Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales/Archive 2017

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2010←Archive 2015Archive 2016Archive 2017

Lists of Listed Buildings

A lot has been accomplished with the lists of listed buildings for Wales, although there's always more to be done. I would be interested in others' thoughts on the Importance grading for the lists. Taking two examples, Grade I listed buildings in Monmouthshire and Grade II* listed buildings in Monmouthshire are both rated LOW Importance. I've haven't checked them all but this seems to hold true for the lists for the other Welsh counties. I think LOW Importance, indicating that the lists are "of little importance to this project, but (.) cover() a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia" is an odd categorisation for lists of all of the most important buildings in Wales. I would have thought HIGH a more appropriate designation but would be interested in other views. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Generally these lists are of buildings of interest (with a handful of Grade II* and Grade I) in a specific part of Wales. The above examples might be of high importance to Monmouthshire, but I can't see how they would be of high importance to the entirety of Wales. Sionk (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I should have given more, and more varied, examples. Take Listed buildings in Cardiff. This includes: Cardiff Castle, the Crown Court, City Hall, Llandaff Cathedral, The National Museum of Wales and St Fagan's. Any one of these seems to me to be of more than LOW importance to Wales - collectively, I would certainly have thought their listing was of HIGH importance. KJP1 (talk) 22:02, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Honestly, don't get hung up about the importance ratings. Along with the B/C-class distinction, they're an artefact of a long-abandoned scheme from Wikipedia's early days to produce CD-ROM and print versions of Wikipedia and to decide which articles would be included in the limited space; they've had no actual impact on anything for over a decade. Most of the large projects like WikiProject Visual arts and WikiProject Military history have abandoned the importance scale altogether. ‑ Iridescent 22:17, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks - that is useful to know. If they have no impact, I may just amend anyway to pander to my hang-up. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 09:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I've done a lot of assessment for WP:WALES and other WikiProjects. In some projects articles of type List have an importance of "NA", which I often think is most appropriate. If pushed I would rate Lists of Buildings... as Low or Mid, as they are (in my judgement) a niche interest. I would expect Top and High designations to contain maybe the key 15% of articles on Wales. welsh (talk) 17:57, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Bryn Cader Faner

The reference http://www.stonepages.com/wales/bryncaderfaner.html makes no mention of the site being used as target practice. Is there any evidence of this actually happening? Two 'locals' I met up there were angry about the reports that the site was used as target practice, so I think it is important to ensure such statements are correct and not just anti-army propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.254.201.36 (talk) 10:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I suspect the source for this (as with so much bullshit regarding Neolithic sites) is Julian Cope; he openly admits that his books are his personal musings and based on whatever his feelings were at the site, not based on fact, but because he's the popular face of neo-mysticism, his fans have a tendency to assume whatever he says is true. If it had actually been used as a target for WW2 gunnery practice, it wouldn't be standing and the surrounding hillside would be pockmarked by craters. The WW2 gunnery ranges were at Penrhos, Aberdaron and Hell's Mouth on the Lleyn Peninsula, Criccieth, and Aberporth, all of which are some way away—for obvious reasons, military tests were done near the railway lines so they could actually get the equipment and observers in place. I'd consider before the Second World War, the British army removed some stones on the east side equally dubious—the "reference" is questionable at best, and the military had considerably more important things on their mind in WW2 than trekking out to a location in the middle of nowhere and miles from the nearest road in order to rearrange the stones of a stone circle. ‑ Iridescent 18:29, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

400,000 photographs of archaeological objects found by members of the public in England and Wales

In recent weeks, 400,000 images of finds, logged and photographed by the Portable Antiquities Scheme, have been uploaded to Commons.

