text:
Talk:Arnold Mindell

Untitled
If the author of this page finds this, I recommend reading some of the other bio's listed at List of psychologists to get a better feel for what is expected in an article. Also, the Wikipedia:Tutorial|tutorial]], especially page 7. Or since the notability mostly comes from being a published author, some articles from List of authors, or more specifically List_of_non-fiction_authors, or even more specifically List of science writers, such as Mark Epstein or Stephen Pinker. Niteowlneils 03:28, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. A revised version will appear shortly. Diogenes 00:19, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hello. Arnold Mindell reads as though it were copied from elsewhere -- especially the phrase "After writing a series of books on these discoveries (see bibliography)" in an article which has no bibliography. Is Arnold Mindell an original composition? -- User:Diogenes may wish to note that Process Oriented Psychology has been listed on the copyright problems page. Wile E. Heresiarch 17:37, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, you may notice that I merely cleaned up the original, intended to put in a biblio but didn't get around to it yet. And yes, I did copy the Process Oriented Psychology article from Arnold's website, and yes I did have permission. If this is not sufficient I will be happy to write my own article. Please don't build a case for me as a plagiarist and infringer just yet. My intentions are good, just learning the culture. Diogenes 06:43, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Please see my comments concerning copy permission at talk:Arnold Mindell. Permitted or otherwise, it is probably better if you write an original article about Mindell. If Mindell's text is eventually posted, my guess is that it will be heavily modified to conform to WP conventions; you might jump start the process by simply writing an original article. For what it's worth, Wile E. Heresiarch 15:49, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your interest. For the record, if you look at the history of this article, it starts off with Mindell's own article about himself, which I then edited as a favor to him. I agree that it could always be better, and have it on my schedule to re-do it. Diogenes 18:20, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

added numerous citations and so hoping it is okay to remove the notice. more citations on the way but it's almost 2am here. will add more in the morning.Stanfordsiver (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC).

 * no, the article is not OK. It is not an objective encyclopedic biography, but a loosly written tribute in the form of an essay. I have removed the absolutely unacceptable parts. What is now needed is references to published 3rd party sources--normally, this would be reviews of his books.   DGG ( talk ) 04:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

redirect article lacking substantive third-party sourcing
Hi Hrafn, I have noticed your edit to redirect. i would like to put some effort into "improving" adding more third-party sourcing this article reading more guidelines. Your action was appreciated. I am interested in your continued critical review of the article's development. Composter (talk) 22:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

 * You've failed to introduce any substantive third party sourcing (after 3 months), so I've restored the redirect. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

inaccurate implication
Hello! My name is James Stillwell and I am the Director of Administration at the Process Work Institute (PWI) located in Portland Oregon. Since I am affiliated with PWI I will not be adding content here but I do want to provide some factual information about Mindell's involvement with PWI. The sentence below references two separate things, 1. The Process Work Institute 2. Arnold Mindell. I am concerned this gives the reader an inaccurate implication that Mindell was involved in the administration of PWI.

"In 1990, Mindell and colleagues established a center for teaching process oriented psychology in Portland, Oregon, now known as the Process Work Institute, which in 2001 was the subject of a controversial ethics complaint."

I would like to clarify that Arnold Mindell was not a member of the organization, not on the Board of Directors, and had no place in running the school in 2001. Additionally, this article is about Arnold Mindell, and the reference to controversy associated with the Process Work Institute seems out of place here. FYI, there are 26 schools of Process Oriented Psychology around the world.

Could another editor help with ammending this? In essence, I think the reference to the ethics complaint should be deleted and it more properly belongs with an article about the Process Work Institute.

EG: "In 1990, Mindell and colleagues collaborated to establish a center for teaching process oriented psychology in Portland, Oregon, now known as the Process Work Institute.

FYI, the reference is: Singer, J. (1995). Arny and Amy Mindell on Process Oriented Psychology (Interview). The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal, 13(4), 25–40.Jamesstillwell (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Arnold Mindell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224105820/http://www.therapytoday.net/article/15/29/categories/ to http://www.therapytoday.net/article/15/29/categories/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Arnold Mindell


text:
Talk:Y Wladfa

Naming of article
I feel the naming of this article is wrong. It is an interesting article, mainly about Welsh immigration. I therefore suggest moving it to Welsh settlement of Argentina. I have some expansion I want to do on this, including on Trevelin, Malacara, etc. Chubut Valley should either be a redirect to River Chubut or an article about the area around the river. I prefer the former. Mtiedemann 18:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. Though it would be good to do the River Chubut (Chubut River) before we do this, so we don't leave a redirection to a non existing page. -Mariano 11:06, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

"Cwm Hydref" query
The article gives the translation "October Valley". Is this what it actually is? Since "hydref" is also the name for "autumn", and that sounds like it makes more sense, to me.--193.195.185.254 03:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

