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)

I think it is pretty clear, the author of this comment wants the intro changed to state the words "Dependent Country" or "Non-Sovereign Country" instead of just "Country" to be clear and accurate on the classification as well as the disputed historical definition differences held in some nations.Edwiki2005 (talk) 14:18, 14 June 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)

I think it is a website promoting Wales and all things Welsh, supported and possibly paid for by the Welsh parliament. That does not mean however that it is makes official statements - it does what it is expected to do, promote Wales - in whatever way, within reason, it sees fit. I would class it as a secondary source of necessity if nothing better is available. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:50, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Dispute over the Definition of Country vs State by Nation of Usage

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) Whole paragraph struck through as it is inappropriate. The issue is the historical dispute over the definition of country which varies by country. Edwiki2005 (talk) 19:43, 14 June 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)

@Edwiki2005, you’re not supposed to re-write your post if people have replied to it, now our responses make no sense. See WP:REDACTED DankJae 14:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Noted and understood, no malicious intent nor intent to cause confusion/break rules, will not happen again. Edwiki2005 (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted the initial comment. As stated, the replies make no sense if you've changed the initial message. You may strike through a message if you wish to retract it. You are also welcome to add a new comment below. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:57, 14 June 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)

The unsigned post disappeared in reference to the above statement. I will paraphrase what I remember being stated. I hope to see the pictures of the old textbooks referenced that validate the definition changeEdwiki2005 (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC):

The historical definition of Country and the modern definition of Country are two different definitions in some respective countries. Historically, many countries required the definition of Country to require independence until the UK definition became the prevalent. The UK definition was adopted by the UN and eventually globalized. The UN definition of State and Country are identical, there is no difference in definition. Edwiki2005 (talk) 14:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

All uncited. Wikipedia uses the definition commonly used in sources, not the “most correct definition” according to yourself and according to some organisation.

Wales is commonly described as a country, so it should be. It currently links to Countries of the United Kingdom not Country accepting it is a unique status. DankJae 14:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

If you want sources then please take a look at the UN definition at: https://unterm.un.org/unterm2/en/ and also take a look at the wikipedia article on "Country" as it outlines the disputes in definitions with clear sources as well as the current prevalent definition. This a talk article, not the actual wikipedia article.... The discussion on definitions is appropriate for reference here as there has been some dispute on the classification of Wales, the work material should be placed in the wiki article on countries.Edwiki2005 (talk) 14:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Historical Definition Used by some countries: 1) Country - An Independent State with the ability to enter foreign treaties and agreements on its own. 2) State - A Nation with its own government with clearly defined borders. 3) Nation - A cultural and geographic group of people with the same identity. No self governance

@Edwiki2005 - most of your post is incomprehensible, made more so by your choosing to re-write part of the conversation. But the essentials haven't changed since the start. Multiple sources reference Wales as a country. Therefore, so do we. If you have Reliable Sources that don't, and Wikipedia isn't one, then bring them here and we can have a look. Until then, you're just repeating your opinion. KJP1 (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

The UK is not the only state to have multiple constituent countries. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:09, 14 June 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)

Dispute over the Definition of Country

There is a dispute over the global english language definition of Country. In the UK, by its current national definition, asserts Wales is a country. However, by some definitions, including but not limited to, the United States definition for its 50 member states which are all nations with their own government (like Wales) it is required to be independent to be determined a country. The inconsistent definition of Country goes into more detail in the wikipedia article on Country (where it is appropriately discussed) with multiple supporting sources in differing directions on the requirements of the definition.

The dispute over whether Wales is defined as a country, appears to upset Welsh people substantially as it is taken as a negative to their national identity. [2].

However, the definition used by the British does call into question the following: 1) Why did earlier colonies with local governments/parliaments similar to Wales under the British Empire referred to as Colonies instead of Countries? 2) Countries that are a republic of States like the United States of America with State governments (parliaments/congress/senate), that cannot be dissolved by the Federal Government at will, like the Welsh Government can be, and are each a separate Nation are deemed States not Countries. Which shows extreme inconsistency in the global application of the word and definition of Country.

