Talk:Cornwall

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeCornwall was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

See also[edit]

'historic region' in lead[edit]

I'm not sure why the phrase 'historic region' is used in the first sentence of the lead. When @Uamaol recently restored the phrase they gave the following reason: 'Cornwall is historically a seperate entity so comparisons to most other counties does not hold value.' I'm not sure this holds true, as counties such as Kent, Sussex, Essex, and Northumberland were historically independent regions but are not described as 'historic regions' in their leads. The likes of Gwynedd and Ceredigion were also independent, although I accept that there's a discontinuity there between the historic kingdoms and contemporary counties.

To be honest, given the lead, body, and the History of Cornwall article explain the region's history with increasing levels of complexity, I'm not sure if the phrase isn't simply redundant. A.D.Hope (talk) 12:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kent, Sussex, Essex, Northumberland, Gwynedd and Ceredigion all have separate articles for the kingdom; Kingdom of Kent, Kingdom of Sussex, Kingdom of Essex, Northumbria, Kingdom of Gwynedd and Kingdom of Ceredigion. Cornwall has a mere redirect to History of Cornwall which this article is the main article about. So this article kinda talks about both, so the term should remain. Any split into Kingdom of Cornwall is best discussed if that is considered.
Plus applying full consistency for Cornwall as if it just was a part of England is going to be quite controversial (as I found out), so prefer the term to remain. There is no need for full consistency everywhere, not all counties are the same in their individual context. Cornwall does have quite a unique separate ethnic identity to all those other counties to a degree. DankJae 01:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of the county articles should cover the history of that county, but the lead should really begin with what the county currently is — a ceremonial county and Celtic nation. Adding 'historic region' into the mix isn't necessary, particularly as the fourth lead para covers that history. A.D.Hope (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Celtic nation was mentioned in the talk page history, but not sure of "historic region" tbh. If you're willing to do a bit of digging and find if there is consensus for Celtic nation but not necessarily Historic region then that should be fine. (See who added "historic region" long ago) I understand "historic region" is not quite clear, so if you're willing to change it for Celtic nation if there was consensus in the past instead of historic region then that should be a bit fine. Ofc, the lead should not just be ceremonial county though. I do suggest looking through the archive and seeing if there was consensus for "historic region" or any other descriptor, or wait for more editors to establish a longer consensus on this controversial issue before editing it. DankJae 12:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean Celtic nation in the first sentence, not sure when it was moved to the second one, or if it always was in the second. It was mentioned here for example, have not been following the article for a long time, but you did just propose removing historic region, therefore leaving just ceremonial county, which I oppose. DankJae 12:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The lead of Cornwall is contentious, to put it mildly, but the lead sentences appear to have been broadly stable since a 20 December 2020 by @Roger 8 Roger, which resulted in:
'Cornwall (/ˈkɔːrnwɔːl, -wəl/; Cornish: Kernow [ˈkɛrnɔʊ]) is a ceremonial county in South West England. It is recognised as one of the Celtic nations and is the homeland of the Cornish people.'
Roger's edits tidied up a couple of previous ones which moved the 'Celtic nation' passage into the lead. It was previously in the second paragraph, and I can see from this discussion in 2012 that it was previously in the fourth. Its current position in the second sentence seems to be the result of a gradual creep up the lead which has gained consensus by not being reverted. Personally I'm happy with this arrangement, as the first sentence explains Cornwall's constitutional status within the UK and the second explains its other major identity.