  • Portable Antiquities Scheme sample gallery
  • Hand of ancient Roman statue, Leicestershire.
    Hand of ancient Roman statue, Leicestershire.
  • Roman coin hoard, now at the Roman Baths and Pump House Museum in Bath.
    Roman coin hoard, now at the Roman Baths and Pump House Museum in Bath.
  • Roman gold intaglio, 100-200 AD, Essex.
    Roman gold intaglio, 100-200 AD, Essex.
  • Pewter ladle or toy, medieval, Lincolnshire.
    Pewter ladle or toy, medieval, Lincolnshire.
  • Flat axe, bronze age, Lincolnshire.
    Flat axe, bronze age, Lincolnshire.
  • Swastika design brooch, Anglo-Saxon 6th-7th century, York.
    Swastika design brooch, Anglo-Saxon 6th-7th century, York.
  • Unidentified copper alloy coin, thought to date to 1-296 AD, Hertfordshire.
    Unidentified copper alloy coin, thought to date to 1-296 AD, Hertfordshire.
  • Ancient Roman brooch in the shape of a dog, 100-200 AD, Lincolnshire.
    Ancient Roman brooch in the shape of a dog, 100-200 AD, Lincolnshire.
  • Sunburst rowel (spurs), c.17th century, Cornwall.
    Sunburst rowel (spurs), c.17th century, Cornwall.
  • Unusual quarter stater, 50BC-20BC, Surrey.
    Unusual quarter stater, 50BC-20BC, Surrey.
  • Medieval thimble, Norfolk.
    Medieval thimble, Norfolk.
  • Anti-papist pipe tamper with head of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, 1678, West Berkshire.
    Anti-papist pipe tamper with head of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, 1678, West Berkshire.

They are now ready for further categorisation on Commons, and use in Wikipedia articles.

Please see this note on Commons and the project page there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Good news: bot report now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Popular pages Agathoclea (talk) 15:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Taff Vale Railway page

Re: Taff Vale Railway page > Cardiff to Merthyr Tydfil legend

The town of Nelson is referred to on three separate occasions in the legend. On each one an incorrect internal link is used. The town in question is Nelson, Glamorgan, Wales and NOT the Lancashire based town. There is a Wikipedia page referring to Nelson, Glamorgan and a brief reference to its former railway station.

I would be grateful for your help in this.

Charmilsky (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

@Charmilsky:  Done As there is no page for Nelson, Glamorgan railway station, it will now be a red link. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
I altered it to to Nelson for consistency with the existing entry in List of closed railway stations in Britain: M-O#Ne. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Archive 2017/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Wales.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Wales, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Aberconwy House review

I have recently created a wiki for Aberconwy House and i am waiting for approval and review of the wiki. i am a new user here so i don't have much idea of where to approach

thanks Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamjoyandlove (talk • contribs) 17:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@Iamjoyandlove: Edward, for a fairly new editor, you've made a great start on this article. I've made a few suggestions on the article's Talkpage, here [1]. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 07:22, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Newish user creating hundreds of DWB-sourced stubs

Editors at this project may want to review the work of Helenrp (talk · contribs), who has been creating hundreds of biographical stub articles sourced to only the Dictionary of Welsh Biography. The main problems with their work include:

  1. All articles are one-source. More sources need to added. the ones which fail GNG need to be AfD'd.
  2. Too specific disambiguation terms in title. Many articles need to be renamed to use proper disambiguation terms.
  3. Many articles which actually meet GNG are likely to have scope for plenty of expansion.

223.227.31.61 (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Useful to mention this here; some editors have already intervened in this case (see User talk:Helenrp). It will need some work to get it straight, and it will take time. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I think this relates to the project going on in Welsh wikipedia, where an effort is being made to "catch up" with the DWB and the rules on stubs and references are different. Will try to address is myself as well. Deb (talk) 07:36, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps naive of me, but I never knew the rules would be different in the Welsh WP, and I'm wondering why this would be...Tony Holkham (Talk) 08:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Each Wikimedia project (such as Commons; English Wikipedia; English Wiktionary; Wiciadur Cymraeg; Wicipedia Cymraeg; etc.) is, generally speaking, free to define its own policies and guidelines, provided that they are compatible with the Terms of Use and other Foundation policies.
The Wicipedia Cymraeg equivalents to WP:NOR and WP:NPOV appear to be cy:Wicipedia:Dim ymchwil gwreiddiol and cy:Wicipedia:Safbwynt niwtral respectively, and both are quite short compared to our pages. However, I can't find an equivalent for WP:V at Wicipedia Cymraeg - cy:Wicipedia:Polisïau a chanllawiau has several entries, but many are redlinks (often in English!) and none seem to concern verifiability: I may be wrong here, and I'm sure that Llywelyn2000 (talk · contribs) will know for certain.
What we describe as a "stub article" is laid down at Wikipedia:Stub which is a guideline - not even policy. However, it's quite extensive compared to, say, cy:Wicipedia:Eginyn - this page hasn't been updated much, and doesn't have many watchers: I suspect that this edit may have gone unnoticed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
FURTHER EXPLANATION: The number of regular editors on cy is small. As long as they are writing in Welsh, we try not to discourage them by deleting unreferenced articles. Bear in mind that, because the number of edits is relatively small, vandalism is rare and is quickly stamped on. Spam doesn't tend to happen. The criteria for notability are also different, because there are a number of topics - particularly those related to the Welsh language - that are considered relevant when their English equivalents might not be. For example, it is estimated that Penguin Random House, the largest English-language publisher, publishes 15,000 new titles a year. Gomer, the largest Welsh publisher, brings out about 120 titles a year (and that includes English-language titles); in consequence, Welsh wikipedia considers all Welsh-language books to be worthy of an article. Deb (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Those redlinks that I mentioned are gone, and there is now cy:Wicipedia:Gwiriadrwydd - both thanks to Llywelyn2000. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:45, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