"Hydref" in Welsh can mean both "October" (usually as "mis Hydref") and "autumn". However the Spanish version of the name uses "Octubre", so I suspect it does refer to the month - the colony in this area was set up on the 16th October. Rhion 16:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Not forgetting, of course, that in Argentina October is in the spring, not the autumn! -- Arwel (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Welsh colonization of the Americas
The name of the article should be Welsh colonization of the Americas. I'll soon change it if nobody cares. --VsA 20:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Bad move. This article is exclusively about the colony in Argentina, specifically in Patagonia. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Welsh settlements elsewhere in the Americas e.g. Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont or indeed all over the US and Canada, apart from which the rename makes the first sentence incorrect "Welsh colonization of the Americas began in the 19th century." - no it didn't, that began in the 17th century. Please move it back. -- Arwel (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree with Arwel - the article is specifically about one colony. Perhaps there is room for a "Welsh colonization of the Americas" article, but this isn't it. Rhion 18:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I thought the same before seeing German colonization of the Americas, it only talks about one colony in Venezuela. And, if the time is a problem, then please see Danish colonization of the Americas, when the colonial empire begins in the 18th century. But the article's name is irrelevant, and I won't start an edit war for this. Cheers. --VsA 20:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * It could be merged with Welsh Tract and become Welsh colonization of the Americas? Robdurbar 22:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Prince Madoc
Even though it's only a legend, shouldn't there be at least a brief mention of Prince Madoc here?--Caliga10 13:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Certainly not. Even if he ever existed, Madoc was never within 5000 miles of Argentina. -- Arwel (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Factual area in area conversion
500,000 acres is not 5,000 km². There are 247.1 acres to a km². I don't know which figure needs fixing. Olborne 10:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not sure which is right - the acres sounds more likely though as it equates better to irrigation along an 80 km stretch. If this means the total fertile cropland of Chubut, it may be the higher figure, given that the River is a lot longer than this 80km length mentioned. Martín (saying/doing) 10:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed the reference to 500,000 acres/5,000 km². It is difficult to know which is right as it is not clear exactly what the figure represents. It can be put back if somebody is able to verify it. Rhion 11:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Gabriel Heinze
Removed the statement about Gabriel Heinze being able to speak Welsh - there's a lot of doubt on Talk:Gabriel Heinze about this, especially as he appears to hail from Entre Rios state which is a looooong way from Chubut! It appears an anon may have put this "fact" in his article in late 2004, then it's been picked up by various football websites and Sky Sports and we've all gone into a feedback loop quoting each other - even the Manchester United site mentions it... -- 01:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I forgot about Hainze being also in this page. Well done. Mariano (t/c) 08:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The title "Welsh" isn't welcomed by many Cymries
Note the term "Welsh" is generally not always a good word to name our people, because some of us "Welsh" people in Wales object to the term in times, was used to offend and insult others in Great Britain (like "to Welsh them up" or "Welshing them") had violent meanings to promote ethnic and regional tensions against the "Welsh". Many of us preferably self-named ourselves Cymry, Cimries or Camries from an earlier source in our language (consult the Wikipedia article on Welsh people). I'm not suggesting do away with the term, but in a political correct world we live in (Wikipedia has focused on what may accidentally offend or disparage groups of people), the terminology of "Welsh" send horrifying mental images of some historic level of prejudice and discrimination against us Cymries for over hundreds of years. The major reason why many Cymries left Wales in the 18th and 19th centuries to North America, Australia and South Africa (even into Northern France, where thousands of older local residents has family in Wales) was to preserve our language and culture. The issue was when the culture was endangered by an approaching British conformity, anything "Welsh" was treated an unfavourable act and legal penalties were inflicted by English authorities for anyone who did "Welsh" cultural behaviours. I knew in the mid 1800s, Wales school houses punished students for openly speaking the language around instructors or teachers, and were rigourously disciplined for doing so. The children set at the corner or by the chalkboard had wore an embarrassing sign "Welsh Not" for English speaking children to observe how "those bad unpatriotic Welsh kids" are having a different culture. The Argentine-Welsh community struggles to preserve their cultural integrity in the year 2006, but the anti-British and nationalist mood during the Falkland Islands war (1982) made several thousand of people from the region emigrate to Canada and/or Chile. I never heard of the Argentine people adopted the term for reasons as a pejorative, but be in mind in part of ethnic sensitivity on the usage of "Welsh".63.3.14.1 14:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you provide any data other than anecdotal to back any of this up? 75.92.153.227 (talk) 19:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Falklands War
Was there a backlash against the Welsh in Argentina during the Falklands war, or were they not viewed as British? Lofty 20:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * They regard themselves as Argentines, not British - as some visitors from Wales found out at the time when they referred to the "Falklands" rather than the "Malvinas".Rhion 23:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I think it was reported that the pilot of the plane which bombed the Welsh Guards on the Sir Galahad was a Hughes... -- Arwel (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Arwel, perhaps you are talking about Augusto Hughes? --190.19.65.18 (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Y Wladfa and Caernarfon
Hi all - I was in Caernarfon a few months ago and I came across a chapel with the following plaque:

"GWLADFA PATAGONIA - Mewn ystafell yn y Capel hwn, yn 1856, y trafodwyd gyntaf yng Nghymru y syniad o Wladfa Gymreig ym Mhatagonia" [plus the date of dedication] ("Patagonian Colony - In a room in this chapel in 1856, the idea of a Welsh colony in Patagonia was first discussed")

