Talk:Wales

Anthem

It would appear, according to Wales.com, that "Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau gradually became accepted as Wales’ national anthem – though to this day, it has no official status as such". Therefore, should this be taken as Wales does not have an official national anthem? Similar to Scotland, England and Northern Ireland not have an official anthem, instead a song which is used as an unofficial anthem primarily at sporting events? Goodreg3 (talk) 22:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, I would point out this article from the BBC, which concludes "Increasingly sung at patriotic gatherings, Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau gradually developed into Wales' national anthem, although it is neither officially or legally recognised as such". Therefore, this would suggest that it must be recognised on the article that Wales has no official national anthem, and instead, commonly, the anthem used unofficially. Goodreg3 (talk) 22:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia convention in cases like this is to use de facto so I have added that -----Snowded ^TALK 22:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Granted, however, I thought it best to open up a discussion here as your previous reverting had a bold claim that it was the official national anthem as it "had been the national anthem before the Welsh Government was established". Whilst true, that does not appear to be relevant. It is indicated through a number of sources that there is no official or legal national anthem of Wales.

• Everything you need to know about Wales' National Anthem
• Welsh National Anthem
• The background to Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau

Goodreg3 (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I reverted to a long standing stable version - you might want to check WP:BRD and also check out the language rentry in the UK article. It doesn't say 'none' with defacto added on the end that would be absurd. I'll replaced 'none" with 'de facto' which is in line with the reference which does not say there is no national anthem, it says there is no official one -----Snowded ^TALK 22:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

No official national anthem would certainly confirm there is "none". There is no official national anthem, rather, one which is used on a de facto basis. That does not take away from the fact there is no legal or official anthem in this instance. Goodreg3 (talk) 22:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, I am aware of the BRD cycle, which is why I reverted back and then opened this discussion for others to become involved to get a consensus on this. Whether reverting to a long standing stable version or not, it does not excuse the fact that the article currently appears to be displaying wrong or misleading information that there is a legal and official national anthem of Wales. Goodreg3 (talk) 22:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

The reference you give does not support 'none' it does support 'de facto'. Many long standing things are not official, but they exist. You need to check the UK article on language as an example. Otherwise you evidentally are not familiar with the BRD convention - it does not mean that the disputed edit stands, it means the long standing version does until resolved. I've done my best to respond here and shown you why with examples. There is nothing wrong or misleading in de facto -----Snowded ^TALK 22:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Arguably, it doesn't support a de facto use in my eyes either. We just take it for granted that it is commonly used as the Welsh anthem in the same manner as the other countries of the UK. Unless you can find alternative sources which support it as either a de facto anthem, or official, or indeed legal, anthem, then please do so. I will leave it and see what others suggest. Additionally, the layout you have created on the article infobox in my opinion does not flow well and not in line with other countries. I would also ask for clarity on what you mean by referring to checking the UK article on language as an example? As I have tried, but to no luck as I am unsure what you are referring to? Goodreg3 (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

If you check the information box on the United Kingdom article under language you will see that English is 'de facto'. It is the convention for things that exist but are not official. Somewhat ironically Welsh is I think the only official language in the United Kingdom which sort of makes the point. As to format, de facto could be moved until after the recording if you think that would flow better, But none is as incorrect as official would be -----Snowded ^TALK 23:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not in anyway against the usage of de facto, however, I would point out a long standing convention and stable version on Scotland which referred to a national motto of Scotland. This was found to be factually incorrect, with no sources confirming an official motto of Scotland. It could have been argued that Nemo me impune lacessit or In Defens were de facto mottos of Scotland, however, they were not referred to as such as there was no evidence of them being either officially or legally recognised as such, hence it was removed. So, it may penetrate to the same outcome here, the recognition of no official national anthem, but rather, an unofficial one. Whether you want to refer to that as de facto on the basis on commonly accepted Wikipedia language, fine, but it does not excuse the fact that there is no agreed, official or legal national anthem of Wales, and I think the article should perhaps be a little more clearer on that. Goodreg3 (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Let me repeat a point to which you have not responded. Many things exist by custom that have been established over time. It would be nonsensical to say that English is an unofficial language, although technically it has never been made official. The word to describe that situation is deItalic textfacto and that is more than sufficient. -----Snowded ^TALK 07:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Other pages do not create precedents for this page. De facto is perfectly good. None is wrong. Scotland is not Wales and it is a different situation. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

