Talk:Operation Car Wash

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Brazil / Government and laws / History (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Government and Laws of Brazil task force (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the History of Brazil task force (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Crime (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Title Translation

I don't think "Lava Jato" means "Car Wash" in portuguese, but rather any use of a pressure washer (or the washer itself). Maybe "Pressure Wash", "Power Wash" or even "Jet Wash" (Lava - Wash, Jato - Jet) would be better translations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.21.88.6 (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Sources

@Shervinnaimi:, this article seriously needs more references, we can't just publish accusations here with no sources. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Title

@Cambalachero: you renamed Lava Jato to Petrolão. Goole gives twice as many hits for the former than for the latter (15 million vs. 768 thousand). Therefore, I kindly request you to undo the renaming. Thanks. fgnievinski (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 10 March 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: To be Moved to Operation Car Wash. Note: requires admin assistance, which I will request at WP:RMT. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 11:23, 18 March 2016 (UTC)



Operação Lava Jato? – Per WP:ENGLISH, the article title should be the name that is most common in the English language. From my research, "Operação Lava Jato" isn't commonly used in English language sources. There are two, common, recognizable names in English: "Operation Car Wash" [1] (also "Carwash" [2], sometimes using both spellings in the same article [3]) and "Petrobras scandal." [4][5]. I'm slightly leaning towards Operation Car Wash, as the translation of the Portuguese name, but would support any of the suggestions I made. -- Tavix (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Support - "Operation Car Wash" per OP. InsertCleverPhraseHere 05:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Support - "Operation Car Wash" as per usage in http://news.google.com/ fgnievinski (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 14 May 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. There are three supports, one oppose, and one for the alternative Lava Jato. The oppose is somewhat weak, as noted by RGloucester, as most of the sources cited also call it Car Wash. As Jenks said, this would be moved even with a no consensus result, but in fact I think there is just about a consensus to move back to the result of the previous RM anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:24, 24 May 2016 (UTC)



Operation Lava JatoOperation Car Wash – Per this Requested Move, another move of this page should be considered controversial and be discussed before moving it. – -- Tavix (talk) 20:34, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

@Tavix and Dicklyon: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Looking at that previous RM discussion, it seems that the new title "Operation Lava Jato" would have been accepted if it had been considered, since it's more than twice as common in English sources as the one they made up there by literal translation. Let it go. Dicklyon (talk) 21:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Support – I strongly dispute the above claim that "Operation Car Wash" was "made up" in the previous RM. This is a nonsense. "Operation Car Wash" is the common English name for this. One can see its appearance in The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, The New York Times, and even a BBC article dating back to November 2014. This name has existed since the start of the investigation, and it is even more important to mention that none of these articles use the half-translated "Operation Lava Jato" at all. I struggle to understand why this controversial WP:BOLD move is being allowed to stand, given the result of the last RM. If you've got evidence to counter this usage, Mr Lyon, I'd suggest you present it. RGloucester 15:59, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I was looking at search hit counts; but looking again, I see I must have made a mistake. I withdraw my opposition. Dicklyon (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a second look. I've asked for the assistance of Jenks24 in cleaning this up. RGloucester 16:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose Lava Jato is used in the majority of English-language media: BBC, The Guardian, Washington Post and others [6], [7], [8], [9]; The Guardian reports 177 hits of Lava Jato and "car wash" is not even a right translation. Google has less hits [10] for "Operation Car Wash" than [11] for "Operation Lava Jato" while a lot, lot more cover refers to it just as "Lava jato" as in Google News. Frenditor (talk) 18:41, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't matter whether it is a "right translation". It is the translation used by the vast majority of English reliable sources. All of your hits include "car wash" or "carwash" (there are two spellings possible) alongside "lava jato", and none use mixed form "Operation Lava Jato" as opposed to using the Portuguese for "operation". Your searches are not demonstrating anything in support of "lava jato". RGloucester 20:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Let's go with simply Lava Jato (with no operation or operação), as per Google News search results in English (in decreasing order):
  • brazil "lava jato": 57,700 [12]
  • brazil "operação lava jato": 29,000 [13]
  • brazil "carwash" (or "car wash"): 21590 = 4,290 + 17,300 [14] [15]
  • brazil "operation carwash" (or "operation car wash"): 2,049 = 439 + 1,610 [16] [17]
  • brazil "operation lava jato": 374 [18]
fgnievinski (talk) 10:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Support, Don't half translate a title, the sources don't (per RGloucester ), we shouldn't either. I am confused as to why Anthony Appleyard moved this page to "Operation Lava Jato" in the first place, as this was not the decision that was made in the last RM. InsertCleverPhraseHere 22:34, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, actually, very many sources do exactly use that half translation. Google searches seem to disagree as to what's more common. Dicklyon (talk) 04:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
"Many sources" is somewhat of an overstatement, don't you think? The search for the mixed form produces results from a selection of minor publications, whereas "car wash" or "carwash" appear in all of the top-rate publications. A search for "lava jato", as provided above, nearly always shows that most of the results are something like "Operation Car Wash (lava jato), and so the fact that "lava jato" appears in articles that put "car wash" in the primary position is not an indication that we should use "lava jato". Indeed, it tells us that we should not use it. More importantly, the above searches include results in Portuguese, which certainly cannot be accepted here. RGloucester 13:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I was searching for the complete quoted phrase, getting 13700 and 38,600. That's many, though not close to half. Dicklyon (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I see. These two searches seem more in line with what I expected. I don't know why we all get different results sometimes even if we type in the same thing. Regardless, I'd say that this makes "Car Wash" the clear winner. RGloucester 15:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Usually operations name aren't translated, Operation Weserübung for example. Frenditor (talk) 19:49, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Operation names are not translated if English language reliable sources do not translate them. In this case, they do. We base our usage on the preponderance of WP:RS. If RS refer to "Operation Weserübung", so do we. If RS refer to "Operation Car Wash", so do we. We don't invent our own usage per WP:UCN. RGloucester 16:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
It's just you pretending they don't exist. Plenty of occurrences were already showed. Frenditor (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not pretending "they don't exist". All of the searches have shown that "Car Wash" dominates, and should be used per WP:UCN. "Lava Jato" does appear, but usually in parentheses following "Car Wash", or in less reliable sources, not as the common name of the operation in English language. RGloucester 19:22, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Procedural note. Should this RM end as no consensus then the status quo ante title, "Operation Car Wash", should be restored. Jenks24 (talk) 01:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Agreed.fgnievinski (talk) 10:08, 17 May 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Operation_Car_Wash&oldid=790720173"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Operation_Car_Wash
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Talk:Operation Car Wash"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA