This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Iridescent (talk | contribs) at 20:18, 5 August 2017 (→Dictionary of Welsh Biography inclusion: Some thoughts). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:18, 5 August 2017 by Iridescent (talk | contribs) (→Dictionary of Welsh Biography inclusion: Some thoughts)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Wales and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Wales Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used
 Archives |
|
2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Popular pages report
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 Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wales/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 . All the best. KJP1 (talk) 07:22, 26 May 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)
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:
- All articles are one-source. More sources need to added. the ones which fail GNG need to be AfD'd.
- Too specific disambiguation terms in title. Many articles need to be renamed to use proper disambiguation terms.
- 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 Misplaced Pages; 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 Misplaced Pages: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)
- 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)
- 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)
WiR focus on music and dance in July
 Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons. | ||
.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)
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)
- Thank you all for your comments. I have removed the supposed region names.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 18:01, 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)
- 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)
- 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)
Category discussion
Category:Montgomeryshire Architecture is under discussion at Misplaced Pages: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. Bencherlite 13:24, 30 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 Misplaced Pages articles. Verbcatcher (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Da iawn! Deb (talk) 18:39, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Women in Red's new initiative: #1day1woman
 A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: #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) |
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 Misplaced Pages is never grounds for deletion here. Each Misplaced Pages 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)
- You may PROD them for lack of sources or for notability, but non-existence of an article on another language Misplaced Pages is never grounds for deletion here. Each Misplaced Pages sets its own policies and guidelines, including inclusion criteria. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 05:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- Iridescent, Thanks for your input! So, does it seem reasonable then to tag with articles for {{Proposed deletion}} if
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:
- Regarding inclusion in Welsh Misplaced Pages, it's kind of reverse logic. We generally don't delete an article if there is a corresponding article in Misplaced Pages in the most appropriate language. If there's an article there, then I wouldn't post a Prod tag.
- 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 Misplaced Pages - it's smaller, has less editors, and is more inclusionist than, the English Misplaced Pages, but, like the English Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages should not be used as a argument for or against deleting or creating an article on the English Misplaced Pages. 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)
- "it's not quite finished yet" is merely a jocular reflection on the status of the Welsh Misplaced Pages - it's smaller, has less editors, and is more inclusionist than, the English Misplaced Pages, but, like the English Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages should not be used as a argument for or against deleting or creating an article on the English Misplaced Pages. Robevans123 (talk) 16:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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 Misplaced Pages's terms—Selina Rushbrook is an obvious one who springs to mind.) ‑ Iridescent 20:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC)