Talk:Trinidad and Tobago/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive: October 6, 2004 – June 5, 2007

History

The article refers to the union between the colonies in 1889, and calls that entity 'Trinidad and Tobago'. I don't have references or dates to back me up, but the union was not initially a union of equals, and the 'and Tobago' was not used officially for long periods of time. Guettarda 17:40, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pitch Lake

How can you describe the Geography of Trinidad and not mention the Pitch Lake?!--TaranRampersad 06:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Question

What is a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago called? A Tobagan? This has always bothered me User:Revmachine21

Officially, Trinidadian or Tobagonian. Unofficially, Trinbagonian, Trini (used for both Trinidadians and Tobagonians). Or, Citizen of Trinidad and Tobago (One of the ironies of official forms in Trinidad - e.g., the forms you fill out when entering or leaving the country, don't have room for Trinidad and Tobago in the "Nationality" section. Guettarda 13:47, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What do you think about adding this info to the article? My thought process isn't unique enough to come up with this question for the first time. The United States page has a gigantic ongoing fight about how to call its citizens. T&T deserves at least as much...

FYR... added citizenry info Revmachine21

I've heard a new way of pronouncing it that has stuck with me since, the way I've heard was "Trini-bagonian". With the 'i' from "Trini" included and not just shortend to "Trin", has anyone else heard it stated this way? I thought that pronounciation certainly is neat from the common one now used "Trin-bagonian" (which has a definant pause in the name), but "Trini-bagonian" almost rolls off the tongue without a pause. It gives both islands two syllables as well "Trin-ne" "Ba-go" + "nian"... I've stuck to this one since. 'an yes I'm part "Trini". CaribDigita 17:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'd say one of the defining characteristics of Trinidadian speech is "less is more". Most people say "Tri'idad", "T'bago"...we're lazy speakers (although Creole grammar adds words, so it probably balances out..."wuyyuhgodo?" has as many syllables as "what would you do [about it]"? (not that they really mean the same thing). "Trinbagonian" (4-5 syllables) is too long - "Trinibagonian" adds another one. It might have a better flow to it...on the other hand, if you drop the "n", you'd have "Tree'bagonian" (which in no longer than "Tri'bagonian"...no, wait, "ee" is longer than "ih". Oh well, have to run to class now. Guettarda 17:27, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Check this out: http://www.scl-online.net//scllanguage_home_en.php?id=4 , especially Part C, Names and Pronunciations. Jsferreira 14:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

North or South America?

Should Trinidad and Tobago be considered part of North America or South America? It seems that at the moment the country is listed in neither continent. I can see either viewpoint--on the one hand, it's considered part of the West Indies, hence grouped together with Central America, hence part of North America...but it's also clearly not that far away from the coast of South America. The country article itself says North America, but I want to be sure. Alfvaen 17:33, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Just to allow for better discussion, if you look at the languages spoken you'll see why there is an association with the English speaking Caribbean and North America. Anglophones identify with anglophones. Spanish speaking countries more readily identify with South America because of the language. This also puts Guyana and Belize into the 'Caribbean' which is thus associated with North America. ;-) --TaranRampersad 08:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

This might be more argumentation for and against constituents of Latin America, Anglo-America, et al. Arguments for this geopolitical dichotomy are varied: references in Wp should allow for possible ambiguity and depend on context. To allow for a possibly neutral point of view: the UN includes Trinidad and Tobago among the countries of the Caribbean (obviously!) which they consider a region of North America (with two other regions); this is also consistent with most atlases and compendiums and despite the proximity and influence of its southerly neighbour. In devising tables and refining content (much POV) for each continent (including for North America), I've defaulted to this categorisation, with explicit provisos for anomalies. And if online prevalence is any indication:

• there's rough parity of mentions of "Trinidad and Tobago" with either "North America" or "South America", but there are more than twice as many hits when searching for ...
• dual instances of "Trinidad" and "North America", which double those of it and "South America"

I hope this helps! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

When the reference to "North America" was added by User:23skidoo, I disagreed with the statement, but it is common usage, as you pointed out, to lump the Caribbean into North America, for want of a better "continental" home. I was unable to find a good definition of a continent that could be useful (after all, Europe is only a continent by convention). Including Curaçao, Aruba, and Bonaire in North America, but leaving Margarita in South America can only be justified in political terms. Guettarda 18:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

