Talk:David Zayas/Archive 1

Archive 1

Latino

Do people think he looks latino, because when I first saw him on Oz i thought he looked more italian and wasn't sure wether he was meant to be an italian or latino inmate. TeePee-20.7 11:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• he have a hamitic face of northern africa.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.114.198.75 (talk) 15:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

cockshots

Would a count on the # of times his cock is shown in Oz be appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.74.63 (talk) 06:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Puerto Rican-American

First of all, Puerto Rico is not an incorporated part of the U.S. (hence, it is not even part of the U.S.). Island residents do not pay federal taxes nor vote in federal elections. Please read up on the topic before making a statement that Puerto Rico is "part" of the U.S.

Second, Puerto Ricans are a distinct cultural group in the U.S. If you click on the Puerto Rican-American link you see you will be forwarded to the article "Puerto Ricans in the United States". American is a common nationality, but not every American is of the same race or culture. Mr. Zayas is a Puerto Rican-American. He will not fit in with the cast of "Jersey Shore" nor have an affinity with Al Sharpton. Please read the article to understand this. Further vandalism will lead to administrative action. Removing Mr. Zayas's ancestry is not only racist and ignorant, it is disrepectful.--XLR8TION (talk) 06:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:: "Vandal". Is that what we call someone who makes an edit we don't like, now? "Ignorance and stubbornness". "Refused to see reason." Is that what we call it when someone disagrees with us, now? Threatning administrative action. You actually accused me of being a racist, on my own wall in fact, simply because I disagreed with you. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. JackFloridian (talk) 20:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Protected

This article is protected from war editing as requested. As stated above, editors should refrain from removing the fact that Mr. Zayas is a "Puerto Rican". The issue should be discussed in this page. Thank you. Tony the Marine (talk) 19:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The war editing between the parties involved evolves around the following sentences: "David Zayas (born 31 December 1969) is a Puerto Rican-American theatrical, film, and television actor". as to "David Zayas (born 31 December 1969) is an American theatrical, film, and television actor."

As I see it:

• 1. The term "American" would be understood as being born in the mainland USA.

• 2. The term "Puerto Rican-American" would be understood as being born in the mainland USA of Puerto Rican descent.

• 3. The term "Puerto Rican" would be understood as being born in Puerto Rico, as in "David Zayas (born 31 December 1969) is a Puerto Rican theatrical, film, and television actor." (Let's remember that there is a "Puerto Rican citizenship" to begin with).

Therefore, let's stop the nonsense. What is it going to be, #1, #2 or what it should be #3? Tony the Marine (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Puerto Ricans, even those with "Puerto Rican citizenship" are American citizens. They are Americans born in Puerto Rico. I checked the pages of three random black Americans (Avery Brooks, Morgan Freeman, and Al Sharpton), and they are not described as African-American. I checked the pages of three random caucasian Americans (Michael Bay, Roger Ebert, James Blish), and they are not described as Caucasian-American. They are simply Americans. That accusation of "racist ignorance" (as an aside, can one be racist and ignorant about one's own ethnic group?) cuts both ways: treating one group differently from others is also racist, and also ignorant. I agree we need to stop the nonsense and figure out one constant descriptive policy.JackFloridian (talk) 21:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

If they were Americans why did the Census forms that were distributed this year show a Puerto Rican checkbox in Hispanic Ethnicity origin (section 5: http://www.census.gov/schools/pdf/2010form_info.pdf).

Because that is an ethnic identity. It does not change the fact that they are American citizens.JackFloridian (talk) 00:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

If you are telling me that Al Sharpton and David Zayas are the same race and ethnicity you are truly ignorant. Furthermore, there is Puerto Rican citizenship, which is recognized by the 1952 Commonwealth treaty. The Puerto Rico Department of State has issued thousands of certificates confirming Puerto Rican citizenship to those who qualify.I can proudly say I am one of those lucky recipients. The U.S. Justice Department has not challenged the law, leaving it valid. Read up on your topics before making ignorant comments and edits.--XLR8TION (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Very nice. You continue to make accusations of racism (on my wall, in fact), and call me ignorant, simply because I disagree with you. The personal insults are especially humorous, I must say. Just so you are aware, your "reply" in no way, shape, or form a) refutes my point, nor does it in fact even ADDRESS my point. As I said prior, the fact that "Puerto Rican citizenship" exists DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT EVERY PERSON BORN ON THE ISLAND OF PUERTO RICO IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN BY BIRTH. Perhaps you should read up on your topics before making ignorant comments and edits.JackFloridian (talk) 00:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