WiR focus on music and dance in July

Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons.

File:60C0074BA4FF-1 Джемма Халид.jpg


(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 10:40, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

New music clips and album covers on Commons

A treasure trove of music clips and album covers has been posted to Commons at c:Category:Audio files by Sain (Records) Ltd and c:Category:Sain (Records) Ltd, album covers. Please join me in adding them to Wikipedia articles. Verbcatcher (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Da iawn! Deb (talk) 18:39, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Regions and sub-regions?

Hello WikiProject Wales. Does anybody here recognise the "region/sub-region" names which have been added to List of Welsh principal areas by population? There are no citations in the article and Google yields no significant mentions. They have the air of being inventions by the anonymous editor (especially the Pembrokeshire + Isle of Anglesey "region") but I thought I'd better ask around before reverting the article to remove them.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 09:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Martinevans123 and Ghmyrtle:, They mean absolutely nothing to me. What on earth is Metro-Newport? Metropolitan area of Newport? And why is Monmouthshire part of it? I'm no expert in this area - and have consequently pinged a couple of others - but I suspect you are right and that they are OR/inventions/wishful thinking by the IPs. KJP1 (talk) 12:10, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
We're all very broadminded in Newport, you know. But I'm very unsure about that. I'll have a look round. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
If you go back to before the 1974 reorganisation, Newport was in Monmouthshire (historic). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and the only regions within Wales that I am aware of are the five electoral regions used for the twenty additional Assembly Members (see additional member system and National Assembly for Wales constituencies and electoral regions): Mid and West Wales; North Wales; South Wales Central; South Wales East; and South Wales West. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
The regions/sub-regions don't seem to align with any administrative/political/statistical geographic areas of Wales that I am familiar with. There are various divisions that are used/proposed by politicians and geographers (see Wales Spatial Plan) or look at books like People, Places and Policy: Knowing contemporary Wales through new localities, but most of these are fairly obscure. Even if the regions added in List of Welsh principal areas by population turn out to be real in some way, their use in the page in question is distracting and uninformative... Be bold and remove them. Robevans123 (talk) 14:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Martinevans123 and Redrose64:,In reply to Redrose's first point, I absolutely agree but Martin will recall the trouble we got in to when, in recognition of this historic link, and of the fact that the Newman Pevsner is called Gwent/Monmouthshire , we suggested the Tredegar House article should mention this historic connection. I know a fair few Monmouth residents who would react equally badly to being told that they actually lived in Metro-Newport Y7! I'm inclined to follow Rob - if these areas do have an actual existence, it's so remote from people, and its usage is so uncommon, that we are better off without them. KJP1 (talk) 17:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you all for your comments. I have removed the supposed region names.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 18:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, just to state this anonymous user has been causing concern with his Leicestershire edits over the past few months, and I noted the over-complication at the time to the Wales population table - the IP has now been temporarily been banned - see the Talk:Leicester#IP_edits_without_a_summary_or_source. section for my summary on the user, in case further such edits occur. --The Equalizer (talk) 13:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red's new initiative: #1day1woman

Women in Red is pleased to introduce...
A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: #1day1woman
  • Create articles on any day of any month
  • Cover women and their works in any field of interest
  • Feel free to add articles in other languages, too
  • Social media hashtag campaign: #1day1woman

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Monnow Bridge

An editor has requested that the Welsh pronunciation for Pont Trefynwy be given in the lead. It's a good suggestion, and I could have a try but I may make a mistake. If any editor from this project knows how to do it properly, I'd be very grateful. KJP1 (talk) 06:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Now done. KJP1 (talk) 16:26, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Huw Cae Llwyd

Does anybody want to have a stab at rescuing Huw Cae Llwyd? I strongly suspect from the odd phrasing that this is a verbatim translation of the 1953 Welsh language book cited, but I very much doubt either that the original will be online, or that anyone is likely to have a copy of it lying around that they can check. ‑ Iridescent 19:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

"Gwaith Huw Cae Llwyd ac Eraill" has been digitized, so there's some hope of checking things. Sionk (talk) 22:37, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Dictionary of Welsh Biography inclusion

Does inclusion in Dictionary of Welsh Biography automatically confer notability?