There's always borderline cases whenever things are put into boxes, but somehow none of the Caribbean island nations are considered part of South America. (By the way, Margarita does not take you to Isla Margarita off the coast of Venezuela; that link should probably be fixed to point to Isla Margarita or something in the History of Trinidad and Tobago article.) As far as continents go, they often go via tectonic plates and the like, and I know that in previous geological eras there was a definite sea gap between North and South America. But I don't know where the Caribbean fits in. Certainly it would seem that Trinidad & Tobago would be part of the same plate as South America, but it's also part of that whole arc of islands from the Bahamas on down. Maybe you should try to convince the Trinbagonian(?) government to official change its continental affiliation.  :-) Alfvaen 19:00, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

The border between the Caribbean plate (it is its own plate) and the South American plate apparently cuts through the middle of Trinidad. As for membership, most Trinidadians (and Tobagonians, I assume) would sooner see themselves in North America than South America...there are only 7 miles of water between Trinidad and Venezuela, but far more Trinidadians have been to the US and Canada than to Venezuela. "The (Spanish) Main"" has always been a somewhat mysterious and distant place, even though you can see it from western Trinidad.

As for getting the government to do anything - I strongly suspect that I am the wrong person to convince them to do anything (my lack of support for the current PNM government could be guessed easily from my surname)...and in my experience, Patrick Manning (the PM) is far too stubborn to be convinced of anything by anyone. Guettarda 19:17, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I believe at one time the United States regarded Trinidad and Tobago as being "North American"?? Case in point, T&T still has an 'area code' and was a part of the former (809) area code. An "Area Code" is mainly the product of the North American telephone system. Otherwise the Caribbean should have country codes just like Guyana, Mexico or much of the rest of the globe? CaribDigita 04:06, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

From my Talk page, a good analysis of the whole situation - Guettarda 17:06, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The American (USA) POV: The Caribbean is often considered its own world region as distinct and separate from N.A., S.A. and C.A. although some Caribbean states are obviously part of one or the other. Belize is definately C.A and Guyana is definately S.A.

However, from the point of view of The United States of America, the Caribbean has the same Country Code for International Calling and falls within the North America Calling Plan. That is, its country code is "1" and all phone numbers have an "xxx-yyy-zzzz" format where "xxx" is the three-digit "Area Code" --examples; Jamaica: 876, Trindad: 868, ect.-- "yyy" is the three-digit "Local Exchange Code" or city code --example; Mandeville: 962-- and "zzzz" is the "Location Identification Code" --example; 876-962-5555 represents a number in Mandeville, Jamaica. How these are used vary for each set of exchanges. Some areas always require 7-digit dialing while others only require "1+" 7-digit for calls outside of the Local Exchange. Others require 10-digit dialing for all numbers and "1+" 10-digit for those outside the local calling area (which also varies within sets of exchanges and area codes). All require an International Access Number followed by the Country Code, optional Exchange/City Code and "Location Identification Code" --whose format varies in different parts of the world-- to dial outside of the NACP. For this reason, if you use the operator to place an international call from the United States to the Caribbean, you must state that you are calling North America. If not, they will ask you for a country code and when you tell them "1" they will say, "No, the country code for the country you are calling" and if you tell them "876" then they will say that that is an invalid country code.

Also, since the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico are part of the Caribbean, the U.S.A. tends to put all of the Caribbean in N.A. since these two places are USA teritories and, by association, belong to N.America. Who really cares what the USA thinks. They sometimes call their president the leader of the free world.

The Americas POV: On the other hand, the Caribbean is considered a part of the Americas and people have often split the Americas into three distinct parts; North, Central and South, with the Caribbean states being completely excluded from the list of states belonging to any of these regions. For this reason it is often annexed to N.A. since the Greater Antilles lies closest to that area and sometimes to C.A since most of the Caribbean lies withiin the same latitudes as that area and sometimes S.A since the nearest Caribbean island to a mainland is closest to that area or because the Caribbean starts from the Guianas --which is in S.A.-- up through the Windward Islands and Leeward Islands of the Lesser Antilles and finally to the Greater Antilles. Good luck sorting that out.

Iceland and Greenland were both settled by Scandinavian colonists prior to Christopher Columbus and so are considered European or Scandinavian and not part of the Americas.

The Geologic POV: There are three plates involved; the North American plate containing North and Central America and with it, Belize, the S. American plate containing South Americar and with it, Guyana and the Caribbean plate containing all of the West Indies except Bahamas, Bermuda and --technically-- Barbados, which are all in the Atlantic Ocean. This, of course, splits Panama across two continents; N. & S. America.