It would appear this debate has caused some unrest amongst fellow Welsh Wikipedia contributors. I’m not saying de facto is right or wrong, I couldn’t care less about how it is worded. Rather, the debate is about whether Wales does or doesn’t have an officially recognised national anthem as the article, up until yesterday, suggested. The situation here and the Scottish motto isn’t far apart in my view. They could both be considered de facto considering the long standing tradition and assumption of the Scottish motto. What I am saying is, is that it wasn’t kept and refereed to as the de facto motto. It was removed because it wasn’t the official or legal motto of the country. The very same situation here with regards to a Welsh anthem. Goodreg3 (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I think anyone with any knowledge of Wales reading the article would probably think "de facto" was pedantic. Tony Holkham (Talk) 14:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

The debate is about whether Wales does or doesn’t have an officially recognised national anthem. No, the debate has thus far been whether it is an official anthem. "Officially recognised" is not well defined. It is used on official occasions such as the opening of the Senedd. How is that not official recognition? De facto is indeed a touch pedantic. We can tolerate that pedantry, but let's not make more of this than we should. The page is to tell people about Wales, not to tell people how clever the editors are. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Unofficial or none (which I reverted last night) are plain wrong. So the choice is really being saying nothing other than having it as the entry or adding 'de facto' -----Snowded ^TALK 14:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm having difficulty understanding what is the current dispute. As of now, it says it's "de facto", which seems correct. As far as I can tell, no one's say it need be changed. The argument seems to be over what it previously said which doesn't seem relevant any more. Is that right? DeCausa (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

That is right. The current version appears to command a consensus. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2024

Wales is a constituent country of the United Kingdom but it is not a sovereign country. It shares its political and social structure with the other countries of the United Kingdom—England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Wales has its own distinct culture, language, and traditions, and it has a degree of administrative autonomy, including its own parliament known as the Senedd. However, it does not have sovereign status and its international relations and defense are managed by the UK government. 80.194.154.230 (talk) 10:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The article makes it quite clear that Wales is part of the sovereign state of the United Kingdom. Liu1126 (talk) 10:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Website

Is Wales.com Wales' official website? It was removed in this edit by Yedaman54. Unsure whether it should be considered the "official website" or ignored as mainly a tourism website? DankJae 10:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

It's marked as © Welsh Government 2024, so I guess it is. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Martinevans123, I mean its obviously operated by Visit Wales, owned by WG, but what constitutes a country's "official website"? Does Wales.com meet that? Likely does, the editor didn't provide reasoning. DankJae 11:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

The website parameter is meant for international organisations, it's odd to have a website for a country. A website might represent the government perhaps. CMD (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

If one regards the Welsh Government as the "official government" of Wales, how can there be any other? Looks like Scotland has scotland.org Not sure about England though. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

But the gov.wales site is the official WG one. Yes, Wales.com is owned by WG, and used by Visit Wales. It was obtained at the same time as Wales.org, which was used for many years for library.wales.org[1] (managed by the National Library, but on behalf of Welsh Government). CyMAL (as was) was behind this, and also managed obtaining wales.com for WG from a private individual. But it seems wales.org was considered surplus to requirements (after all, we now have .wales and .cymru) and allowed to lapse, so that one is now in hands of a private company. Is Wales.com the website of the country? Perhaps. It seems likely that Visit Wales will continue to use it, but is that enough for it to be the country's website? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I apologize for that. I removed the website because it appeared to be a tourism site that was operated by Visit Wales. However I am taking a look at the site again and now i'm not sure. Like there is a also a different dedicated Vistwales.com website so maybe it is Wales official website. Yedaman54 (talk) 01:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

The lock on this page protects propaganda that falsely asserts Wales is a country

This sites lock prevents the correction in the intro that falsely states Wales is a country. Wales is not a country by international definition. In order to be a country, a nation needs to be independent, which Wales is not. Wales is a nation and a state. The belief that Wales is a country is derived from mulitple decades of British propaganda and misinformation for manipulative purposes.If truthfulness is the intention of wikipedia then the statement "is a country" should at least be replaced with "Wales is a federal state of the UK in which the UK considers to be a country" Edwiki2005 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion ..... I suggest you review Talk:Countries of the United Kingdom/refs. If there are academic sources currently refuting this please bring them forth. Moxy🍁 01:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The UK is not a federation, so that's even more inaccurate. DankJae 11:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Your suggested replacement sentence is not grammatically correct, i.e. does not make sense. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC) p.s. where is your "international definition" of a country? Thanks.

Wales is not a state. It is a country. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2024

Please add a hatnote:

{{Distinguish|Whales}}

This parallels the {{Redirect-distinguish|Whales|Wales}} currently appearing atop Whale. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 02:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: Merged into {{about}}. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 04:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)