For instance, Siôn Abel, who wrote two ballads appears in the dictionary, but I am not finding any other sources to establish notability for his own article.

I am also pinging in @Jason.nlw and Helenrp: into this discussion.

Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:19, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Definitely not—and ditto for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography as well (although in the case of the latter, appearing in both the Victorian DNB and the modern ODNB can be reasonable grounds for presuming that somebody has had sustained interest over time and that the reliable sources do exist somewhere). A Dictionary of insert country here Biography entry can be usable as a source, but if you're unable to find anything elsewhere (as appears to be the case here) then the subject by definition fails the "significant coverage in multiple, independent, non-trivial sources" criterion.
Also be aware that the ODNB is riddled with errors and anything they say should be taken with an extreme pinch of salt, particularly if you can't find corroboration elsewhere, and I suspect the same applies to the DWB. The example I generally use is William Huskisson, who is described by the ODNB as the first fatality of the railway age, when in reality he wasn't even the first railway fatality in Eccles (and Huskisson was a high-profile cabinet minister, not an obscure and poorly-documented figure where the sources are difficult to check). ‑ Iridescent 18:00, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Iridescent, Thanks for your input! So, does it seem reasonable then to tag with articles for {{Proposed deletion}} if
  • there are few sources found for the subject of the article and no significant accomplishments to establish notability
  • there is no corresponding article on Welsh WIkipedia
I am working this list of 258 articles created from the Dictionary of Welsh Biography and so far John Abel (minister) and Siôn Abel meet that criteria and have few views, for instance. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
You may PROD them for lack of sources or for notability, but non-existence of an article on another language Wikipedia is never grounds for deletion here. Each Wikipedia sets its own policies and guidelines, including inclusion criteria. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 05:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Absolutely - and Siôn Abel would almost certainly meet the criteria for inclusion in Wicipedia - but, just like here, it's not quite finished yet... Robevans123 (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi CaroleHenson, I've also been looking at Helenrp's contributions and have been thinking similar thoughts. The DWB has entries on figures who it notes are obscure, e.g. Joseph Davies (magazine editor): "Nothing is known for certain about Joseph Davies." (Though the entry was written in 1959, and more research might have been done on him since.) See also this discussion, which should have taken place here rather than on the talk page of the article for Wales, about poets who might not meet the notability criteria. I agree with Redrose64 and Robevans123 above that whether or not an article exists on cywiki shouldn't come into considerations of notability on enwiki. Ham II (talk) 10:30, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Great input! @Redrose64, Robevans123, and Ham II:
  1. Regarding inclusion in Welsh Wikipedia, it's kind of reverse logic. We generally don't delete an article if there is a corresponding article in Wikipedia in the most appropriate language. If there's an article there, then I wouldn't post a Prod tag.
  2. I am not sure what makes Siôn Abel notable, but I removed the Prod tag for that article. I don't know what "it's not quite finished yet" means.–CaroleHenson (talk) 13:12, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
    "it's not quite finished yet" is merely a jocular reflection on the status of the Welsh Wikipedia - it's smaller, has less editors, and is more inclusionist than, the English Wikipedia, but, like the English Wikipedia is a work in progress. If an editor created a page for every entry in the Dictionary of Welsh Biography then the articles would almost certainly be accepted. The presence or absence of an entry on the Welsh Wikipedia should not be used as a argument for or against deleting or creating an article on the English Wikipedia. Robevans123 (talk) 16:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
    Ah, gotcha. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
    Reminds me of Max Boyce's comment on the Treorchy RFC clubhouse: "It'll be nice when it's finished". Do you think they ever finished it? – PeeJay 16:32, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
  3. Regarding the discussion on the Wales page, it sounds like there are similar concerns regarding notability of some of the articles in DWB. It would be great to have someone take a look at the ones that I have posted Prod tags on from my list as a cross-check - having removed it for Sion Abel, there are 8 articles with Prod tags right now. Can someone help me with that - removing any tags that are disagreed with?–CaroleHenson (talk) 13:12, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Sources

