Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales

English-language pronunciations
Hi, just noticing that an @2A00:23C7:7C9B:AB01:859:8379:EBEB:EF99 anon is removing the IPA for English pronunciations? They argue there are potential American English pronounciations? I doubt Americans are even aware of many Welsh places, but if it is commonly used surely can be added or put into a note? Many articles have multiple pronunciations. They state because Welsh only has one pronunciation that, that, is the only one is needed as the rest of derivatives? So far they've done it to Gwynedd, Penrhyndeudraeth and Porthmadog. Although are there sources for any of these? These seem to be based on personal original research?  Dank Jae  23:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I suspect the motivation may be more to promote a particular viewpoint rather than to build the encyclopaedia without bias. It may be helpful for this wikiproject to have a recent changes watchlist as is used by WP:YORK to make it easier for users to monitor articles for potentially disruptive edits. EdwardUK (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I wish that IP would use talk pages. However, I think they have some knowledge of linguistics and have a point. They did it first at Ceredigion and were repeatedly reverted in a slow burn edit war until I opened a talk section and we reached a consensus that they can go. See Talk:Ceredigion, but the tl;dr is that these pages are about the place, and what a reader of a page about Gwynedd, Ceredigion, Porthmadog, etc. wants to know about is the place. Where the words are Welsh, naturally any reader might be interested in how to pronounce the word, but they are not interested, and certainly not in the very first sentence, to know how the word is mispronounced elsewhere.
 * And to get longwinded again (you can ignore this paragraph) IPA can very accurately represent a pronunciation, but pronunciations are coloured by dialect. Take /pɔːrθˈmædɒɡ/ for example, which is given as the English IPA of /pɔrθˈmadɔɡ/. Almost the same, and the differences come in the length of the o and a slight closed shift of the a from fully open. Except the English IPA guide does not offer the fully open a, except in the notes, where it suggests that, per the OED, the /a/ more closely reflects RP. So /a/ is not used because the writer of the IPA English page decided not to follow RP but another variant of English. American English perhaps? And then, what of that r? It is meant as an approximant in the IPA English guide, yet the guide admits this means it is really IPA /ɹ/. What is rendered is the IPA symbol for an alveolar trill, /r/, which is heard in a few English varieties but is definitely unusual in English. So that English rendering is, in any case, problematic. It doesn't belong there. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll just add a caveat to my comments. In some places an alternative pronunciation is so common that it may not be enough to list just the standard Welsh pronunciation. Aberystwyth is a case in point (but currently only has one pronunciation listed). These would need to be considered case by case. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:55, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @FutureFlowsLoveYou, just did the first reversion of such at Powys, citing MOS:DUALPRON. So what to do about the others removed?  Dank Jae  13:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is an established alternative English pronunciation for Gwynedd and Penrhyndeudraeth. I personally would leave those alone. Porthmadog has an English alternative, not used much anymore, of Portmadoc. This is in the article, and could, presumably, be rendered in IPA too (although I don't really see the benefit to the reader of doing so). I would agree with the reversion on Powys, as there are two pronunciations there (although now it lists 3. We could pare back one). Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @EdwardUK, That would be great although how do you set one up, looking at Yorkshire's I assume it is a manual watchlist of every related article and then funnelled through the related changes system?  Dank Jae  14:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That is basically how it works. The lists are put together from all the pages tagged with the wikiproject template. Although, it would need updating occasionally to add any new articles to the list. I made one for Rugby league about a month ago based on their article assessment page and it seems to be working, once I had worked out a method it only took an hour or two to create it. I am usually busy over weekends but I should be able to put together one for Wales next week. EdwardUK (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That would be great if you could!  Dank Jae  16:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That's a disappointing assumption, for my reasoning has been clear. I'm not sure what 'particular viewpoint' you think I have in mind. Also, some other assumption made about my edits I have disproven below, such as the matter of the breve when transcribing dipthongs (which is backed up by the already-existing article on dipthongs.
 * Some of the contributions in this topic section display bad faith, I'm afraid. I feel that some of those who have contributed subscribe to the unfortunate assumption that to edit in a way that gives the Welsh langauge prominence in situations where it is merely logical is a 'Nationalist'.
 * Anyway, I do accept, with thanks, that the vast majority are doing what they feel is right, but the tone here suggests that I am probably wasting my time. You shall all feel very relieved then when I tell you that I am done. 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:79E4:CC96:47BF:D694 (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I have questioned the IP on their Talk page but have had no response. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:33, 5 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Still as an IP, their address may constantly change, in the period of this discussion it already has (but clearly the same person), so possibly they would edit under another ip address and not see the question? This does make monitoring their changes a bit more difficult unless someone has every county and place on their watchlist.  Dank Jae  14:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course. Just being optimistic! It geolocates to BT in London, likely static. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The address is an IPv6 one. In an IPv6 address the bottom 64 bits are not static as they are used for autoconfiguration. If the user has just a single /64 (the smallest range available in IPv6), then they are all addresses under 2A00:23C7:7C9B:AB01::/64. That is, that part of the number doesn't change, but the other part will - perhaps every time they switch off their device. That gives them a range of about 1.8x10^19 different addresses. If the user took one stride in the same direction for each of those addresses, they would run out of numbers when they reach the M25... not the one in London... the one in Sagittarius. Here are all their contributions to date: Special:Contributions/2A00:23C7:7C9B:AB01::/64 Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah right, so we can expect to see Welsh IPA changes for place names in Sagittarius before long! Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh it's being going on for a while, but based on some of their edit summaries seems their argument is just "Welsh pronunciation is the only correct one". Anyone into IPAs willing to look into them? What is the IPA policy anyway, seems a bit OR.  Dank Jae  16:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have been watching the user's edits. I have neither strong motivation either to assist or to revert. I would be reverting if they were blatantly wrong. There is a bit of disagreement over whether IPAs need references. IPA is phonetic spelling, and when there is a single unequivocal pronunciation of a Welsh word, spelling that word in IPA should not need a reference. Edits at Penparcau demonstrate a problem though. Very often there is not a single pronunciation. I reverted one of the IP's edits but left their reformulation. There is a message on my talk page about it too. The IPA there now is correct standard Welsh, and does not, in my opinion, need a citation. However Penparcau is in mid Wales, and there is a mid Wales pronunciation of the word that differs in the end vowel. The inhabitants of Penparcau, meanwhile, pronounce it with yet another end sound that is not properly Welsh. I suppose we could cite the variations and then spell them. It is another example of MOS:DUALPRON. But my reason for not going in and making a bunch of changes is that - MOS or not - pages are meant to give knowledge to readers, and long discussions of various pronunciations do not belong in the first sentence of a lead of an article that is about a town. The article is not about dialect continua. Fingers crossed the IP doesn't do this all the way to Sagittarius (I am pretty sure the dialect beyond this star system is fairly unrecognisable - although I don't have a source for that). Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I must admit I have had exactly the same reaction. But the big question - shouldn't en.wiki have English IPA guides, at least more prominently than Welsh IPA guides (which really belong at cy.wiki)? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC) Sagittarius Love Languages: An Expert-Backed Guide - all you need to know!
 * The guideline for appropriate use is for inclusion when it would not be obvious from the spelling, in which case a source to verify the non-obvious could be reasonably expected, and if it is unambiguous then the pronunciation is not necessary. Should this apply equally whether the pronunciation is in Welsh or English then based on the edit summaries it could have been the Welsh that they removed. If in Gwynedd 65% of residents speak Welsh then a third do not, and the majority of these probably use English as would the national/local authorities and media when communicating with these non-Welsh speaking residents. This seems a reasonable proportion of the population for the articles to include an English IPA where appropriate. Those used for the administration within the area could be considered as the standard English and Welsh pronunciations, and if these are the same in both languages then why not mention this too. I am not convinced by the edit summary that a British-English pronunciation should be excluded because people on the other side of the Atlantic, few of whom may have ever heard of the place in question, may use an dialect that causes it to sound different, but if the IP has sources for multiple other English-language variations (or maybe even Patagonian Welsh alternatives?) then rather than removing content these could be added and placed in a footnote as in the examples in MOS:PRONPLACEMENT. EdwardUK (talk) 04:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The guideline for appropriate use is for inclusion when it would not be obvious from the spelling, in which case a source to verify the non-obvious could be reasonably expected. This is the case for non obvious pronunciations of English language placenames, certainly. Worcester, England for instance. I note that even there, editors have not felt it necessary to cite the IPA. But for Welsh placenames the situation is different. Welsh has phonetic spelling, so anyone understanding the rules of the Welsh spelling system can read (almost) any Welsh word correctly first time. Nevertheless the rules of the phonetic spelling system are not widely known by readers who speak English but not Welsh. Moreover it is very common that readers of Welsh place names do want to know how the place is pronounced. Thus it is good information in an article to provide the reader with the pronunciation, either by giving them the Welsh rules of pronunciation (which you see a lot in books), or, as Wikipedia and dictionaries do it, using IPA. If using IPA, this falls squarely into WP:BLUESKY. The IPA template itself links to the pronunciation guide, so that is not required, and the only other reference that would make any sense would be something like "Teach yourself Welsh" and that is unecessary. We don't reference spellings. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have to say I tend to agree that there is only one correct pronunciation for most Welsh names. Deb (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Seems they've tried to remove Anglesey's IPA entirely. Still not convinced by their edits. If the argument is that Welsh is already phonetic, tbh that actually means there is less reason for the Welsh IPA if those more familiar with the language, do not even need it. But I'd say verified English IPAs should stay, rather than based on personal use as in the end, I don't think there is a IPA exception to WP:V? (unless there is?).  Dank Jae  20:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * They were rightly reverted on Anglesey. I think the way Wikipedia presents IPA may be leading to a misunderstanding. Apologies if I am wrong on that I am about to state the obvious. But for the avoidance of doubt, there is no Welsh IPA that is different from English IPA. There is simply IPA. It is a phonetic alphabet, and given a particular pronunciation of a word, there should only be one way to correctly describe it in IPA.
