Talk:Mannheim/Archive 1

Swansea, Wales, UK
The location of Mannheim's sister city has several times been changed from UK to Wales by anonymous IP editors. May I suggest doing such things in their natural order: Thank you. --Hans Adler (talk) 02:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) secession
 * 2) acknowledgement by the United Nations
 * 3) making this kind of edit on Wikipedia.


 * This nonsense is continuing. Part of the problem is that Wales is actually not very well known internationally. I am from Mannheim, and until I heard about Swansea and that Swansea is in Wales, I had never heard of Wales. Changing "Swansea, Wales, UK" to "Swansea, Wales" is bound to confuse some readers. Changing the flag from that of the UK to that of Wales is also absurd. See WP:MOSFLAG:
 * In general, if a flag is felt to be necessary, it should be that of the sovereign state (e.g. the United States of America or Canada) not of a subnational entity, even if that entity is sometimes considered a "nation" or "country" in its own right.
 * --Hans Adler (talk) 23:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Hans - I know this was a year ago you left this note but I've just removed the union flag from the page - I'm trying to have consistency across all articles and - although it may not be the case in Poland across the world most towns who're linked with another in a country which forms the UK tend to display the respective national flag rather than the union's flag   . If you're still active on this page and have an opinion, I'd love to hear it! --Richardeast (talk) 16:39, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please refer to WP:MOSICON, which implies that we should use 'subnational' flags with direct relevance. And it is relevant in this case (although Wales is a country, and not a subnational entity). The MOS example (above) says 'in general' (that is: not always) and goes on to discuss a person's legal citizenship, which is not relevant here. Please note that although 'humourous' edit summaries can sometimes be appropriate, they rarely are when reverting. Daicaregos (talk) 18:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am referring to that rule. Actually there are two relevant rules, MOS:ICON and MOS:ICON. In the first, Wales is specifically mentioned as an example of a subnational entity that some editors feel a stronger attachment to than the sovereign state (in this case the UK). After this clarification of terms, it says: "In general, if a flag is felt to be necessary, it should be that of the sovereign state (e.g. the United States of America or Canada) not of a subnational entity, even if that entity is sometimes considered a 'nation' or 'country' in its own right. This is partly for the sake of consistency across Wikipedia, but also because a person's legal citizenship is verifiable, whereas 'nationality' within a country can be porous, indeterminate and shifting. An English person's passport describes them as a 'British citizen', for example, not 'English'; being English is a matter of self-identification, not a verifiable legality in most cases. Many editors, however, feel that the UK's subnations in particular are an exception in sporting contexts, and disputes are likely to arise if this sovereign state maxim is enforced in articles on subnational British topics."
 * In the second it says "Subnational flags (regions, cities, etc.) should generally be used only when directly relevant to the article. Such flags are rarely recognizable by the general public, detracting from any shorthand utility they might have, and are rarely closely related to the subject of the article." (My italics.) To underline the problem described here, consider the Swansea. See the German flag? It might just as well be a flag that is half black and half yellow: the flag of Baden-Württemberg, the non-sovereign Land (literally: country) in which Mannheim is the second-largest city. But it isn't, because in an international context (which this clearly is), the flag is as useless for recognising Baden-Württemberg as is the Welsh flag for recognising Wales. There are simply too many subnational entities in the world for that.
 * If you feel very strongly about this, secede. Hans Adler 18:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The Wales flag icon was added to the Sister Cities section when Swansea first appeared there over four years ago. It has remained on the article since at least May 2008. So, it should be accepted as consensus to show the Welsh flag icon. In fact it has been accepted even by yourself, in December 2008 and June 2009. You say “In the first, Wales is specifically mentioned as an example of a subnational entity that some editors feel a stronger attachment to than the sovereign state (in this case the UK).” If you read the link again you will see that Wales is specifically mentioned as a country and the word subnational does not even appear in the paragraph containing reference to Wales. As I said: The MOS example says 'in general' (that is: not always) and goes on to discuss a person's legal citizenship, which is not relevant here. Further, the part you quoted above provides an example of where the sovereign state need not be used (in that case sports). There is no suggestion that there cannot be other occasions when the nation's flag can be used. Mannheim's page about Swansea gives information on Swansea and Wales exclusively, rather than about the UK, showing that Mannheim considers Wales to be relevant to their twinning arrangement, and not the sovereign state, which makes it directly relevant. As to your comparison to Baden-Württemberg; it is not a nation and therefore is a subnational entity. Wales, however, is a nation. I accept the point that not everyone would recognise the Welsh flag (although, as this is an encyclopaedia one should accept that not all information would be known to everyone). And I note you have accepted previously that both the Welsh (national) flag icon and the UK (sovereign state) flag icon. With that in mind I have reinstated the Welsh flag icon to be shown together with the UK flag icon, which should be sufficiently informative to general readers. Daicaregos (talk) 21:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with all your points (e.g. "nation" is just a word; in the same way, the "country" of Bavaria officially calls itself a "free state", never officially joined the Federal Republic of Germany, and has reserved the privilege of maintaining a Bavarian citizenship concept which is different from being a German citizen who happens to live in Bavaria; similar things apply to Quebec and possibly to the French TOMs), but I don't really have a problem with having both flags there. However, this should be handled uniformly throughout Wikipedia, and as I said on Richardeast's talk page, I think we should discuss this on WT:MOSICON to get to a clear consensus, and then implement and enforce it. (The key questions seem to be: (1) Are England, Scotland, Wales "subnational" in the sense of MOS? (2) Do we use national flags, subnational flags, both or none for city twinning?) Flags are a notorious area of nationalist POV pushing, which is the main reason why I am a bit irritable when I see any edit that changes them. Hans Adler 22:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The UK has constituent countries with their own histories, and in the case of Wales its own language (which is not a variant of English before you mention Schweizerdeutsch Hans). In sports such as football they have separate teams;  Germany has played both England and Wales, not some combination of those, in soccer for example.  Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have varying degrees of self-government.  Scotland and Northern Ireland have distinct legal systems.  Wales and Scotland are also distinctively referenced as nations.  They are not fully sovereign states but neither are they sub-national identities.   A twin city is a cultural exchange which further emphasises the different nationalities.  Most of my friends in Swansea supported Germany over England in the last World Cup, as I did.   All of this has been debated (under mediation) and the balance of references use "country".  The ledes of the relevant articles reflect that consensus so its not a nationalist POV, especially as that status is acknowledged by the sovereign state.  Having a discussion of this in one place makes a lot of sense but will need to avoid emotive language.  -- Snowded  TALK  04:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to lecture me about the UK's languages and "countries". I have spent a few years in England (Cambridge and Leeds), and I occasionally try to moderate in Wikipedia's conflicts about Ireland-related terminology. I am a veteran of the huge debate about the naming and content of our Leeds and City of Leeds articles, a set of articles that were kept hostage in a poor state for years because of formal terminology POV pushers who insisted that in the UK, nobody in their right mind would ever refer to a settlement that doesn't have city walls or a writ from the Queen as a "city", and that consequently it is completely false to refer to the urban settlement commonly known as "Leeds" as a "city" at any point since the reform in which the city was enlarged to the metropolitan district which now holds the city status, and which consists of much more than the main settlement.
 * If you don't want to do it, I am going to start the discussion at WT:MOSICON. In my opinion MOSICON is perfectly clear that Wales is "subnational" in the sense of MOSICON. The language there must take into account the complex situations all over the world, including "countries" consisting of "states" (US) and "states" consisting of "countries" (UK). It's impossible to find formulations that fit every single country when taken out of context. And it's particularly hard to fit anything to the situation in the UK, which over its long history managed to introduce terminological chaos not just on the level of its constituent countries, but even of many cities. Example: According to the UK and Northern Irish governments and a consensus of reliable sources, the UK has four constituent countries, with NI being in the list. One might innocently conclude that NI is one of the four constituent countries of the UK, but that, of course, is a slightly contentious statement. The claim that NI is a constituent country of the UK is definitely contentious and the claim that NI is a country is plain wrong according to many.
 * Sorry for the rant. I tried to get rid of the emotive language before going to the central discussion. Hans Adler 08:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello Hans (and Daicaregos/ Snowded). I'm sorry I missed this debate though given my work load, I'm quite glad ;) I'm not going to get into the technical definition of whether we are or are not a country given we're in the UK, the EU, UN, etc... but I will state for the record that Mannheim's own website lists Swansea - Wales, not Swansea - GB.
 * p.s. You'll be glad to know too Hans, I supported Germany in the world cup too ;) --Richardeast (talk) 14:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what the MOS has to do with, um, tea? Anyway, I apologise for having been a bit lazy. I promised to start a discussion at WT:MOSICON but haven't done it yet. Will do so now. Hans Adler 17:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

