adding what are soon to be totally credible pieces of information, work with me? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 01:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
;Request for page protection |
|
|
The Sacramento Bee story says a ''tabloid'' is making claims, along with counter claims that ''This is another garbage story in a tabloid full of garbage'', and that ''The explosive suggestion that Cruz’s father would have had any affiliation with Oswald is not corroborated in any other way''. This is grossly insufficient sourcing to directly report the claims, and falls well short of covering it as a noteworthy controversy that a Tabloid made such claims. This should not be included in any form until we have more good sources, and if such sources show up we need to discuss ''how'' it would be covered before any edit is made to the article. ] (]) 11:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:: This page looks like a Cruz press kit. It needs to have other information. Is Misplaced Pages just a regurgitation of a person's press kit? Can we quote Cruz from his interview in The Daily Texan and include the photo of him protesting in favor of the Castro regime at UT? Has anyone pulled a FOIA on Cruz? At such time that the FOIA becomes available can we post items for that? BTW McClatchy is the parent company of what was formerly know as Knight-Ridder, again I believe that there are plenty of credible sources for inclusion of some of this info but lets start at the beginning ie inclusion of photos from The Daily Texan as well as excerpts from interview with Cruz] <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:::Adding additional information, based on a reliable sources, is fine, even if it is negative about the article subject. If there is something particularly contentious that you want to add, it should be based on particularly reliable sources. |
|
|
:::If you aren't sure what counts as reliable, see ]. |
|
|
:::I'm not sure what you are getting at with talk of FOIA, but it is not the place of Misplaced Pages to make freedom of information requests. |
|
|
:::] (]) 18:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
{{od}}{{U|Edclass66}}, you wrote above: {{tq|"Lets make some news here guys!"}} You seem to have a very skewed and inaccurate impression of what Misplaced Pages is and is not. Misplaced Pages ]. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 18:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: ] says "if such sources show up we need to discuss how it would be covered" so what say you ], is this a notable news item worthy of being on Cruz press release of a Wiki Bio / WBLP? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 22:51, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::: btw https://en.wikipedia.org/Portal:Current_events Misplaced Pages does cover news, this is news, this is an appropriate forum to discuss these allegations ] <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 22:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::::http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3556745/Ted-Cruz-furiously-denies-latest-claim-tabloid-claims-identified-dad-photo-Lee-Harvey-Oswald.html <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Rafael Cruz Supported Castro - self declared support can be added to WP article] (]) 17:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC) == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meantime, in the early years of his career at UT, he remained a supporter of the Cuban Revolution. He tells me that he gave dozens of lectures about the Revolution to various clubs in Austin. |
|
|
|
|
|
As soon as Cruz returned to Austin, '''he contacted the various groups''' before which he had lectured to ask them for a second audience. Now he talked about the evils of Communism, about the dangers of Castro’s regime, about the betrayal Castro had inflicted upon the Cuban people. |
|
|
|
|
|
The question is who where those various groups, and is it possible that he could have been lead to both support Castro and oppose Castro by different groups and at different time for different purposes. Dis he actively support or oppose Castro while in New Orleans? |
|
|
|
|
|
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/282228/exile-and-revolution-mario-loyola |
|
|
::Nothing needs to be added to the article. It is already in the article. You should actually read the article before you make suggestions. The questions you have about the groups is just speculation and not supported by reliable sources.--] (]) 00:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Back Seat of Car - after getting Visa and Passport stamp to leave == |
|
|
|
|
|
Rafael Cruz’s Cuban saga ends with him hidden in the back seat of his father’s car in late 1957 as they drove along the coast to Havana, where he boarded a ferry and sailed to Miami, before continuing on to Austin. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::When you edited the article you stated that "he was in the bottom of a car", which is not what the NY Times says. Also, this information is undue weight. There is no need to report that he was in the back seat. That does not add anything to the article and it needlessly overly detailed.] (]) 16:52, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
should have said ""he was in the '''bottom''' backseat of a car" - if you are hidden in the backseat I know of no place but the bottom to hide - it is factual and material b/c he got a admitted to UNT, a Visa, and a passport stamp via a bribe, yet he went to the boat hidden in the backseat of a car - meaning that he was still in some sort of danger- your point is taken that I did not quote verbatim the NYT but this portion is material IMO ] (]) 17:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::He wasn't in the bottom of a car. That's a fact. Also, it is irrelevant and unnecessary.--] (]) 17:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
backseat or bottom backseat - I did not mean underneath - anyway the fact that he states he was transported "hidden" in a car by he father, is much more important than that he was transported in a car. It is either in a car, or bike or walking - its that he was hidden that makes it noteworthy. - we can settle on "hidden in the backseat" just like in the NYT article |
|
|
|
|
|
