Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales

Cadw's renaming of castles

As a discussion at my talk has now spilled out concerning Criccieth Castle, as well as a discussion at Carreg Cennen Castle (which after a self-rvt my original edit was re-instated). I raise my edits and the way forward here. @A.D.Hope and Sirfurboy:

Between March and April this year, Cadw changed the names they use for some castles in Wales to the Welsh names for their website pages in English. For example, in March they had Caernarfon Castle, but then changed to Castell Caernarfon in April. (current) Cadw did not change all to Welsh names, for example Beaumaris Castle and Flint Castle remain, not Castell Biwmares and Castell y Fflint. They seem to have only changed castles in places where the place-name used is the same in both languages so "Conwy" and "Caernarfon" etc or minor spelling differences such as now using Castell Cricieth compared to in "Criccieth", but leave those with more significant/established differences.

On ~26 June I had boldly amended leads on the castles it affected from:

Caernarfon Castle (Welsh: Castell Caernarfon; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...

to

Caernarfon Castle (Welsh: Castell Caernarfon; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...

I had argued that as Cadw is the main operator for many of these that in effect their name change is an "official" name change, a now alternative name used in English, and one of significance. So applied MOS:BOLDALTNAMES, but maintained them in parenthesis and labelled Welsh, as the change is new, and not as common (yet). However, I self-reverted at Carreg Cennen Castle finding out that Cadw's website is not the sole website of the castle, and a castle site continues the use the English name so not universally official, but Sirfurboy argued that my original bolding should remain. I did revert myself at Llansteffan Castle as it is privately-owned. I didn't also apply Cadw's Welsh use at Cilgerran Castle as that is National Trust-owned which keep the English name.

But A.D.Hope disputed the bolding be added at Criccieth Castle. But after discussion alternatively proposed and tested the following:

Criccieth Castle, known in the Welsh language and marketed as Castell Cricieth ([kastɛɬ ˈkrɪkjɛθ]), is a ruined thirteenth-century castle ...

So should my original bolding be reverted? it remain? Or this alternative or other wording adopted?

Diolch. (note as of this comment Wayback Machine appears to be down?) DankJae 21:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Before getting to another discussion, I think it's worth noting that I view this more as a discussion of how to best update the relevant articles to recognise Cadw's change in terminology, rather than a dispute with DankJae's edits per se. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The position I'm coming round to is that, in choosing to use the Welsh names of certain sites in English-language contexts, Cadw is treating them as English names. If we look at Criccieth Castle, for example, nothing in the language or formatting suggests that Cadw is treating 'Castell Cricieth' as a Welsh phrase. On that basis, but acknowledging that this hasn't been confirmed by Cadw, the wording I've trialled at Criccieth Castle is an attempt to acknowledge that 'Castell Cricieth' is a Welsh phrase and primarily associated with the Welsh language, but is now also being used in English as a name for the site.

It's my understanding that the latest edition of Cadw's magazine (or maybe its newsletter?) contained an article about its new naming policy. If anyone has it handy that would be a great help. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I've no idea why we should be tripping over our own feet in eagerness to reflect whatever wording Cadw quietly use on their website for their castles. The vast majority of English language sources still use the English language. I've said many times, this is the English language Wikipedia and, if a subject has a commonly used and recognised English language name, then we should use that one. After all, Castell is simply Castle in Welsh, no need to be BOLDing it. Sionk (talk) 22:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

All of the articles about these sites will continue to use the English names as their titles and throughout the text. This discussion is about how to handle the Welsh names, which are generally mentioned in the first sentence anyway (see e.g. Strata Florida Abbey), but which Cadw is now using as the sole name in English contexts. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sionk, well it is likely the beginning of Cadw using only the Welsh name in English, early days, so eventually another Bannau Brycheiniog. Just decided to recognise it by bolding it now, if it catches on more or only Cadw's does it for months, then a different approach would be taken. While this is English-language Wikipedia, we use names used in English not from English, if Cadw's use of Castell, just like we do at Castell Dinas Brân, becomes popular in English, we have to recognise it regardless if its from Welsh, or we'd be visiting Dinas Bran Castle.

Not denying the "... Castle" is still the common name for now. Just that "Castell ..." is now used "officially" as an alternative on some. The leads still start with English name, but whether the Welsh name should be boldened like Llyn Tegid, or whether it remains Welsh if used in English, is the issue. DankJae 22:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

We are in MOS:BOLDALTNAMES territory here. That says:

Only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative names (which should usually also redirect to the article) are placed in bold.

So where there is an incoming link and the alternative name is significant it may indeed be bolded. Whether Cadw rebranding under Welsh names is significant is something we can come to a view on here. To me that is likely significant for a bolded mention as DankJae had it. But the only one I went ahead and changed back was Castell Carreg Cennen, because that gets referred to that way in some English sources and on road signs etc. It lies in a place called Castell and sits in the woodlands known as Coed y Castell. I have often heard it referred to by that name by people speaking English. This puts it in a special class of Welsh castles, also including Castell y Bere, where the Welsh name does indeed seem to be significant for a mention. I have no strong opinion on the likes of Cilgerran and Llansteffan, although I think there is a reasonable case for bolding them all as Welsh names so long as there is an incoming link, and based on the fact that Cadw's literature now refers to them that way, and so it is reasonable that people would be searching for them under those names too. None of them, of course, should be renamed per WP:COMMONNAME.

I am not a fan of the "marketed as" text. The Welsh word might be better just listed as the Welsh name as we do for many places too. I am away from home this week, and my Cadw magazine is at home so I cannot consult that at this time. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd be happy to pause the discussion for a week until you can check your copy of Cadw's magazine, if everyone else is happy to do so and nobody else with a copy comes along in the meantime.