 * The Welsh pronunciation guide that links from Welsh IPA spellings merely points to the specific IPA sounds that are found in Welsh. The English pronunciation guide, however, is misleading because there is a greater dialect continuum and the guide can mislead the reader as to what sound is represented by a letter (/r/ being a case in point). Ideally you would simply link to an IPA guide (such as: International Phonetic Alphabet ). But we don't want to bog down readers with all that information, so these pronunciation guides have developed to simplify things. The English guide simplifies at the expense of accuracy. But again, there is a single IPA. Given a word with a single standard Welsh pronunciation, and no English alternative (e.g. Aberdyfi, which has an English spelling but the same pronunciation) then we should put the IPA in to tell a reader how to pronounce it. One IPA, for the one correct pronunciation. And I say that knowing full well that the Aberdyfi article doesn't do that. For some reason we have an unsourced and very subtly incorrect "English" IPA, partly because the English pronunciation guide favours a particular flavour of English that is not RP and partly because someone has mistaken an open mid back vowel for the schwa, or else, for that syllable, has favoured RP over other flavours of English! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Still uncomfortable with the idea "one correct pronunciation", what if locals have a local pronunciation that diverges from Welsh phonology. I know Rhos and Clwyd (Welsh-derived words) are pronounced differently depending where in Wales you are, so still concerned with this "Welsh alphabet" first standard, although, overall, yes few have sources either. Still don't like the idea how local pronunciations in English and Welsh may be mass-removed for the "only correct way". Like yes you mention a "single standard Welsh pronunciation" but if that existed then why are these edits happening suddenly and widely? Surely the standard should've already been there, but there was another one added by someone else.
 * Once again, the editor in question isn't using the argument "no English alternative", but "it is not needed". I am not really questioning their edits to the Welsh IPA tbh, but the removal of others and with no citations to confirm the new or the old was correct.
 * Finally there is the assumption English-speakers in Wales pronounce the Welsh names correctly, and while they likely do, the uncited and wide-ranging edits do not make me trust it. May be if possible instead of changing the existing IPA, but a theoretically standard one (in line with the Welsh alphabet) is added before it?  Dank Jae  22:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Indeed there are many varieties of Welsh English, such as Cardiff English, etc., where standard English or standard Welsh pronunciations do not apply. But I guess there might be many non-English speakers who come here to see how to pronounce Welsh place names in English? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Plus I keep seeing the IP add "u̯" which isn't even in Help:IPA/Welsh, so there goes accuracy.  Dank Jae  14:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello, the purpose of the mark such as that in "au̯" is to show that the vowels are not sounded separately (as two syllables) but rather form a single unit (a diphthong, which is also a single syllable). Really, the Welsh IPA page should note this. Look at the IPA guide pages for other languages which also have similar dipthongs, sucH as Finnish, and you will see the same mark. 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:59DC:F6CC:E84C:1008 (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Best discuss there whether to add it there, before adding contradictory IPAs, in the end this is about Welsh not Finnish.  Dank Jae  01:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not suggesting that Welsh follows the IPA for Finnish or indeed any other language, but rather that this is the convention when transcribing dipthongs (including for Welsh). I will look for sourceable material to show this in any case, as I understand that to those not acquainted with IPA, it might look like I am following my own instinct (which I assure that I am not). Best wishes 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:59DC:F6CC:E84C:1008 (talk) 08:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just saying best raise a discussion at Help talk:IPA/Welsh to add that symbol before putting it into articles. Readers now see that symbol but aren't explained what it means on the IPA page, so confusing.  Dank Jae  13:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I shall do that.
 * You will also see that in the article on dipthongs the following sentence:
 * "The non-syllabic diacritic, the inverted breve below ⟨◌̯⟩, is placed under the less prominent part of a diphthong to show that it is part of a diphthong rather than a vowel in a separate syllable: [aɪ̯ aʊ̯]".
 * I hope that you will now see that I am indeed following a recognised convention for IPA transcription. 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:79E4:CC96:47BF:D694 (talk) 17:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:59DC:F6CC:E84C:1008. Are you in any way related to 2A00:23C7:7C9B:AB01::/64? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Martinevans123, while their edits are not appearing under that IP range, both as under the same partial block, and both involved with Penparcau.  Dank Jae  14:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Quelle surprise. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * There's nothing I can click and see there sorry, so I can't tell you. 2A00:23C7:7C81:9001:79E4:CC96:47BF:D694 (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Try 2A00:23C7:7C9B:AB01:181B:4B17:AC6F:6D12, for example? Thanks Martinevans123 (talk) 18:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * What you're talking about, I think, is dialect. For example, round this area, it's common for names with "oes" at the end of them, e.g. "Treoes", "Tan-y-Groes", to be pronounced as if they were English, with a long "o", but I'm not sure that being mispronounced by Welsh people makes it okay. Deb (talk) 18:43, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Talk:Ceredigion concerning an English pronunciation.  Dank Jae  08:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * There is now a discussion at Talk:Llandudno concerning its pronunciation. I have a feeling that this issue isn't going away and that we now may have to consider banning English pronunciations on Welsh names if they're continuously being in dispute.  Dank Jae  10:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also Talk:Merthyr Tydfil.  Dank Jae  10:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that anybody is calling for the abolition of the English pronunciations necessarily, but rather a consistent approach? They're all over the place at the moment. For example, as stated there, the IPA for 'Merthyr' currently states that is pronounced rhotically, i.e. that the 'r' is prounounced in both instances. This is clearly not the case., regardless of the citation.