I can't see any Caernarfon connection in the article as it stands, so is there something to this? The plaque (I'll upload a photo of it when I can) looks rather official and well kept (it was dedicated nearly forty years ago), so I'm assuming the events in this chapel must have been significant enough. Any thoughts people? Rob Lindsey 01:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Minority?
Would it be more accurate to say that the welsh 'ceased to have an overall majority', or is there another group which is larger than the welsh?IceDragon64 (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Flash floods and not enough rain?
The last paragraph of the first settlers section says that flash floods destroyed all of their crops, and then the next sentence says their crops failed because there wasn't enough rain. How could both be true? Sounds like they had too much rain, not a lack of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.246.217 (talk) 15:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Well, flash floods also occur in barren deserts (see Flash flood), so that's not necessarily a contradiction at all. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Subject
This article was written about the Welsh settlement in the Chabut province of Patagonia, Argentina, known as Y Wladfa. For reasons undiscussed, the article's subject was changed (here) from being about the settlement to (apparently) about the people who settled there. However, the focus of the article remains on the settlement, rather than on the settlers; only the introduction was changed. I propose the introduction be reverted to note the article's focus, and that the article be renamed "Y Wladfa", which is how the Welsh settlement in Argentina is known. Daicaregos (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 23:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Welsh Argentine → Y Wladfa — Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC) This article is about the Welsh settlement in the Chabut province of Patagonia, Argentina, known as Y Wladfa. The article's introduction was changed on 9 July 2010 from being about the settlement to say it was about the people who settled there. However, the focus of the article remains on the settlement, rather than on the settlers; only the introduction was changed. I propose the introduction be reverted to note the article's focus, and that the article be renamed "Y Wladfa", which is how the Welsh settlement in Argentina is known. No response was received to the previous proposal posted here on 17 November 2010. Daicaregos (talk) 14:40, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Support, as proposer. Daicaregos (talk) 14:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Although in general I don't favour using other languages on English wikipedia, the expression "Y Wladfa" is in common use, whilst "Welsh Argentine" is essentially a made-up term, and ambiguous to boot. Deb (talk) 12:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Tentative oppose this title, support move to a different title. I'm the one who reworded the introduction to be about Argentines of Welsh extraction; I did so after the article had been moved from "Welsh settlement in Argentina" to "Welsh Argentine". This was necessary as (1) the move was not followed by any further cleanup (the article title wasn't even changed in the lead), and (2) "Welsh Argentine" is clearly an inappropriate title for an article on a settlement. I support a move away from "Welsh Argentine", but if we want the article to be about the settlement, is there anything wrong with a descriptive title like "Welsh settlement in Argentina", "Welsh settlement in Patagonia", etc.?--Cúchullain t/ c 14:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Whilst I understand the sentiments, I am concious that this is the English Wikipedia and that it is extremely unlikely that most visitors here would know to search for "Y Wladfa" (let alone spell it). I think it is fine on the Wicipedia Cymraeg but I have always taken a general presumption against Welsh names here, not from any linguistic concerns, but simply because of the utility of this site as an encyclopaedia for the English speaking world. Where Ordnance Survey lists Welsh names as equal with English I am happy to use the Welsh name (as I did when creating Ynys Llanddwyn). In this case we don't have  such a neat guide as Ordnance survey. I do agree that the current alternative is poor but I am certain a better title could be found such as The Welsh colony in Patagonia or something similar  Velella  Velella Talk  17:39, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

 * Question: Any data to demonstrate that the proposed name is the WP:COMMONNAME? I did a quick review and the current name, or English variants thereof, are pretty widely used.--Labattblueboy (talk) 18:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have found some. As you probably noticed when you looked at the results of your Google search, no more than half a dozen actually relate to Welsh Argentine. Most are results of Argentine and Welsh appearing in the same text. Among the books that use 'Y Wladfa' are: 1 Land of my fathers: 2000 years of Welsh history, by Gwynfor Evans, 2 Encyclopedia of Canada's peoples, by Paul R. Magocsi, Multicultural History Society of Ontario, 3 A Welsh Song in Patagonia, by William Casnodyn Rhys, 4 Will Britain Survive Beyond 2020?, by David Melding, 5 The Use of Welsh: a contribution to sociolinguistics, by Martin John Ball, 6 The Australian people: an encyclopedia of the nation, its people and their origins, by James Jupp,  7 Mimosa, the life and times of the ship that sailed to Patagonia, by Susan Wilkinson,  8 The Celtic revolution: a study in anti-imperialism, by Peter Berresford Ellis,  9 Language of the land: the Mapuche in Argentina and Chile, by Leslie Ray,  10 Britain and Latin America: a changing relationship, by V. Bulmer-Thomas, Royal Institute of International Affairs,  Rough guide to Wales, by Mike Parker, Paul Whitfield, 12 Celtic dawn: the dream of Celtic unity, by Peter Berresford Ellis, 13 Connections: Liverpool Global Gateway, by Arabella McIntyre-Brown, Guy Woodland, Fiona Shaw, 14 Conserves: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases by Inc Icon Group International. It still makes the news occassionally: The Independent,   The Western Mail. The National Archives confirm the Welsh colony in Patagonia, Argentina is called Y Wladfa. The National Library of Wales have these: 'Framed Address presented to the Reverend D. D. Walters by The Union of Free Churches, Y Wladfa, on his departure for Wales', 'Twenty five post cards of various views of the Wladfa', and 'Electronic copies made at NLW from photographs of the Welsh community in Y Wladfa, Argentina, …' The Welsh Assembly Government call the settlement Y Wladfa. And, by the way, the people who live in Y Wladfa are Welsh Argentinians and not Welsh Argentines. Daicaregos (talk) 23:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Comment Move proposal sounds sensible, but "Argentine" is the correct word. The Celestial City (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

 * The topic of the current article is the History of Welsh settlement in Argentina. —   AjaxSmack   18:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * And the Welsh settlement in Argentina is known as Y Wladfa. I'm not convinced the topic is the settlement's history. Its history may comprise the article's current content, but it is not its topic. The settlement is extant, and there is every likelihood that the article will be expanded to include more information on the current settlement. Just as a by the way, several of Wikipedia's other language projects call their articles 'Y Wladfa'. Daicaregos (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

 * As I said above, I'm the one who rewrote the intro, but I did so only to cleanup after a move from the original title of Welsh settlement in Argentina. When the page was moved to Welsh Argentine, the article title wasn't changed in the intro, and no other changes were. I think the article should definitely be moved and refocused on the settlement, but I think a descriptive title like "Welsh settlement in Argentina" or "Welsh settlement in Patagonia" may be preferable. Looking around, I think that all taken together, descriptive names like that may be the most common way of referring to the settlement in English-language sources. For instance here the National Library of Wales refers to it as "The Welsh settlement in Patagonia". Glyn Williams' book on the settlement is titled "The Welsh in Patagonia". John T. Koch's Celtic Culture encyclopedia barely mentions either Wladfa or Gwladfa (and generally only within citations to other works), though it has substantial sections on both Welsh emigration and Patagonia. Again, though, I do support a move to focus the article on the settlement rather than "Welsh Argentines".--Cúchullain t/ c 15:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