It's occurred to me that I could borrow The New Companion to the Literature of Wales (1998) from my local library and note on CaroleHenson's list which authors and poets have "significant coverage" (which I would define as being at least two paragraphs) in both the DWB and the NCLW. Presumably all of these would pass the threshold for notability? (The Welsh Academy Encyclopaedia of Wales, 2008, might be another one to consider.) I wouldn't be able to start this for a least another week, however. Or would you like to do this in the National Library, Jason.nlw?
With the {{prod}}ded articles, perhaps the search for significant coverage in independent reliable sources could begin by placing {{Friendly search suggestions}} on the talk pages of each of those articles? Ham II (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
I am performing searches on each of the articles, including VIAF for authors and The National Library of Wales website, so there's no need to post search suggestions on my account (I have all the main sources (custom google search, JSTOR, etc.) saved in a search folder on my browser). Any other specific source suggestions would be helpful, though.
I wish I had access to the two books that you mentioned, but they are in google books and though only in snippet view, I could search to see if the subjects of the article pop up in a search of the two books, and if they do then consider them notable. Kind of cludgey approach, but it doesn't hurt to check that way.
Any assistance is very much appreciated!!!–CaroleHenson (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
For demonstrating the notability of pre-20th-century Welsh figures, the (free) archive of Welsh local newspapers run by the NLW is often very useful. Nineteenth-century Welsh civic pride and the Victorian cult of antiquarianism were such that even with the most obscure characters tended to get gushing A fifteenth-century local poet pieces in the Prestatyn Weekly or whatever. This type of article is virtually useless as a source, since they tended to be written by enthusiastic amateurs who were regurgitating half-remembered anecdotes they'd heard in the pub so need to be qualified with "according to an amateur historian writing in 1860" disclaimers, but are invaluable for demonstrating that interest in the topic has existed over the long term. (When you see the same name cropping up across multiple newspapers on multiple occasions, particularly if they're from multiple towns, that can be an indicator that an apparently non-notable figure is actually quite significant in Wikipedia's terms—Selina Rushbrook is an obvious one who springs to mind.) ‑ Iridescent 20:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Ok, excellent. Thanks, Iridescent.–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

A Dictionary of Welsh Biography article is a major indicator of notability, but I agree that it is not in itself sufficient. In addition to the text of the DWB entry we should take note of the sources that it cites. For example, the DWB article on John Abel (minister)[2] cites four sources in addition to those in our article. I haven't been able to read those sources, but they include The Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion (1928-29, 56), which is a good source. The existence of these sources adds to notability, even if they are not available to us. A recent date on the DWB article might support notability as it indicates the recent opinion of the DWB editors. Their John Abel (minister) article is dated 2001. Verbcatcher (talk) 21:08, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Verbcatcher. Currently, the John Abel article has a notability tag on it. It sounds like from what you are saying, it should be removed.–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:ANYBIO discussion

  • Yes Inclusion in a work such as DWB automatically confers notability per WP:ANYBIO which has this as an explicit provision, "The person has an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication." Note that this is a guideline and so any corner cases, such as those mentioned by Iridescent above, might then be exceptions. Exceptions are expected for guidelines as they are not firm, hard rules.
Use of the proposed deletion process in such cases seems disruptive because obscure topics may not get sufficient traffic for them to be spotted within seven days. Per WP:PROD, "PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected." as it is only for "uncontroversial deletion". I came here because I noticed CaroleHenson using PROD incorrectly. I shall now be removing any other prods that she has placed for this reason. Tsk. Andrew D. (talk) 08:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
A couple of things, Andrew Davidson,
  • I don't know that I'm too far off, based upon the comments here and the discussion at the discussion on the Wales page
  • I didn't apply the Prod tags in a vacuum... I opened up a discussion here... and asked for help by someone to ensure whether the Prod tags are appropriate or not.
  • Based upon the nature of some of the articles posted at the DWB site at The National Library of Wales, I wouldn't consider it in the same category as DNB.
  • Please tell me, what makes Robert Allen (Baptist minister) notable?
  • In the long run, having articles about subjects that aren't notable isn't the worst thing in the world, but it's hard to argue notability for any other cases if an article like this stands. To me, that means that anyone who's been a minister, teacher, writer of anything then should be considered notable for a Wikipedia article, which goes against WP:ISNOT, WP:Notability (people) and WP:GNG. I'm trying to use WP:Common sense in parsing out the various guidelines.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:20, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Where you removed the prod tags, I added {{notability}} tags (John Abel (minister), William Adams (mining engineer), Evan Owen Allen, Robert Allen (Baptist minister), Joshua Andrews). Based on the fact that Ham II can check for notability of some of the subjects of the articles, but not for a bit, this makes sense in terms of approach rather than the prod tags.
So, going forward, if I question notability, I'll add a notability tag.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:55, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Robert Allen (Baptist minister) seems to be a very odd topic and I'd understand why it was PROD'd. After all, the WNB article appears to be based solely on the personal recollections of a friend. It doesn't suggest wider notability but does suggest WNB has a looser inclusion criteria than Wikipedia. Sionk (talk) 20:46, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposal

The more that I work on this set of articles, the more that I am confused for the need to duplicate the Dictionary of Welsh Biography effort. There are a few gems out of the 45 or so articles I've worked on, like Albert de Belleroche, but most of these are about poets or clergy who may, or may not, have a few published works. If there are not a few key sources - or significant coverage - I don't see why we have most of these articles on WP, per notability guidelines and does not seem in the spirit of building an encyclopedia. Specifically, it seems to be a mass effort to post content from a niche focus area, per WP:NOTNOTHERE.

Proposal:

I am pinging in people who have weighed-in on this conversation, on this page, or elsewhere @Jason.nlw, Iridescent, Redrose64, Robevans123, Ham II, PeeJay2K3, Verbcatcher, Andrew Davidson, and Sionk:–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:07, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose The Dictionary of Welsh Biography is a reputable work, recognised by respectable institutions such as the National Library of Wales. Per WP:ANYBIO, if a subject appears in that work, we presume that they are notable. CaroleHenson appears to have a particular interest in Colorado rather than Wales and so has no special authority to override this. She complains that this means inclusion of some poets and clergymen but this is not a problem. Wikipedia contains numerous biographies of obscure people – my current favourite is Chitty (cricketer). It is the nature of an encyclopedia to contain just about everything and Wikipedia is one of the biggest. It is our explicit policy that "there is no practical limit to the number of topics Wikipedia can cover or the total amount of content". We already have over 5 million articles and we're going to have millions more. The DWB has less than 5000 entries and so is a drop in this ocean. Andrew D. (talk) 22:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
  • OpposeI am confused as to why CaroleHenson thinks that inclusion in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography or other sources is needed to make a Dictionary of Welsh Biography article notable. Dictionary of Welsh Biography is comparable to all these sources in the way it is edited and compiled. The whole point of a Dictionary of National Biography is that it records people of importance in the context of that nation. The Oxford DNB records those of importance in a British context. The Welsh DNB records those of importance in a Welsh context. These may appear less notable in some cases when looked at in a wider context but Wales is a small nation. That does not make its history less important. I think that it is dangerous to start suggesting that some academic peer reviewed DNB's imply notability and others do not. Jason.nlw (talk) 00:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose the development of a criteria (we already have WP:GNG) because generally DWB makes clear claims of importance and often cites other secondary publications as its sources. Robert Allen (Baptist minister) is a very rare example of someone I wouldn't consider to be notable by Wikipedia standards (a chapel minister, and that's it, when there were many more preachers than there are today). Common sense should be applied on each occasion. I would scrutinise a Wikipedia article about a 21st-century poet or preacher far more carefully than that of someone that had died more than 100 years agom, the corollary of RECENTISM is that people who died before the late 20th century are underrepresented here. Sionk (talk) 01:13, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose - there is no need to develop further criteria. All national dictionaries of biography are usually regarded as sufficiently authorative to confer notability. As with any source, however reliable, there may be errors or occasional odd inclusions. They can be considered on a case by case basis. As to Robert Allen (Baptist minister), any revivalist baptist minister who supports themself through mining and farming and entertains their congregation is almost certainly unique and should be included!
As an aside, I do feel that this discussion of a few entries from the DWB is verging on wondering what colour to paint the bicycle shed. I'm off to create some articles (see section below). Robevans123 (talk) 13:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose - A national biographical dictionary already looked at the question if the person was notable at his time. Once notable we can include him here. Obviously what makes a 19th century person notable might not be what makes a 21th century person notable. Different times - different perspectives. Who cares today about a minister of some chapel except his flock? - 200 years ago he was a person known far and wide. Agathoclea (talk) 15:45, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Three bishops named Anian

There are three articles about bishops named Anian, one of Bangor and two of St Asaph. I addressed copyright violations on these articles, but they are really out of my league -- both because they are about bishops of the Catholic Church and they are about 13th century Welsh history. I have really struggled and figured that it's really better if someone that is more comfortable with these topics would do a much better job.