I wasn't entirely happy with the term 'marketed' myself. If we do decide to acknowledge Cadw's terminology change then I'm not sure if simply bolding the Welsh name is enough now that it's being used in English contexts, although I'm still not entirely sure if we do need to reflect the change. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Just noting that with respect to Carreg Cennen Castle, it's not right that "It lies in a place called Castell", Castell is simply the name of the farm where visitors effectively begin their visit - a.k.a. Castle Farm. I'm struggling to recall any English speakers (visitors or locals) referring to the fortified place as Castell Carreg Cennen, other than in a deliberate act of using the Welsh name - that may change, but I'd be surprised if that was any time soon. Just to also observe, at a slight tangent, that this instance of preferential treatment of the Welsh name differs from that of the national park within which it sits, insofar as the NP name is set out at the end of a statutory process. Incidentally - in formal legal terms - despite all the hullabaloo, the name remains unchanged from 1957 as Brecon Beacons National Park/Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog, per all legal notices still issued by that body. Geopersona (talk) 09:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. Without doing a full analysis, you do see 'Carreg Cennen Castle' a fair bit. I think Bere is the only major masonry castle regularly referred to as 'castell' in English, although it's somewhat more common with smaller structures like Tomen Castell or hillforts like Castell Henllys. A.D.Hope (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The castle sits on the land of the farm, AKA Castell, which is how the land is referred to on OS Maps, so yes it lies in a place called Castell. Coflein references the English language work The Bone cave at Castell Carreg Cennen [1], it is widely described thus on the Internet (dating from its very first mention on the world wide web). Some examples, [2], [3]. This one titles it one way but the other in the text [4]. This is not a new thing [5] and there are many pictures that call it this. This one in the People's Collection [6] for instance, or this random less notable one [7]. It is this way in a lot of books. Some examples [8],[9], [10], [11]. Referred to this way in Archaeologia Cambrensis (English language) [12] Listed under carreg for the dictionary of Welsh Place names [13] and [14], and that's just a quick search. I can't speak to your anecdotal experience except to say my anecdotal experience is very different, but it is very clear that it is frequently referred to as Castell Carreg Cennen by people speaking English.

On your point about the National Parks, I do not understand what you are saying, and wonder if you may have misunderstood the proposal here. Brecon Beacons National Park has the term Bannau Brycheiniog National Park bolded. That is, the Welsh name of the park, now adopted by the park authority to describe it in English, is bolded in our article - but the article title remains the WP:COMMONNAME. That is exactly what is proposed here, isn't it? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

There are sources which use "Carreg Cennen Castle", for example Visit Wales, but I'll only go to the effort of collating them if we decide to make a change to that article.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion of the Brecon Beacons, but looking at the naming there might help us understand this issue. There are currently three names for the park:

• Brecon Beacons National Park, the fully English name
• Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog, the fully Welsh name
• Bannau Brycheiniog National Park, the English name which uses the Welsh name for the area

The first and third names are included in bold the lead of the article, as they're used in English, but the Welsh name is only included in the infobox. This contrasts with Snowdonia, where the national park does not have a separate article, and where the lead sentence begins "Snowdonia, or Eryri" as both names are used in English.

On that basis, I'd say that the Cadw issue boils down to whether we consider what were formerly just the Welsh names for the sites to now be additional English names or not. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, of course there are many places calling it Carreg Cennen Castle. More of them. That is the common name. Surely that is not at issue. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

No, the issue is whether 'Castell Carreg Cennen' should be treated as entirely Welsh or as an alternative English name. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

We don't bold "château de Versailles" on the Palace of Versailles article (despite "Château de Versailles" often being used in English language sources), so I don't see why we should be bolding the Welsh names for Welsh castles. Cadw is a Welsh organisation, with a Welsh name themselves, operating in Wales. Certainly if they chose to promote their properties under the Welsh language names it may encourage English speakers to use the Welsh name more often ...but I certainly doubt the Welsh language names have suddenly become English. Sionk (talk) 12:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Is it right to treat 'Castell Carreg Cennen', to focus on that example, as soley the Welsh name for the castle when it's used in many English language sources? A.D.Hope (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Geopersona, Legal names don't really matter themselves, especially if they're not used anymore. Wikipedia in the end is guided by what sources use today and in some way what readers are familliar with, not what it is referred to in a decades old document. We don't call Gwynedd, "Caernarfonshire and Merionethshire" even though that is what is still used in the 1994 act.

Nonetheless my initial rationale of Castell Carreg Cennen, is that a prominent organisation Cadw, in some ways the national heritage organisation, in which has importance, use the Welsh name in English, so felt it is now an alternative name in need of increased prominence. We're still in the early days if these do catch on, so may be I was early and a review needed in a few months. Just like Bannau Brycheiniog NP is now an alternative and possibly the common name now (recent source-wise), but a discussion for that talk. DankJae 20:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@A.D.Hope, @Geopersona, @Sionk, @Sirfurboy

In light of Cadw's birthday some sources are now mentioning Cadw (but independent of) and their castles, and these sources use "Castell" now for the ones Cadw changed. So Cadw's changes are starting to be adopted now, but of course just starting, nothing common,

These now have used Castell for:

DFP - Rhuddlan, Caernarfon, Harlech (same article as in the Leader, some since May and Rhyl Journal)

ITV - Caergwle

Nation.Cymru - Conwy, Oxwich, Caernarfon, Cricieth, Harlech, Rhuddlan[15]

WalesOnline - Harlech

Visit Wales - Caernarfon

Daily Post combined Dolwyddelan's and used Dolbadarn's even before Cadw.

So does this justify my approach more? Once again, not arguing it is the common name, or even that it needs to be considered English, but just bolding it to signify that it is not just purely a name only used in Welsh and is used alternatively in English.

So should they be bold or not? Should they remain tagged as Welsh or not? Parenthesis or not?

Note: the Versailles website, uses "Palace of Versailles" throughout the website in English (bar the French logo), the point I'm arguing is that the comparable websites for these castles no longer use the English name, so not as comparable. DankJae 17:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd take the approach that the Welsh names have now become alternative English names in these cases, which I believe means they don't need to be in parentheses or specifically tagged as Welsh (although the latter is desirable). I'd consider them notable names as they're used by Cadw and now in at least some of the media. My preferred wording would be something like:

"Criccieth Castle, also known in both English and Welsh as Castell Cricieth..."

