This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales 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.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
DankJae, you changed the date range of this article in this edit[1] which looks like it makes it more regular, but I think actually there are reasons to prefer the old range, because (as often happens when dividing up history into chapters) the key dates don't fall exactly on the century changes. 1282-1542 pretty much exactly covers the period when Wales was annexed and ruled directly by England, and is thus co-extensive with the English rule in Wales article that could almost certainly be merged into this article entirely, removing a WP:POVFORK of this article. This article would be Welsh history from conquest to the Laws in Wales Acts (often known as the Act of union - although that term is disputed). That makes a very sensible chapter. Are you happy with that? An alternative is to start it a little earlier and include the conquest itself, so starting perhaps with Llywellyn the Last. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sirfurboy, be free to change the date in the short description, the lead had those dates so thought it was incorrect, but if you deem otherwise be free to change it if you plan to change the article, in the end SD's can be easily changed as an article develops. My priority was changing it to "Aspect of Welsh history", don't mind whatever date. (format it as "1282–1542") Seems the article was created with 1282 to 1542 in mind, not sure why the lead has 1250-1500 though.
And yes English rule in Wales can be considered to be merged here, would be fine with that. In the end, I have not really edited this article, so do not claim any authorship, just patrolling adding/standardising SD's. DankJae13:02, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I amended the article and added the dates 1250-1500 based on the official timeline of the high middle ages. Perhaps it is worth noting this article is about a specific era in history involving culture in Wales, merging the article with English rule in Wales would miss the impartiality of the article and miss a crucial official era of Welsh history from a neutral perspective about the middle ages. I think your reasoning sirfurboy should be explained more... Cltjames (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So I am not sure what official timeline you are referring to. Different sources will say different things, but late middle ages would usually be about 1300 to about 1500 which is what we say on Late Middle Ages but here you have it starting in 1250. But there is no reason to treat the subject in exact centuries. Part of the reason for naming the periods is because their definition is a touch fuzzy, and in history courses and texts in any place, you will find that historians will begin with some occasion that brings change, whether that be Machiavelli publishing The Prince, or the end of the Roman republic or, indeed, the conquest of Wales, which happens to have occurred just a touch before 1300. Perusal of the sources on the page, or any history article page will show that historians do this. But I also see that this is a child article of History of Wales, and on that parent article, we still have "Late middle ages: 1283–1542". It is a clear chapter in Welsh history that happens to closely coincide with the dates we think of as late middle ages. As this is a child article, this really needs to be consistent with the parent.
Lastly, I share your concern about the impartiality of this article. It is the lack of impartiality on the other one that is my reason for suggesting merging in the good information from there, and allowing us to remove a POVFORK of this article from Wikipedia. I would appreciate your help in ensuring the point of view remains neutral, but that, in itself, is not a reason to choose arbitrary dates rather than the clearly occasioned ones, as intended by this article's early authors. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