Is someone interested in tackling these?–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Category discussion

Category:Montgomeryshire Architecture is under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_June_28#Category:Montgomeryshire_Architecture, the main discussion point being whether the category should be merged into the current county as Category:Buildings and structures in Powys or whether it should reflect the historic county name by being renamed Category:Buildings and structures in Montgomeryshire. All contributions welcome. BencherliteTalk 13:24, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Welsh-language television programming has just been moved by a bot to Category:Welsh-language television programs as a result of a rather generalised discussion. They seem to have forgotten or overlooked the fact that we use British English, not American English, in Wales, and therefore it should be Category:Welsh-language television programmes. Do others agree that this needs to be moved accordingly? Deb (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Agree. Tony Holkham (Talk) 13:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
The same argument would apply to most of the categories, the vast majority of non-America countries prefer British English. Sionk (talk) 21:16, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Welsh language in English articles

We have the guideline WP:USEENGLISH. I'm sure that we also have a policy/guideline about the use of Welsh language, restricting it to certain circumstances; such as placenames where there is no English name, like Aberystwyth; or as a translation of the article title within a parenthesis in the lead, as we have at Cardiff Central railway station. Where is this formally written down? Do we have a user warning template for informing prople about breaches? See for example recent edits to Llanelli. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:44, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

The addition of a place name in the native tongue is quite common and standard as far as I can see (e.g. see Moscow). Giving the Welsh name in parentheses of a Welsh place seems perfectly normal, certainly if it is the main subject of the Wikipedia article (it gets a bit more complex with places like Aberdovey/Aberdyfi, where the anglicised version is stil used on roadsigns, maps and rail timetables but the Wikipedia munchkins use the Welsh name as COMMONNAME, but that's another battle for another time). WP:USEENGLISH appears to give guidance particularly about article titles. As for translating other names or phrases in an article (as happened in Llanelli), well, I've reverted that sort of thing too in the past. WP:USEENGLISH by implication seems to suggest that names of other things, which aren't the main subject, shouldn't be translated. Though again there will be exceptions where the translation is of use, for example in Llanfair, Vale of Glamorgan I gave the Welsh translation for the village of St Mary Church because this gives the name to the parish. Sionk (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
I'd certainly see edits such as this one as ill-advised. The Welsh names don't appear in the original linked articles and the two churches themselves, which both seem to be English-speaking Church in Wales, do not appear to refer to themselves in that way. Not sure I've ever seen any user warning template for that sort of thing. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Sacred Wales (top 50 churches and chapels)

The National Churches Trust is currently running an online competition with a chance to vote for your favourite church/chapel in Wales from a pre-selected list of 50. The competition is available at the Sacred Wales website. The competition has received some coverage from the BBC website, regional welsh newspapers, and also local welsh newspapers. The competition closes at the end of August. I would estimate, very roughly, that about 8,000 people have voted so far.

I thought it would be interesting to see how well we covered the 50 churches and chapels on Wikipedia. The result was a little disappointing... Of the chosen buildings, 25 are Grade I listed buildings (five of which have no wikipedia article), 16 are Grade II* (11 without articles), 8 are Grade II (6 without articles) and one is unlisted (unsurprisingly, without an article). I've turned the list of the 50 into a table, with links where articles exist, in my sandbox at Top 50 Churches in Wales. The list also includes links to the Sacred Wales website, the Cadw listing page, and the coflein (national monuments record) listing, giving some suitable sources.

I'm planning to work through the list to fix the omissions (starting with the Bethania Chapel in Maesteg, Grade II*), and later turn some of the stubs into better articles. If anyone is searching for an idea for an article to create or expand, then feel free to use the list as a starting point.

