Talk:Geography and identity in Wales

Developing this article?
This article, if it is to be worthwhile, needs a great deal of work, in my view, and probably a change of name. The text was split off from an earlier article, North-South divide in the United Kingdom. I'm not at all sure there is a "divide" in Wales in the same sense as the (social, economic, cultural) divide between the south (or south east) and north of England - but clearly there are / were cultural variations within Wales. Most obviously, in the historic level of development and industrialisation, but also, going back into medieval history, the different kingdoms, and different dialects / versions of the language. There is also the question of simple rivalry between north and south. I am no expert on this at all, and I certainly don't want to be accused of stirring up divisiveness where there is no evidence for anything of substance, but I'd be interested in the views of other editors. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It certainly needs renaming. There is a historical post industrialistion devide between the rural, welsh speaking north, mid and west of wales and the industrial, english speaking and socialist/internationalist South East.  The novels of Emyr Humphreys paint this well in the seven volume series of novels known as  Land of the Living.   Current resentment about the balance of power between southern members and the north in the Assembly etc. etc.   No there is a divide but its not North/South per se.  Certainly nothing like the English difference. -- Snowded  TALK  08:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) If there is any animosity between North and South Walians, I'm sure it must only be one-way. From my perspective as a "Gog" who has lived in Cardiff for three years, I rarely heard any disparaging comments from southerners about the north except in the form of banter (e.g. "You bloody Gogs!"). However, when I'm back in North Wales, I often hear negative comments about the south, particularly regarding the coverage of the area on the Welsh news programmes. So if there are any ill-feelings between the north and the south, it's probably purely based on jealousy. – PeeJay 08:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My family comes from the South but I grew up from 5-18 in the North and I think the "jealousy" comment there is uncalled for. There has been animosity and indifference both ways over the years and there has been some discrimination.  It should not be exaggerated but neither should be be ignored  However the last thing we want is an article which gives the appearance of some racial divide.  I for one know I will mix with South and North later today in Cardiff (please can we beat them while I am alive to see it) and the differences will not be there.  However there is a very interesting history of differences here that deserve exploration.  Socialist-liberal,  welsh speaking-english, rural-industralist, nationalist-internationalist etc.  In geographic tools its also Norman Wales V Treaty of Montgomery Wales-- Snowded  TALK  08:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm impressed by the instant response! Any good refs? By the way, where's this "socialist/internationalist South East", Snowded? - I'm still looking!  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:26, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It was there in the early part of the last century and survived through until the 60's/70's. Look at the miners libraries, workers education movement, strength of the communist party etc. etc.  -- Snowded  TALK  08:36, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I know, I was being momentarily flippant, which is sometimes necessary when one deals with this local authority. Anyway - we need refs.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There are various concepts of division between different parts of Wales, two of the most notable are Sir Alfred Zimmern's 1921 typography, "Welsh Wales / American Wales (which sounds strange today) / English Wales", and Denis Balsom's 1980s "Three Wales" model, "Y Fro Gymraeg / Welsh Wales / British Wales". The idea of a north-south divide is too simplistic.--Pondle (talk) 11:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I believe this is a difficult article to justify as a stand-alone piece. As far as I can see the only real divides between the two areas, is the higher percentage of Welsh speakers in the North, the Assoc. Football / Rugby Union split and the physical divide caused by an inadequate transport link between them. I've been looking through The Welsh Academy Encyclopaedia of Wales for a reference on the so-called divide and they appear to ignore it. I think this will be difficult to reference as it is not based on any accepted social basis. Also, where is the divide line? There's no Watford Gap in Wales that I'm aware of. FruitMonkey (talk) 13:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That's why we're talking about changing it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