*Option 3: Puerto-Rican: OK, lets all cool down. There is no reason to come to insults over a matter of which can be discussed civilly among editors. Such actions are immature and don't help us here expand and improve upon these articles. Both sides here have a point, thus these issues are resolved with a discussion so a consensus can be agreed upon. Tony has taken the first step in providing some definitions to the contentious terms here. But we have to remember that there should be some consistency between articles. So I shall explain my Vote. All Puerto-Ricans are born American Citizens. There are sources which state this. Nowhere in the Manual of Style does it say that citizenship is to be the exclusive way to identify ethnicity. So this does not mean that David Zayas cannot call himself by his ethnicity of Puerto Rican exclusively. I think that to be Puerto Rican is to be American such as Hawaiian and any type of Native American tribe may call themselves (such as Cherokee, Navajo, or Apache). South Americans don't identify themselves as "Sur Americano". It is common knowledge (to us Puerto Ricans) that we will most likely refer to our ethnicity when on the mainland of the US or Abroad as being Puerto Rican when asked. This is the case regardless of birthplace. It is a matter of descendancy. I go further and state that we should be recognized as one of the most recently created Races, but that's another discussion. So, IMO, the threshold for inclusion of the term Puerto Rican exclusively should be descendancy. If a reliable source can be found that states that David Zayas identifies himself as solely "American", then the lead section should be changed. Otherwise, it should stay as Puerto Rican, per Tony's definitions above. Hope this Helps. QuAzGaA 01:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

• A friendly reminder - The terms "African-American", "Italian-American", "Hispanic" and so on are ethnicity's and per Wiki policy are not to be included in the intro of an article. That is why you will not find it in the articles of the three random black Americans (Avery Brooks, Morgan Freeman, and Al Sharpton). "Puerto Rican" is a nationality,not an ethnicity, as well as "American" and even though American citizenship was imposed (They had no say in it) upon Puerto Ricans by way of the Jones Act of 1917, it is the norm, as a common street practice and in the articles, to referrer to a person born in Puerto Rico as Puerto Rican. I would not object to a person born in the mainland USA being referred to as an American of Puerto Rican descent or what ever, since being born in the USA guarantees a permanent citizenship, however those who are born in the island have a congressional approved citizenship which can be revoked. I strongly suggest option #3 as the proper solution. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

"Puerto Rican" is not a nationality, as there is no "nation" of Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is a US territory that is overseen and administered by the United States. Putting the label "Puerto-Rican American" in the first line of a biographical article can only be a statement of ethnicity, which is against policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JackFloridian (talk • contribs) 20:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

• • Great discussion. Allow me, Tony, to throw in a monkey wrench to the argument that birth is determinative. Four of the last five PR Senate Presidents were not born in Puerto Rico. If birth is determinative, then neither Roberto Rexach Benitez, Charlie Rodriguez, Kenneth McClintock nor Thomas Rivera Schatz could be considered "Puerto Rican". Three of them would be Puerto Rican Americans, and one would be Anglo-Puerto Rican? If descendancy is determinative, three would be Puerto Rican-Americans, and one would be Texan-Puerto Rican (if you think Texas ain't a nationality---don't mess with Texas!) or maybe Anglo-Ponceño (as in Ponce, so as to distinguish it from the rest of the parking lot!). Whatever you all decide, I will abide by the consensus reached. Pr4ever (talk) 03:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
• One of the problems resides in that the term "Puerto Rican-American" could be considered as an ethnicity by Wiki standards and that would only leave us with the options of describing the subject in question as either "American" or "Puerto Rican", however I think that another option, and I may be wrong, could be to describe the subject as "Puerto Rican/American". I know that it would be similar to "Puerto Rican-American", but maybe it can be argued that with a "/" we are not indulging into the subjects ethnicity, but into the subjects nationalities. Any thoughts? Tony the Marine (talk) 17:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I WILL GIVE MY OPINION:
Political vs. cultural adjectives
IMO, we first need try to define in what realm we are trying to use the Puerto Rican, American, or Puerto Rican American attribute in this article: Is it in the Political sense, or is it in the Cultural sense? (There is also the Geographic sense -- that is, based on his place of birth -- but that is a subset of both the political and the cultural realms). If in the Political sense, then Zayas is an American despite the fact (or really, because of the fact) that he was born in Puerto Rico, and despite the fact that he was raised in the Puerto Rican cultural heritage. This is so, of course, because PR is not a distinct political unit, but is part of the US. This is also so because Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, and internationally, Puerto Ricans are American citizens before they are Puerto Rican citizens. But in the Cultural sense (that is, ethnically), he is a Puerto Rican for he was, both, born in Puerto Rico to Puerto Rican parents and he was raised in the Puerto Rican heritage (whether this happened or not in PR -- such as it happened in the Bronx with Zayas -- is irrelevant). An instance in which Realm comes into play is this: When we say that people in Puerto Rico are Puerto Ricans but they are also Americans, we are saying that culturally (ethnically) they are Puerto Ricans, and Politically they are Americans.