The Sacred Wales list provides an interesting view of religion and architecture in Wales and includes such delights as the church in the sea, the church in the sand, and the most crooked church in Great Britain (my favourite). A shame that there is no place for St Mary's Chapel at Capel-y-ffin, which would be my favourite if it had been on the list.

Finally, a question. Given the amount of media coverage already received, is the Sacred Wales competition sufficiently notably to be worthy of it's own article on wikipedia? Diolch. Robevans123 (talk) 12:49, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Robevans123 Rob, Well I'm pleased that the Monmouthshire ones are at least covered, although they could do with some work. Very happy to pick these up for improvement, and look at filling in some of the Grade I gaps. KJP1 (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Go for it! And feel free to add a note on my sandbox page on anything improved or added. Cheers Robevans123 (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Interesting, nice table! I'm wondering whether TNCT have politely chosen their list to cover all of Wales and a variety of denominations (therefore ensuring there's an even spread of the vote). Not sure why Penarth's Trinity Methodist Church was chosen, there seem to be a wide choice of very interesting, curious churches and chapels in the Vale of Glamorgan which would have been a better choice (I'm rather taken by the cute parish church next to Gileston Manor).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sionk (talk • contribs)
St Giles Church looks lovely (and well deserves it's own article). TNCT definitely worked hard to present a balanced list, but oddly Wrexham County Borough is the only principal area not covered. The different denominations are definitely represented proportionally as well. I could see why most of the churches were chosen but Penarth's Trinity Methodist Church was a mystery to me... Robevans123 (talk) 15:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Clearly "Wrexham steeple" is no longer one of the Seven Wonders of Wales... Ham II (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Church of St Issui, Partrishow - I cannot believe this one hadn't been done previously. Definitely my favourite! KJP1 (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Notable as a venue for some high profile choral events, I'll have you know! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Frankly, the Prince of faux-Georgian, Quinlan Terry-inspired, reactionary, Trumpton tosh is welcome to it! KJP1 (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Dispute at Talk:Aberfan Disaster

A dispute at Talk:Aberfan disaster#Clarity of writing has descended into personal attacks and name calling. This is particularly undesirable in the talk page of a sensitive article. This needs more eyes please. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:58, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Or it could need less people fanning the flames, given the OP who is a serial WP:CPUSHer, hasn't posted there for three days. I appreciate you are acting in good faith, but sometimes it is best to let the dust settle without interjecting to point out the obvious policies everybody knows. - SchroCat (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Voice of Saunders Lewis

I want to add an audio clip of Saunders Lewis's voice to his article. Four are available on Commmons:

I don't speak Welsh and would like a Welsh speaker to:

  • Recommend which of these is most suitable
  • Confirm that the words are acceptable for Wikipedia (not libellous or too rude)
  • Provide a translation of the title of the poem (and its date if possible)

There are other clips of Welsh poets in c:Category:Audio clips of Lleisiau Beirdd Cymru, which are also listed at these links.[3][4] Please add some of these clips to the appropriate articles. Thanks, Verbcatcher (talk) 16:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions and WMUK will hopefully be putting up a prize for those who do Welsh dictionary entries on women. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on Welsh women during this month please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles for your project please add them to the appropriate sub list Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

I'm a bit disappointed to only see two editors from WP Wales creating articles for the Women World Contest. There is £250 in Amazon vouchers being put up by Wikimedia UK for whoever produces the most new quality articles on women biographies in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and Welsh Dictionary, though all British women bios are welcome. So far only 29 articles have been submitted on British women to the main part of the contest and I can't even recall seeing a single Welsh biography yet. masses missing from the ODNB too. Please get involved and make Welsh women a part of the contest!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Cilrhedyn, Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire

In the Cilrhedyn article is the sentence "The parish of West Cilrhedyn (Pembrokeshire) is now part of the community of Cleddau." Cleddau is linked to an article on the River Cleddau. Clydau appears to be the name of the community, but there is nothing in the Clydau article about West Cilrhedyn.

Will someone please sort out the linking and confirm the relationship of Clydau and West Cilrhedyn?

At the same time you may want to remove the graffiti on the Cilrhedyn talk page.  Done

--Oldontarian (talk) 15:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Oldontarian, I'll have a look later today. Tony Holkham (Talk) 15:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I have clarified the distinction between Clydau community, parish and settlement - three entities with the same name; the parish is distinct from West Cilrhedyn, a neighbouring parish. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:50, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Wales

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 19:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wales/Archive_2017&oldid=1239367566"