If this is too wordy, then simply "Criccieth Castle, or Castell Cricieth...", perhaps with a sentence on the name somewhere in the body. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@A.D.Hope I do believe the latter should be the ultimate wording until commonname changes to the title, but still prefer (Welsh: Castell ...) until at least a dozen sources use the new names regularly. I guess I'm having my own "phased approach", but I did find more sources using Castell than expected, but still only the start. DankJae 18:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

My line of thought is:

• Cadw manage these sites, so the names it uses for them are significant; if they are not the article title, they warrant a mention in the lead.
• Cadw have made a definitive shift to using the Welsh names of some of its sites exclusively in English-language contexts. The media is begining to follow this usage.
• Cadw and the media do not treat these names as foreign in English-language contexts, e.g. they are not italicised.
• We should therefore treat these names as alternative English-language names, which means bold but no italics.
• Nevertheless, it's important to indicate that these names originate in and are closely associated with the Welsh language.

It's on this basis that I suggested the wording above, which I think neatly explains the situation in flowing prose. However, I wouldn't object to something like (alternative English, Welsh: Castell [X]), which conveys essentially same information in parentheses. Perhaps 'alternative' has connotations of 'secondary', though? A.D.Hope (talk) 22:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Only prefer a layered approach, should multiple sources especially UK-wide quickly follow suit (so like three more) then I'd support "Castle or Castell" wording. It's not helping that Cadw haven't publicly announced this change so little media attention, and not wanting to be too WP:OFFICIALNAMEy, adopting it so eagerly before many readers have even heard of it.

"Eryri" was quickly added as "or" because of how much attention (and edit wars) it generated, and it became clear it had to be accommodated. Cadw has been very (publicly) silent on this? so we can't go ahead of the curve, but still believe something had to be done. Not helping that castles are much less reported. Nonetheless, that's why I ask it here to see what format is preferred.

Mine is simply that I believe "(Welsh: Castell) is best for now due to how quiet the rename has been, but fully prefer "Castle, or Castell," when the change is more public and/or more sources use it.

Alternatively, we switch the infobox name to the Welsh name, and leave the lead alone. DankJae 22:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I mean, does it really matter how loud Cadw have been or how many edit wars have ensued (or not, thankfully, in this case)? The outcome is ultimately the same.

I would suggest not just changing the infobox, it seems like a bit of a halfway measure which doesn't really settle the issue. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

This is what is in Cadw's Heritage in Wales magazine on this change:

Preserving our Welsh language

During spring 2024, Cadw started on a journey to review and standardise the names of the sites in our care. We have made our site names more accurate and consistent and are raising awareness of the Welsh names of our historic monuments and encouraging people to use them.

Where there is little difference between the Welsh and English names for a monument - such as for many of our iconic sites like Castell Cricieth - Cadw will now only use the Welsh version of the name; you will notice the change in this edition of Heritage in Wales magazine. We already use just one name for some sites such as Pennarth Fawr and Plas Mawr in north Wales, and Castell Coch in south Wales.

We are taking a phased approach to standardise Cadw site names with guidance from the Welsh Language Commissioner's Place-names Standardisation Panel.

The Welsh Government, of which we are a part, has a commitment to safeguarding and promoting Welsh place names. We hope you will join us in celebrating our language, culture and heritage through this process.

Diolch. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I had theorised this was standardised related, but thanks for a more clearer statement from them. Although their mention of a "phased approach" seems to signal more are to come, so keep a heads up. DankJae 18:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, that all makes sense to me; thank you for taking the time to type that out, Sirfurboy. In some cases, such as Criccieth/Cricieth and Penarth/Pennarth Fawr, I don't think the difference is even between 'English' and 'Welsh' names so much as alternative Welsh spellings.

What this will presumably mean for us is that all Cadw-related publications will use the Welsh names in future. In my opinion that makes them significant alternative names (i.e. bold and in the lead) where they're not already the aticle title, although it doesn't inherently make them the common name for title purposes. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Just an observation, but I can't help thinking this is a reaction to the declining use of the Welsh language in Wales. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 06:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Possibly, especially after the census recorded a decline. The standard list was made in 2018, but only has since been acted on, so possibly due to the recent decline, increase in language activism and nationalism, and gov agreements with Plaid.

But all guesswork. DankJae 10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Survey

Survey because I did ask for third opinions, but needing clarity and sources using it above. @A.D.Hope, Geopersona, Sionk, and Sirfurboy: (those above)

• TLDR from discussion above, Cadw started using the Welsh names for some castles, as part of the same initiative. Some media has followed since, therefore should their Welsh names be considered alternative (not common yet) names and how?

Articles affected

Rhuddlan Castle Oxwich Castle Ewloe Castle Dryslwyn Castle Dolwyddelan Castle Dolforwyn Castle Dolbadarn Castle Dinefwr Castle Criccieth Castle Coity Castle Carreg Cennen Castle (local discussion leaning support) Caergwrle Castle Bronllys Castle Conwy Castle Caernarfon Castle Harlech Castle (unsure of the following, as they're not mainly operated by Cadw) (for this survey assumed not to apply, unless specifically stated it should) Llansteffan Castle Cilgerran Castle

How and should the Welsh names, of the few castles Cadw has renamed, be formatted in the top of articles?

• 1) No change i.e. Caernarfon Castle (Welsh: Castell Caernarfon; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...
• 2) Change (see options below)
• 3) Local change, suspend centralised discussion for local discussions

If 2, which of the following:

• a) Bolding Welsh i.e. Caernarfon Castle (Welsh: Castell Caernarfon; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...
• b) As Welsh, but no {{lang-cy}} i.e. Caernarfon Castle (alternatively known by its Welsh name Castell Caernarfon; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...
• c) As English, known as i.e. Caernarfon Castle ([specific word] known as Castell Caernarfon [or specific phrase]; Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]) is a medieval fortress ...
• d) Equal i.e. Caernarfon Castle, or Castell Caernarfon (Welsh pronunciation: [kastɛɬ kaɨrˈnarvɔn]), is a medieval fortress ...
• e) Other, like Welsh name in infobox only.