also the fact that he went to an Elementary School by the same name as the town he grew up in - although the section is called early life the elementary school is not noteworthy- where did you find the school anyway? thx ] (]) 18:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::It was in the New York Times article. Also, why do you claim that "he went to a elementary school by the same name as the town he grew up"? If you claim this then you need to provide a reliable source. If there is no reliable source then it did not happen. You are not a reliable source.--] (]) 22:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
OK we agree about the need to remove the Elementary school. done And the verbiage about the back seat was an interview in the NYT article and it is a primary part of the narrative, that he was in some sort of danger when he left. added back done] (]) 00:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
OK ] you put back in the interesting school name, Arturo Echemendia located in the unexpectedly located in his hometown Matanzas - and remove part of story "saga ends with him hidden in the back seat of his father’s car" and leave only "father drove him to a ferry terminal" - so you win we can leave the repetition of his hometown and school name, and just remove the fact that he his father drives a car - unless you can see reason ] (]) 16:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::I haven't won anything. It is not a competition. I removed an edit where an editor, not you, put in that Cruz's daughter died of overdose. I removed it because it is not relevant to Cruz's story. It is not about winning. I removed the information about Cruz laying down in the back seat of the car because it seems to be too much information, but if you believe we absolutely have to have it then we should put it back in. However, I put back in all of the citations that you removed. Now, those citations are helpful to the readers and they are not hurting the article, only helping the article. I do not see any reason to remove them. You have not provided a reason to remove them. No reason. If you have a good reason to remove helpful citations then I would like to hear it but so far you haven't provided one. As for the Elementary school, that information was provided by the New York Times and once again you and me are not reliable sources, but NY Times is.--] (]) 19:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
] Ok, appreciate the olive branch - I had just received Edit ability but lost it and now have to go to source, glad you put the sources back - its hard to edit at source so that reversal is justified and appreciated - look you talk about too much information, and although the name of the elementary school is in the NYT it does not add to the story. The fact that in another NYT article he tells the story that he was in effect, smuggled out of Cube, or transported, not just in a car, as you would want to leave in, but hidden in the back seat, the part you see fit to remove b/c that portion is too much information. So that being said my point is the elementary school is too much information but fact that he was smuggled or hidden in the back of a car is part of the saga. I would like to see you add that. Your stated earlier that the article is fine as is but in fact it needed and still needs updates. Hopefully you can see my point now] (]) 15:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:You said, "It does not add to the story". Well, Misplaced Pages is not a story. It is a point of view (POV) to be created and promoted. We got where the facts and the reliable sources take us. I don't know why you want to remove the name of the school in Cuba but you haven't given a good reason. We can add the fact that he was in the back seat of a car while he exited Cuba.--] (]) 15:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I've been watching this back and forth for a few days. {{U|Redtobelieve}}, one thing you seem to have trouble grasping is that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a magazine article or an online book. We don't tell stories, we provide ] in the midst of ] supported by ]. If something is properly sourced and aids the reader to better understanding the article subject, then it should be included. Not for "story telling" value but for lasting ]. I see you've already received an editing block, and it seems you are still having trouble understanding why we do things here the way we do. Perhaps you should take time to read ] before proceeding further and becoming more frustrated. After you do that, then return to editing. You'll likely have a happier editing experience after doing so. If you still find yourself coming up against brick walls -- whether they be in the form of having your edits reverted or communicating with other editors on talk pages -- I recommend you take your questions and concerns to ]. There, you will find experienced editors ready to help allay your concerns and frustrations and answer your questions kindly and productively. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 16:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== 14 with Castro is false - 17 out of prison is false - Christian Post vs NYT == |
|
|
|
|
|
Within two or three years of the 1952 coup that brought Batista, a former president, back to power, Mr. Cruz says, he was participating in street protests |
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Cruz was one of them, he said in the interview. He had enrolled in September 1956 at the university in Santiago. There, he said, “I became involved with the Castro group.” meaning 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting Fact: Cruz's father, Rafael Cruz, fought in the Cuban Revolution alongside Fidel Castro when he was only 14 years old. When he was 17, he was captured, imprisoned and tortured. After his father got him out of prison. |
|
|
FALSE - he we in fact 18 when he got out of prison the month before he fled to Miami - first in bottom of a Car NYT |
|
|
|
|
|
has both 14 and 17 wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 17:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::The article has been edited to say "teenager". The reliable sources conflict. The word "teenager" gets the point across.--] (]) 17:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
is not a reliable source as it has a simple error in math to calculate age - NYT is better - you removed the line that "he became involved with the Castro group" |