 * Having read the above discussion(s), it seems that the logic of including an English pronunciation is that it at least gives something for those not conversant in Welsh to work with. That is fair enough, I think, but when the IPA given is then inconsistent or indeed simply misleading - to what avail? Another question is which pronunciation is favoured when there are many English pronunciations in circulation? The Welsh obviously avoids this as there is much less variation in the standard pronunciation, with it being a phonemic orthography. The exception maybe is the difference between [ɨ] and [iː] in the North and South, i.e. such as in 'canu'. A trifling point compared with the inconsistency in the English pronunciations.
 * I'm not saying that I have an answer, though. It is a thorny issue that seems to lead right back to the start ad infinitum! Llabbillob (talk) 11:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The reason why I started this discussion was because someone was removing all English-language pronunciations. Arguing "the English one is misleading/inaccurate/numerous/uncited" compared to (original/correct) phonetic Welsh, some argue the Welsh one is the only one needed.
 * I only follow what citations give us, especially if the pronunciation has been disputed, because a lot of pronunciations are OR. I only added Merthyr's because this issue led to the previous IPA being removed entirely. So reinserted using sources.
 * We can include multiple pronunciations, although for Merthyr only found two. If they're too many, they can be put into a footnote, or generalised into one variety based on Wikipedia's IPA guides (although leading to it differing from sources, subject to dispute).  Dank Jae  11:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There are now two accounts created today removing English pronunciations, unless there is an agreement here, there seems there will be a backdoor ban on English language pronunciations on places in Wales, particularly those with Welsh names. New account 1 and new account 2 (although mainly Welsh names overall).
 * Just a bit surprised how all of a sudden there is a collective campaign against English-language pronunciations. Seems everyone is tired of disputing, so easier to propose a guideline against English-language pronunciations?  Dank Jae  18:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert in the intricacies of IPA markup, but the latest edits seem to be happening on names of places in the Welsh speaking heartlands, where there is likely to be a common pronounciation regardless of your mother tongue. However, there are clear differences in several places, particularly in the areas of Wales where Welsh speakers are less common, where the common pronounciation does not follow Welsh phonetics and has been 'anglicised' in some way. I can think of places like Llanedeyrn, Caerau, Magor and Slebech off the top of my head. The English language Wikipedia shouldn't be a place to enforce Welsh language phonetics only ...if that is what the IPs are trying to do. Sionk (talk) 20:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Well this discussion, as well as at Ceredigion, led to no consensus or supporting the status quo of removing the English pronunciation.
 * The initial other IP which sparked this discussion edited outside the Welsh-speaking heartlands, so not always limited to them.
 * I agree that more eastern parts diverge, which is why I express concern on the Welsh pronunciation only approach, even if its likely the most accurate and used, as there are variations on Rhos for example. However with English-language pronunciations slowly being removed, and with no guideline for/against them, and that many lack citations in the first place, not sure if they should all be restored or removed. Nonetheless, seems that if nothing is agreed, slowly IPs would remove them all.  Dank Jae  22:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * another IP removal of the English pronuncation, any pronunciation other than the Welsh one is simply incorrect.  Dank Jae  21:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Tŷ Coryton
There's an irritating gap here, Registered historic parks and gardens in Cardiff, where there should be an image of the gardens/grounds of Coryton House. I can find nothing suitable in Commons, or at Geograph. Google suggests that the site, now Tŷ Coryton special school, is virtually surrounded by development - superstore/hotel to the N, residential to the E - but with the trainline, the canal and a nature reserve to the S. It also looks well-wooded. I've no idea if a photograph from public land/the highway is possible. If any Cardiff-based editor has the time/inclination to find out, I'd be very grateful. KJP1 (talk) 07:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @KJP1 I imagine you've already looked here and decided it's not suitable? I don't even know for sure that these are in the gardens of the house, but you could maybe contact the copyright holder. Deb (talk) 08:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Deb - Thank you very much. I'd not actually thought to look there. And the orchids are very pretty! I may well see about contacting the holder. Oddly, neither Coflein nor Cadw hold any images either. Cadw is less surprising, but RCAHMW has a very extensive image archive so that is more so. If all else fails, I shall force my aged, Welsh-resident, mother to get her Box Brownie out. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 12:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:English_Maelor
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:English_Maelor that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Natg 19 (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Afon Tanat
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Afon Tanat that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.  Dank Jae  21:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Can anybody here sort out an apparent problem on cy.wiki?
It appears that the Welsh Wikipedia articles on townships in Burlington County, New Jersey (but not cy:Burlington County, New Jersey itself) all show under Notable residents (Pobl nodedig) the same table of notable residents of the entire county. The repetition can be seen from the Commons listing of uses of the images, such as commons:File:Cardiak.jpg. When I try to edit one of the township pages, such as cy:Florence Township, New Jersey, I can see that it's drawing the data from Wikidata, but I can't read Welsh, so I can't figure out whether the default display needs to be flipped from the county to the township, or even whether the list resides somewhere as a template transcluded onto the pages and would need to be edited there.

