Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales/Archive 2024

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2020 ← Archive 2022 Archive 2023 Archive 2024

Requested move at Talk:Royal corgis#Requested move 4 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Royal corgis#Requested move 4 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Holywell Town F.C.

Template:Holywell Town F.C. has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. EdwardUK (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Guto Puw

Guto Puw has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 07:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Watchlist

Links to the "recent changes" watchlist for articles related to the wikiproject have been added to the sidebar and the Open tasks section of the project page. EdwardUK (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Diolch! DankJae 20:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
@EdwardUK, hi, just made Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Wellbeing, where do I add it? DankJae 20:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I divided the watchlist between four project subpages: Article List, Article Talk List, Other List and Other Talk List ("Other" covers things like categories and templates). The aim is to do full updates from time to time to deal with any changes, though new articles (or those newly tagged by the wikiproject) and their talk pages can be added to the relevant section of these lists. EdwardUK (talk) 20:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I assume you mean the Wales versions of those, will do. DankJae 20:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes - must have cut/pasted the wrong links - have corrected them now EdwardUK (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Missing Welsh Government cabinet posts

Just a notice that I am slowly going through creating the missing Welsh Government cabinet posts. Just published five:

I assume they're notable as their holders are presumed such per WP:NPOLITICIAN, and well wanted to accompany Minister for the Economy (Wales), Minister for Finance (Wales) and Minister for Local Government (Wales). If not notable, open to a list of Welsh Ministers article or something.

Just raising this because I do not know the history of these positions enough and there are a few gaps in the continuity of these posts as I struggled to find sources for exact dates of previous office-holders, so there are a few gaps on the older positions. Plus as not fully knowledgeable of government, I may have made a little mistake here and there, so any corrections would be welcomed.

Yes I am aware, the upcoming new first minister may reshuffle it all again, but I started this before the announcement was made. :/

Blwyddyn Newydd Dda. DankJae 17:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Done all of them, if I missed anything please check! DankJae 02:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Devolution related pages need an update

Proposed further Welsh devolution and Proposed Welsh justice system require an update following recent events and debate which has been covered in the news.

Welsh independence also needs an update following recent news (the neutrality banner has been there for months and I'm not sure why either). Unionism in Wales could perhaps be updated in the same manner.

I've added some pointers to the talk pages of those first three pages.

Thanks Titus Gold (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Cadwaladr and the Welsh Dragon

Note this video stating that the claims the Welsh Dragon being linked to Cadwaladr were a mistake. It minimally mentions such link being present on Wikipedia, although critiques the sources’ sources instead. There may be edits based on this video on articles relating to the dragon, national flag, Cadwaladr, the Tudors and others. Just a heads up should edits based on this already be done or if an editor wishes to accept the video’s argument or actively reject it. DankJae 22:33, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

The Cadwaladr article was already fine. Information that contradicted Cadwaladr was added to Flag of Wales and Welsh Dragon sourced to an MA in Creative Writing that I had already taken issue with before. No prizes as to who added it, and perhaps why (do I detect some POV in the sidelining of Henry VII?) Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
I think the video is mostly fair but seems to make some wrong assumptions about what a source was pointing to. Even the video creator admits to the wrong use of Cadwaldr and the dragon and having done months of research to reach that conclusion. I'm glad it's been assessed. Multiple reliable sources acknowledged the connection between Henry VII and the Red Dragon of Cadwaladr, but no citing of the original source it seems. The MA source I think was just acknowledging the association that Henry VII made rather than Cadwaladr actually using it.
For such ancient history, I think it's wise to avoid any news articles! Thanks for addressing this. Titus Gold (talk) 03:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Funnily enough, I recently realised the lack of evidence whilst editing the Welsh language equivalent. "Gwarchan Maelderw" (poem) seems to be one of the earlier mentions of a red dragon. Titus Gold (talk) 04:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't look like a reliable source to me. Deb (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Rhondda

Rhondda has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Mass implementation of Welsh place-names on other Wikipedias

While the inner workings of other Wikipedias are not impactful on this Wikipedia, as each one operates separately. Just want to raise that after noticing excessive changes at Wikidata, such as removing "Bala Lake" for Llyn Tegid [1], seems one editor is mass-replacing derivatives of the currently used English names with the ("official", in a few cases) Welsh ones at various other (up to 32 ish) Wikipedias. Which depending on the Wikipedia may go against rules they may have in place, similar to what we have as WP:COMMONNAME here. Once again, while we shouldn't try and influence the consensus at other Wikipedias, considering the editor has had issues here, I could not overlook it and seems unlikely an active contributor in most of these 32 other language Wikis aside in place-names.

Nonetheless, just raising this should any discussions be started on English Wikipedia and an argument along the lines of

but other Wikipedias use the Welsh name

is used, which is obviously not enough alone regardless, but providing more context should it be used.

While sympathetic to using Welsh names, including that of Llyn Tegid (I have a personal project on it), one editor changing to Welsh place-names in 32 languages seems questionably good faith, let alone fluent or with local consensus. If any of you have connections to other (aside cy) Wikipedias to either take action, start discussions there, or recognise these edits are acceptable, then please do.

Apologies if this isn't the correct place, but have no idea where. DankJae 18:21, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Good to see TG honouring the spirit of their T-ban, and keeping their rampant POV in check. KJP1 (talk) 18:49, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
I expect it has something to do with the recent decision by the local national park to only use the Welsh language names of lakes in their juristiction. I don't have any knowledge of the rules that govern articles in other language Wikipedias - but unlike the English language Wikipedia, I doubt they need to have a preference for English language titles for their articles. Sionk (talk) 21:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
​So far, quickly checking es and fr, they seem to have something like commonname. de is a bit more complex stating "in the national language" from translation, but then goes to basically commonname if not the case. it states "official" names can be used if only there is no pre-existing italian version or italian use of the English one. Nonetheless, not saying every change is wrong, but doing it suddenly in 32 languages seems that such policies were not considered and was agenda-based. Some of them at fr, seem to be reverted, and was even banned from one wiki. Just raising it nonetheless.
Plus these changes are also impacting Wikidata, so corrections need to be there. Seem also not to be limited to lakes, with
Snowdonia → Eryri,
St Asaph → Llanelwy,[2] (so far not moved the articles yet)
Bull Bay → Porth Llechog,
Red Wharf Bay → Traeth Coch,[3]
Tanygrisiau Reservoir → Llyn Tanygrisiau, also spotted, with all the (former) names in English removed entirely, not even an alias[4], meaning such data items cannot even be found with the old name under search. May raise it at Wikidata? no idea tho. DankJae 22:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
As KJP1 suggested, it doesn't bode well for any chance of having a Wikipedia topic ban reviewed, especially with the questionable name changes in Wikipedia article-space. Wikidata problems will have to be raised on Wikidata. Sionk (talk) 00:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Already raised at Wikidata. DankJae 11:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Yes used Welsh names except for "British English" where I left as is. I agree official "British English" should be left as is on wikidata. Would prefer coming to me directly if I've made any mistakes so that I can immediately correct. Apologies Titus Gold (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Removing all the "English names" under "English" and all other languages seemed very intentional, leaving a newly added sole "British English" for the actual Common name. I explained my reasoning there on both the issue and why I chose the location of the discussion. DankJae 01:52, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Titus Gold - Your call for a direct dialogue would have more credibility, if you had attempted to discuss this major change before implementing it. But that would run counter to your modus operandi of seeking to get Facts on the ground in support of your view. What was the reason you didn't discuss this, here or on the other wikis, before implementing it? And do you think it is compliant with the spirit of your Welsh-topics T-Ban on en:Wiki? And what is the purpose of the change? KJP1 (talk) 05:38, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
That's fair enough. It was intended to apply a consistent label pattern used for all non-"British English" labels as there didn't seem to be consistency or guidance for these labels. I also hadn't considered that common name policy might actually apply for non-British English or Welsh labels. In hindsight, I agree I should've discussed before implementing this on some pages. I will do this from now on wikidata in the same way that I've been doing in past few months in particular for Wikipedia. Hope that explains it. Titus Gold (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
It doesn’t explain it at all. What you mean is: “Having got my own way, I’m content to promise collaboration in future”. But you’ve made, and broken, that promise many times. What would have some credibility, would be if you self-reverted your changes, and then came back here to discuss what you planned to do and why. Are you prepared to do that? KJP1 (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
They're back at it again for Devil's Appendix on other Wikis, see Wikidata. DankJae 20:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Quelle surprise. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Titus Gold - Personally, I think this needs to go back to ANI. The terms of the topic ban are:
"There is a near-unanimous consensus here to topic-ban Titus Gold from articles relating to Wales, broadly construed. A six-month wait before any appeal is recommended. There isn't a consensus for any additional topic bans or other restrictions at this time, but the community's patience is clearly wearing thin, and Titus Gold should be aware that problematic behavior in other areas will likely lead to further sanctions. (As written, the topic ban applies only in mainspace, but, again, disruption elsewhere will probably result in a swift expansion of the restriction" (my bold).
To me, this is a second clear breach of the spirit, if not the letter, of the ban. It's also a clear breach of their commitment given above: "I should've discussed before implementing this on some pages. I will do this from now on wikidata". In short they simply cannot be trusted not to continue to push their POV. I'll flag it shortly, unless anyone else wants to pick it up (please!). I've pinged TG so they are aware, although they watch this page. KJP1 (talk) 00:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Topic bans are specific to English Wikipedia. Wasn't this a change to Wikidata only? If so, there is no breach of the topic ban and TG is perfectly entitled to make those edits. Having said that, the nature of the edits would be material in any appeal to the topic ban. It is exactly the type of POV editing that raised the concerns before. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Absolutely take the point, and I think your reading of the ban scope is entirely right. What I was wondering was whether the "problematic behaviour in other areas" clause would cover it. But quite happy to be told I'm wrong on that point. What is so frustrating, aside from the continued POV editing, is TG's bad faith. On 26/11/23 (above), they promised to discuss before implementing any more such changes. So where was the discussion before this latest change? KJP1 (talk) 09:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
To be honest, I am not sure what the process is for taking this up at Wikidata. Wouldn't it have to be raised with admins there? But I get the frustrations. TG has always been civil, but again and again the same things recur. There may be reasons for that. I know nothing about TG the person, and I am aware that there are reasons why past commitments can be forgotten without it necessarily demonstrating bad faith; but whatever the reasons, the effect is disruptive. TG needs to be aware that the community is repeatedly asking for more discussion, and if this is not forthcoming then referrals to whichever admin board is appropriate will follow. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
This is technically not about Wikidata itself. Whenever you move a page on any Wiki including this one you also edit Wikidata. The edits at Wikidata are a result of their page moves on Norwegian Nynorsk and Cebuano Wikipedia. Which I don’t think they’re fluent in, nor considered what that language actually uses, and are only there to POV push Welsh names.
Not calling for anything specifically, nor do I think I can, just raising the issue again, as it seems that this issue isn’t solved, so expect them to do more, and appears that nothing has changed in their editing since the T-ban both on this Wiki (moved to other Celtic countries) and slowing spreading to other Wikipedias. DankJae 11:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
OK, in the interests of starting the discussion suggested above; Titus Gold - could you:
  • Briefly outline the place name changes you have been making on foreign-language Wikis and your intended rationale;
  • Briefly outline the steps you've taken to understand the policy/guidance prevailing on those foreign-language wikis on place naming, e.g. their equivalent of Wikipedia:COMMONNAME;
  • Briefly outline the steps you've taken, with diffs, to obtain consensus on the foreign-language wikis for the changes you've made;
  • To help get a sense of scale, give details of:
(a) the number/names of the foreign-language wikis where you have made changes;
(b) the number of place name changes you have made on each foreign-language wiki.
  • Undertake not to make further changes until this discussion is concluded.

Thank you. KJP1 (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

As other users have stated, I was sure not to edit anything within the scope of the ban. As far as I can see, since the 20th November, Nant Clogwyn y Geifr is the only one I changed in other languages. (Also just created a handful of pages on the Welsh language Wici on small places that mostly didn't exist in other languages.) Some of reasons behind the two page moves was that there is no automatic preference for any English place names in Wales in any other language; the national park has announced it is moving to official names in the original Welsh only for waterfalls; common name doesn't seem to apply because I couldn't find any info on Nant Clogwyn y Geifr in those languages.
I thought bold moves were permitted on other language Wikis? So I'm now meant to start discussions before page moves? (Obviously I would know this is more often needed on English Wiki because there might Welgh lang/English lang contenders for any name changes)
What must I now do to have the topic ban lifted? Could I have very clear and defined criteria please (I think ambiguity on this may have been one of the contributors to the ban in the first place.)?
Thanks for your time. I'm happy to conform to any recommendations for now and future. Titus Gold (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Titus Gold - can you give details of all changes, including those before 20/11/2023. KJP1 (talk) 19:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
After double-checking it's only those two moves for a place name (in a language other than Welsh) since November 2023.
(Since 2016, May 2020 I've counted (roughly 10 pages with roughly an average of 5 different language moves for the same page) so total of 50 page moved over that period.
Some of the reasoning I used in the past was:
  • Other languages tend to always use whatever the English Wikipedia uses as a page name without even considering the Welsh name simply because it was what English wiki uses (and perhaps being completely unware of there being two names for some places in Wales)
  • Welsh Wici is virtually never used for the template for name of places in other languages and I was concerned that this tendency of only using English placenames for Wales across all other language Wikis regardless of any other factors.
  • Common name does not seem to apply to the virtually all of these names since there seems to be virtually no reference to these place names in other languages (exception mentioned below).
  • Officially and legally in Wales, the Welsh name comes first, followed by the English name if there is one; so my thinking was that if a page was not in English, then perhaps it would be appropriate to default to Welsh more often if there was no common name factor.
  • For some there was added reason that the Welsh name only was official, e.g some lakes in Eryri/Snowdonia.
  • One name that I had perhaps had not considered properly for common name was Mont Snowdon in French. Consequently, this were reversed anyway and remain the reversed name (some were other reverts as well I think). Obviously France is geographically closer to Wales and and after some digging I found one or two articles using "Mont Snowdon"; so in hindsight, I had overlooked common name for that.
Titus Gold (talk) 20:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

A proposal to reverse an undiscussed split at Talk:List of Nuttall mountains in England and Wales#Merge proposal. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Welsh named pages

A discussion last year was about the renaming of Talk:Lôn Goed. Today I searched for Arthur's table, but realised it was actually listed as Bwrdd Arthur. Perhaps more Welsh named articles should be redirected into English? Starting with the Iron Age Arthur settlement on Anglesey, should we change Bwrdd to Table for the search engine? Cltjames (talk) 01:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cltjames, if you believe it meets WP:RPURPOSE be free to make it, however IMO probably not, at least as a redirect (maybe a DAB). Although IMO, translations are a bit tougher to justify, especially in vaguer cases like making Big beach for Traeth Mawr. If Arthur's table is used by sources as an alternative name for Bwrdd Arthur then yes a redirect could be made, but if it isn't (incl. as just a translation) then it indicates the subject is more commonly referred to by its Welsh name. Plus there can be multiple translations, or the translation be very generic or vague possibly referring to other articles too, so in this case other tables? I believe such one could be confused for King Arthur's Round Table. If Bwrdd Arthur is commonly described as just "Arthur's table" in multiple sources and no other article is referred to that either, then it possibly be more justified, but this case probably not as a redirect, at least that's my initial opinion. DankJae 03:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Bwrdd Arthur seems like a good option for the article name as the alternatives each have minor variations: A Topographical Dictionary of Wales describes it as 'The fortress of Din Sylwy, otherwise called Bwrdd Arthur, or "Arthur's round table"', the RCAHMW list of historic place names records it a 'Bwrdd Arthur or Dinas Sylwy' and Smith, G., 2008 , Iron Age Settlements in Wales has 'Din Silwy has an alternative name of Bwrdd Arthur – (King) Arthur's Table'. EdwardUK (talk) 04:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
@EdwardUK? @Cltjames, is arguing whether Arthur's table should be made a redirect, the article is already called Bwrdd Arthur? DankJae 04:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC) Edit: "redirected" gave me the wrong impression. DankJae 04:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
On second thought, @Cltjames, by "redirected" do you mean "moving"? If so then no, per WP:USEENGLISH, Bwrdd Arthur is likely used more. DankJae 04:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, Din Silwy could work. Only I'm approaching the issue of Welsh placenames on the English Wikipedia here. Cltjames (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wales/Archive_2024&oldid=1222738612"