Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Wales (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Notification of a draft which has since been published Foreign relations of Wales[edit]

I am forming a page on the foreign relations of Wales, see Draft:Foreign relations of Wales and have also added a similar notification on the Foreign relations of the United Kingdom talk page. This seems like a more appropriate option than adding a heading here for Wales for example. Because of further attention given to the topic in popular media as well as availability of sources, now seems like an appropriate time to form the page. Titus Gold (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Foreign relations? (though technically "paradiplomacy"?) Wales does not have the powers of foreign relations, nor is it part of any (governmental) international body? AFAIAA, although happy to be proven otherwise. Autonomous regions usually do not have these types of articles? Minor diplomatic meetings usually with more local or sector leaders, is not really the pinnacle of foreign relations. General promotional meetings happen in all tiers of government, so it is not unusual, doubt there should be a Foreign relations of London article. Not sure what you mean by "popular media" most of the sources currently listed are primary, from or related to the Welsh Government, or the World Cup?? But it is still being made so being open-minded for now (WP:DEMOLISH), and some other sources if found could justify it, so just gonna wait and see, but seems to be a mash-up of various internationally related topics or strategies. (There is list of diplomatic missions in Wales) While there is no precedent it could be converted into something else, idk.
Plus could you change the heading as just saying draft is very vague. Many thanks! DankJae 18:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is no longer a draft, as TG has moved it to main space, less than 24 hours after asking for comments. Where is the secondary source coverage of this topic that indicates it’s a suitable subject for an article, rather than yet more, poorly written, POV/OR? KJP1 (talk) 20:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because of further attention given to the topic in popular media. What attention? Per Scotland, suggest WP:BLAR to Office of the First Minister. The page says up front that this is not a devolved matter so neither is it an encyclopaedic subject. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seems to suffer from Recentism - Rather than a list of receptions held and places visited by the first minister it could probably benefit from a section on historical context discussing events/themes such as the Pennal Letter and the Welsh League of Nations Union. EdwardUK (talk) 22:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm only surprised TG hasn't shoe-horned Owain Glyndwr inviting foreign dignatories to the Machynlleth Parliament. But on a serious note, there is some merit for the subject. Wales has had its own government for several decades which has actively promoted the country overseas. I seem to recall Wales had an office in New York (or somewhere across the Pond). Sionk (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the replies. My apologies that I hadn't noticed them until now. I agree that the article is more recently focused which may be due to a more recent push by the Welsh government for international relations in recent years.
The article is a little too heavy perhaps on primary government sources at the moment and could do with use of more secondary sources. The Scotland equivalent did not seem to be discussed at all but just redirected in 2012 due to lack of article edits (only had 3 non-cited sentences).
I have made it clear in the lead that foreign relations is not devolved although this is an interesting topic. There is some amiguity in both Scotland and Wales as to where the lines actually lies when it comes to international relations."Welsh Ministers are responsible for observing and implementing the international obligations of the United Kingdom which relate to its functions."[1] When it comes to devolution, certain powers for law making, formal international agreement and military deployment are clearly centrally held and the Glasgow Climate Pact for example seemed to exclude Nicola Sturgeon.[2] (Worth noting different legislation for Wales and Scotland when it comes to devolution.)
Welsh government officials are frequently communicating and visiting politicians abroad which is a form of international diplomacy. Both the Welsh and Scottish governments have publicly available international strategies and have international offices across the world (21 offices in 12 countries for the Welsh government). The Welsh government has also made memoranda of understanding or agreements with the government of Japan, the regional governments of the Basque country and Quebec etc. There have also been funding schemes operating between Wales and other overseas countries and regions and even a year of diplomacy in a particular country (2021:"Wales in Germany", 2022:"Wales in Canada", 2023: "Wales in France").
Now that you mention foreign representatives at the Glyndŵr Senedd, perhaps it would be worth a mention as an early example of foreign relations @Sionk! Joking aside, I'm happy to add an older history section and I'm happy to move the article to a different title or back to draft temporarily if a majority of editors see fit to do any of these.
If you look at the article so far, there's plenty of content from reliable sources that quite clearly justify a page. Titus Gold (talk) 02:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Titus Gold - As you are fully aware, Wales doesn’t conduct foreign or international relations as we define them; these are undertaken the UK level, foreign policy being a reserved power. What it does do is conduct its external affairs, mainly in relation to economic development/trade/culture etc. So, I would certainly support a title change. Then, in relation to the article itself:

  • can you look for appropriate secondary R/S that cover the topic - at present over half of your sources are Welsh Government press releases/statements, and most of the remainder are press reports of meetings/conferences etc. You don’t have a single book/journal/academic publication that covers the article topic;
  • can you try and improve the prose - it’s currently pretty poor;
  • when putting a draft up for discussion, can you give it longer than 24 hours before unilaterally moving it to main space - otherwise, it looks like you didn’t seriously intend to have a discussion. KJP1 (talk) 07:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per KJP1 Wales does not conduct foreign or international relations, and this is another ill-conceived page for that reason. I foresee a slew of rushed title changes, but suggest slowing down on that until we know what this page is about. Per EdwardUK it could be about historical foreign relations, but I am not convinced of the benefit of separating that subject out of the history pages that already discuss the Pennal letter, both in its own article and in various articles that talk about Glyndŵr. There are enough of those with the same text copy and pasted from one to another. So this is about the modern issue (and it definitely should not contain another copy and paste from those other articles). This is also not about foreign relations, but external affairs, international affairs and major events. Aren't these already covered in articles about Welsh Government? They should be. That is where they belong.
What is the evidence that these are an encyclopaedic subject in their own right? Titus Gold I asked: "Because of further attention given to the topic in popular media." What attention? This question relates to KJP1's point: where are the reliable secondary sources that suggest this is even a topic? Sionk I agree that there is some subject of external affairs etc., but this page title is wrongheaded and POVy. Wales does not conduct foreign relations, because that term has a specific meaning and refers to a reserved power. Titus Gold, you say: There is some amiguity in both Scotland and Wales as to where the lines actually lies when it comes to international relations."Welsh Ministers are responsible for observing and implementing the international obligations of the United Kingdom which relate to its functions." This is not an ambiguity, it is a definition of the roles and responsibilities of Welsh Government. It does not conduct foreign relations but it does implement treaties and agreements (e.g. in ports and airports). Note that the police also implement international obligations, but we would not then talk about Foreign relations of the Metropolitan Police. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's a topic to be found here, under some form of title. Non-state actors conduct relations, and those are covered by reliable sources. There are some papers, eg. Wales engaging with the EU during Brexit, Welsh language-leveraged engagement in various regional and international forums. I wouldn't mix historical relations with devolved government relations though, that's heading into wild SYNTH territory. (There's probably a topic for the Met too, international activities of the Met or something.) CMD (talk) 08:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So, I’d suggest we agree on what the article’s subject is; then whether it warrants a stand-alone or is better incorporated into existing articles; then, if it’s to be standalone, what the most suitable title is, taking into account how it’s done elsewhere. Scotland covers it under Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, as part of the Scottish Government series. Not saying that’s best, just how it’s done. As a start, could TG move it back to draft, as per their offer above, and then we can have the discussion. KJP1 (talk) 08:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
p.s. I’d agree that attempting to weave in historic coverage would be problematic. The Scottish page doesn’t try to cover the Auld Alliance. But then, I read User:Sionk’s suggestion as tongue in cheek! KJP1 (talk) 08:48, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Personally I don't think there's a need for change to the heading; Wales clearly plays a significant role in it's own foreign relations, but what is important is to acknowledge is the limitations by centrally held powers on what the Welsh government can do. I have already acknowledged this in the lead. I agree that the article needs improvement including more secondary sources including scholarly ones (of which there are available) and better prose. These are only the early stages. Titus Gold (talk) 12:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While you may not, there is a clear consensus of editors who do think the title needs discussion/revision. You said above, “I’m happy to move the article to a different title or back to draft”. Is that no longer your position? KJP1 (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict) I would suggest it's probably far more important to acknowledge that phrasing like "limitations by centrally held powers on what the Welsh government can do" is wildly