Please select as many options as you're open to, due to the multiple options given, and help to establish some consensus.

Unless the outcome is clear or called for an early closure, I suggest to leave this survey up for like a month (yes a month). I'll add a post to each castle affected, and if necessary restore the previous leads (do I?). The outcome of this should last until sufficient evidence supports a change, as raised in a new discussion here or at each article, and not by me. The outcome should be enforced on articles affected until consensus states otherwise. Titles are not affected by this. Thanks DankJae 20:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Just to make you aware, the group of articles affected is larger and also includes e.g. Capel Gwydir Uchaf, Capel Llugwy, and Capel Runston. There are also some minor changes, such as Blaenafon Ironworks (from Blaenafon), Caer-went Roman Town (from Caerwent), and Pennarth Fawr (from Penarth). A.D.Hope (talk) 20:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Hmn fair, but those are kinda all more individual specific cases so may be better those have local discussions depending on the outcome here. "Castell" instead of "Castle" is much more straight forward than changing the name of the place itself (bar Cricieth and Coety). But yes didn't notice them. DankJae 22:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The use of 'capel' rather than 'chapel' should be rolled into this discussion, but the impact of Cadw's changes to the place names in English could probably be decided article-by-article. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Well I've already started this so no idea how to roll it in at this stage, may be just add an extra question? DankJae 15:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Geopersona, @Sionk, @Sirfurboy, are you happy to work on the understanding that this discussion applies to all Cadw sites where the name has significantly changed, not just the castles? I think the three chapels mentioned above are the only other sites this currently applies to, but there might be some others we've missed. A.D.Hope (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, happy, although we appear to be a long way from a clear consensus! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@A.D.Hope, not the sites where Cadw has only changed the place-name. Those are more subtle, so may not be as adopted. Best case-by-case for those, if such a minor change is adopted or considered just another minor spelling. Using Castell over Castle is more obvious and intentional than Blaenavon and Blaenafon. Plus I did hold back on applying this policy on sites which are also managed by other organisations such as the National Trust or privately-owned. DankJae 20:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, by 'significantly changed' I meant the likes of castle to 'castell' and chapel to 'capel' rather than tweaks to place names. Apologies if that wasn't clear. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

• 1 - the status quo is fine at the moment, there's no need to eagerly change everything based on the actions of one website, even if it is the website of the Welsh body that manages these sites. These sites have always had an alternative name to the English one, but it is a Welsh alternative and we deal with non-English names by putting them in brackets (non-bolded) in the lead sentence. I used the example of the Palace of Versailles above, English language sources often use the French name, Château de Versailles, but we don't bold it on the English Wikipedia article. Sionk (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

  I did mention that at least the Versailles website uses "Palace of Versailles" themselves, Cadw clearly isn't anymore. DankJae 22:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

• 2d is my preference. 2a is also fine. I think Sionk's point is reasonable, and if we had no agreement, 1 is a reasonable default option. "fine at the moment" sounds right. However, as above, MOS:BOLDALTNAMES allows that significant alternatives may be bolded as long as there is also an incoming link (which we can ensure). The reason I think these meet the definition of significance is that the statutory heritage body entrusted with their care, and an arm of Welsh Government, are only referring to them thus. Visit Wales are also part of Welsh Government and are likely to follow suit. People will thus start searching for these on those names. They are not the common name (except the likes of Castell Coch and Castell y Bere) but they are significant. I agree there's no rush. You could even make this an RfC if you wanted wider editor inpit. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

  And, in fact, I am fine with option 3 too... so um... not exactly decisive there ;) Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

  The flaw with 2d, as I see it, is that it doesn't associate the 'Castell' form with the Welsh language. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  Yes I considered that. But that is the thing. If the word becomes an English usage it is only Welsh in the way "rendezvous" is French, or "zeitgeist" is German. It is a potential flaw of the policy. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  I see where you're coming from, but at the moment we're dealing with names which were until recently almost exclusively Welsh-language and which are still heavily associated with that language. If they become thoroughly Anglicised we can deal with that at a later date. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  If other organisations and media were to follow the lead of Cadw in promoting the Welsh language names, the situation might change. But they haven't yet, have they? Sionk (talk) 23:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  They have, as @DankJae showed in his post at 17:00 on the 13th, above. A.D.Hope (talk) 23:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks, silly me. Though the majority of those articles are undigested repeats of a CADW press release about their 40th birthday. I'd still stand by by point that the tail is wagging the dog here. Sionk (talk) 09:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

  I do think that those articles are a good example of how the press tend to just use whatever name is on the press release rather than formally choosing a position – it was similar with the Brecon Beacons and Snowdonia. 'Just going along with it' is arguably a choice in itself, mind.

  I'm not sure if the tail is wagging the dog, though. What's proposed is a small change which will in some way acknowledge that the Welsh names are now used in English, which is definitely true. It is early days, but given Cadw have a lot of sway over the sites their position does carry quite a lot of weight. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

• 2e: my preference is to treat the names as both Welsh and English. I've given suggestions as to how this could be done in the discussion above, but for the sake of keeping everything in one place two options are

  [Name] Castle, also known in both English and Welsh as Castell [Name]

  and

  [Name] Castle (Welsh, alternate English: Castell [Name])

  A.D.Hope (talk) 11:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  That works for me. Jim Killock (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

• 2a: - for preference, but I could as easily go with other 2. options. I understand the view that 1. is currently best, given CommonName and the fact that most sources currently use those. But I think it is significant that the responsible Welsh heritage body, following Welsh Government policy, has began a process of name alterations. Cadw's "journey" (yuck) is recent, but it is highly relevant, and over time the sources will follow it. For me, we should probably recognise and reflect that now. But I can also live with a waiting policy. KJP1 (talk) 07:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for copying me into this - I've been very busy with other matters this last few weeks so have been nowhere near WP. I've nothing to add at this point as the matter would seem to have had a good airing and I've no strong preferences. Geopersona (talk) 07:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