Greenland is on the N. American plate and Iceland is split betweeen the N. American and Eurasian plates. Iceland therefore shares the same issue as Panama, being on two continents, as the Mid-Atlantic Ridge divides the island.

The Geographic POV: The Americas is actually split into four distinct parts; North, Central and South America and the West Indies --which will include the Bahamas, Barbados and sometimes Bermuda, none of which are in the Caribbean Basin. This also solves the issues of Belize and Guyana which are considered Caribbean --Belize because it lies against the Caribbean Plate and Guyana because it is the homeland of the Caribs-- but not West Indies states since they are not islands (hence, indies).

Again, Greenland and Iceland are not considered part of the Americas and are therefore Eurpoean.

I believe you want the Geographic POV. --Okay Hosein 20:49, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

National Anthem

The national anthem is called Forged From The Love of Liberty here (and in its own article). Anything official I can find only calls it "the national anthem of Trinidad and Tobago" (e.g., National Anthem. I would never have thought to call it anything else until I came here. Is there an authoritiative source for this name? Guettarda 19:59, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Steel pan only instrument developed in the 20th century?

A prior revision of this article stated that the Steel Pan was the only instrument invented in the 20th Century. I can think of at least one counterexample -- the Theremin -- and of course synthesizers in general. So I've taken out that part of the steel pan comment. -- — I. Neschek | talk 18:18, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

from Steelpan: The steelpan is the only acoustic instrument that was invented in the 20th century.

It's widely described as "the only instrument", "only acoustic" is true (as in, non-electronic). Guettarda 18:28, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I can't come up with a counterexample for the revised article, and I appreciate you revising it and putting in the phrase "widely claimed". Thanks much! -- — I. Neschek | talk 18:34, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The steel pan is not (synthetic) it is handmade, nothing attached to create this distinct tone. I know how to make this instrument, want the facts? speak to someone like Boogsie, Ellie, Bertie and others who pioneered in improving this wonderful instrument.Try making a synthesizer out of an OIL DRUM, PS: I ALSO MADE A KEYBOARD SYNNTHESIZER I could not bang on the VCO or CONTROL OSCILLATOR with a hammer to create a sound. Vic

It's one of those phrases you grow up hearing over and over - but of course there was always the counterexample of the synthesiser. As a "true" instrument, as something that produces music through vibrations, I think it's the only totally new type of insrtument. Anyway, someone phrased it well on the steelpan page, but with no expertice of my own I can only honestly say "widely claimed" (at least by us Trinis). I suppose there must be a PhD or two that address that question - when I have the time I suppose I'll have to try and track down some evidence one way or the other. Guettarda 18:59, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Map choice

Since the discussion is going on off-page, I thought it should be copied here. (Guettarda 18:49, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC))

(from User talk:Kelisi)

I like the new map. Thanks for adding it. Guettarda 21:43, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please stop adding these ugly maps. The colors are way too strong. —Cantus…☎ 22:49, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

The colors on your maps are pretty bright. Also, the text on them is pretty small, when they're reduced to the ~300px size that is generally used for illustrations. —wwoods 17:24, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I see no reason for your replacement of perfectly good maps with your amateurish looking ones. Jooler

C'mon - the CIA maps suck. Maybe Kelisi's map isn't perfect, but it's no worse than that old one. Guettarda 18:47, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

To User:Jooler: You made a mistake in your edit summary - don't you mean reverting to uglier map? :) (Never thought we'd make it big time enough to have a revert war. Cool!) Guettarda 19:06, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

To User:Jooler: Can you please refer me to the place in the policy which says that these CIA maps are "house-style"? Also, why is less information better than more information? Thanks. Guettarda 17:06, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This debate continues at Talk: Panama

History of Tobago

I removed the sentance: The changing of hands of the European powers was mainly to keep Tobago free of pirates. I believe this sentance to be both factually inaccurate (piracy thrived because the island was not dominated by any one power, but once it they didn't fight over it because they belived the other to be doing a poor job of suppressing pirates) and not idiomatic English. Guettarda 29 June 2005 20:23 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board

I would like to announce the establishment of the Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board. Anyone with an interest in the Caribbean is welcome to join in. Guettarda 1 July 2005 04:13 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

South America is currently nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. You can support the article with your vote.--Fenice 12:14, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Tourism

An anon removed "although it has declined in the environment after the September 11, 2001 attacks" from the sentance "Tourism is the mainstay of the economy of Tobago, although it has declined in the environment after the September 11, 2001 attacks". While I don't know the trends over the last year, tourism in Tobago declined between 2001 and mid-2004. If it has recovered, the edit is viable, I just don't know if it has or hasn't. In addition, has global tourism recovered from 9-11? Guettarda 16:03, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Removed text