misconstrued, similarly to how much of the current article is. CMD (talk) 12:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Regardless of the state of this article, it will be the start of a new precedent, which I'd assumed was limited to sovereign states and territories. There is a request for a Scotland one citing this one. As mentioned above this too could apply to London or the Met. A lot of this article is on international visits and non-binding agreements so that can apply to many locales. DankJae 13:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, depends how much context there is, and what the best way to present the information is. Hard to place it under a ministerial post as currently done for Scotland, given there hasn't been an International Relations Minister for a few years. CMD (talk) 13:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's the current lead (I welcome constructive edits and to the page) "Wales is a country that is part of the United Kingdom (UK), with international relations remaining a UK government matter, not devolved to Wales. The Welsh government however, works to promote Welsh interest abroad with 21 international offices worldwide. The First minister of Wales, Mark Drakeford currently responsible for international relations since taking on the role from Eluned Morgan in 2020. The Welsh government has signed agreements or memoranda of understanding with other countries and regions including Japan and the Basque Country and for the last three years organised a year of diplomatic relations with a specific country; "Wales in Germany" in 2021; "Wales in Canada" in 2022; "Wales in France" in 2023."" Yes I'm happy to move to draft if there is a majority of editors agreeing with that; I've only seen one editor suggest this. Yes I brought some recently new articles for Wales to the attention of WikiProject Scotland suggesting that they may be of interest and offering my collaboration if wanted. There are already similar articles for non-sovereign entities so this isn't really a new precedent except for a devolved constituent country of the UK perhaps. I point to examples such as Foreign relations of the Faroe Islands, Foreign relations of Greenland, Foreign relations of Hong Kong (matter not devolved), Foreign relations of Macau (matter not devolved), Foreign relations of Curaçao (matter not devolved). Some of these entities seem to be in a similar position to Wales and Scotland when it comes to international relations. Mark Drakeford acts in the interest of international relations (in his official portfolio of responsibilities), taking over the role from Eluned Morgan in 2020 who was named as a minister for "international relations" up until then. Titus Gold (talk) 14:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wales does not have an MoU with Japan, it has an MoU with Ōita. None of those other entities are similar to Wales. CMD (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree it should be draftified while discussing. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Appreciate it may be seized upon, but, re. precedent, there is a Foreign relations of the Mayor of London article, albeit I wouldn’t personally agree with that title either. As to the Scottish example, that is just another instance of TG looking to seed their preference elsewhere, which they will then cite in any subsequent discussion. KJP1 (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The same issues arise there as here, which is why OTHERSTUFF doesn't provide precedent. That article is long forgotten by the looks of things. Also the equivalent here would be the First Minister or Welsh Government, not Wales. But again, no precedents so draftify, THEN decide what the subject is, THEN decide if it warrants a standalone article and THEN decide on a title, as you said earlier. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draftify sounds a good idea as there are several parts of the article that need improvement. More links to relevant subjects about the Welsh economy, history and diaspora would be helpful. The section on trade seems the same as (although a more up to date version of) the corresponding section of Economy of Wales, so a link to this article would be preferable. Compared to more concise articles like Hong Kong and the Faroe Islands much of the content could be seen as trivial. It is unclear to what extent the NATO summit relates to foreign relations in Wales as other than just being the venue it did not directly involve Welsh politics, so may be more related to foreign relations of the UK. Also the establishment of a national football museum is a boost for Welsh culture, but is there anything to indicate that it is being built to improve foreign relations. EdwardUK (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some of the entities have similar positions to Wales when it comes to foreign relations (I did not say they were "similar to Wales"). Yes *Oita, Japan I stand corrected. Scotland topic is simply an attempt to draw attention of other editors to build more significant articles on Scotland. Of course, I want to see successful and expansive WikiProjects for both Wales and Scotland. 3 editors of 7 in this discussion have now suggested "draftify" which is not a majority at the moment so it is best to be patient and wait. Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations states "Foreign relations - This describes the policies that a particular country has vis-à-vis with other countries, or on particular issues (e.g.: Foreign relations of Qatar. Additionally this also includes the category which details the network of foreign missions a country has abroad (e.g.: Qatari diplomatic missions), and diplomatic missions located in that country (e.g.: List of diplomatic missions in Russia)."