• 1: As we're in English Wikipedia, I think we should carry on as we're doing until the Welsh names become commonplace. Deb (talk) 07:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

• Just as one indicator of media trends, I see that the Monmouthshire Beacon is now using Castell Caernarfon, Castell Coety, Castell Conwy and Castell Harlech, [16]. KJP1 (talk) 07:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

  Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle Ages, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Kingdom. DankJae 19:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• 1: We don't yet have enough evidence yet, nor has enough time lapsed, to say if the Welsh government-preferred spelling is being adopted in enough English-language sources. Let's keep the status quo until we see more. If that happens we would probably want to go for 2d because they'll no longer be Welsh-only alternative names. (All that said, if those sources widely adopt the names, we should probably have a RfC to determine if we should rename the article titles per WP:UE and WP:MODERNPLACENAME.) Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 00:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Also, I'm thinking that the lengthy 2b is untenable per the spirit of MOS:LEADLANG, which advises against including "particularly lengthy names" because that "clutters the lead sentence and impairs readability". While the names themselves aren't long, the proposed text is. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 00:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
• 2d: because both names are already established in English if Cadw promotes the Welsh version in English materials. Fairly rapidly these will appear in international and tourism contexts relying on Cadw. Official usage and some journalists will lean to the Welsh as the "official" name. It seems clear that the term is Wels also as the Welsh pronunciation is given. 2a suggests to a reader, rather than a Wikipedian, that the Welsh name is not normally used in English. It's best to recognise this change to use the Welsh name in English materials in a form that is neutral, rather than risk offence and edit wars as this rapidly becomes more commonplace. --Jim Killock (talk) 09:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

  • Might the fact that your comment is written mostly in the future tense suggest that we're putting the cart before the horse a little? The change is still very new, and as far as I'm aware the articles have remained stable besides the initial edits made by @DankJae and myself before this discussion was opened. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:41, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

    I understood I could be read that way but tbh Cadw's use of the term ought to be sufficient as they are promoting it. The rest of my comment should be read as expectation that its usage will be reinforced given the prominence and influence that Cadw have over the use of the name. Jim Killock (talk) 11:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@A.D.Hope, Deb, Geopersona, JimKillock, KJP1, Sionk, Sirfurboy, and The ed17: Well it's been more than a month, with a bit of a delay (sorry I'm busy). So if I counted correctly:

Extended content
Doing a tally by first preference/second/default = total, it's: Option 1: 3 / 0 / 2 = 5 Options 2: 4 (first preference) = 4 Option 3: 0 / 1 / 0 = 1 2a: 1 / 1 / 0 = 2 2b: 0 / 1 / 0 = 1 2c: 0 / 1 / 0 = 1 2d: 2 / 1 / 0 = 3 2e: 1 / 1 / 0 = 2 3: 0 / 1 / 0 = 1 Please tell me if I cannot count.

So there's a weak first preference for a change (4 v 3), but no agreement on one, with some stating we should restore the original for now. If you're wondering on my vote, I'd prefer 2a (as originally done), but then agree with 1 as a default, then would prefer 2d (when more sources use it). If there is another discussion in the future, we can trim it to 1 or 2d, or plus 2a or 2e by A.D.Hope. If including my votes it will be trimmed to 1, 2a and 2d as future options.

Anyway, should I basically revert my edits? Will do so if there is no objection here. Sorry for making this pointless. Hope you enjoyed your holidays if you had them. Diolch DankJae 21:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Now that the initial discussion following Cadw's change has died down, I have come round to the idea that it would be better to wait and see how things pan out. That would mean reverting your initial round of edits, DankJae, but it certainly doesn't mean this discussion was pointless. On the contrary, I think you handled it very well and that 'actually, we don't need to change anything' is a perfectly valid outcome.

Maybe we should revisit the issue in a year or so? See if Cadw have started publishing guidebooks under the Welsh names or if there's more evidence of English media outlets using them? A.D.Hope (talk) 08:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

It was by no means a pointless discussion, but the current consensus is quite understandable. However, in more and more of the media coverage that I see relating to this issue, the outlets are following Cadw's lead. I'm pretty sure we will need to re-visit the issue, but the discussion we've had here will likely make it easier to reach a decision when we do. KJP1 (talk) 08:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Reverted my edits DankJae 22:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I hope this hasn't left you deflated, DankJae. The discussion was definitely worthwhile, and I think we'll return to the topic sooner rather than later as things develop. A.D.Hope (talk) 16:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Meaning of "llettau"

This building in Flintshire is called "Llettau at Pentrehobyn". Is "Llettau" just a name, like "Dunroamin", or does it have a meaning? It sounds something like an almshouse. I can't find it in on-line Welsh dictionaries. KJP1 (talk) 05:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

It looks like a plural form of llety. Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru gives all the following as plurals of llety: "lletyau, lletyoedd, lletyon, lletyfon, lletâu, lletai, lleteiau, lleteuon", and it defines the word as "lodging(s), billet, accommodation, quarters, dwelling, abode, inn; room, chamber; lodge (of Freemasons, &c.)". Ham II (talk) 10:55, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Ham II - Great to hear from you, and many thanks. "Lodging" makes perfect sense. By the by, I've flagged a thought at Talk:Cathays Park which may interest you. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 11:22, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for British people

British people 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. Z1720 (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Owain Glyndwr article

After doing some brief browsing, I feel the Owain Glyndwr article is almost completed (except for 8 {{citations needed, and 3 {{pages needed) with almost 140 references. I think it could be nominated for a Wikipedia:Good article nominations after either removing the warrant text, or finding the sources and a copy edit just to make sure the article is worthy of a GA status. Anyone want to join in, help out etc? Cltjames (talk) 16:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Pont Fawr