I have removed the following text from the article - while there may be some useful material there, I don't think the tone is appropriate, and there are POV issues. Guettarda 06:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Perspective

Main article: Perspective of Trinidad and Tobago

Trinidad and Tobago has been a regional leader ever since the collapse of the failed Federation of the West Indies. Previously seem as one of three Caribbean influences along with Jamaica and Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago has emerged as an example to follow for the rest of the region. Jamaica's slow growth, and lack of economic progress and Barbados' stunted growth given an over reliance on tourism has gave Trinidad and Tobago the opportunity to spread its influence. Major manufacturing, industry, headquarters, policy, and many other issues are based in Trinidad or have been exported from Trinidad. Its dominance in the region can be seem by its treaty making powers, influence in Caricom, influence in aid-giving, control of regional energy supplies, and growing influence in world politics (re: Venezuela, Cuba, US, EU). The rest of the region looks to the US and EU as though in a 'father/ son' relationship while Trinidad and Tobago has been the first economy to improve that relationship to a mroe businesslike relationship. Progress has been made and a reduction in crime will be all Trinidad and Tobago needs to propel itself well into the 21st century and beyond!

Question #2

Maybe is stupid but... why there are Trini who seems to be named in Asian-style (surname first, like, thinking 'bout football, Stern John or Cornell Glen) and others named in European-style (like Dwight Yorke or Russell Latapy) ? Is it only a coincidence (= Stern and Cornell are really names also if they seems surnames and John and Glen are surnames even if they seems names) ? --necronudist 19:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Firstname Surname is normal usage in TT. The use of surnames as first names in these cases is just a coincidence in these cases (or maybe a perverse sense of humour on the part of their parents). Guettarda 22:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Outside of T&T, how about Elton John, Spencer Tracy or Tatum O'Neal, not to mention Forrest Gump? Elton, Spencer, Tatum and Forrest are all surnames. Many English first names began as surnames, and vice-versa. Glen is originally a surname. Other common examples are Ashley, Austin, Beverley, Bradley, Brandon, Brent, Brett, Bruce, Byron, Calvin, Cameron, Casey, Chanel, Chantal, Clinton, Clive, Cody, Craig, Curtis, Dale, Dana, Dean, Denzel, Desmond, Dexter, Dwight, Errol, Evelyn, Farley, Garth, Gary, Graham, Grant, Hayden, Howard, Jocelyn, Keith, Kelly, Kelvin, Kirk, Lennox, Leslie, Rodney, Russell, Ryan, Sheldon, Shelley, Shirley, Sidney, Stanley, Stewart, Tracy, Trevor, Troy, Vaughan, Wayne. (Others include Ainsley, Alton, Anderson, Arden, Ashton, Audley, Barclay, Carey, Clayton, Dustin, Garfield, Gordon, Keegan, Kendall, Kent, Leigh, Lester, Lindsay, Lloyd, Logan, Lyndon, Reagan, Ross, Scott, Whitney, etc.) Surnames themselves come from a variety of sources, including place names, such as Beverley. Surnames are not universal, and were only adopted in England from the 13th century. Parental motivations might include wanting their children to have unique, distinguishing names (or a combination thereof), rather than two commonly used names. So let's consider these parents trendsetters - fashions come and fashions go. :-D Jsferreira 11:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Perspective link worthy of addition?

I just happened across the Government's link with the information on 'Vision-2020' the so-called action plan for transforming Trinidad and Tobago into a developed nation. Is it worthy of Encyclopaedic mention?

• http://vision2020.info.tt/

CaribDigita 21:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure, why not? —Nightstallion (?) 17:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Economics lifted from CIA Factbook?

It appears that the brief Economics section is cut and paste from the CIA World Factbook. Legally this is not a problem as it is public domain, but it should be referenced. MnJWalker 22:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Alternatively, someone could write their own version if referencing the CIA is not seen as appropriate. MnJWalker 11:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Population estimates

I have removed the population estimate. Prior to release of the 2000 census the CIA Factbook estimate predicted a decline from ~1.3 million to ~1 million. The census showed the population steady ~1.3 million. Assuming that the CIA Factbook once again estimates the population at 1 million, it suggests that the CIA Factbook's population estimates are highly unreliable. Guettarda 01:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Removal of cited information regarding location

User:Guettarda recently removed cited information regarding the geographical location of Trinidad and Tobago -- namely, that it is of the (Lesser) Antilles -- on the grounds that it was poorly worded and it added little. This also appears to be in response to being called to account by me for what can be construed as ... poorly worded commentary.

