Category talk:Former Spanish colonies

Inconsistent Use

The application of this category seems inconsistent. How can "San Francisco, California" "Los Angeles, California" and "California" all be "Former Spanish Colonies"? It is especially inconsistent that this category is part of "Former Countries" Something is wrong here.--Paul 00:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with it, stop being nationalistic and stick to facts. California etc. was part of New Spain for three centuries.. --Ramirez72 10:55 11 May, 2007 (UTC)

You have misunderstood my comment. California was a Spanish colony, but San Francisco and Los Angeles were not. San Francisco and Los Angeles were/are sub divisions of California. It is appropriate for California to be included in the category but, inappropriate to include San Francisco and Los Angeles. --Paul 17:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Paul is correct although San Francisco, and Los Angeles started as missions the whole Southwestern United States plus the Louisiana teritory were part of New Spain. But Brazil and the Portuguese colonies are not here? Since Spain and Portugal had an Iberian Union for over 60 years so Brazil, Portugal, Mozambique, etc. were also Spanish colonies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.80.243 (talk) 02:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

You forgot..

Jamaica —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.0.46 (talk) 23:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)