Does anyone have any preference/is there any relevant guidance for naming an article on Pont Fawr? This is currently a redirect to Llanrwst. We could have: Pont Fawr, Pont Fawr, Llanrwst, or Llanrwst Bridge. Cadw calls it Pont Fawr in the Grade I listing (of which it has two), but Llanrwst Bridge in the Scheduled monument record. Coflein goes with Pont Fawr. For other Grade I listed bridges, we've generally gone for the anglicised name, with the exception of Pont Cysyllte. Not sure what the "common name" would be, probably Pont Fawr? Don't have any particular views myself. KJP1 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I would go with Cadw and Pont Fawr. Tony Holkham (Talk) 08:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I think the title should be Pont Fawr, Llanrwst, as Pont Fawr is probably not unique to use on its own. Tony Holkham (Talk) 09:19, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I also thought there would be more mentions of Pont Fawr than there actually are. I thought it would be like Ty Mawr, of which Monmouthshire alone as three. I notice this article, Tu Hwnt i'r Bont uses Pont Fawr, so I think we'll go with Pont Fawr, Llanrwst, but I'll give it a bit in case there are other views. KJP1 (talk) 09:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata can be good for checking this sort of thing. From that I see that there's a Pont Fawr in Llandderfel (Grade II*), a Pont Fawr in Aberdaron (Grade II), Bont Fawr/y Bont Fawr/Dolgellau Bridge (Grade II), a Pont Fawr aqueduct in Pont-rhyd-y-fen (Grade II*) and Bont-fawr ("a tiny hamlet in Carmarthenshire"). So Llanrwst at Grade I might still be the most significant one. It would also be the only one with an article if you decide to create one, and WP:D2D implies that in such situations no disambiguation is needed. Ham II (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Pont Fawr it is, though whether I've correctly handled the alternative/native language title in the infobox is another matter. KJP1 (talk) 07:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe worth BOLDing the alternative English language name, which is widely used (probably for ease of distinguising it from other big/main bridges). But clearly it's widely referred to as Pont Fawr in English language sources, beyond just Cadw. Sionk (talk) 10:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I think that looks better. And I very much like the nifty tool Ham II has used to explain the "CR/CP" initials. Showing my lamentable ignorance of Welsh, why is "Great Bridge" "Pont Fawr" but "Great House" is "Ty Mawr"? KJP1 (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Mutations - a soft mutation occurs in adjectives after a feminine noun in this case. Jim Killock (talk) 11:16, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

It's explained here: Consonant_mutation#Welsh, but it's easier (as a very basic learner) just to memorise the differences than understand the concept! Tony Holkham (Talk) 11:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The language gods decided long ago that bridges were girls and houses were boys :) Sionk (talk) 23:17, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Welsh Grade I listed buildings

I've been looking at the coverage of Welsh Grade I listed buildings. It's quite a healthy position: twenty of the Principal Areas (PA) have full coverage, either with standalone articles or with re-directs to sections in wider articles. That leaves one PA with a total of four gaps (Blaenau Gwent doesn't have any). The "missing" articles are all for churches, and the current position is (the numbers are the Cadw identifiers):

• All done.

If anybody has the time/inclination to pick any of these up and get a Start article going, it would be greatly appreciated. Although I appreciate it's a niche interest! The best sources are the Cadw and Coflein databases, and I can provide the relevant Buildings of Wales entries if needed. KJP1 (talk) 13:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll try, especially those near me. Noticed all largely the north. :) DankJae 21:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks. There’s no hurry, of course. And yes, I noticed that northern bias. I wonder why. More editors based in/with connections to the south? Greater availability of sources? KJP1 (talk) 04:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Quite possibly. It's noticeable that Welsh topics have somewhat patchy coverage and that the articles themselves aren't always of the highest quality; on YouTube, the channel Cambrian Chronicles covers Welsh history in some depth and it's a bit of a running joke that he always finds something wrong on Wikipedia. Articles like kingdom of Gwynedd really do need addressing. Personally, I'm hoping to bump Erddig and Penarth Fawr up to 'good' in the near future. A.D.Hope (talk) 08:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

For the record, I didnt actually do much work on the Kingdom of Gwynedd article itself, just added references, proofreading and a few paragraphs. But from what I've grasped, whoever wrote the article did a decent job in going through the timeline of Kings. But, I feel it's more of a biographical outlook than an article about the kingdom. But I don't think Cambrian Chronicles mentions the Kingdom of Gwynedd article, only the List of rulers in Wales and Cadwaladr had erroneous entries. Otherwise, I added a sentence about Penarth Fawr from a digital book I have. Cltjames (talk) 21:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether to use infobox building or church. I have tended to use church for churches. Does it matter a great deal, or is it better to use building for listed structures? Tony Holkham (Talk) 15:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I now see there is an infobox religious building. I've created a few, and used all three infoboxes without any apparent reason for each, so have confused myself, it seems. Tony Holkham (Talk) 15:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Tony, you’re on a roll! Many thanks. I tend to use the church IB. It doesn’t, as far as I know, allow for the multiple listing designations which I like in the Historic site IB, which can be a pity as you often have a listed lychgate/cross etc. But it does give you parish/priest/diocese etc., which is useful. KJP1 (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, KJP1. Sometime I'll review what I've created and see whether any should be changed. Tony Holkham (Talk) 15:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1, I think you can embed the multiple listings of historic sites IB into Church IB, tried at User:DankJae/sandbox/3.