This is very inappropriate: said verifiable information was absent from this haphazard article beforehand and no attempt was made to copyedit this content. Classy. Until it can be demonstrated why this information should be removed or until compelled otherwise, I will restore it. Cogito ergo sumo 00:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

1. Wikipedia is hypertext, so there's no need to actually explain every little detail that's available across a wikilink.

   This is your opinion -- one which I do no share, particularly given your prior addition of citation tags to corrorborate this information in the 'Lesser Antilles' article, which I have since rectified. This information is no less legitimate than, for example, noting further down in the geography section that the state is North American by virtue of it being in the Caribbean, which possibly doesn't make much sense and is (given the state's location) contestable. As well, explain how it is trivial when, for instance, redundant notations (in two sections) regarding the number of islands in this archipelagic state are not. Cogito ergo sumo 11:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

2. I asked you to clean up horrible writing - you refused, so I removed it. Simple enough. There's no need to include badly written info of marginal value. Guettarda 03:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

   Wrong: you asked and, acknowledging your comments, I made editions. After my comments to you, you single-handedly decided to remove informative (i.e., non-trivial) content. It's your prerogative to 'edit mercilessly', as it is mine; equally, I'm under no obligation to hereafter follow your arguably brusque counsel. Simple enough. Cogito ergo sumo 11:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

3. "Cited content"? Um, no. The link you added doesn't support your assertion. Guettarda 03:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

   Wrong again: the link from the online Columbia Gazetteer of North America (a reputable publication) directly supports the content added (excerpt follows, emphasis added):

   [The] West Indies ... is divided into 3 groups, the Bahamas, the Greater Antilles (Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico), and the Lesser Antilles (Leeward Islands, Windward Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and the isls. off the N coast of Venezuela).

   and I can provide others. This information (though unsourced) is also in the dedicated geography subarticle.

   So, until you start editing in a more collaborative manner, making sense, and conducting yourself civilly (which you really haven't done throughout), I see no reason to relent. Cogito ergo sumo 11:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Latest edits

1. I removed the population estimate from the lead. The latest CSO estimate is for 2002. The UN estimates, while more reliable than the CIA estimates (which have been wildly unreliable) are unsourced and lack methodology. There's no need to place low-reliability info in the lead.

   I added the estimate more for context: it seems odd to only note area/population figures/proportions for Tobago and not for the whole or just Trinidad. Anyhow ... Cogito ergo sumo 20:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

2. Trinidad and Tobago are not the southernmost islands in the Caribbean. See the map at Lesser Antilles. Trinidad is. Tobago is not. Guettarda 11:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

   Noted: actually, I wonder if the Leeward Antilles are further south than any of these islands. In any event, I may yet tweak the content to indicate their 'southerly' (or southeasterly) nature. The wiki markup must be corrected, though, for some content recently edited. Cogito ergo sumo 20:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Why the heck are you once again reverting to your factually inaccurate version? Guettarda 03:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about again -- do you read or even comprehend? I've revised text as above, i.e.:

• removing undue weight placed on Tobago's specifications (and this is an issue)
• the southeasterly location of T & T in the Antilles (not southernmost -- though this is actually noted in Encyclopædia Britannica -- and not just 'southern end' as you insist given the Caribbean's east-west length)
• restoring notation that they are in the West Indies which you removed, again in EB and commonly known)

and, thus, is not false information or mere reverts to prior content; please demonstrate if you can. Perhaps you need to clean out your cache.

What is false, however, is your continuous harping: again, you seem to prefer retaining this article in a predetermined state that meets only with your approval and you seem to have difficulty conducting yourself civilly. Until you edit and discuss constructively, I will edit as needed and will give your comments the consideration that they deserve. Cogito ergo sumo 13:36, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

BTW: before you start insinuating about the quality of content on relevant Wp pages, In memoriam is spelled with an 'a', not a 'u'. :) Cogito ergo sumo 16:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Largest "city"

Granted, the template uses the AE definition of city, and I am trying to figure out how to fix it. But regardless of whether you use the BE or AE definition of "city", it isn't Port of Spain - it's either Chaguanas (AE def, synonymous with "town") or San Fernando (BE def, "town which has been conveyed city status"). Guettarda 14:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you regarding what the largest city is not (Port of Spain) -- remember: some prior edits unwittingly insinuated that information; my apologies.