The phrase 'historic county' was added to the first sentence on 21 September 2021 and seems to have stuck around from then until my major edit on 27 June. Since then the phrase 'historic region' has been added. The reason I've been removing 'historic county' from the lead sentence as I've been editing the county articles is that the Wikipedia:UKCOUNTIES guidance takes that the view that the historic counties don't exist. Any differences between the current and historic boundaries should be discussed in the article (e.g. in the second para of Lancashire), but Cornwall's historic and current boundaries are nearly identical and so the differences don't warrant a mention in the lead. On that basis, if 'historic region' is just a proxy for 'historic county' then I do think it should be removed. A.D.Hope (talk) 16:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it is fine with me, but maybe ping the editors involved, to back up such consensus, especially those more connected to this article. Atlhough per WP:CornwallGuideline (which I was educated on :D) which advocates for "England, United Kingdom", should "United Kingdom" be added somewhat after England here? DankJae 21:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the second part of your comment is really a separate issue, but why not dive in?
I've had a quick look at the articles on Cornwall's largest settlements and the Isles of Scilly, Eden Project, Minak Theatre, Lanhydrock House, Land's End, and Tintagel Castle. thirteen of the twenty-one parishes, Lanhydrock, and Tintagel Castle use 'Cornwall, England, United Kingdom' or similar (e.g. Cornwall, UK). The rest use 'Cornwall, England' or similar (e.g. Cornwall, South West England), so regardless of the guideline I'd say there's no consensus one way or the other. Other county articles just use their region if it includes the word 'England' or 'region, England' if it doesn't, so my preference would be to do the same here.
I'm not really sure who's involved here — I'd expect anyone with Cornwall on their watchlist to have commented by now if they were interested — but there's no harm in pinging the article's active top editors @Ghmyrtle @DuncanHill @Johnsoniensis @Talskiddy@Murgatroyd49 and re-pinging @Uamaol
A.D.Hope (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I recently changed some articles from "Cornwall, United Kingdom" to "Cornwall, England" boldly applying UKGEO but seems there is an exception is for Cornwall so it should be C.. England, United Kingdom all round. Note many IPs may have removed either England or UK over the years, which is why the guideline holds more weight than usage. Can't exactly compare to other county articles as an exception seems to have been made for only Cornwall, due to the sensitive nature. But I'm only talking about should "United Kingdom" be added to this article's lead if all other sub-topics should be "C...England, United Kingdom", but may be a WikiProject Cornwalll contributor should probably settle that. DankJae 22:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The reason a number of editors prefer UK to England is the pretence that Cornwall is actually another country like Scotland and Wales. This comment won't be popular which is why I have stayed out of the discussion till now. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There has been active promotion of all things Cornish for many years. That is not necessarily wrong but one result is that Cornwall is described as being different from the rest of England, an area in its own right. That results in what I think is an unusual distortion of reality in many articles. Someone without any knowledge of the UK reading this article is likely to think there is a distinct active group of people in the far SW corner of Great Britain with there own unique culture and language. This type of promotion of a language and race isn't confined to Cornwall: it happens with lots of minority groups, especially those on the edge of dying out. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there is a distinct active group of people in the far SW corner of Great Britain with their own unique culture and language. It's also true that that group is a minority within Cornwall and that Cornwall is administered as part of England, so it's about balancing things.
In terms of the issue at hand, I'm not sure what 'Cornwall, England, United Kingdom' really achieves. It's more cumbersome than just using the county and country, which is the convention elsewhere, and doesn't 'remove' England. I'd argue a more effective way of incorporating Cornwall's distinct identity into articles is to simply use Cornish names and terms where appropriate, which is the standard in Welsh, Scottish, and Northern Irish articles and is already done in many Cornish ones. Look at the lead sentence of Falmouth:
Falmouth (/ˈfælməθ/ FAL-məth; Cornish: Aberfala) is a town, civil parish and port on the River Fal on the south coast of Cornwall, England, United Kingdom.
