Talk:Welsh settlement in the Americas

New Article
Note that this is a new article, not Welsh settlement in Argentina which was briefly moved to this title. Rhion 20:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense
A not independent state (even that Wales is not) can not colonize! Theory-finding at it's best. Wrong lemma. --Wittkowsky 08:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, this is how it is traditionally described. -- Arwel (talk) 11:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Strike that - I thought you were referring to the article on the settlement in Argentina, which was briefly moved to this location. Yes, I'm not terribly happy about this articles' name, which someone created by analogy with all the other "colonization of the Americas" articles, either. -- Arwel (talk) 11:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * A name change, then? Welsh settlement in the Americas, perhaps?--Cúchullain t/ c 13:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Much better, should be applied to all so-called "Colonisation"-articles. I think, the author was confused by the wrong explation in the beginning of the colonisation-article (that still is waiting to be re-written). Colonisation is a more or less military occupation of an external country, which not necessarily has to be a state at that time, without the consent of its inhabitants (well, there may be no inhabitants at all, but that doesn't matter in this case). What these articles describe is just the settling of foreign immigrants in the Americas and the foundation of their dwellings and quarters. --Wittkowsky 13:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and did it. I left the article in the template though, someone else can remove it if they feel it doesn't fit.--Cúchullain t/ c 17:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Welsh Settlement in Tennessee
Why would anyone remove information on Welsh settlement in Tennessee, yet leave Welsh settlement in Pennsylvania or Argentina? What is the difference here?Drachenfyre (talk) 08:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)