 * The examples shown above of its use in English are not unique. (see here) Although some authors seem to prefer to use 'Gwladfa' to 'Y Wladfa', among them John T Koch (see Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia, R. Bryn Williams Gwladfa Patagonia: the Welsh colony in Patagonia, 1865-1965 and Will Kaufman, Jérôme Elie Britain and the Americas : culture, politics, and history : a multidisciplinary encyclopedia), 'Gwladfa' is a more generic settlement rather than the specific settlement in South America (see: in general or, in particular: Anne Kelly Knowles Calvinists incorporated: Welsh immigrants on Ohio's industrial frontier) In his work The search for Beulah Land: the Welsh and the Atlantic Revolution, Gwyn A. Williams says: "And from the 1860s, there was a serious attempt to create a Gwladfa in Patagonia in the Argentine ... So successful was it that the very word Gwladfa acquired a precise geographical location." (i.e. Patagonia), The Cambrian, volume 18 1898 says, "Wales over the sea. or the Welsh Colony in Patagonia, is called Gwlad- fa." Even The Spectator magazine, (who are not exactly renouned for their love of things Welsh) said (volume 244 part 1 1980) "In particular, there was the passion for a 'Gwladfa', a national home, a Zion in the wilderness for the Welsh-speaking, … In the end, the only Gwladfa to survive was in the remote wastes of the Chubut valley in Patagonia" In summary, it is shown that 'Y Wladfa' is the WP:COMMONNAME in English. As was shown above, 'Y Wladfa' is used in books, magazines, newspapers, the Welsh Assembly Government, etc., etc.,. Its use is summed up well (here) "A new scheme to strengthen the link between Wales and Patagonia is to start in the new year. This document refers to the areas were the Welsh settled as 'Y Wladfa', rather than Patagonia as the latter refers to a huge area of Argentina and also encompasses much of southern Chile." Daicaregos (talk) 11:00, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Nearly all of the sources quoted are the Welsh talking about the Welsh (albeit in English). Both the Knowles example and Knowles and Elie are interesting as they both use the word Gwladfa in italics as an obvious acknowledgement that they are quoting from the Welsh. There is a strong temptation living in Wales (as I have done for more than 40 years) to accept the views espoused locally, even amongst the political, artistic, literary and historical experts, doyens and academics, that the local view that will have resonance with the much wider English speaking audience of this encyclopaedia. I believe, and believe strongly, that they will not. I do not believe that the references quoted do establish Gwladfa or its mutated form satisfy the requirements as English language common names.  Velella  Velella Talk  12:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Who else is going to talk most about (or read about) the Welsh in Patagonia? Well surprisingly, John T. Koch (who is American), for one. His Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia uses 'Gwladfa'. These are some of the encyclopedias to use 'Y Wladfa': 1 Encyclopedia of Canada's peoples, edited by Paul R. Magocsi, 2 The Australian people: an encyclopedia of the nation, its people and their origins, by James Jupp, 3 Britain and the Americas : culture, politics, and history : a multidisciplinary encyclopedia by Will Kaufman, Jérôme Elie, and of course 4 The Welsh Academy encyclopaedia of Wales, John Davies, Nigel Jenkins and Menna Baines. Although Welsh (which apparently shameful nationality disqualifies his work from being a reliable source), the AM David Meldingis a Tory, yet he still uses 'Y Wladfa' in his Will Britain Survive Beyond 2020?. These books don't seem to be the Welsh talking to the Welsh: Leslie Ray Language of the land: the Mapuche in Argentina and Chile, Royal Institute of International Affairs Britain and Latin America: a changing relationship, by V. Bulmer-Thomas, Carl Bridge and Kent Fedorowich's The British world: diaspora, culture, and identity, Rough guide to Wales, by Mike Parker, Paul Whitfield, Arabella McIntyre-Brown, Guy Woodland and Fiona Shaw's Connections: Liverpool Global Gateway, Inc Icon Group International's Conserves: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases. The London (English speaking) media use the phrase: The Independent, The Telegraph, The Spectator magazine, (as above). And finally, if it's good enough for John Davies (Wales' formost historian) to use 'Y Wladfa', it should be good enough for Wikipedia. Daicaregos (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Where suddenly has 'shameful nationality raised its head. To whom is this comment applied? It is wholly improper to draw inferences from no evidence whatsoever. My clear point is that the vast majority of the English speaking world will have no knowledge of the Welsh and the Welsh language. as this is the English Wikipedia, my proposal is that we choose a title that is likely to reflect the experience and expectation of the great majority of Englsih speaking Wikipedia users. If the phrase shameful nationality is aimed at my previous edit, then I believe I deserve an explanation ans a full apology.  Velella  Velella Talk 20:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Clearly we can use the term; the question is whether it's really the common name for the subject, enough to be useful as the article title. And there's a difference between a source mentioning the term, and using it extensively. Koch's encylopedia merely mentions the term "Gwladfa", in the "Wales" section of the article "Emigration and the Celtic Countries"; the article on the settlement itself is under "Patagonia". "Gwladfa" isn't even listed in the index; "Wladfa" directs the reader to "Patagonia". Some of the other links you give appear to be similar. I don't know if it's just a trick of the Google search, but this book on the colony doesn't appear to mention the term. From what I've seen, you're much more likely to find a source discussing the Welsh settlement that doesn't use the term, or that uses it only in passing, than one that uses it preferentially.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:13, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I think Dai's point is well made, "Wladfa" is certainly used in English. But I still think it is easier to find sources that don't use it (or Gwladfa), or that do so only in passing, but say something like "the Welsh settlement in Patagonia" or "the Welsh in Argentina", etc. "Welsh+Argentina" returned 24,000 hits on Google Books. Nearly all the ones I checked discuss the settlement. By contrast "Wladfa" returned a little over 1,000 hits. As such I think our readers would be better served by locating the same information under a descriptive title. Obviously Wladfa and Gwladfa should be redirects and discussed in the text.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I am re-inserting the comments I made earlier, but were deleted here. Daicaregos (talk) 21:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:NAME says article titles are based on what English-language reliable sources call the subject of the article. Clearly, 'Y Wladfa' is one of those. The other, principal criteria include: Recognizability – that the article is indeed about that topic. Tick. Naturalness – titles are expected to use names and terms that readers are most likely to look for in order to find the article (and to which editors will most naturally link from other articles). Take a look at related articles; 'Y Wladfa' fits naturally as a link. Precision – titles are expected to be precise. Tick, other suggested titles fail precise. Conciseness – shorter titles are generally preferred to longer ones. Tick. Consistency – titles which follow the same pattern as those of similar articles are generally preferred. N/A. 'Y Wladfa' is the most suitable title for this article. Daicaregos (talk) 19:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the issue is "recognizability" and "naturalness". From what I have seen, I don't think most readers, even those familiar with the settlement, are necessarily going to be familiar with the term, and therefore I don't think it will be natural for them to search for it. "Welsh settlement in Argentina/Patagonia", on the other hand, is recognizable to anyone, and a natural search term for the interested.--Cúchullain t/ c 22:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:NAME says one important aspect of "recognizability" is the use of common English names as used in reliable sources on the subject. I have provided many reliable sources that use 'Y Wladfa' as  a common English name. As for "naturalness", are you unfamiliar with the term? John Davies seems to be familiar with the subject, and uses the term. Daicaregos (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand that there are a lot of English-language sources about the Welsh in Argentina that use the term, and thank you for presenting those. But there appear to be even more that don't use it at all, or do so only in passing, or in citing someone else, etc. That's why I think a descriptive title would be more recognizable and a more likely search term. But this is hardly the first time well-meaning editors have disagreed. At any rate I've said my piece, and I'll be happy with whatever happens so long as the page is moved to focus on the settlement rather than the "Welsh Argentines". --Cúchullain t/ c 00:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Flag of the Chubut Welsh
During my adolescence I visited the Welsh colonies in Chubut and one day a flag caught my attention while I was passing by a house. It had a blue background with a red dragon facing left on it and since it seemed similar to the flag of Wales it left me somewhat curious. Years later I come across the same emblem, this time on Flags of the World, and as I am looking at it for the first time in a very long time a suggestion occurs to me: I think it would nice if the flag was added to the article, ideally along with some information regarding its origin and usage. What do you guys think? --190.19.100.143 (talk) 00:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Y Wladfa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016085052/http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/English/International_Links/Wales_and_the_World/wales_argentina/wales_argentina.aspx to http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/English/International_Links/Wales_and_the_World/wales_argentina/wales_argentina.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070104024938/http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/migration/pages/patagonia.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/migration/pages/patagonia.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426062713/http://www.teithiautango.co.uk/index.php/en_US/home/argentina to http://www.teithiautango.co.uk/index.php/en_US/home/argentina

