Talk:Glamorgan/Archive 1

Townships
Have removed the Townships: Ystradyfodwg link which was under the heading Administration. Article was from the a 1907 encyclopaedia, seemed entirely irrelevant to an article on the county. Perhaps should feature in a History article? GarethRhys 14:59, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

More information/refrences
Just had a quick look through this article, it seems very light on source information. I have added one link that I found quickly searching the web, though this article needs a lot more work done on it. Floorwalker 04:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 88.105.55.192 18:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I even agree with you. =\
 * The link you provided to source information regarding the fact it was a principality of Normans doesn't seem to be enough. The webpage I've checked (http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/southeast/sites/history/pages/counties_glamorgan.shtml) doesn't look more verifiable than someone's word of mouth.


 * More printed and representable sources are needed. Especially for historians.


 * Hint: Try and check out Wikipedia's page article such as the late Cho Seung-Hui. Now, one short-lived ordinary person like him has even more sources than a long-lived county region of Wales!


 * 88.105.55.192 18:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Historic county
Shouldn't this page be re-classified as the Historic county of Glamorgan since the introduction of the Unitary Authorities? Jongleur100 (talk) 17:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * True, but it has no president. If we went down this path then in a hundred years most geographic pages would be "Historic...". The page does say historic in the text, though the tense is mixed up, so that may need refining.FruitMonkey (talk) 22:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Anyone coming across this page could easily believe that Glamorgan still exists as a county as most of the page is in the present tense.
 * I think it should be made clearer that the article refers to the historic county. And there is a precedent, if that's what you mean. Take a look at Monmouthshire. Jongleur100 (talk) 23:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you totaly, (apart from changing the name of this page) I think the tense of the page should be placed into the past tense. If you are happy to do it, then go for it. I'd be glad to give opinion afterwards.FruitMonkey (talk) 23:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)