Talk:Bajo Nuevo Bank
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bajo Nuevo Bank article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Why did I insert the disputed accuracy-tag?
editWhy did I insert the disputed accuracy-tag?
I inserted the disputed accuracy-tag into this article here because there is only limited online information available about Bajo Nuevo Bank and it seems difficult for me to get clear information on Bajo Nuevo Bank. -- Citylover 12:13, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Really an active US Claim? YES
editThe UNC webpage University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill — The Serranilla Bank (with picture) and Bajo Nuevo are still claimed by the U.S. says:
"The Serranilla Bank and Bajo Nuevo are still claimed by the U.S.; the U.S. Department of State reiterated the American claim in December 2003. All these islands are also claimed by Nicaragua, and Bajo Nuevo, at least, is claimed by Jamaica."
"Reiterated" is linked to here: US Dept of Interior webpage which does not support the statement on UNC's page. Maybe someone can contact the UNC author for more info? FRS 19:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I spoke to a staffer at the Office of Insular Affairs, Department of the Interior over the telephone who confirmed to me that the US does claim sovereignty over Bajo Nuevo Bank and Serranilla Bank. Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Removal of NPOV/Disputed Accuracy
editPer WP:POV Cleanup, I am removing both tags. Lack of information should not imply any inaccuracy, nor should a controversial topic imply any slanted POV. As it reads, the article is informative and neutral. -- Irixman (t) (m) 19:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Lighthouse
edit | NOTE: There is a discussion related to this topic on the USMOI talk page. (November 2009) |
No one knows who runs the lighthouse, or if it's even running? How is this even possible? Doesn't this kind of thing get written down somewhere? ManicParroT 17:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Crossposted from Serranilla Bank talk page:
- Okay, I'm going to take the plunge here. I cleaned this article up (somewhat) from the messy state it was in about a month ago. I've read all the sources cited in the article. In respect to these following new sources, which I will cite in the article shortly, it seems that Colombia's de facto sovereignty here (regardless of law), is indisputable.
- The lighthouse (photos of which can be seen here) has been rebuilt some time during the last decade or so.
- The "replacement of the lighthouse structures" (of both Serranilla's and Bajo Nuevo Bank's), costs and everything, is detailed in this report by the Ministerio de Defensa Nacional. Date: 2008.
- And this report, again by the Defence Ministry, talks about replacing the individual lights themselves--again, costs included.
- I've now edited the article to reflect plainly Colombia's control over the territory. I'm sure this will rile up some sort of argument, but I fail to see how anybody can argue with photographic evidence. Rennell435 (talk) 08:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Claimed by...
edit... Jamaica and Nicaragua according to the IB, but the text seems to imply otherwise. And what about Honduras? Serranilla Bank seems to be in a similar (if not identical) situation. Perhaps we can recast these as "historically claimed by"? 109.255.211.6 (talk) 03:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)