Which aspect best expresses Cornwall's culture, the use of the Cornish name or 'United Kingdom'? A.D.Hope (talk) 10:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Use of the Cornish name is far preferable. As you say, it is consistent with useage eleswhere on Wikipedia. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:24, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just commenting to (hopefully) prevent the discussion being archived. A.D.Hope (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed about balance. We don't enter Cornwall and be confronted with people walking around speaking Cornish or dressed in different attire. As a percentage of the population those who actively present themselves as celtic Cornish will be minimal to the point of not being relevant. However, we have to use the percentage from RSSs, which isn't the same. The promotion of Cornish things in sources will be greater than the population at large, which justifies a mention in the article. But again, balance is needed and I think it sometimes goes too far. Comparison with Wales and Welsh is nonsense - Welsh is an actively spoken primary language over vast areas of the country. Use of Cornish in the lead should be removed. The guidelines are quite clear that a second language should only be added if that language/name is used by a considerable percentage of sources, which isn't the case with Cornish. It should not be used for a language that has a link of some sort with the article's subject. That is what is happening here. There is absolutely no ambiguity about the name of any place in Cornwall. If the Cornish name is used, such as on a road sign, it is with the English word next to it, removing any confusion. Yes, mention the Cornish name, but not in the lead. The county should be treated no different from other county - Cornwall, England. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this position goes too far the other way and is very unlikely to reach consensus, Roger. Including Cornish names in the lead does no harm and quite a bit of good in acknowledging the Cornish language in a natural way, so there's little reason to remove it. It also follows the consensus on UK place articles, which is to include the Welsh, Irish, Scots, or Scottish Gaelic name for a Welsh, Northern Irish, or Scottish place where it exists. A.D.Hope (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, unlikely to reach consensus, but especially not here as it relates to multiple articles, I may have directed the conversation too much in the direction of what Cornwall is or should be. Was just asking if UK should be added in line with the guideline while discussing the lead. Any changes for places in Cornwall to be described as just "Cornwall, England" would need a discussion at WP:CORNWALL, but the current guideline is against that. DankJae 20:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree it won't go anywhere but I thought I'd make my point nevertheless. :) Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do so many who identify as English have such a strong opinion on what is written in an article about Cornwall, do you all go onto articles about Sapmi and the Saami and gyp them too? 85.10.117.114 (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well IP, if one were to cross over from the Devon side into Cornwall they wouldn't see many differences, cultural or economy wise. Yet we have editors here trying to assert that Cornwall is the antithesis of the region it is geogaphically located within, i.e the Southwest (refuse to call it England, fine). And the issues facing Cornwall are not even remotely similar or relevent to those being faced by the Saami.--SinoDevonian (talk) 10:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with Cornish nationalism is it mainly bogus. The majority of the present day population is descended from 18th century immigrant miners from the Midlands and their families. There is a reason the Cornish language died out in that period. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The language did not die out. DNA proves that Cornish ethnicity was not bred out. OK noted Engish nationalist racism 85.10.117.114 (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You certainly need a citation for the bizarre claim that most people in Cornwall are descended from Midlanders. The Cornish language did not die out in the 18th century, although it was in serious decline, the reasons for which had mostly been explained by William Scawen some years before. The existence of the language in the 19th century has been extensively researched by Rod Lyon in his book, 'Cornish - the struggle for survival', published in 2001 by Taves an Werin, and is the current focus of research by the University of Exeter. I suggest you read those before making further unsubstantiated claims. Brwynog (talk) 01:03, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://dspace.plymouth.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10026.1/8903/LCH_V4_2_05_Kirkhope.pdf?sequence=4 85.94.248.27 (talk) 07:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
( "THE CASE AGAINST THE PROPOSED CROSS-BORDER “BIDEFORD, BUDE AND LAUNCESTON” PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY" )

