From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Good articleWales has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
October 2, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
December 1, 2010Good article nomineeListed
November 22, 2011Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article
The issue of whether Wales is a country or not has been repeatedly raised.
The result of all these debates is that Wales is indeed a country. This has been confirmed in formal mediation.

The discussion is summarised in this archive here. Further information on the countries within the UK can be found at Countries of the United Kingdom, and a table of reliable sources can be found at Talk:Countries of the United Kingdom/refs.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2015[edit]

Average rain fall.........53 inches

Average summer temperature..........48-63

Average winter temperature...........35-45

Capital city.................Cardiff

discussing origin of a symbol[edit]

Why am I not allowed to mention where the feathers originate? why does one editor feel the article does not need more explanations even though I could use hundreds of references to back up the origin? I thought the reason for wiki was to inform the mass, not leave out some details?

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2018[edit]

Section 2.4 - Medival Wales - spelling mistake in third paragraph "the whole of Wales recognised the kingship of Gruffudd ap Llywelyn." change to "The whole of Wales recognised the kingship of Gruffydd ap Llywelyn". Originlausername1 (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanks. Well spotted. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Capitalisation: "First Minister" or "first minister"[edit]

We appear to have an edit warrior using one wikipedia (not policy) as an authorty for the style on this article That isn't the way things work. If there is a formal style guide or similar then lets have the reference. In the mean time the use is capitalised in Welsh Government sources which carry more authority than a wikipedia article on the general subject or the opinion of one editor. -----Snowded TALK 21:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

I agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Wales has a first minister, and must elect a first minister.
Editor Snowded is edit-warring about this, as she is trying to insert caps (Wales elects a First Minister)
In this instance, "first minister" is not capped because we're not talking about the title of a specific person. Eg, correct would be, "First Minister Bob Smith is one of several first ministers in the UK".
Not only is this Wikipedia style ( ), but it's also the BBC's style. See here, for example: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild (talkcontribs) 21:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
It's a title. I think it should be upper case. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom seems to use upper case throughout i.e. in every instance, e.g."... politically it gradually became necessary for him or her to govern through a Prime Minister who could command a majority in Parliament." So why can upper case not be used for "First Minister" here? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:38, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Reliable sources vary in their style. For instance, the BBC, the Independent, the FT, the Guardian, and the Times all use lower case. The Telegraph and ITV use upper case. Personally, I find that split quite surprising - but if the majority of high quality reliable secondary sources like those use the lower case form, and it accords with WP style, we should use it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
I would tend to accord the Welsh Assembly itself more weight than newspapers, even if they are WP:RS broadsheets. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't we give preference to secondary rather than primary sources? Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Carwyn himself also uses upper case. But that probably only amplifies your argument? However, secondary sources closer to home seem to agree with him. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Guardian style guide: first minister (Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, Northern Ireland assembly). I haven't found any other specific references in other style guides. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Two points initially on the process (i) user Newzild is the one making the change (and against two other editors who restored the status quo per WP:BRD) so accusations of edit warring seem a little wild not to mention aggressive (ii) another article on the subject and one tagged as needed further references is not a Wikipedia style guide so again we have a false claim in the edit summary.

Then to the arguments:

  1. Other established UK articles provide better precidence that the weak one sited by Newzild for Wikipedia practice. So the use of capitalisation for Prime Minister on the UK article and First Minister on the Scotland and Northern Ireland articles give us a strong indicator and we should be consistent with those.
  2. The various Wikipedia articles that start "First Minister of..." all use capitals
  3. We have mixed use in the quality newspapers so no clear guidence
  4. A quick search on Google scholar shows extensive use of Capitals (I didn't check in detail but scrolling the first few pages of half a million hits said most used Capitals)
  5. Welsh Government sites use capitals

If there is to be a change here it flies in the face of practice on multiple other UK articles. So the proper place for discussion is either a style guide or more likely the UK project. Unless some strong argument is put forward I'm going to restore the long standing, and stable version pending a wider resolution -----Snowded TALK 05:34, 10 September 2018 (UTC)