Since Wales is indeed a country as previous discussions have concluded, this is technically not a new precedent and fits into the article format. The categories do not use the term "sovereign state" and neither do the article titles such as in e.g List of sovereign states. I encourage any additional info on the precedent of the article type as I could not find any more info than this. Please suggest any page improvements on Talk:Foreign relations of Wales rather than here, but ideally constructive edits of Foreign relations of Wales would be greatly appreciated. Titus Gold (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of every editor who has expressed a direct view, there is a clear majority to put this back to draft. You said that you would do this. You are now stalling, and trying to encourage discussion on the article Talkpage, and about the article, rather than its title, by which you hope to gain de facto acceptance of the title as it stands. Please do what you said you would do, and put it back to draft. We can then discuss in the staged approach referenced above. KJP1 (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I said, I will move "back to draft temporarily if a majority of editors see fit to do any of these". 3/7 currently propose draftify, which as we know is not a majority. I will of course keep to my word if a majority wants to draftify. There have been no proposals for alternate article titles that I am ware of. As I have already stated, I don't think there is need for change in this regard but happy to discuss. Titus Gold (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You do make it very hard to AGF. You are, I would suggest deliberately, misunderstanding a distinction between countries and sovereign states. There is no article entitled Foreign relations of England. That is because England’s foreign policy is conducted by the UK government. This is equally true of Wales, and indeed Scotland. I would suggest External relations, the term used in Scotland. But all of this can be discussed/agreed on the draft you previously promised. KJP1 (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand what a sovereign state is and I understand that Wales is a country and not a sovereign state. England is a completely different political situation to Wales and Scotland as we all know, with some saying that the prime minister essentially doubles up as the English first minister. I recommend you read about the West Lothian question. There is no doubt that the Welsh and Scottish governments both conduct international diplomacy, but they are obviously heavily limited by the devolution settlement. The UK government only is able to agree international treaties, deploy the military etc. Of course Wales and Scotland don't conduct international diplomacy to the same level as some sovereign states but they still have international relations and they are countries. There are also examples of non-governmental international relations between Wales and international partners. Again, you're misconstruing what I said, I promised to draftify if a majority of editors suggested so and I will keep to my word. Titus Gold (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why don’t we let others decide whether your aim here, and elsewhere, is to build an encyclopaedia, or to push your POV. KJP1 (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand what a sovereign state is But you do not seem to understand what equivocation is in an argument. There is no doubt that the Welsh and Scottish governments both conduct international diplomacy. So where is the Welsh embassy in the USA? Or anywhere? Wales has no diplomatic mission because, as discussed, foreign policy is a reserved power. But yes, we can equivocate on this (as well as on the term 'country') because we can talk about sport diplomacy and cultural diplomacy and such like, as Welsh Government do here, [3], but that is not foreign relations. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes of course, letting everyone weigh in.
The definition of foreign relations can be broad and the article fits the WikiProject description. Wales has 21 international offices but no embassies as we know. That report uses the title "International Relations through Public Diplomacy and Soft Power".
From now on it's best to make specific requests in discussion or comments rather than have an endless comments that may not lead anywhere. I'm always happy to engage. Titus Gold (talk) 21:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies if I haven't read every word of the discussion so far. In my view, there is clear evidence of Wales developing international relations (there was briefly an International relations minister) and as we have all been reminded, there are 21 international offices run by Wales. But I think at the moment Foreign relations of Wales is doing the job of a category, rather than a coherent article, gathering together some quite disparate events and initiatives that have promoted Wales overseas. And as far as I can see, all "Foreign relations of FOOland" articles take diplomacy and formal foreign policy as their subject. In the case of Wales, international links and initiatives seem to be designed to promote investment, business and tourism. I think "Foreign relations of Wales" is the wrong title, because it is not dealing with the same type of subject as Foreign relations of the United Kingdom and other "Foreign relations of FOOland" articles. Maybe (because Wales has had an International relations minister) the article should be renamed International relations of Wales. But more realistically, it would seem most of the subjects gathered in this article should be covered elsewhere, in Economy of Wales etc. or articles about the Wales Government. Sionk (talk) 10:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've moved this back to draft since it wasn't ever submitted for review. Please work on it there. Deb (talk) 12:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Deb, many thanks. It really is much better to have the discussions on title/coverage/content etc. on a draft, rather than a live article. We can now pick up this up at the draft. KJP1 (talk) 13:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Discussions are now being held over this draft at Draft talk:International relations of Wales (draft since moved). Any of those commenting above in this discussion are encouraged to raise their views there. Many thanks! DankJae 01:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rail transport in Wales draft[edit]