This article is absolute tosh. Flintishire is (one of) the richest country in Wales, and it's in the north. The valleys are very poor, while Wrexham is a boom town. Never mind the economy - that's not what the divide is about at all. There are no direct roads from north to south, nor railways. All roads lead to England, because that's how the valleys run. Wales has three part - the top, the bottom and a gigantic space in the middle - that's the divide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.48.80 (talk) 12:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A complete re-write or AfD needed
I've been looking at this article in more depth and I believe wholesale change is needed. Demographically, there is no clear north-south (or even east-west) divide in Wales. The linguistic and economic divides run east-west. The ONS Area Classification groups most of Wales into the "coastal and countryside" cluster, the south east and north east stand out. I've already talked about the "three Wales model" in the conversation above. I reckon that we should completely re-write this article, or expand Geography of Wales with socio-economic information and delete this nonsense. What do others think?--Pondle (talk) 12:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * This 2002 press release from the Institute of Welsh Affairs refers to a report, "Divided We Fall", and states: "The report argues that the real division within Wales is not north versus south but a much more complex three-way split, first identified in the 1920 by the inaugural professor of international relations at University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Sir Alfred Zimmern. This was still evident in the voting patterns in the inaugural Assembly elections in 1999. In modern terms the three areas are Y Fro Gymraeg, the Welsh-speaking heartlands; Welsh Wales - the south Wales valleys; and British Wales, the areas closest to England, plus Pembrokeshire." That makes sense to me.  I think there is some merit in expanding the current article with both a statistical analysis, as suggested by Pondle, and a wider social / cultural / historical summary.  Clearly the resulting article would be a lot broader than suggested by the current title, and it should be renamed.  The IWA report uses the term "divisions" - would "Geographical divisions in Wales" be too general, as well as too provocative?  What would be a better title?  If we can focus on an appropriate article title, it might make the job of finding appropriate referenced content easier.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say something such as Economic and social geography of Wales. Though I still think that would make for a nice expansion of Geography of Wales.--Pondle (talk) 16:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Possibly, although some of the historical and cultural aspects might not fall within many people's perceptions of what is covered by the term "geography". Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Cultural geography', 'historical geography', 'social geography' are all terms in my copies of the Penguin Dictionary of Human Geography (edited by Brian Goodall, published 1987) and The Social Science Encyclopedia (edited by Kuper & Kuper, published by Routledge in 1996), I think 'geography' has to be in the title because we are dealing with spatial variations here.--Pondle (talk) 16:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying, but I think the current article on Geography of Wales is too poorly developed and too focused on the "traditional" geography of landforms, places and so forth to allow a section on economic / social / cultural "divides"/"divisions" to sit easily within it; and, if it is to be a freestanding article, it need not use the term "geography". Although academic geographers would see the issue as sitting within the definition of geography, most readers may not, and it may be that a title such as Regional divisions within Wales would be more understandable to a wider audience than, say, Economic and social geography of Wales.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the three nations bit works well for the last 120 years or so, possibly more with other historical differences. If you think about it Wales starts as divided Princedoms, sees the Anglo Norman invasion of the South, Marches and Pembroke and then goes through a series of rivalries and brief unities before we get to the post 13C- Industrialization period.  That triggers the two way divide I talked about (which is reflected in the literature, then the coastal/English/Retiree starts to become distinct.  .  I think the subject is worth an article in its own right, but it should probably start with Industrialization.  It badly needs renaming - maybe "Divisions in Modern Wales" or similar.  Might be a nice one to get to GA fast as there are some good sources, and its not a huge subject.  -- Snowded  TALK  20:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer Social geography of Wales over any title with "divisions" in it; the latter option sounds more like a POV fork. Ham 18:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * That sounds good to me, except that it assumes that (say) east Flintshire is a "part" of Wales, which it isn't. East Flintshire is a part of the "North West" of England. It has nothing at all to do with Wales, except by accident of politics. The culture and economy is pure English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.48.80 (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * PS: maybe the aim should be to identify social geography independently of false political notions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.48.80 (talk) 12:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Pure English. A particulary fine example of an oxymoron. Well done that troll. Daicaregos (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Title
Can I propose Regional identity within Wales - or alternatively Regional identities within Wales - as clearer than, and preferable to, either the current title or the previous one. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Daicaregos (talk) 10:09, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not precious about the title; North-South divide in Wales was clearly inadequate and crying out for urgent change. If someone can think of a better title than then as far as I'm concerned they're more than welcome to move the article. But I'm not sure about regional identity / identities because Balsom's 'regions' are misnamed: they aren't really regions of Wales in the classic sense. I can't think of anyone who might say that they come from somewhere called "British Wales" or "Welsh Wales" for that matter. These terms only really have any meaning as part of a model in political science.--Pondle (talk) 23:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * My view is that the work on political identity does not require its own article to itself - it should form part of a much wider-ranging article on regional identity within Wales, which could summarise differences in historical identity (and language / dialect - a topic barely covered anywhere) as well as current identity. "Regional identities..." would cover all aspects.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support regional identity, the politics is tied up with geography any way -- Snowded TALK  08:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