Had used it for Building IB at General Market, Wrexham as long as its okay the listings are at the bottom of the IB and some minor gaps on mobile? DankJae 16:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Dank - That looks good. I shall try it with the next one. KJP1 (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

DankJae - so, I tried an embedded multiple designation. The result was not a success, [17]. Any idea what I'm doing wrong? KJP1 (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1, you just forgot the extra }}

As there’s both {{Infobox church}} and {{Infobox historic site}} for the two {{ you need the two closing }} DankJae 11:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1, @Tony Holkham, can I take Flintshire for now? Because you two took my county :( it's fine DankJae 17:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

DankJae - Sorry! Flintshire is all yours. I am working through Powys, and will move on to Gwynedd. Then we can assess the situation. If anyone else has a particular affection for the Welsh Riviera, Conwy and Denbighshire is available! KJP1 (talk) 18:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

p.s. The Church in Wales Heritage Records, [18] and CPAT, [19] have proved VERY useful sources. A fair amount is lifted from Cadw/Pevsner but there is much additional material. KJP1 (talk) 18:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

No probs. I'll take whatever, but probably not until next week, sorry. Tony Holkham (Talk) 19:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done Flintshire 27. A bit rough, haven't done a church in a while, and surprisingly sources had quite a bit. But its late. DankJae 23:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done Flintshire 321, also a bit rough. Will still try and improve them both overtime, the sources had quite a bit. DankJae 22:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

DankJae, Tony Holkham - With thanks to DankJae and Tony, we're now done with these, having a standalone Start, or a reasonable re-direct to a section of a larger article, for all of Wales' Grade Is. They can certainly be improved/expanded, but they give basic information to readers, and provide a starting point for other editors. KJP1 (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

great work! You two were speeding through.

Of course the next goal is the other Grades but there’s so much more of those. So slowly going through them already (locally). DankJae 12:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

The problem with II*s and IIs, apart from the sheer numbers!, is WP:RS. The II*s are hard enough, but for the Grade IIs, beyond Cadw and Coflein, it’s a real struggle. But you’re right, no reason not to try. KJP1 (talk) 12:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1, agree there’s likely less sources, especially for individual listed buildings on a terrace. Hence for Wrexham, I group a bunch of them together, usually by street or area. As having their own stubs would be pointless. Plus allows for greater context, but aware that the streets don't inherit the notability. DankJae 13:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Victoria Terrace, Beaumaris was great for sourcing as Cadw listed each of the twenty apartments individually. But each report says the same thing! KJP1 (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I've just counted the Grade II* list in Pembrokeshire and it came to 186. I've added one, but there may be others missing, and some are missing wikilinks, so quite a bit of work there. Interesting, though, and the above comments are very helpful. Cheers, T. Tony Holkham (Talk) 14:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I find grouping them, by location, function etc. can help. You’ve got half a dozen dovecotes, so with a model for those, you could probably repurpose some of the general history of dovecotes, and make it specific with the Cadw/Coflein/Pevsner. Then you’ve got 18 entires at Pembroke Dock, so a Listed buildings section there would allow you to mention them, and link them, under sub-headings, and a paragraph on each. Not as good, perhaps, as 18 standalones, but quicker! Alternatively, a separate article, “Listed buildings at Pembroke Dock”? Lastly, you’ve some estates, e.g. Cilwendeg Farm (three) where one article could cover the house/stables/gates/whatever. It just helps to make the 186 slightly less daunting! KJP1 (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

p.s. I've just noticed that this, Pembroke Dockyard has a section, Gallery of listed buildings on the site. This would probably be a better place for a Listed buildings section. KJP1 (talk) 07:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Cadw at 40 - good to see our niche interest getting some wider coverage. KJP1 (talk) 07:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Women in Green's October 2024 edit-a-thon

Hello WikiProject Wales:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2024!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 12:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Snowdonia/Eryri National Park Authority

I'm opening a general discussion about how we refer to the national park authority (NPA) for Snowdonia/Eryri. The current name of the article about the area is Snowdonia, but the NPA is referred to as both "Snowdonia NPA" and "Eryri NPA" depending on the page. The Snowdonia article uses "Snowdonia", for example, whereas National park authority uses "Eryri".

This is discussion is not a proxy for a requested move of Snowdonia. Rather, it's intended to explore whether using a consistent name for the NPA is necessary or desirable, and if so what name to use. There is no pressing need to find a consensus, as overall it isn't a major issue. A.D.Hope (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

As at Talk:Recommended place-names in Snowdonia, I am still of the opinion that as the NPA is a distinct formal organisation, referencing it does not need to (automatically) follow the common name of the area they cover, instead its name is considered independently. As the NPA has no article proving a common name, there is no preference AFAIAA that one name is chosen over the other, so either name can be used by editors (compared to a preference for geographic features) depending on the context.

As the body now uses Eryri and has started using "Eryri National Park Authority" then it is at least an option, and per below appears to be the more-common/as-common name. However, if "National Park Authority" is decapitalised as "national park authority", it is a descriptive name (an NPA covering [area]), therefore under MOS:GEO, it should use the article title for the area. So "Eryri National Park Authority" but not "Eryri national park authority".

Looking at Google News, since Jan 2023 there's two pages with "Snowdonia", but four pages with "Eryri". As a very rough look at media usage in the absence of other aggregators, at minimum the common name of the NPA among recent sources is at least disputed.

But alternatively the legal name of the authority and the park uses "Snowdonia", which the NPA continues to use referencing their legal responsibilities, although we don't follow legal names only because they are. As well as the argument of consistency to use "Snowdonia" everywhere until an RM on the main article changes it. I assume any consensus here would revert edits like this.

It should however be only Snowdonia National Park as it is a geographic name and a main (overlapping) definition of Snowdonia, until the article is moved or split.

Soft preference for Eryri NPA, although admit the authority hasn't entirely switched (is it due to legal obligations/upcoming rebranding?). DankJae 15:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Civil parishes

I recently raised a question at Talk:Carmarthenshire#Civil_parishes about tables of (ecclesiastical) parishes which are being referred to (erroneously in my view) as civil parishes, which do not necessarily equate, even though the names may be the same. The tables are also incomplete, are lacking links and contain mistakes.

There haven't been any civil parishes in Wales since 1974, of course, but still the distinction should be made when adding to history sections. Many (ecclesiastical) parishes still exist as part of the Church in Wales.