Rail transport in Wales has been created (now draftified from the mainspace), editors involved in this Wikiproject may be of interest of this draft, and any assistance is welcomed. Although I do wonder if Railways in Wales is more suited to the scope. It was created wholly focusing on criticism of the UK Government though, since trying to make it more neutral, so any help is welcome. DankJae 19:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Added this here as I really am busy right now, but it was published as very focused on criticism of the UK Government, so not NPOV, so bring it here. DankJae 19:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DankJae It was certainly not focused on UK Government criticism. Do not misrepresent the entire article (in it's infancy) based on two sources; HS2 and Northern Powerhouse rail. They are very prominent topics in the news in Wales. Very unfair and undue misrepresentation. Titus Gold (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please come and assist with the page if you have time to do so. It would be much appreciated, thanks. Titus Gold (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You published it way too early and started on the criticism. Yes they are prominent in news, but this main topic here is the actual network itself. DankJae 19:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is the diff when Dankjae moved this to draft: [4]. This indeed looks very POVy. It is already looking a bit better, but is a long way from being an encyclopaedic article about rail transport in Wales. No strong opinion as to whether Railways in Wales is better as a title. I don't have time nor expertise to write about Welsh railways, sorry. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So you want to exclude a mention of HS2 then? Titus Gold (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those things can be mentioned with due weight, in the whole context of the network, they're merely political controversies, therefore should not be main focus of the article. They can be under a smaller section of a bigger article, but when published it was 80% of the article. Details should be at the main article pages themselves. I am not suppressing these concerns, I added the Wales section at HS2 and NPR on the controversy, I very much care about this topic, but it should not be given undue weight in an overview article on Wales' rail network. DankJae 19:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And surely if the page subject is Rail transport in Wales, HS2 is, in fact, off topic. Barnett consequentials are not hypothecated, so the point being made is merely about Welsh Government funding. HS2 is a project in England, and if Wales is to have its own article, it is out of scope. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well the controversy is that the UK Government classes it as "England and Wales", so technically they say it is on topic. 😅 DankJae 20:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What I wrote about HS2 was a single sentence. I wrote a short paragraph mostly from Labour MS, Lee Waters' perspective but also had reply from UK gov. I was trying to add a bit of everything to the page. The page was still in it's infancy and being developed. Anyway, let's just move on. Titus Gold (talk) 22:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course funding, or lack of funding, can be part of an article about rail transport. But it's disingenuous to add an article request then almost immediately create a POV stub, then demand someone else "come and assist with the page". The point of an article request is to wait for a subject expert to come along and create it, surely. In the meantime, there's a quite serviceable section in Transport in Wales about rail transport in Wales, which can be a target for the subject. Sionk (talk) 22:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I simply changed my mind about waiting for someone else to make it. I haven't demanded anything. No need to make assumptions. I think an overview page of rail in Wales would be most useful. Titus Gold (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick question. Can someone add the welsh name for Butetown in the new station article? Thanks. Difficultly north (talk) The artist formerly known as Simply south 16:58, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

done Titus Gold (talk) 18:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are fluent in Welsh (or can contribute relevant wikimedia), please join WiciBrosiect Cymru Thanks. Diolch. Titus Gold (talk) 13:07, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Llancaiach Fawr#Requested move 28 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. EggRoll97 (talk) 00:25, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need an infobox for a Grade II Listed Building[edit]

Anyone good at doing those? We've just started the draft at Draft:Plas Dinas. Thanks, Softlavender (talk) 07:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Softlavender: added one, be free to expand or amend it further if needed. DankJae 10:52, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much, DankJae! Excellent work. I think the draft is just about ready for prime time now. Softlavender (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
DankJae, would you like to be included in the DYK nomination for your contributions to the article, so you will get a DYK credit for that? Softlavender (talk) 22:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Softlavender, thank you for the consideration, but I only added an infobox, you did all the research so I am happy for you to have it, thank you for the article! And to be honest I have no idea how DYKs (noms) work so I just leave them alone, so may be another time when I take them more seriously. Diolch! DankJae 22:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]