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:24, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Colony or settlement?
An IP editor has edited the opening phrase to leave text that appears inconsistent. My knowledge of Welsh is very limited, but I think that Wladychfa is a grammatical variant of Wladfa, and it should be translated consistently. If Y Wladfa means 'The Colony' then Y Wladychfa Gymreig presumably means 'The Welsh Colony'. Or should they both be 'settlement'? Verbcatcher (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

The words to " Gwlad Newydd y Cymry (The New Country of the Welsh) " are on the " Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau " wikipedia page : link or copy ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen_Wlad_Fy_Nhadau#Lyrics_2

I have been looking for a video of it being sung - without luck DaiSaw (talk) 19:49, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Welsh-speaking countries and territories
What's the threshold for this Category in terms of percentage speakers? Huw Edwards' 2015 documentary suggested there were Welsh speakers there. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:04, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I see it's up for deletion anyway. So maybe no point discussing. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Images to use in article

I recently found images from 'The Sphere' and used my skillset to restore them as best as I could, I spent a few hours doing this so I'm dumping them here so if I have the time at a later date or if someone else has the time, then you can just utilise this section. Hogyncymru (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Y Wladfa


text:
Talk:Centennial Olympic Park bombing

This needs fixing?
"....down. We will see that they a [4]""

it just ends? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.240.30 (talk) 11:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Securite Mesurs
I removed the following subsection added today because I can't figure out what the author was trying to say. (maybe missing words or perhaps a whole sentence)

 * The IOC tightened security as a result of incident. However, it would not be until the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City when security was very stringent at the Olympics, since they were the first since September 11, 2001.

If you can make this more understandable, add it back. AU Tiger ʃ talk /work 06:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Number killed
Is the number of people killed one or two? The first paragraph says two, but the body and other pieces on Wikipedia about the bombing state only one. 12.36.152.153

 * I made the same mistake myself. I'm not sure why we both missed it, but the article specifically mentions two people. Broadfootp 17:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It's a problem, because some people don't think the cameraman should be included (not just on Wikipedia). I've never actually sat down and addressed it in the article(s). I personally apply the 9/11 rule, i.e. you don't draw the line at the people killed by the crash, or by the fire, or by the smoke, or by the collapse. You would count a firefighter who had a heart attack fighting a fire, so somebody dying doing his job in the middle of a disaster seems to be a victim of the disaster. On the other hand you can just never summarize the total, but then you always have to explain the cameraman with the approximate same text. I prefer to do that in the body of the article. --Dhartung | Talk 20:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

 * What is this 2nd WTC attack rule you speak of? Is this a formal Wiki policy? Seems to me that there is a single death to be counted here.  Unless there's a citation that this heart attack was a result of the bombing (shock, fright, etc.), and not something that had been building up gradually and was going to happen soon one way or another, it's not encyclopedic to attribute that death to this bombing. Alvis 05:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess the reasoning would be more of an emotional connection to the disaster than anything else. After all, anyone at the park that night could be considered a "victim" of the bombing. I myself would draw the line at the person who was actually killed as a direct result of the blast, either by the blast itself or the debris or shockwave. But there is the emotional connection thing too, I suppose. Here in Guam, we had an 8.1 earthquake in 1993. After the quake, someone was driving a friend to the hospital for a non-quake related infirmity, crashed the car, and the friend died (resulting from the infirmity, not the crash). For a time, that person was listed as a "quake fatality". Later on, however, that inaccuracy was corrected. It's all a matter of wanting to be identified with a newsworty item, in some cases.Jlujan69 21:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I actually considered deleting the camera man from the text out-right (but wisely decided to check the talk page first: as an explanation for a common, incorrect, death count, his inclusion is valid). My reasoning would have been that he was neither killed by the bomb, nor "caused to be killed" by the bomb, but died due to his own voluntary physical activity. By analogy, someone who had a fatal heart attack after running to reach his TV to see a news cast concerning the bombing would have an equal right to be included; someone who died due to emotional upset from the same news cast would have a greater right. The camera man's physical proximity is of litte or no relevance.