In order to be globally accurate, it is advised that simply referencing Wales as just "Country" is inappropriate as it assumes the UK definition is valid over all other commonly used definitions, including by countries with English speakers that substantially outnumber the UK population. Rather to be true and correct, it should be stated clearly as "Dependent Country", or "Non-Sovereign Country" when referenced to accurately reflect the status instead of just Country. Edwiki2005 (talk) 20:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

However, by some definitions, including but not limited to, the United States definition for its 50 member states which are all nations with their own government (like Wales)

No, you are still confused. The United States is a federation of 50 states. States, yes (for some value of "state"), but not nations.

... the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all

- emphasis mine. The confusion here is your own. It is not a confusion on this page. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:43, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

What is wrong with you? Did you seriously try to quote a recital for a flag (also a propaganda source) of a specific country as a source of valid reference? Are your going to use the same to validate the indivisibility of the United States? or how about the Existence of God Which is also validated in its pledge of allegiance? Or how about all the slaves that were in the country, were they getting justice and liberty for all? The pledge in fact has roots back to the US Civil war, in which the southern states asserted in their right to succeed from the USA, they argued they were 11 separate countries which "duly" had the right succeed and form a confederation (like the European Union). After all, states like Texas and the original 13 colonies were all Countries (also in a confederacy) before joining the United States. The US definition of country internally denies a state as a country unless they have independence, therefore if independence is disputed they are still not a country which is one of the reasons that justified the refusal of the United States to allow the southern states from leaving. [3] Edwiki2005 (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Well then I expect you can provide sources that back up your curious assertion that each state in the US is a nation. But not here. We are now in NOTFORUM territory. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2024 (UTC).

Easy, I attached one of 1,000's of available references not to mention the various Native American Nations as well are nations, all of which have their own flags, governments, and constitutions [4] Edwiki2005 (talk) 00:19, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

You think the USA is made up of Native American Nations? wow. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I think your use of that one source is a little overly selective. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "cannot be dissolved by the Federal Government at will, like the Welsh Government can be"? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

What I mean is this effectively, and more accurately: [5]. I would need to review rights and procedures, but the UK parliament could pass legislation on the devolved matters to the local Welsh government superseding their authority. Nothing precludes them from also electing to dissolve/remove the referendums on devolution through new vote/referendum. Edwiki2005 (talk) 22:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

What you are perhaps alluding to is the fact that the UK is a quasi federal unitary state. Whereas the US is a federation of states - albeit an apparently indivisible federation. None of this is relevant to the definition of a country. On that, you have some reading to do. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

What I am alluding to is a US state cannot be dissolved by the federal power as one of its irrevocable powers other than through sedition as it is a Nation State, and unlike Wales. However, it cannot leave the Union, so in those respects one could argue Wales is a country as it has the right to be sovereign if it so chooses, which a US state cannot. Edwiki2005 (talk) 00:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you "would need to review rights and procedures". Can I suggest you take a nice long break from this discussion, and possibly from Wikipedia in general, to do just that. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

This pointless timesink is going nowhere. There’s really no discussion to be had until the editor who wants a change puts forward a range of RS that deny Wales is a country. They haven’t to date. Until they do, I’d suggest we focus on more productive areas. KJP1 (talk) 22:13, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I am not asking that Wales be changed to state not a country. I am asking that, it is stated in the intro, as in my proposal above, that the Wales description should explicitly state "Dependent Country", or "Non-Sovereign Country" to clarify that as stated, with multiple sources in the respective WIKI article on the subject matter (I can copy paste over?), that the definition of country varies by country. In the UK, by UK definition, Wales is a country. By other countries definitions it is not, as the definition requires independence for them to be. Edwiki2005 (talk) 00:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

The definition isn't by country, the different definitions exist everywhere. All of the synonyms here, state, nation, country, have developed a mishmash of overlapping and redundant meanings. If that is to change it needs to happen in the wider English world, not Wikipedia. CMD (talk) 01:30, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Edwiki2005, do your "arguments" also apply equally to England? I don't see you campaigning quite so strongly over at Talk:England. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)