I know this does not in any way affect English Wikipedia, but I'm hoping some of those who have this page watchlisted are also active on cy.wiki, or would otherwise be willing and able to go over there and sort this out. Thanks in advance! Yngvadottir (talk) 22:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It looks like all the Notable People are listed as born in Burlington County, so I would have thought the best place for the information would be on cy:Burlington County, New Jersey and not repeated on all township articles. I've no idea how the articles were generated, I expect cy.wici are using a clever bot way of generating content for the Welsh Wicipedia. I occasionally edit articles there, but don't create any from scratch. Sionk (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe ask the question (in English) on the Talk page of Llywelyn2000, who seems to be managing the Bot (and heavily involved in cy.wici) - click on "Ychwanegu adran" to add a new section Sionk (talk) 13:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, this is a problem I've had with other pages and have taken up with Llywelyn2000, but he didn't seem to agree that it was a problem. I'll have a quick look though. Deb (talk) 13:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I've deleted that section from articles where none of the names are relevant or have cywiki articles, and only left a couple where I could find Welsh-language articles for people who really were from those townships. I'm prepared to do this elsewhere if you can flag up problems. Deb (talk) 08:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Gethin Jones
Gethin Jones 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. Spinixster  (trout me!)  01:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Lists of communities
Hello,

I was wondering why there are no lists of communities by principal area of Wales, whereas there are lists of civil parishes for each of the counties of England. Is it just that no one took the time to create them?