(In contrast, the above mentioning of including hypothetical firemen could still be justifiable, because their involvement would be a direct and non-negotiable attempt at miminizing the effects of the bomb; the camera man, in contrast, could have chosen not to run, with an effect only on news coverage.) 88.77.135.6 (talk) 14:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The article mentions "The blast claimed 2 lives and injured 111 people, while another person died of a heart attack". This would indicate 2 people died from the bombing and 1 additional person died from a resulting heart attack. Should it be changed to "including a person who died of a heart attack"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.99.164.23 (talk) 04:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Format
I have broken the "investigation" section into two sections because it's very unfair to have an investigation section with two headings -- "Richard Jewell" and "Eric Rudolph" -- when Jewell was cleared. I changed the headings so that the reader will immediately see that there was "the wrong man" and then "the right man." If you think there's a better way to present it, that's fine, but please do not simply revert to "The Investigation" with just the two men's names as sub-sections. Jewell does not deserve that. CoramVobis 04:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

This "cheesecake" Person
Would someone please warn or do the appropriate action to 207.69.18.16? This user has now vandalized the "Reaction" section of this article, particularly references to Bill Clinton, three times now, and three times someone has had to go back and undo it. It's a shame we have such idiots on the web who have nothing better to do with their time, but we do, and need to deal with them. Webmacster87 03:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Any editor can warn a vandal using the standard user talk messages. Start with a good-faith notice and escalate. If you've reached level 3, take the issue to WP:AIV. --Dhartung | Talk 03:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Right-Wing Extremism
"The problem of right-wing extremism"? That is definitely POV, so I am going to remove it. It doesn't even have a cite. Entbark 13:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed: Shaped charge
I have removed the reference to the steel plate being a shaped charge. Shaped charges typically are voids placed within the explosive material itself in order to direct the expansion of gasses within the explosive material itself. Directing the explosion using amother materials isn't typically refered to as a shapped charge.--69.176.17.46 (talk) 01:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

And who is Cleere?
Poooooooor writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.64.13.196 (talk) 00:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Needs more info about the investigation.
One thing I can think of is the battery purchased at Sewell hardware on Dixie Highway in Lake Worth. Rudolph also purchased nails and a small spool of wire there. I wont be adding all that info as I was there at the hardware store the same time as Rudolph was but not all this info was made public. It is just that it seems to me they were not interested in pursuing any info at first that did not tie Jewell to the bombing, until other bombings appeared to be linked. In other words -a botched investigation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.72.164.84 (talk) 19:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Possible copyright infringement
Large portions of the "Richard Jewell" section seems directly cut and paste from this url: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/5577-trial-by-media-the-justice-system-no-one-wants-you-to-know-about — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:4105:3D00:55F3:BD7F:3A97:C919 (talk) 10:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Right, good catch. I redacted and rewrote the material to end the copyright violation. Herostratus (talk) 00:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Centennial Olympic Park bombing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131212162859/http://www2.orlandoweekly.com/util/printready.asp?id=10931 to http://www.orlandoweekly.com/util/printready.asp?id=10931
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fbi.gov/majcases/rudolph/centbom1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:51, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Attendance, Stadium & Events after bombing
Neither this article nor the one on the 1996 Olympics say anything about the effect on attendance or the games. Looking at the calendar it doesn't look like any events were cancelled. Whether or not these were affected, it's relevant. Were people still allowed into the park? What additional security (if any, and I assume there was) was imposed? Ileanadu (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Eric Rudolph (cropped).png

who died
could not find more information on who died. only on who killed and didnt. 179.219.200.183 (talk) 13:53, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

If the Olympic park bombing wasn't a Christian terrorist attack, then 9/11 wasn't an Islamic terrorist attack
There are no less than six reliable sources in Eric Rudolph which definitively peg him as a Christian terrorist. I'm sorry, but to pretend otherwise is to bury ones head in the sand. Groupthink (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Can you present the sources here so we can evaluate their quality and weight? Given that most sources describe this as domestic terrorism, not Christian terrorism it may be a hard case to make for the lead.  However, it might be good content for the body. Springee (talk) 11:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Centennial Olympic Park bombing


text:
General Motors F platform

The F platform, or F-body, was General Motors' rear-wheel drive pony car automobile platform from 1967 until 2002. It was based partially on the GM X platform, which was used for compact applications instead of the sporting intent of the F-Body. The only two vehicles to have been built using the F-Body platform are the Chevrolet Camaro and the Pontiac Firebird. The fourth character in the Vehicle Identification Number for an F-body car is "F" on model year 1985 and up vehicles. Earlier Camaros and Firebirds had differing VIN codes, but are now commonly referred to as F-bodies.

First generation (1967–1969)
The first F-body cars were produced in 1966 for the 1967 model year, as GM's response to the Ford Mustang and later the Mercury Cougar. Originally designed strictly as the platform for the Camaro, Pontiac engineers were given a short amount of time prior to the Camaro's release to produce a version that matched their corporate styling as well. The F-Body was available as both a hardtop coupe and a cloth-top convertible. As was GM policy at the time, Chevrolet and Pontiac both installed their own engines; however, the engine lineups were similar. Both cars could be had with either division's base inline six-cylinder engine, a V8 engine of approximately 5.3 liters (327 cu in for Chevrolet, 326 cu in for Pontiac), or a larger V8 engine of approximately 6.6 liters (396 cu in for Chevrolet, 400 cu in for Pontiac). Due to delays with the design of the second-generation car, the 1969 models were produced longer than usual.