The template can easily be changed (e.g., to 'Largest locale' or similar) but this (of course) will affect the (majority of) country articles that use the template and would probably be unwise without wider discussion. If the common template is wholly inappropriate for T & T, it can be extruded into the article and changes made to the article as necessary. I do not think it wholly problematic, though perhaps imprecise in this instance, to retain the current information as is; if it is problematic, though, maybe a footnote can be added differentiating between the status of Chaguanas and San Fernando? Cogito ergo sumo 17:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The UK article uses "largest conurbation", but I don't have the patience to figure out what really is going on there, so I asked at the template talk page. No one has said anything yet - if I don't get an explanation I'll try to figure out who modified the UK template. Guettarda 18:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Tada! The diff will reveal the particular entry that allows for specificity in this regard. Enjoy. Cogito ergo sumo 18:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Cool!. Except... the largest conurbation would probably be the East-West Corridor, since it emcompasses much of the north of the island. But that gets difficult to source, etc. "Municipality" might be good, "town" would probably be the best since reflects common usage and can be supported by census figures (coming up with population figured for the East-West Corridor would require (a) that one look at census enumeration districts, and (b) that one make a judgement call as to what to include. So...I'd vote for "town" - keeps it simple and verifiable. Guettarda 19:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Works for me. Cogito ergo sumo 19:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Trinidad and Tobogo

When I clicked on Trinidad and Tobago it said this: SO YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO! WELL BASSICALLY YOU DIE

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinidad_and_Tobago"

What's going on?Can i please find out about Trinidad and Tobago? I want to find out to

I'm from trinidad, have lived there from the time i was eight and moved about a month ago, and i can tell you that this is just a joke that is used among us in response to the crime rate. Trinidad's sometimes a dangerous place, because of the lack of stability in the government, but most of the time it's not senseless slaughter. There have been about 320-380 murders in a yearly count for these past few years, but all of them are because of gangs, brawls, or long-term feuds, maybe an old grudge in a few cases. There is very rarely serial killing or senseless murder, but kidnapping is at a high for the business owners of the island. Rape isn't necessarily common, but it happens.

Don't worry about it. There's a bad side and a good side to the place. I think the good side far overshadows the bad one. The people are warm and friendly, the rainforests are almost untouched in the north and central parts, the culture is strongly upholded, the food is good, and you're bound to have fun at all the clubs, concerts, and fetes. The shopping isn't so bad, either. Locally made furniture and jewelry is high-quality and a lot of their stuff is imported. The natural beauty is sometimes breathtaking to boot.

The person who wrote this probably had their life affected by the bad side more than the good one, and if this is the case then I'm sorry.

But take it from someone whose opinion isn't clouded by anger: Trinidad isn't so bad.

Potential Additoins to People of Trinidad & Tobago

I was going through the chapter dedicated to Trinidadian people, specifically in the areas of television personalities and calypsonians and noticed that some prominent figures were missing. Should there be articles dedicated to the following individuals?

Sugar Aloes (calypsonian)
Winston "Big Brother Dave" Elcock (radio announcer, television presenter and MC)
The Mighty Terror (calypsonian)

I believe these are some of Trinidad's more well-known individuals who should be considered for a Wikipedia article. Does anyone agree? I will list more as I continue researching this. Shinigamisama 22:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to add articles - there are lots of gaps (though Dave Elcock wouldn't be the first gap on my list). BTW - there is an article on the Mighty Terror Guettarda 23:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject

There is now a proposed WikiProject for the Caribbean area, including Trinidad and Tobago, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Caribbean. Interested parties should add their names there so we can determine if there is enough interest to start such a project in earnest. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Arrival Day

I removed this as a public holiday - as far as I can tell this was just a single celebration of the 200th anniversary of Chinese in TT, not a new public holiday. Guettarda 16:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Revert

Just wanted everyone to know I reverted the minor vandalism made by 209.94.214.37. Bjman 14:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Shangos

In Religion - The Shangos is a culte similar to Xango do Nordeste in Brasil and similar tchamba africanes in Brasil Xambá. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.191.101.27 (talk) 09:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC). [1] [2]

Population

I see the population has just increased from 1.3 to 2.5 in the last edit. Is this really true? - Dave Smith 10:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

New Template for "Trini" User talk pages

I've created a user template for "Trini" users: Template:User_Trini. You can click on my profile to see how it's used. Adding this template will automatically add you to the category Trini_Wikipedians - Servant114 00:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3