User talk:Enaidmawr

Post a new message...

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Hi, welcome to my talk page. Feel free to post messages for me here, using a new section if relevant (just click the banner at the top of this page). I will normally reply to a message here rather than on your own talk page, so you may wish to temporarily bookmark this page if you expect a reply.

If I've left a message for you on your own talk page I'll have bookmarked that page so you can reply to me there rather than here. This has the advantage of avoiding fragmented discussions.

Sh'w mae Enaid, a chroeso adref. Gobeithio bod roedd llawer o hwyl 'da ti ym Mhoroco (pam Moroco?). Fydd llawer o bethau i wneud yn y flwyddyn newydd wrth fan 'ma. Wyt ti'n barod eto? Cofion, Daicaregos (talk) 07:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sut mae, Dai? Diolch am y croeso adref (i Gymru neu'r Wiki, neu'r ddau?!). Es i Foroco am fy mod yn hoff iawn o'r Maghreb - er mai i Tunisia dwi'n mynd fel rheol - a'r diwylliant Arabaidd a Berber. Cefais amser anhygoel yno ac mae gen i sawl ffrind newydd hefyd (rheswm arall: cefais docyn awyren yno ac yn ôl, Manceinion i Marrakech, am ddim ond £80!). Gobeithio byddaf yn medru cyfrannu yma eto mewn ychydig o ddyddiau, unwaith fod y Calan allan o'r ffordd, ond mae gen i lot i'w wneud ar y Wicipedia Cymraeg hefyd, fel arfer. Ond mae angen criw o ni i gadw golwg ar y pethau Cymreig yma hefyd, ond does? Cofion cynnes a 'Dolig Llawen, Enaidmawr (talk) 00:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question at Maelgwn Gwynedd, "because I was trying to circumvent some of the misinformation about him in literary sources". I think you might have interpreted things not in a way that I meant them (I was certainly not casting aspersions on either the legends or their importance ... more like I was pre-empting some accounts, such as in bio dictionaries, that allege that Maelgwn was a lowlife scumbag, citing the "Tale of Taliesin" ... perhaps I did it in a way that was misleading? Similarly for the other items in the section. At any rate, that is the reason for the section title "literary misinformation").

Welcome back!! Have been on a bit of a break myself of late, self-absorbed in some research, and am just checking in for a moment. I trust that you thoroughly enjoyed your stay overseas.

Should you feel the urge, no obligation implied, there are now articles for review on Manaw Gododdin and Aeron, as well as a map of the cantrefi and cymydau (neither as yet complete, but perhaps they will be useful in getting things completed; it's hard to nail things down trying to work from a list only, without seeing where things are) ... there's a cantref map in the front of Wendy Davies' 1982 book (W in the EMA), which I'll incorporate in the fullness of time. Actually, I feel like a bit of a slacker lately, considering the continuing contributions that Cuchullain has been making while I've been out and about.

Am now going back to my self-absorbing research, for the time being. Again, welcome back. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Notuncurious, good to hear from you again! Moroco was great, thank you, and after seven weeks was beginning to feel like home but it's good to be back (I think... apart from the fact it's b****y freezing, brrrr!). I hadn't checked the article history: no offence intended! The wording gave the impression that Hanes Taliesin itself was somehow a "spurious text" and that it was at least partly invented by Iolo M. What is true is that he wrote the notes (or at least contributed his own ideas/inventions there) in Guest's edition of the Mabinogion. Might also be worth mentioning that spurious details purporting to be a variant on the Hanes Taliesin are found in the Iolo MSS. as well: surprising how often they are blithely quoted by so-called "researchers" and "popular authors on the subject". Was in too much of a hurry - like yourself, just dropping by, or rather in and out from Wicipedia Cymraeg, as usual. I'll take a look in the direction pointed later. All the best and hwyl, Enaidmawr (talk) 21:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good wishes. NTW on RHaM = not to worry on Rhun Hir ap Maelgwn, Enaid. Nor elsewhere (yes, I meant to disparage Iolo's contribution to Guest's "Tale of Taliesin", not the "Tale of Taliesin" itself, my mistake in the presentation). We both seem able to build up a head of steam, and there is no offense implied or inferred. My only specific request in this regard is that you not change a thing in your article reviews on my account, and there is no need to check the history before commenting and editing ... your reviews are appreciated here. I understand the objectives and motives. I have something in mind in what I'm doing, though for now I'm not ready to say what it is. The origin of this approach was dictated by practicality (I've moved from academia, so much modern material is no longer available without spending a ton of money). I understand the frustrations and the reasons (some of which mirror my own frustrations at this aspect of the situation), so a long explanation of "best sources" is not needed (I'm already aware; but again, practicality intrudes). And one more thing: welcome back again!! Best Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 03:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Enaidmawr. Welcome back to the land of snow and ice. Good to see you enjoyed your trip to the Maghreb. Are you able to offer any further help on the spelling of Llanfair-yn-neubwll at User talk:Skinsmoke? I've explained the best I can, but would be grateful if you could confirm whether I've got it right or not. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skinsmoke. Good to hear from you after all this time. Maroc was great, thanks. Spent half my time there explaining to people that we don't have cold winters and heavy snow these days in Wales and then landed in Manchester to find it was -2 degrees and falling - and that was three weeks ago! I've answered the query at your talk page (em, think I'll go and hide in the Maghreb for a few months again...!). Cofion, Enaidmawr (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At last, a reply from Canolfan Bedwyr on my talk page. As you predicted, they're munching humble pie, but doing it with style! Skinsmoke (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've removed Category:Villages in Carmarthenshire from several articles - I've no problem with that. When I added the Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire, I wondered about removing the Villages cat, but left it on the grounds that since I was unsure, better to have than have not. Hope that makes sense... --Redrose64 (talk) 00:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Redrose64. That's ok, but as they are communities containing several villages/settlements they shouldn't be in the Villages of Carms category (confusingly, some villages are communities as well - let's say a village + surrounding countryside but no small villages within that area - so should be in both cats!). No problem though, thanks for your help. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I first came across communities last July, when checking out my namesake, Red Roses, which was in Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire. Not knowing much about the Welsh local government system, I looked around: and found that, according to their website, Carmarthenshire has 72 communities, none of which are Red Roses; but Red Roses is within Eglwyscummin Community - so I fixed it. That's when I did a broad sweep to remove Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire from inapplicable articles, and add it to those that were applicable. I tended to ignore Category:Villages in Carmarthenshire; but it may have been added by me to some, but only if I was also removing Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire and such removal would have left the article uncategorised.