I have tried to make one in my sandbox for Blaenau Gwent, since it is the principal area with the least number of communities, using the featured list List of civil parishes in Somerset as a rough guide. Do you think it looks fine? – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 12:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * - We do have this, List of communities in Wales but, as you say, it will just be that no-one has got round to doing a set of lists by Principal Area. Your draft looks rather good, I like the maps! It's quite a task to take on, with 878 to cover, but I'm sure it would be a useful addition to Welsh coverage. KJP1 (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy to help with this.  Dank Jae  13:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Try to 'proof' against notability concerns. While the lists can be viewed as navigational the only source in the sandbox article is NOMIS. What strikes me about the England articles is some (many? most?) have a copy/pasted narrative. 'Clever' because the multiple sources satisfy notability for each article, but at the same time questionable as to why we're repeating the same content across multiple articles. Witness the History and Current position sections of Civil parishes in Bedfordshire, Civil parishes in Berkshire, Civil parishes in Cheshire. Rupples (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a good point. I'm not that hot on Notability debates but won't their legal status confer Notability under NPLACE? I know some of the, rather surprisingly acrimonious, debate on the English ones arises from unparished areas, but Wales doesn't have any of those. As for "generic" material, I agree this could easily be found, e.g. here, . Personally, I'd not be too bothered by a bit of repetition - we have it in the principal area series of Cadw/ICOMOS Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales because it makes sense to explain the listing criteria at each instance. KJP1 (talk) 15:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * P.s. - Although I was surprised to see that Baglan Bay appears to be an unpopulated community, i.e. without permanent residents? That sounds rather a contradiction in terms, and PLACE does say "populated", legally-recognised....KJP1 (talk) 15:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I expect we don't have separate lists for each principal area because when like List of civil parishes in Nottinghamshire they are simply lists (rather than expanded like the example in you're sandbox) because they can fit in a single list. However having expanded lists and splitting them does seem like a good idea. In terms of notability all communities in Wales have a form of local governance unlike pre 1974 urban parishes in England so will be notable.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 16:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, as the current list is just names, makes sense for all 800+ as one, but if we add in more details, then best split by principal area.
 * If there is duplication, especially if it is not really needed or unique to a county (like the history section) on the English ones, then possibly move those sections to civil parish. But a small consistent intro for context is probably fine. This sandbox seems to be fine.
 * If arguing notability, and that lists of presumed notable features aren't presumed notable themselves, then I would note all listed building lists would technically fall foul of that too, so a likely bigger discussion.  Dank Jae  12:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've wondered about listed building lists and notability. All I'm suggesting is, it's preferable where possible to include sources independent of the listing authority. I mention this because as a contributor to AfD's I've noted those arguing for a list's deletion often cite WP:NLIST to support the claim a list is not notable, One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Other editors have challenged this interpretation but not always successfully. Rupples (talk) 14:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC) Applying this to list of communities, try and avoid reliance on a single source, unless confident the list can be seen as a navigational aid or index to Wikipedia articles. Rupples (talk) 14:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. I have decided to be bold and launch the list onto the main space: List of communities in Blaenau Gwent. The 21 remaining lists should follow at some point, unless someone else wants to create some or all of them. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 12:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Wales-related editor topic ban appeal
In relation to the discussion raised here at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales/Archive 2023, a topic ban appeal on an editor's edits to pages relating to Wales has been raised. Their edits have been frequently discussed here.