Second generation (1970–1981)
The second generation F-body cars were actually released in February 1970, due to extensive delays in the design and production of the new body style. Both cars grew considerably, with fairly drastic changes in styling to match each brand's updated styling across the lineup. Only Pontiac received engine options in the 7.5 L range in the earlier years of the second generation - (454 cu in for Chevrolet is in technical manuals, but was never produced), 455 cu in for Pontiac. However, this engine option would be discontinued as emissions and fuel-economy restrictions made their production costs prohibitive. Performance continued to decline through 1981, as power levels dropped and weight increased.

Third generation (1982–1992)
The third generation of the F-Body was introduced for 1982, as a major redesign with a more modern look and a lighter, better-handling car. In a move that would later happen across almost all GM models, the Firebird switched from Pontiac-designed engines to the same Chevrolet engines that powered the Camaro. This was also the first generation of F-Body to be available with a four-cylinder, the Iron Duke. The last Firebird to be built with an engine not available in the Camaro was the 1989 Turbo Trans Am, which had a turbocharged 3.8 L Buick V6, derived from the Buick Regal.

Fourth generation (1993–2002)
The fourth and final generation of the F-platform was released in 1993. It was an extensive revision to the third generation car, instead of a clean-sheet design. It was produced until the platform was canceled at the end of the 2002 model year. Unlike most of the prior years, the engine choices were simplified considerably; each year, on both the Camaro and the Firebird, there was only one V6 and one V8 available. For 1993 to 1995, the V6 was the 3.4 L (208 cu in) 60°; 1996–2002 cars received the 3.8L (231 cu in) 3800 Series II V6. 1993–1997 V8 cars shipped with the 5.7L (350 cu in) LT1, while 1998–2002 cars received the 5.7L (346 cu in) LS1. Both engines were available with the 4L60E four-speed automatic transmission. V6 engines with a manual transmission had a five-speed unit; the manual for V8 cars was the T-56 six-speed, manufactured by either Borg-Warner or Tremec. An optional Hurst-supplied shifter was also available on V8 models.

The fifth-generation Camaro was released in 2010 (after a seven-year layoff) as a 2010 model, using the Zeta chassis, with a VIN code of "F". According to GM, and contrary to rumors of a Firebird companion, no accompanying Pontiac model was planned before the discontinuation of the Pontiac brand in 2009. The sixth generation of the Camaro utilizes the GM Alpha platform shared with the Cadillac ATS and CTS.

title: General Motors F platform


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TLAs from AAA to DZZ

Was on VfD before, discussion from then follows. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 00:14, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC) ''moved from main vfd page. Rossami''

 * TLAs from AAA to DZZ, TLAs from EAA to HZZ,TLAs from IAA to LZZ,TLAs from MAA to PZZ,TLAs from QAA to TZZ,TLAs from UAA to XZZ,TLAs from YAA to ZZZ - These list are of little use, and don't belong in an encyclopedia. —Noldoaran (Talk) 19:36, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: Useful. Optim 19:40, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Useless because they dont organize these words they just list them. Bensaccount 20:23, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. These are useful for maintenance purposes, shows what TLAs are in use, makes it easy to get to "nearby" ones. I use these pages pretty regularly, and I think if other people used them more often, they'd be less likely to make hashed-up messes of TLA connections to articles. Stan 20:33, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful. Maroux 20:36, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)
 * Keep. Really useful. Secretlondon 20:55, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless clutter. Everyking 21:05, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Wik 21:13, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Perl 21:29, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia: namespace. Useful for meta purposes. Anthony DiPierro 21:41, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Why? Because I like 'em. IMHO a very good example of something that's appropriate for a Web encyclopedia though not a print encyclopedia. Dpbsmith 01:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, just as useful as List of people by name etc. - SimonP 02:41, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. No case has been made for deletion. Just BTW, these articles represent a great deal of work by some valued contributors. Andrewa 15:10, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - next will be "list of all four-letter abbreviations", "list of all five-letter abbreviations", etc. This isn't a list of real abbreviations but any combination that could ever possibly be an abbreviation. Any reader looking for AAH will search for "AAH" and not "TLAs from AAA to DZZ" - Texture 16:17, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful administration tool. -- Graham  :) 20:59, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Votes or comments below this line
 * Why have you put all these comments about the four-letter acronyms into the VFD for the three-letter acronym pages? —Stormie 06:04, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know why the old discussion on 4 letter abbreviations is here either, but delete the 3 letter ones too. Wikipedia shouldn't be a database for all possible mathematical combinations or anything like that. How many three-letter combinations are possible with our alphabet is encyclopedic info, but I don't think these lists are. Everyking 11:56, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * TLAs: 17,576 with exactly 3 letters ignoring case, 46,656 if you include digits. FLAs: 456,976 and 1,679,616. Aren't you glad you asked? :-) Kenwarren 20:07, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Probably not, considering that he didn't ask for this info. Re-read carefully :-) --Diberri | Talk 21:48, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, interesting and useful. - SimonP 15:38, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Joyous 15:42, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep though maybe move to wikipedia namespace. Also, I've replaced the old discussion above with the actual deletion discussion for these articles (from ). -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 21:42, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks Graham! —Stormie 00:36, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Neutral, although tending towards deletion. Delete. How are these more useful than typing in the desired TLA into the search box? I agree with Everyking, plus I haven't seen any evidence of how these lists are useful (or interesting, for that matter). Also, how could these articles possibly "represent a great deal of work" by anyone (as Andrewa stated above)? A 30-sec Perl script could accomplish this quite easily. --Diberri | Talk 01:21, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cribcage 03:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. - Kenwarren 04:12, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Wikipedia: namespace. Given that the pages survived the previous listing by almost a 3:1 margin, I wonder how legitimate it is to relist them for deletion. -Sean Curtin 06:12, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Wikipedia: namespace. -- The Anome 09:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful. bbx 10:57, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Far more useful and informative than many of the inaccurate and incomplete lists on Wikipedia that are constantly in desperate need of cleanup. I've used these often once I discovered them and keep planning to pull out books with many abbreviations and update them. Jallan 17:30, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have used them as a resource before. Rmhermen 21:29, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. God knows acronyms are the bane of our lives - having a reference to determine what Mr. Smartypants was talking about in trying to impress me never hurts. Denni ☯ 01:13, 2004 Jul 29 (UTC)
 * Keep, clearly. Jgm 03:12, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Dunc_Harris|☺ 13:06, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, I agree with Diberri, char a,b,c; for(a = 'A'; a <= 'Z'; a++) for(b = 'A'; b <= 'Z'; b++) for(c = 'A'; c <= 'Z'; c++) fprintf(fp,"%c%c%c",a,b,c);. Very useless list since TLAs are created all the time, and anyone who wants a TLA lookup will search for it.
 * Keep - David Gerard 12:37, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. For those of you who think searching replaces these, they are also useful for a negative search.  IE, I have invented something or started my own company and want a TLA that isn't being used.  Just look at the red links.The Steve 14:17, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