For Pembrokeshire, I cut and pasted the table to List_of_hundreds_of_Wales#Pembrokeshire. I think it would be the right thing to do the same with Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion#Civil_parishes (where it appears under Geography), and even Denbighshire (historic), where there is another similar table. The editor (Mark J) who compiled the tables did not respond to requests for comment. Tony Holkham (Talk) 14:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it here, Tony. I agree that ecclesiastical parishes would probably be a better name, although that was much the same thing as a civil parish at the time. However they are all historical, and I am not sure what they add to the articles. I would support their removal absent a clear rationale for inclusion. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:13, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, yes. Looking in detail at Pembrokeshire, I found a list of civil parishes (1909) and there was some correlation with ecclesiastical parishes, but also some differences, so making the distinction is important. I'll give it a little more time before acting. Tony Holkham (Talk) 15:22, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I have done the three extant counties, and am working my way through the historic counties, putting the table of parishes in context. Feel free to amend if you wish. Tony Holkham (Talk) 12:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done All done, I think. If any more are found, they can be treated similarly. Tony Holkham (Talk) 12:54, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Bit confused of the mixture of Welsh and English names now added on them? It clutters it quite a bit more. DankJae 17:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I think we have to wait until Mark J has finished with the tables and put right anything that is left, as he doesn't engage. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Gruffydd ap Llylweyn family name discrepency

I started a Talk:Gruffudd ap Llywelyn ap Iorwerth#Family naming inconsistency about a discrepancy I discovered to do with the spelling of the name Gruffudd in articles related to Gruffydd ap Llywelyn's family. Anyone care to give some advice as to how to deal with the situation? Cltjames (talk) 17:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes, if you want a job done you have to do it yourself. Simple explanation; consistency is needed & Gruffudd was the original modern spelling before a newer Gruffydd, therefore when historians first referred to Gruffydd (Griffiths) they would have pronounced the name with the 'u'. Simple amend, done! Cltjames (talk) 00:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Infant school featured article review

The article infant school is currently going through a featured article review. Any comments would be appreciated. Llewee (talk) 13:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Wrexham § a city or the former town/city centre of the City of the County Borough of Wrexham?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Wrexham § a city or the former town/city centre of the City of the County Borough of Wrexham?. Do we interprete the Letters Patent literally, and regard the City to be Wrexham County Borough and not Wrexham, which in turn is something, anything but "city". DankJae 16:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Aneurin Bevan

Aneurin Bevan 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. Z1720 (talk) 16:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Informal discussion

An informal discussion of article issues, a "Before opening a reassessment", has been initiated at Talk:Dylan Thomas#Article issues and classification -- Otr500 (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Heneb: the Trust for Welsh Archaeology

We should probably have an article on Heneb, the successor body to the four Welsh Archaeological Trusts, which was established this year, [20]. Is there any preference as to title: Heneb or Heneb: the Trust for Welsh Archaeology? The former is simpler, the latter gives the reader a clearer idea as to what Heneb is. KJP1 (talk) 07:10, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I'd be inclined, initially at least, to simply make a redirect from Heneb to Welsh Archaeological Trusts until we see how Heneb is run and develops. It tends to be the individual archaeological trusts that are cited in articles, I think. Tony Holkham (Talk) 09:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's certainly true at present. Even Heneb’s own website comprises a single webpage, with links to the four trusts, in effect a re-direct itself. I'll do that for now and we can see how it develops. KJP1 (talk) 09:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1, @Tony Holkham, when I updated the pages a while ago on the merger, I did plan to make a Heneb page but couldn’t find enough sources then. Prefer Heneb over the name with a description like how Cadw doesn’t have theirs. DankJae 09:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

That's fine - I've done the redirect as Heneb, although I originally spelt it wrong! As and when there's more info., we can overwrite the redirect. At present, I can't even see such basics as CEO, board, charity registration, so my suggestion for an article was premature. That said, it certainly exists now. How it can, without any of the basics of corporate governance, is beyond me. KJP1 (talk) 09:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

p.s. I did not know that "heneb" is Welsh for "ancient monument". I wonder if they are going to set up their own database of historic sites, with their own set of identifiers. I've never really understood why, beyond the historical, Cadw and RCAHMW/Coflein have their own listing systems for what are, in many cases, the same places. KJP1 (talk) 09:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I looked up news articles and found two that refer to Heneb here and here, but nothing that refers to the establishment of the trust. Tony Holkham (Talk) 12:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Here are a few refs that might support an article on Heneb

• Council for British Archaeology
• FAME
• Appointments
• Letter heading
• Another letter

Tony Holkham (Talk) 12:52, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

My preference would be to rename/move the Welsh Archaeological Trusts article to Heneb leaving the original name as a redirect. The article on the WATs is an overview of the four organisations rather than on a separate entity, and contains nothing that would not be included as part of one of those articles or as part of the history for Heneb. The article can be reworked to include a history section and an updated overview rather than creating a separate article.

A note on citations - Heneb had always been the website for the Gwynedd Archaeological Trust, so the merger might not cause too many problems with citations from their website, but it may still be worth going through any articles that have citations from here and the other trusts websites and adding archive copies where possible in case these sites stop working after the new-look Heneb site has finished being "under construction". EdwardUK (talk) 14:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

@EdwardUK, isn’t Heneb based on the Dyfed AT?

Neutral on converting Welsh Archaeological Trusts, as it links the old AT articles together but the article isn’t extensive. Wondered if we should re-approach the (old) trusts themselves, convert them to Heneb regions? Delete them? Merge into Heneb? Or keep historical as now? DankJae 15:18, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you are right it was Dyfed AT that changed name – but the website address Gwynedd had always used is heneb.co.uk, though checking again I see I made the mistake of thinking that this was the same as the new Heneb site (heneb.org.uk). EdwardUK (talk) 17:23, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:England–Wales border § Recently added maps

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:England–Wales border § Recently added maps. Concerning the graphics, potential OR/SYNTH of maps added in good-faith! DankJae 15:21, 17 November 2024 (UTC)