|
|
|
|
|
Then there is the statement that as a teenager he did not know Castro was a Communist - of course he didn't - nobody did - not the US either - he did not declare himself a communist till Dec 1061 when Cruz was 22. He was a revolutionary and had not yet been mugged by reality. This should be considered for removal as nobody is calling Cruz a communist. |
|
|
] (]) 20:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::No, it shouldn't be. All of the information that needs to be presented is presented.--] (]) 22:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Review of Balance - all against Castro all the time, for the Revolution unless you mention Castro == |
|
|
|
|
|
didn't know Castro was a Communist -- he became a harsh critic of Castro -- lectures opposing Castro -- regretful for his early support of Castro |
|
|
|
|
|
VS |
|
|
|
|
|
joined the Cuban revolution -- support of the Revolution -- opposing Castro and the Revolution -- against the new regime in the counter-revolution |
|
|
|
|
|
Request that we allow just one sentence in the beginning that he supported Castro when he started the Univ Santiago at 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
and that we remove the one sentence at the end - "regretful for his early support ... expressed to his son" This would still have a tilt overall against Castro in early life section ] (]) 18:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)] (]) 18:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Why? There is no reason for this.--] (]) 22:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Look ] it is a very small request and I have made so good improvements to this article and corrected some obvious errors or conflict. Didn't know Castro was a communist until perhaps summer of '59 when he returned to Cuba, but still two year before Castro declared he was a communist - the US Gov't still hoped he, Castro was not going Communist - and the line is talking about Ted Cruz anyway - simple that's why |
|
|
|
|
|
2nd removing "regretting support for Castro" is redundant as he was reportedly now giving speeches against Castro. |
|
|
|
|
|
Simply put, he was for the Revolution and its leader Castro - stated as articles state it, straightforward - then the was against Revolution and Castro as he became disillusioned. |
|
|
|
|
|
Now I am starting to wonder, although maybe this is not the place, if Rafel was actually a supporter of Batista. That would explain the 3 days in jail in June '59, then with some outside help, a quick accepted application to UT and US Student Visa a month later and a quick stamp on his passport from Batista to exit the country beginning the journey hidden in a car. It is also amazing that he knew almost no English, yet finished with two hard degrees in 4 years, while taking a short trip back to Cuba while having meager job and assets. Yes he was for Castro, then against Castro, but maybe he and his family were always against him - and he must have had some unspoken resources to draw upon to get out of the country and in a university so quickly. Very interesting, don't you agree?] (]) 00:25, 29 Apri |
|
|
::can we get a tighter timeline on Cruz move to New Orleans? it says he moved to NOLA in his 20's which covers 10 year time frame. i believe he moved to NOLA in 1962 is there any hard info or link to support his move to NOLA in '62? ] |
|
|
:::also - the photo which shows an as of yet unidentified person per the Warren Report standing with Oswald handing out flyers, Cruz fits numerous points of the profile: Cuban who has ties to Cuban expat political goings on in the southwest, has revolutionary cred and maybe some clippings of the Daily Texan he shows to OSwald to cement a working relationship or point of agreement, lives in NOLA at the time, looks like person in photo ... etc. the reason why he has never been ID'd by the Warren Report etc is that he is working for US intelligence and hanging out with LHO prior to the assassination, which would obviously cause a huge PR problem up and down the line ] , ] , ] <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::@]: If you want more information in the article about New Orleans then go out and find reliable sources to support any additions. It is as simple as that. Engaging in speculation on this talk page will not get anything in the article. If there is no reliable source then it did not happen.--] (]) 15:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Then it did not happen? Lol... 1984. ] (]) 20:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC) |
|
The article subject's Cuban citizenship is referenced to several articles that do not, in fact, say that Cruz continues to be a Cuban citizen. They all agree that he was born and grew up in Cuba, that he was at one time a Canadian citizen, and that he is now an American citizen; but none of them state whether or not Cruz retained or renounced his Cuban citizenship at any point. I could not find any sources that confirm this one way or the other. It would not be appropriate to carry out original research to determine whether citizenship rules in Canada or the United States required renunciation of citizenship in another country at the time Cruz obtained them; at the same time, it would also be original research to interpret Cuba's citizenship rules as saying that Cruz is definitely a dual citizen. How best to resolve this? The sources don't support what is said in the article, but there don't seem to be any sources that could truly clarify the situation. Is the hypothetically ongoing Cuban citizenship really that relevant to the article?
Risker (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Cruz also claims he was an anti-Batista revolutionary, but all the circumstances thoroughly researched fail to find any evidence of that. He could claim he was born on the moon, but it wouldn't belong in the article as fact.Activist (talk) 22:45, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Conditions for the issuance of a student visa in the 1950s included receipt of ongoing financial support and forbade working for wages. The minimum Texas wage at the time was $1.00/hour. It also included fluency in English as a requirement. The notion he could learn English by going to the movies is absurd. Activist (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