Two established and essential legal points to remember: “The whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entirety of Cornwall is vested in the Duke of Cornwall”, confirming that Cornwall has a separate Head of State from the remainder of the UK. This was upheld in the High Court in 1855, during the Duchy v Crown Foreshore dispute, and again as recently as 2011. “Although Cornwall is de facto administered by England, a formal de jure joinder of Cornwall and England has never taken place.” (G.D Flather, Queen’s Counsel attached to the Boundary Commission 1988). These remain undisputed at law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.94.248.27 (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on including the Cornish flag in the infobox[edit]

Should the article infobox contain the flag of Cornwall? A.D.Hope (talk) 09:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

  • I oppose including the flag. Taking a wider view, the flags which are generally used in the infoboxes of the English ceremonial county infoboxes are those registered with the Flag Institute, a charity dedicated to vexillology. While their promotion of flags is admirable, they aren't an official body and the flags registered with them are not official.
The Institute also only registers flags for the historic counties of England, the boundaries of which don't align with the current ceremonial counties. It would be misleading, for example, to include a flag intended to represent the historic extent of Lancashire when the article infobox is about the ceremonial county, which has very different boundaries.
The above led to the WP:UKCOUNTIES guidelines being amended, after a discussion instigated by myself, to advise against including flags in the county infoboxes: "Do not include flags in the infobox, as they cannot be placed in context there." The intent is that flags will instead be placed in the body of the article, with an accompanying paragraph or two explaining their history, symbolism, and use. This is the case with the Cornish flag, which has its own subsection in this article which also links to the main Saint Piran's Flag article.
I do appreciate that the Cornish flag has a longer history than its registration with the Flag Institute, and that the current county borders are similar to the historic ones, but to avoid problems elsewhere and for general consistency with the other counties I wouldn't support an exception to the guideline. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per A.D.Hope - convinced placing the flag in the infobox violates WP:DUE. SportingFlyer T·C 10:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, while I would lean support, to avoid antagonising the issue, probably should wait until Cornwall becomes more than just a county. However this article also covers it being a nation, so if this is only on the "county", then maybe a split has to be done. DankJae 10:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This article is primarily about the county, but I'm not sure a split is needed as e.g. Cornish nationalism, Culture of Cornwall, Cornish people, and Duchy of Cornwall already exist. A.D.Hope (talk) A.D.Hope (talk) 23:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean oppose - flag as icon. Support adding 4th image to montage. (UPDATED) - Strong countervailing reasons would be needed to ignore a consensus at a previous RfC. One such reason would be that the flag should be on the page somewhere. It is useful information. However, there is a section on the page just for the flag, with a larger image attached. That section allows context and history to be described. As such I do not see any reader benefit in duplication of this image in the infobox. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to add, Tewdar says below, We don't have to use the flag icon, we can use the nice photograph I added, which was reverted. I do not oppose a photo of a flag in the image montage of Cornwall, as the flag is a very well known symbol of Cornwall. I am specifically commenting on a section that shows the flag, with a caption "flag" and no context. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:32, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I prefer the photograph anyway. I knew I should have started the RfC myself (see proposed options above...)  Tewdar  17:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am updating my !vote. I had not seen the discussion above with 4 options, as I was brought here by RfC notice, and the RfC only asks one question. I agree with the guideline that an infobox flag icon with a caption "flag" lacks the necessary context, but the photo montage is meant to provide something of the character of the locality, whist relying on the main section for context. Anyone who does not think St Piran's flag is representative of Cornwall has probably not been there much lately. Cornwall is highly unusual amongst counties in having a clearly identifiable flag associated with it, and the enthusiasm for which this is displayed. I don't think the result of this RfC should be a decision that freezes out the use of that flag as an image in the montage. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In my opinion a photo of the flag goes against the spirit of the guideline, which is not to include flags in infoboxes at all. It doesn't matter whether the image is an .svg file or a photograph of the physical flag, they're functionally equivalent. A.D.Hope (talk) 23:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Where is the discussion and consensus to that effect? I certainly agree that placing a flag icon as per the current page, with a caption "flag" is wrong in that implies an official status that does not exist, and that the infobox summary cannot contain the nuance to describe the meaning of such a flag. But equally the photo montage is used to present aspects of the character of a locality, and the reader is not likely to make any assumption about the official status of a flag if you simply have an image of the flag flying in the montage. Rather, the reader will get the impression that in Cornwall this flag is flown, and the page contains detail on what the flag is. And Cornwall is exceptional among counties in that the flag is an important symbol of the county and its people. I do not see a problem with placement in the image montage. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sirfurboy: Do you have the link to the RfC discussion (?) that resulted in this change to the infobox guidelines?  Tewdar  09:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't. That's what I was asking to see. Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sirfurboy, @Tewdar the link is here: [1] Rupples (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC) Added pings in case missed in the middle of this discussion.Rupples (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks, Rupples. Looking at that, I see that this was not an RfC and although there was some consensus there, it was poorly tested. I think that needs an RfC. But having said that, my view is unchanged that a section that puts in the flag and captions it "flag" makes an implication that is not placed in proper context. I still lean opposed to such an icon based flag, labelled flag, but I see nothing in that discussion that prevents an image with a Cornish flag being placed in the Cornwall photo montage. If this is deemed against the spirit of the guidelines, we should open an RfC on the guidelines themselves. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see only two votes, with the guideline changer noting that relatively few editors have contributed to this discussion. This is the basis for excluding a photograph of St Piran's flag from the infobox?  Tewdar  11:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The current county collages avoid overt symbolism such as flags, instead using images which broadly convey something of the character of the area. The majority are landscapes or townscapes, but Staffordshire, for example, includes a bottle kiln, referencing the ceramics trade; Herefordshire includes an example of the county's distinct Romanesque sculpture, and both Devon and Cornwall include their moorland ponies. This works well, as the images are quite neutral and therefore stable – nobody can argue that Cumbria doesn't contain the Lake District – and is one reason why I'm very against introducing things like flags or coats of arms into the collages.
    Also, as I said above, I don't think there's much functional distinction between a flag icon and a photograph of the same flag. They convey the same thing. A.D.Hope (talk) 08:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support inclusion as icon or as image in collage - I didn't agree that flag icons and collages convey the same thing. A collage conveys the character of the locality whereas a flag suggests some kind of official adoption of the flag, without context as to what that adoption is. On reflection, though and having looked at Yorkshire as well as all of the Welsh administrative county articles (e.g. Ceredigion, Anglesey, Pembrokeshire etc.) I see flags and coats of arms in infoboxes and in all cases they are wikilinked to flag articles which carry that missing context. The Cornish flag also wikilinks to a suitable flag article. I think the change to the guideline is therefore incorrect, and having noted that the change had only a very narrow consensus, and was not discussed in an RfC, I believe that (1) I should support retention of the Cornish flag on this page and (2) that an RfC should be opened on the guideline to more firmly establish whether this is a guideline the community actually want. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'd like to hear from those who think the flag should be included before making a decision. Willing to consider inclusion if compelling reason(s) put forward, but as things stand I think the flag is better presented in the Culture section. Rupples (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @A.D.Hope, to your knowledge have there been other instances of editors reinserting flags in county infoboxes since we had the discussion at UKGEOG? Cornwall is the only one I recall. Rupples (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To my knowledge yes, although they do blur together a bit. Certain counties (e.g. Cornwall, the Yorkshires, Lancashire) tend to have their flags reinstated every few weeks or so, whereas others are rarely touched unless an editor has decided to reinstate all the county flags.
    I can dig up specifics if anyone wants them, but I'd rather not go searching for diffs if I don't need to. A.D.Hope (talk) 17:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're a bit like that 'comprised of' guy, but with flags, it seems... 🙄  Tewdar  18:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion. Information useful for the reader. Clearly WP:DUE. Why wouldn't it be included? The infobox is specifically designed to concisely present a useful summary of pertinent information. That normally includes symbols, coats of arms, flags, etc. And the Cornish flag pre-dates any Flag Institute. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom.
Youprayteas (t • c) 14:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support inclusion of flag. Cornwall is far more than an English ceremonial county. Member of the Celtic League and considered one of the Celtic nations regardless of its current position Lyndaship (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose inclusion. Showing the flag in the infobox communicates that Cornwall has officially adopted the flag and uses it to represent Cornwall, but I see no evidence that either the Lord Lieutenant of Cornwall or Cornwall Council has adopted the flag and uses it officially. If the council had adopted it, we would still have the fine question of whether that made it appropriate to our subject defined as the ceremonial county, but that's moot. Our infoboxes aren't the place (and lack the capacity) for nuanced descriptions of an unofficial flag's precise popular standing or sparse Victorian attestation. NebY (talk) 15:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support inclusion:
  • St Piran's flag is a potent symbol of Cornish identity,[1] an emblem of an assertive Cornish identity,[2] and an "icon of Cornish mining and identity" [3]
  • There is "widespread use of St Piran's flag on homes and public buildings",[4] and it is "one of the most prominent visual signatures of Cornish identity as it appears across multiple spheres: the domestic, commercial, institutional, political and cultural".[5] St Piran's flag is a sign of Cornwall's distinct national identity, which "is almost ubiquitous in some areas and can be found on flag poles, T-shirts, or car-stickers".[6]
  • "Cornwall is a cultural entity, signified by the frequent use of the St. Piran’s flag, the efforts to revive the Cornish language, the ethno-nationalist movement that seeks Cornish ‘home rule’, the remembrance of secessionist legends and by the over thousand-year-old border river Tamar." (note which one is first on the list)[7]