The city of Mannheim's webpage on partnerstädt refers to Swansea as "Swansea - Wales", and it does on its "Swansea - Wales" page. The UK is not even mentioned. Mannheims partner/twin towns should be referred to on this article the way they are referred to by the city of Mannheim. I am changing the Swansea entry to reflect the primary and reliable source, rather than editor POV. Daicaregos (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * In my experience the Germans have a habit of identifying the nationality of British citizens according to their home nation rather than the sovereign state. I think that, when it comes to national terminology and symbology on an English language page, citing as a reliable source a German language website, the subject matter of which is entirely irrelevant to the specific issue of the correct name/symbol to be used, and which can in no way be construed as an authoritative source on this issue, really is stretching it.


 * What is telling is that in the 38 other English language articles relating to the largest German cities (I got bored by the time I finished the 200,000+ list - sorry), there is an overwhelming consensus to use the flag of the union, even for Scottish and Northern Irish cities (and dare I say it, the one other Welsh city that is twinned with a German city, though for how long now I do not know). I have to concede that in two cases the English flag has crept in, and in a third, flagless case, the country is given as "England", but still, 4 out of 38 does tend to strongly suggest that use of the home nation's flag/name above that of the sovereign state flies squarely in the face of the Wikipedia standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.3.197.235 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)