So, imo, this comes down to, "When we say 'David Zayas (born 31 December 1969) is a/an (FILL ADJECTIVE HERE) theatrical, film, and television actor...', are we trying to describe Zayas' citizenship or are we trying to describe his heritage and culture"? If we are trying to describe his citizenship, then we should say he is an American; if we are trying to describe his heritage then we should say Puerto Rican.

Significance of the Place of Birth
I believe we should be careful when talking about the place/location of birth as a determining factor: We wouldn't call a child born in Puerto Rico of Canadian parents a Puerto Rican, except - maybe - that those parents adopted the Puerto Rican cultural traits and raised the child in Puerto Rico under those traits. So, no, being born in PR by itself is not sufficient to determine whether someone is Puerto Rican or not, but it does get you there 1/3 of the way,,,besides being born in PR, the child still needs to have been raised in PR and raised in the manner that Puerto Ricans raise their children.

The first scenario to come to mind
Let me provide this scenario: When someone tells you over a cup of coffee in his house, or while playing ball at the park, or while shopping at the mall, while socializing at church, or having your hair done at the salon, etc, etc, etc, that such and such person is, say, Polish, what do you immediatedly think of? Do you think of the country of his citizenship or do you think of his culture/heritage/customs, etc? I personally think of heritage, and I believe most anyone also think of heritage. In the same fashion, if we say that "Zayas is an American actor..." do we think of the name of the country that issues his passport or do we think of his culture? If we say, "Zayas is an Puerto Rican actor..." do we think of his heritage or do we think of the country that issued his passport? I think this is important because this is probably what should determine what adjetive goes in the article.

One's own self-identity
Usually a person is himself the determining source of his identity (note that identity belongs in the cultural realm only, never in the political realm) with a certain group (the Americans or the Puerto Ricans). If Zayas has said he is Puerto Rican, then no amount of ink on the paper or keystrokes on the PC will change that to "American". If he hasn't said that himself, and yet he has demonstrated by his actions (i.e., participation in Puerto Rican events, etc) that he identifies himself with Puerto Ricans then he is not American but Puerto Rican. Note also, that most people who say they are Puerto Rican are not necessarily saying "I am not American", but rather, "I am Puerto Rican first and American second".

With that said, when a person says he is Puerto Rican, he is not saying "my passport is issued by Puerto Rico" nor "my citizenship is Puerto Rican." What he is saying is my culture and heritage is Puerto Rican.

The issue of citizenship
Imo, we need to be careful with blanket statements that could lead to articles with indesirable effects. For example, how many readers would like to read that "Luis Munoz Marin was an American politician? This might be the effect if we use his American citizenship to rationalised that Zayas is an American actor. Worse yet, imo, reading that "Pedro Albizu Campos was an American politician..." would strike just about everyone as odd, to say the least.

With that said, if we said that "Zayas is a Puerto Rican actor..." aren't we automaytically impliying he is American? I believe it is generally a given that Puerto Rican citizenship has a domestic jurisdiction, while the American citizenship has a internationally jurisdiction. It is also a given that Puerto Ricans are American citizens. Thus, by saying "Zayas is a Puerto Rican actor", are we not saying Zayas is culturally Puerto Rican and politically American?