Can you find any academic, or any other, articles or books that say this about other "ceremonial county" flags? If you can, I'd support their inclusion in their infoboxes. We don't have to use the flag icon, we can use the nice photograph I added, which was reverted. Putting a photo of a flag in the infobox in no way implies that "Cornwall has officially adopted the flag" or anything of the sort.  Tewdar  16:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Obvious where this is going. Flag in infobox followed by a revised infobox header "Ceremonial county and Celtic nation". Rupples (talk) 19:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We're actually going to get it changed to 'Brythonic kingdom' as soon as the clientele of the Three Saffron Buns downalong in Old Porthfrantick learn how to create Wikipedia accounts.  Tewdar  21:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Tewdar. Great reply! There is though a serious point to this. Adding "and Celtic nation" to the infobox might help resolve what is looking at present like an impasse. The lead states in the second sentence that Cornwall is recognised as a Celtic nation, so why isn't this reflected in the infobox? It would differentiate Cornwall from other ceremonial counties and provide a strong basis for an exception to the no flags in county infoboxes guideline. Rupples (talk) 10:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is actually an excellent suggestion. Even AD Hope above says this article is primarily about the county (my emphasis). Indeed, the status of Cornwall as a Celtic nation already is a strong reason to make an exception in this case. Unfortunately there are some on this talkpage who seem to believe that the majority of the present day population [of Cornwall] is descended from 18th century immigrant miners from the Midlands and their families.[citation needed]  Tewdar  10:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We're getting into somewhat thorny territory here, but I wouldn't support adding 'Celtic nation' to the infobox. As I understand it the Celtic nations are an informal grouping of culturally related regions, rather than it being an official status like a ceremonial county or a metropolitan borough. A.D.Hope (talk) 09:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it insufficient to cover all of the above in the flag's own article and the section of this article dedicated to it? Part of the point of moving the flags out of the infoboxes was to allow their contexts and histories to be explained more fully, rather than inaccurately presenting them as one-dimensional symbols. A.D.Hope (talk) 00:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it necessary to blindly follow your flagship 'no flags in the infobox under any circumstances' guideline in this case, against the high-quality reliable sources which establish that St Piran's flag is 'one of the most prominent visual signatures of Cornish identity'? Nobody above has presented any reliable sources for why the flag shouldn't be included, just a bunch of WP:OR and some pseudo-policy crafted by random Wikipdians. What is the point of not having the flag somewhere in the infobox?  Tewdar  08:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point of not having a flag in the infobox is that it makes it easier to explain what that flag represents. In Cornwall's case, the flag represents Cornish identity, which is a complex subject, as well as a geographic area, so it's more appropriate to cover it in the article body and in its own article.
There's also other aspects, like the ceremonial county not exactly corresponding to the historic county and the flag not being 'official'. A.D.Hope (talk) 08:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Getting a bit tired of hearing the flag is not official. Who decides what is official or not? Plus I must point out that the flag was flown on the Queens barge in her anniversary celebrations [2]. Thats official to me Lyndaship (talk) 10:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion, I would prefer the standard flag format being maintained (so current), but open to using a 4th image in the montage of the flag flying instead. I believe there should be an exception for Cornwall, as I mentioned at the original discussion over all flags. The main issue with most county flags are that they are/were recent creations/recognitions but not clear if it referred to the modern or historic county. However, Cornwall's flag predates it being an administrative county entirely, while the county had little boundary changes over the years, as well as the general importance the flag has in Cornwall, likely more than many other counties with more recent flags. I'd prefer "ceremonial county and Celtic nation" in both the lead and body, however I am fine with the stable lead mentioned above on 11 July 2023, but the existing lead seems to no longer match that? DankJae 12:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've reverted to an older version of the lead paragraph. The way it was re-written was almost like a lead-within-a-lead. A.D.Hope (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion. I reverted one of the flag insertions to this article to respect the new guideline (which I'd supported) on the basis that Cornwall was just like any other ceremonial county. However, I'm coming around to the view that Cornwall is a valid exception. Tbh I'm surprised that the reference to Cornwall as a Celtic nation is given so high a prominence in the lead as the second sentence. But, assuming this prominence is accepted, it makes sense for the flag image to be included in the infobox because it appears to be the primary symbol of Cornwall as a Celtic nation. Rupples (talk) 10:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm actually surprised that there is so relatively little about Cornwall's distinctive identity and culture in the lead, given the large number of reliable sources available, and even the content of the body of this article. One of the Celtic nations... homeland of the Cornish people..retained its own culture... and that's about it, apart from a bit about the disputed constitutional status of Cornwall and a comment on the language, which apparently is now being revived... gwydn agan bŷz!  Tewdar  10:34, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article content to an extent reflects the perspective held towards Cornwall by the contributing editors. Some of the Cornish people and Cornish population (not necessarily the same) and those of a Celtic persuasion likely see significant cultural differences between Cornwall and the rest of England. Others, because they view Cornwall differently haven't added material on this aspect, by choice or perhaps were just unaware. Rupples (talk) 11:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's worth bearing in mind that the lead should broadly summarise the entire article, and that this isn't Culture of Cornwall. It highlights the most important aspects – people, culture, language – but the details have to be left to the body.
    For my part, I can say that I've no desire to omit or minimise Cornwall's identity from the lead or any other part of the article. At the same time, leads are tricky because they typically have to cover a lot of information very briefly, and not everything can make the cut. I'm sure a historian or geographer would like to say much more about Cornish history and geography in the lead, but there just isn't space. A.D.Hope (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But some might look upon excluding the flag from the infobox as an attempt at suppressing Cornish culture and identity. Rupples (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can understand that, but given the Cornish flag has its own article and a subsection in this one I don't think it would be a very good attempt! A.D.Hope (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - We're not using flags in the infoboxes of other ceremonial counties, so we shouldn't here. Cornwall isn't special among the other ceremonial counties. GoodDay (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a good argument that Cornwall is exceptional though. But additionally there is something a bit odd going on here, because the no flags text was only added to English counties that are ceremonial counties. So all the Welsh counties can have flags, for instance, as can all the historical counties like Sussex and Yorkshire. But Cornwall, being and administrative and ceremonial county co-extensive with its historical county now falls foul of a guideline because we sensibly don't have separate articles for each of those distinctions. The guideline is what needs looking at here. I opened some discussion on that here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#Workshopping Possible RfC. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've no strong view on whether the flag should be included here. I agree with those saying there's a good case for treating Cornwall as an exception, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be different in this particular respect. What I am adamant about, though, is that if the decision here is to include the flag, that is because Cornwall is an exception and it does not set a precedent for other counties. WaggersTALK 16:28, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion - Regardless of the flags of other ceremonial counties, the Cornish flag is a prominent enough symbol that even I (a New Zealander) know about it. The fact that other flags of ceremonial counties are new and relatively unknown has no bearing on the notability of this particular flag; Cornwall is very much atypical. ― novov (t c) 07:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Just to make it clear, there are (at least) the following options available:

(1) a "flag=icon" parameter in the infobox, i.e. the current and stable version for the last twenty years

(2) Replace one of the current photographs in the montage with a photograph of St Piran's flag

(3) Add a photo of St Piran's flag to the montage, giving a total of four images, or

(4) No flag anywhere in the infobox

I really wish that the RfC starter had made these options clear, in retrospect.  Tewdar  18:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC is best as a simple yes or no quesion. If the consensus is to include a flag you can always start a second on how to include it. A.D.Hope (talk) 23:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is Cornwall the only British ceremonial county, with a flag in its infobox? GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Many Welsh counties, e.g. Ceredigion, have flags. Shetland has a flag, as does Orkney. These might be exceptional for being archipelagos, and I am not sure if any other Scottish counties have flags. Some counties of England that no longer exist owing to county changes have flags, such as Yorkshire, Sussex and Middlesex. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the entire dispute can be settled with two-option solution. Have flags in all the infoboxes of ceremonial counties or have flags deleted from all the infoboxes of ceremonial counties. GoodDay (talk) 00:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I may have misled in my answer above regarding Wales. The Welsh counties that have flags are not the ceremonial counties, but they are the administrative ones. In Wales the lieutenancies are the preserved counties. But then, Cornwall is also the administrative county, just as it is also the historical county. The distinction between types of county is all very well but it leads to oddities if we make rules for one type of county that do not apply to all. If we say no ceremonial counties can have flags, then Cornwall can have no flag... unless the lieutenancy is extinguished. Then it may have one by dint of being an administrative county (per Wales counties) or a historic one (Per Yorkshire, Sussex, Middlesex). That makes no sense. Better that we just make a more nuanced general guideline. Flags may only be used if they follow good sourcing as to their importance (Per Shetland perhaps - although Cornwall's claim is older). The alternative should be that no flags should be used on any county articles of any type. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
LOL I see you already thought of what I just wrote 😂  Tewdar  16:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Imagine Cornwall was split (!) into 'East Cornwall' and 'West Cornwall' ceremonial counties. Then we could have three articles, with the Cornwall article having a lede like Cornwall is an area of South West England which was historically a county. It corresponds to the ceremonial counties of East Cornwall and West Cornwall, which are all part of the Cornwall region. Despite no longer being used for administration, Cornwall retains a strong regional identity.
Perhaps then we could have our flag in the infobox. 🙄  Tewdar  16:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

I'd like to propose pausing this discussion, pending the outcome of the RfC on county flags I anticipate Sirfurboy soon opening in the near future at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography.

The result of that discussion will inform this one, so it seems sensible to wait. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice to read everyone's personal opinions, however the legal status, as per 'English' law and judges is; ( "THE CASE AGAINST THE PROPOSED CROSS-BORDER “BIDEFORD, BUDE AND LAUNCESTON” PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY" )
Two established and essential legal points to remember:
“The whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entirety of Cornwall is vested in the Duke of Cornwall”, confirming that Cornwall has a separate Head of State from the remainder of the UK. This was upheld in the High Court in 1855, during the Duchy v Crown Foreshore dispute, and again as recently as 2011.
“Although Cornwall is de facto administered by England, a formal de jure joinder of Cornwall and England has never taken place.” (G.D Flather, Queen’s Counsel attached to the Boundary Commission 1988).
These remain undisputed at law. 85.94.248.27 (talk) 09:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Dunmore 2020, p. 18.
  2. ^ Dunmore 2020, p. 26.
  3. ^ Orange 2019, p. 122.
  4. ^ Dunmore 2020, p. 21.
  5. ^ Orange 2019, p. 115.
  6. ^ Schlink 2015.
  7. ^ Vainikka 2015.

References[edit]

  • Dunmore, Stuart (2020). "A Cornish revival? The nascent iconization of a post-obsolescent language". Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics. 6 (1). doi:10.1515/jhsl-2018-0001. ISSN 2199-2908.

UK county flags discussion[edit]

A discussion has been opened at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#County flags: discussion 1 concerning the UK county flags, which you are welcome to participate in. Thanks, A.D.Hope (talk) 11:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Penzance not listed as 2nd largest population in cornwall.[edit]

Penzance had a population of 21200 in 2011, larger than Truro, St Austell and Newquay, can someone include us in the list as second after Falmouth 2A00:23C4:E141:4D01:8170:9A1B:8902:EEB7 (talk) 16:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to the lead, added it, as it was mentioned in the body. The population figures are uncited so removed. DankJae 19:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cornwall&oldid=1219364065"