(re-indenting - developing into a new thread) Strangely, I can't think of any serious authors who have written about regional identities and differences within Wales (in the sense of north-south, east-west etc etc)... the best-known historians, such as Kenneth O. Morgan and Gwyn Alf Williams, scarcely seem to touch on this (beyond remarking about the differences between those blurry concepts, 'industrial' and 'rural' Wales). I can't find anything relevant in this work of sociology or in the Welsh Academy encyclopedia, either. If there's nothing out there to cite, I suggest that we merge the material here into either Politics of Wales or even Welsh people, and delete the standalone article.--Pondle (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be against merging with Welsh people, if there's too little source material. I've added what I know on the subject, although I admit to being completely unversed in human geography or sociology. I included something on differences in dialect, which is definitely the main way regional differences are manifest to a Welsh speaker. I gather there was once much stronger differentiation between regional dialects and identities, i.e. between the speakers of y Wenhwyseg, y Wyndodeg et al? (Unfortunately my expertise ends there!) If so that might be justification for a standalone article. Ham 20:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm against merger (at least for the time being), and (in principle) for expanding the article and renaming it as discussed above. I think there is a problem of reliable references, and that is epitomised by Ham's edits to the article which, while they may well be true to some degree, are wholly unreferenced and therefore unverifiable.  Rather than deleting them, I hope that refs can be found.  I also suspect that one of the reasons for a lack of references may have been that, for many writers (and for understandable reasons), it has been much more important to emphasise the commonalities between different parts of Wales than the differences.  I think that there are enough regional variations to justify an article but I think that finding the refs may be a challenge.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Content
I'm reverting the text to the version provided by Ham, plus the tags I added. There is an unresolved issue over the scope of this article and the text, but my view is that, until that is resolved, it is better to be inclusive of suggested fields of coverage rather than seeking to exclude them. I will try to add further referenced text, and then in my view we should allow the article to "simmer" for a while - in preference to edit-warring over reasonable content. But we do need to have references. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:06, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that we should overplay the social or economic differences between north and south Wales. As Phil Williams says here, "think of a region... where almost the whole population lives within 50km of the coast. Where most of the land area is upland. The main railway line runs east-west, near the coast, as does the main dual carriageway. In the west of this region Welsh has survived as a community language, but as we move towards the east the proportion of Welsh speakers drops steadily... in the 19th and early 20th century the religious affiliation of the region was strongly nonconformist. In the east of the region coal and steel became major industries." I could go on, but you get the picture - as Williams says, this description applies equally well to north and south.--Pondle (talk) 16:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The Welsh article
I've translated the Welsh equivalent to this article below. As you can see, its content is totally different from that of its English counterpart! I'm putting it here for us to decide what, if anything, we'd like to include from it. Only one statement is sourced, and note that the title North-South divide in Wales has been retained (although it gives almost as much attention to East-West divisions). Ham 17:59, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It is said that a North-South divide exists in Wales, which has cultural and economic elements. Where the economy is concerned, the urban areas of the South (the cities of Cardiff, Swansea and Newport) are prosperous compared with the rural and mountainous areas of the North. Alongside the division's cultural factors -- mainly the fact that ability in Welsh, Welsh identity and nationalism are higher in the North than in the coastal areas of the South (which have been more Anglicised in the last millennium) -- this is a social problem in modern Wales.


 * The status of Mid-Wales, namely Powys and Ceredigion, in the North-South division is ambiguous. These areas are relatively prosperous but their population density is very low; many of Mid-Wales's inhabitants commute to nearby areas to work. Also ambiguous of the status of Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire: they are located in the south of the country but are less urban than Gwent and Glamorgan. To further complicate the situation, part of Pembrokeshire -- the region to the south of the Landsker Line -- is more similar to South Wales as it is more Anglicised (it is called "Little England beyond Wales") and is wealthier than the rest of the county; generally Pembrokeshire is a microcosm of the division across the whole of Wales.


 * To complicate the picture, some political commentators and economists have seen the West-East division as more real and relevant. It can be seen from the maps below that Wales is divided politically (by referendum votes) and linguistically (Welsh-English) on an axis through the centre of the country, form north to south; also the western regions -- North-West Wales, Eastern Mid-Wales and coastal South Wales -- are more prosperous and attract a high percentage of the economic investment in the country. To some extent this division corresponds to the division of Wales for a great part of the Middle Ages between Pura Wallia and the Marches.


 * It could be argued that in recent years the North-South division has declined somewhat. It is said that the borders of the division are evolving, especially with changes between West Wales and the Valleys and the local authorities of the South-East.[1] For instance, regarding the number of Welsh speakers, The 2001 Census found that more can speak Welsh in West Wales than in some counties in the North. There is also an East-West division in North Wales: Welshness [sic: Welsh identity, perhaps] and ability in Welsh are very high in Gwynedd and Anglesey (the northern area of Y Fro Gymraeg), but because of their geography the economy is weak compared with the north-western counties of Wales (Conwy, Denbighshire, Flintshire and Wrexham). This is not a recent development: historically the North-West was more Anglicised. (Note that Flintshire and Wrexham are on the English side of Offa's Dyke.) Despite this statistics on many social and economic matters show that the general North-South division still exists across Wales.


 * Thanks Ham, this is interesting. Mainly WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, but the divide between Pura Wallia and Marchia Wallia is a historical dimension that we haven't touched on here in the English Wikipedia. I also agree that the east-west divide is probably more significant linguistically and economically in modern Wales, and is something that we need to cover.--Pondle (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2010 (UTC)