The discussion is at Administrators' noticeboard. This may be of interest to participants of this project.  Dank Jae  14:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

RFC at RSN: The Telegraph on trans issues
Hello! There is an RFC at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding a subject relevant to this Wikiproject. BilledMammal (talk) 06:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Are you sure you have the right project? I'm not sure why this should be of specific relevance to Wales. Deb (talk) 08:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

UK sub-national geographic flags discussion
I've opened a new discussion at WikiProject:UK geography about sub-national UK flags, including historic county and principal area flags. Anyone is welcome to participate. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The last of the Morgans
cc: - If any AfC reviewers have the time and inclination, there is an interesting draft, here Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar, which needs a review. Thanks in anticipation. KJP1 (talk) 12:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Now passed. KJP1 (talk) 13:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Princess Olga Dolgorouky
Hello everyone,

If any AfC reviewers have any spare time, I have a draft on Draft:Princess Olga Dolgorouky, wife of Evan Morgan, 2nd Viscount Tredegar, and would be grateful if anyone would review it.

TIA

Mac Edmunds (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

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.

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:

to

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:

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?)  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  22:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We are in MOS:BOLDALTNAMES territory here. That says: 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, it is widely described thus on the Internet (dating from its very first mention on the world wide web). Some examples, , . This one titles it one way but the other in the text . This is not a new thing and there are many pictures that call it this. This one in the People's Collection  for instance, or this random less notable one . It is this way in a lot of books. Some examples ,, , . Referred to this way in Archaeologia Cambrensis (English language)  Listed under carreg for the dictionary of Welsh Place names  and , 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.  Dank Jae  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
 * 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.  Dank Jae  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 (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.  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Survey
Survey because I did ask for third opinions, but needing clarity and sources using it above. (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?

class=inline|

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 (Castell Caernarfon; ) 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 (Castell Caernarfon; ) is a medieval fortress ...
 * b) As Welsh, but no lang-cy i.e. Caernarfon Castle (alternatively known by its Welsh name Castell Caernarfon; ) is a medieval fortress ...
 * c) As English, known as i.e. Caernarfon Castle ([specific word] known as Castell Caernarfon [or specific phrase]; ) is a medieval fortress ...
 * d) Equal i.e. Caernarfon Castle, or Castell Caernarfon, 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  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  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?  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  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.  Dank Jae  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 and  A.D.Hope (talk) 11:03, 15 July 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)