Talk:Virgin Islands

Organization

As things are currently organized the pages for the BVI and USVI include only the list of links to the standard list of topics about countries, and could now be deleted. Similarly there is a series of orphans for each of these topics as "Virgin Islands/...". They do nothing more than link to the corresponding topics at BVI and USVI. They too could be deleted. It seems to me that by putting all the links on this page we could eliminate two alternate intermediate systems of linkage Eclecticology, Sunday, April 28, 2002

Spanish Virgin Islands?

I have heard Puerto Ricans refer to their eastern islands (main ones being Culebra and Vieques) as being the "Spanish Virgin Islands." Is this a proper term, and if so, should that group be added here? — Eoghanacht ^talk 13:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC),

Because Culebra and Vieques are geologically part of the archipelago, there should be a map that includes them. The current map excludes them on a political basis, but geologically should be included as part of the "archipelago," as the articles for the USVI and the BVI and the "Spanish Virgin Islands" already account for the political divisions. -Laikalynx (talk) 03:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The Capital City of the U.S. Virgin Islands is Charlotte Amalie. Charlotte Amalie. The harbor is also named Charlotte Amalie and is the most popular port in the Caribbean.Valpotim (talk) 03:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It is not right to say that Culebra and Vieques are the Spanish Virgin Islands. They are in fact two of the 78 municipilaties of Puerto Rico and both are led by elected mayors. In fact, Puerto Rico comprises an archipelago that includes the main island of Puerto Rico and a number of smaller islands, the largest of which are Vieques and Culebra. Therefore, these two islands are part of PR and should be included in the Antilles group, Puerto Rico being the smallest of the Greater Antilles, which include Cuba, Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti), and Jamaica. Therefore, there is not such thing as Spanish Virgin Islands.

Last paragraph seems inappropriate for encyclopedia.

Particularly starting from "Read more about this...". And first sentence ("Should not be confused...") - if it is needed - could be made a part of respective paragraph where Britich Virgin Islands are introduced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaborandi (talk • contribs) 11:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

These words have been single words in the English language for a long, long, time

These words have been single words in the English language for a long, long, time:

northeastern, southeasterm, southwesterm, and northwestern,

and this has been recognized by such authorities in the Western Hemisphere as

The Congress of the United States (as early as 1787, if not earlier),

and the Parliament of Canada, nearly a century ago.

The Congress under the Articles of Confederation passed the Northwest Ordinance, establishing the Northwest Territory in 1787.

The Parliament of Canada made this name for part of that country official a long lime ago: the Northwest Territories. That name still exists, even though its original land has been divided between the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. 98.81.9.116 (talk) 00:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Like a Virgin?

Sure, that was a song by Madonna. But I don't think this to be the official name of the islands. If I'm right - remove it. If I am wrong - an explanation is necessary or other people will stumble about this name too. --93.129.84.75 (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand the problem. The islands in this area have been commonly known as the "Virgin Islands" for a long time. The United States has only three virgin islands, St. John (the smallest), St. Thomas and St. Croix. There are others. St. John, at least, was lush, unspoilt, and unexplored. At that time, there was at least one virgin in these islands - me. --Blumrosen (talk) 01:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Freedom and Slave Revolt

Unfortunately, at the moment, I do not have the source material. But, from recollection - having lived there - St. John, USVI, was the site of two events that are not mentioned (yet) in this article:

1. The Arawak or Caribs kept the island and their freedom for almost a century by warring against, and scaring off, Christopher Columbus.

2. The island was turned into a group of plantations, mostly to grow sugar cane. At what is now considered the far end of the island, Coral Bay was the site of the first slave revolt. The slaves were chased to the craggy edge of the island where they dove to their deaths rather than having to live as slaves again.

Of course, this could all be an urban mythic trick of my memory. But, if someone is interested and has time, and these events turn out to be historically true, they could add depth to this article.

Now, all the article says is:

"The Virgin Islands were originally inhabited by the Arawak, Carib, and Cermic, all of whom are thought to have perished during the colonial period due to enslavement, foreign disease, and mass extermination[citation needed] brought by European colonists.

"European colonists later settled here and established sugar plantations, at least one tobacco plantation, and purchased slaves acquired from Africa. The plantations are gone, but the descendants of the slaves remain the bulk of the population, sharing a common African-Caribbean heritage with the rest of the English-speaking Caribbean."

3. The business of the plantations is gone. The plantations live on in the remaining structures and people's minds. Some of the sugar mills and historical stories are preserved as part of the National Park.

--Blumrosen (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Irish slaves were shipped to the islands before Africans The Irish couldn't adapt to the heat and the sun. Slave owners breed the Irish and African slaves the mixed race was called mulattoes. This practice was banned because it was impacting the slave trade. 64.223.237.32 (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

The boundary between the Greater and Lesser Antilles

Can anyone tell me why the very small Virgin Passage is used as the boundary between the Greater and Lesser Antilles instead of the more significant Anegada Passage? In my opinion, Anegada Passage would be a much better choice as all the islands east of this Passage are very small and spreading southerly towards South America. Also, by using Anegada Passage as the boundary, all three parts of the Virgin Islands would be included in the Greater Antilles. Right now, only the Spanish Virgin Islands is considered a part of the Greater Antilles, that's weird. 2001:8003:9008:1301:70BF:5EFB:E84A:9D69 (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Chad???

OK, a user Nikah kadın ile erkek arasında olur (who apparently has never done anything else, added "Chad" to the See Also list here. It looked to me like just a bit of mischief, so I took it out and commented that if someone wants to put it back, someone should explain it. That person DID put it back, with a cryptic comment referencing some "Chad vs Virgin meme."
I had no idea what that meant, so I reverted it again, and posted a mild span warning to this User's talk page. But now, I find that there is such a meme, and Chad has a slang meaning.
OK, but I hold that the See Also link is not appropriate. As to whether it constitutes vandalism (in the form of gratuitous mischief) or an ill-advised but "good faith" edit, I suggest it falls somewhere in between. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Thirty seconds after I posted this, I found that this "user" has responded to standard warning messages on his/her talk page with vulgar personal cheap shots. Time to block, I think. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

"Contributions" from a "reformed" vandal??

One User:Mystic880, who professes on his/her Userpage to be a former vandal looking to mend his/her ways has filled this page with a curious contribution. He/she has replaced the word "Virgin" with "fortnite" (or once with "gamer")--not in every instance, but throughout the article. The User left no note, as far as I've seen, explaining why this is constructive, and not vandalism. Someone reverted the first instance of this, but many remain. I'm leaving it for someone who knows better than I do what to do about it. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:42, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The same user has come in and continued the job. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)