Citizenship vs. nationality
Imo, we must be careful to distiguish between citizenship and nationality. Citizenship "lives" in the political realm; and Puerto Ricans are Americans by citizenship, because Puerto Rico is part of the US and because Puerto Ricans were imposed American citizenship in 1917. (When I say "Puerto Rico is part of the US" I mean, of course, in the international sense of being a territory of the US, not in the narrower domestic sense of being an unincoporated territory of the US, in which case it is not a part of the US)

Nationality, however, is more closely aligned with the cultural realm. Whereas for just about every other country in the world, citizenship and nationality mostly converge in the same thing, in the case of PR they do not. In the case of Puerto Rico, the primary citizenship is American. But because the word root of "nationality" is the same as the word root for "nationalism", and because nationalism is related to having the cultural identity of a distinct nation, then, in the case of Puerto Rico, the nationality is Puerto Rican. As an aid, let's keep in mind that Puerto Rican nationality existed before 1898. American citizenship came in 1917. The two are thus entirely distinct in the case of PR.

The US Census
Even the US Census cannot determine if Zayas is Puerto Rican, American, Latino, Hispanic, Puerto Rican American, etc, the whole thing is not in black and white as evidenced by the constant changes by the Census Bureau. That is, there is no consensus as to how ethnic groups should be grouped: Orientals or Asians?, Blacks or African Americans?, Latin Americans or Hispanics?. The US Census itself has had shifts throughout decades in how it wants people to identify themselves. My point is that, again, politically everyone is an American citizen, but culturally is another story.

Internationally famous
I have noticed a phenomenom that occurs when a Puerto Rican (suach as Zayas) gains international fame: he suddenly stops being Puerto Rican (I mean, in the media) and suddenly becomes American. How can that be? This phenonomen, btw, appears most prevalent amongst Hollywood actors than amongst any other groups. Are the Americans trying to claim the famous Puerto Ricans for themselves as their own, while categorically denying infamous Puerto Ricans, such as Ángel Nieves Díaz, the American label? I do not think so.

But in fact, I believe this phenomenon is at the center of the argument/edit war in the current case of David Zayas. I would theorize that what happens is that international readers of Wikipedia would more easily recognize the US, instead of PR, as the country of origin of a Hollywood star that was in fact from Puerto Rico. This is much in the same manner that a Hollywood star born, raised, and residing in New York, would not be called a New York actor but an Amercian actor. In ths same fashion, since PR is a territory of the US, internationally it is the US, and, as such, any such actors merit being labeled Americans rather than Puerto Ricans for the sake of readability by the rest of the world. IMO, this is unfortunate, because it deprives the rest of the world populace to learn about the ongoing debate of the political status of Puerto Rico, so there may in fact be a subtle political motive behind this practice by the American media.

Puerto Rican American
I am of the opinion that the term "Puerto Rican American" should not be used, as it does not objectively define anything but, imo, rather reflects an writer's own ambiguity as to which one should be. If talking about Puerto Ricans who were born and raised in Mainland US, or who were born in PR and then established themselves in the mainland US and developed their career etc in the mainland US, I believe the term Stateside Puerto Rican best describes such group.

I also observe that when someone says "Puerto Rican American" in an article, then, if writing in the political sense, then they are being redundant, because all Puerto Ricans are, politically, Americans. This means that the only rasonable explanation for the use of the term "Puerto Rican American" in an article, is that the editor is writing in the Cultural sense.

Mercy11 (talk) 03:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Puerto Rican citizenship

I live in Puerto Rico and have lived here my whole life. All Puerto Rican citizens, and I mean ALL OF THEM, are granted United States/American citizenship upon birth. Everyone. It is redundant to say that someone is Puerto Rico-American when all Puerto Ricans are American. This whole thread is stupid. Feedback ^☎ 02:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Plain wrong. For example, Juan Mari Brás is a Puerto Rican citizen and not a US citizen. --Againme (talk) 15:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh and by the way Mercy, there is no such thing as Puerto Rican citizenship. Do a little research before writing so ignorantly. Feedback ^☎ 02:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Here is an article on the topic seeing that you're ignorant on the legal case that recognized Puerto Rican citizenship. I have my legal certificate in my possession issued by the island government. To this date the U.S. Justice department has NOT challenged the citizenship law, hence, it is valid.--XLR8TION (talk) 07:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Also this subsection will be rename. Expletives nor ghetto language will be tolerated. Please watch your language when discussing topics on this site.--XLR8TION (talk) 08:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

• • This is not the proper forum for this discussion. This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Zayas article, therefore please take up this discussion elsewhere. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

• Feedback, this is not the place to discuss this stuff, so I am responding to your comments above at this location instead. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 01:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC), and I approve this message.

NPOV check

This article seems a little biased to me. -Roger (talk) 20:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)