Results: concensus to keep. DJ Clayworth 16:33, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)


text:
General Motors J platform

The General Motors J platform, or J-body, is an automobile platform that was used by General Motors for compact cars from the 1982 to 2005 model years. The third generation of compact cars designed by GM, the J-body marked the introduction of front-wheel drive for its compact model lines, simultaneously replacing the rear-wheel drive H-body and the European U-body platforms, the latter being a stretched version of the original rear-wheel drive T-body. The J-body was marketed as a world car, with GM brands selling versions of the platform in North America, Europe, Australia, and Japan; in markets outside of North America, the model line was packaged as a mid-size car.

Outside North America, the use of the J platform was phased out after the 1980s in favor of the Opel-based GM2900 platform. In North America, the introduction of the Saturn S-Series would lead to the consolidation of the J-body to the Chevrolet and Pontiac brands.

Following several major revisions, the J platform remained in use into the 21st century; in June 2005, the final example (a Pontiac Sunfire) was produced. Introduced by Saturn for 2003, the GM Delta platform is the fourth generation of compact cars from General Motors.

Background
The design of the J-car began in 1976. Originally, the J-car was only intended for the Chevrolet and Pontiac brands, but soon thereafter Oldsmobile and Buick were added. At the time, GM-controlled divisions in different parts of the world manufactured totally different rear-wheel drive C-segment cars – the Chevrolet Vega in America, the Vauxhall Cavalier/Opel Ascona in Europe, the Holden Torana in Australia and the Isuzu Florian in Japan. It was decided that a common replacement would be developed to eliminate duplication of engineering effort and ensure parts interchangeability – a practice known as badge engineering or platform-sharing. In November 1979, subsequent to the second fuel crisis and only 14 months before the cars introduction, it was decided to create a Cadillac derivative as well. Aside from a hefty price tag, the hastily developed Cimarron had little to distinguish it from the other J-car offerings.

In continental Europe, the car was sold as the Opel Ascona. In Britain, it was known as the Vauxhall Cavalier. Irrespective of badging, European production of the J-body occurred in plants in Germany, Belgium, and Britain. It was generally well received but was narrowly beaten to the European Car of the Year accolade by the Renault 9. The Vauxhall Cavalier version was particularly successful in Britain, where it was the second best selling car in 1984 and 1985 and managed around 800,000 sales across a seven-year production run. At the time, it set new standards for performance and economy in this size of car in Europe; for instance, the 1.6 petrol engined Cavalier for the British market had a top speed of 105 mph, compared to the 101 mph top speed of the 2.0 petrol engined Ford Cortina – its key competitor for a year until the Ford Sierra was launched in 1982. Due to the exterior dimensions, and the engines offered being in compliance with Japanese regulations, the platform was classed in the favorable "compact" designation allowing the Isuzu Aska to compete with other Japanese made products sold in the domestic market at the time. Isuzu also supplied kits for Holden's J-car version, the Camira., whilst correspondingly - Holden manufactured the GM Family II engines installed in J-body cars manufactured worldwide, and also the station wagon bodywork for the Camira was supplied to Vauxhall in the UK for its estate version of the Cavalier II.

The fourth character in the Vehicle Identification Number for a J-body car is "J".

Development
The platform received two major cosmetic redesigns, in 1988 and a more thorough makeover in 1995, along with major powertrain revisions. The 1995 makeover was only sold in North America, as General Motors subsidiaries in other countries had replaced it (mainly with cars based on the GM2900 platform). This makeover had originally been planned for the 1992 model year when work begain in 1988, but General Motors' bad finances forced them to postpone it twice.

A variety of convertible versions were developed as well, from fully official to purely aftermarket. In all cases, final assembly of convertibles was subcontracted by General Motors; in North America by American Sunroof Corporation (ASC); in Brazil by Envemo and Sulam, and in Europe by Keinath and Hammond & Thiede. Hammond & Thiede's version originated with the Karosseriefabrik Voll, which was taken over by H&T in 1985.

Models
Over its 24-year production run, the GM J platform would be sold under 16 different nameplates (five under the Pontiac brand alone). During the 1980s, a version of the J platform would be marketed by every division of General Motors in North America (with the exception of GMC).

Over 5.8 million of the original (pre-1995 facelift) J-cars were sold in North America. Approximately 10,150,000 GM J platform cars were sold across eleven marques on six continents from 1982 through 1997. Consequently, it is the fifth best selling automobile platform in automotive history.

title: General Motors J platform


text:
F-body

F-body may refer to:

 * Chrysler F platform
 * GM F platform

title: F-body


text:
J body

J-body may refer to:

Automobile component sets

 * J body, Chrysler J platform
 * J-body, GM J platform

title: J body


text: Talk:Carlos Menem

title: Talk:Carlos Menem