The aforementioned Eglwyscummin is certainly a case where the same name is borne by both a community and one of the villages within it. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see that somebody else takes the trouble to sort these categories out. It can be tricky at times. Another thing to look out for, here and elsewhere, is suspicious-looking "small villages" - one-liners plus standard large infobox... - that may or may not actually exist. To date I think I've uncovered several dozen farms, dwellings, and even hills and streams posing as "villages" in Wales! (They're all either deleted or redirected to the nearest place we have an article on). Enaidmawr (talk) 21:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one. Abernant, Carmarthenshire. The page lede says it's a community. The Location section says it's a hamlet. It's in both Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire (which I added) and Category:Villages in Carmarthenshire (which was already there). The list of communities which I used for the purpose of adding Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire to articles should be at http://www.carmarthenshire.gov.uk/english/council/councillors/pages/townandcommunityclerks.aspx but their servers are extremely slow today, nothing came back after five minutes "loading". --Redrose64 (talk) 09:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being so long replying, Redrose64. Must have missed your message amongst others that were left over the weekend. Skinsmoke's right, our list is probably more reliable than those on most of the local authority sites. Concur with his warning about ONS and OS' woeful grasp of the Welsh language as well, and that despite over 20 years existence of Bwrdd yr Iaith Gymraeg and other bodies they could consult with! Enaidmawr (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Local council lists of communities are rarely accurate, as they usually only include those with community councils. Many communities, particularly in urban areas, have never had community councils established, while some have joint community councils (such as "Bay of Colwyn Community Council"), and others have community meetings. List of communities in Wales is pretty accurate, and is sourced from the Office for National Statistics and Ordnance Survey Election Maps. The Election Maps site is kept pretty much up to date. Beware of spelling on both these sites though - the Welsh language baffles them! Skinsmoke (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A useful source for the Carmarthenshire placenames is here on the County Council's website. Although incomplete to date, it notes the spellings which have been officially adopted by the Council. Dare I suggest that we adopt the spellings given on the list, a) where there is only a Welsh name, i.e. no English name as such, just variant spellings, and b) where the Welsh name needs to be recorded for places with an accepted English name, e.g. Laugharne? This would make life a lot easier and resolve any arguments. Alternate spellings and variants could still be noted, of course. I've already started doing this on cy, even though I don't always agree 100% with the Council choice, noting if Canolfan Bedwyr offers an alternative. Worth suggesting at the Project notice board for adoption? If other councils have an official list we could do the same thing for those counties too (NB Not just any old on-line list of villages etc but the result of a consultative process, as in the case of Carms, and officially adopted). Enaidmawr (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on the Cardiganshire/Ceredigion proposal. I've gone ahead with another merger of Edeyrnion Rural District into Edeirnion, which I didn't think would be as controversial. You may want to take a look at it. I'd envisage doing something similar with Ceredigion, but with the former local authorities in the table, rather than the civil parishes. Skinsmoke (talk) 02:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also merged Llŷn Rural District into Llŷn Peninsula, though still have some work to do on that one. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edeirnion looks fine to me. I've come across these rather odd former local administrative area articles now and again and must admit that I've never understood the logic behind them: yet another example of some editors' drive to split articles into a number of smaller ones for no good reason. A few of them might be valid, but most seem to coincide with either an existing unit or a recognised historical geo-cultural area which has sometimes been neglected or even ignored here. Little wonder we have so many articles on 'en' - but is that tending to quantity over quality? A bit of healthy pruning will do no harm in the least. Not had time to do Llŷn Peninsula justice yet and it's a bit late tonight. Have a look tomorrow, "inchallah". Btw, did the former unit coincide with the peninsula as such or did it roughly correspond to the cantref? The latter did not cover the whole peninsula as defined today (at least here!). Just a thought. Anyway, I'll leave that for later. Good work! Enaidmawr (talk) 01:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Always difficult with geographical features to know exactly what is included, as they tend to be a bit fuzzy round the edges. I have defined Llŷn Rural District by listing the various civil parishes that were part of it at one time or another: Dolbenmaen got added in 1934, for example. Basically, most of the peninsula was in the Rural District, with the exception of Criccieth, which really belongs to Eifionydd, and Pwllheli, which was a freestanding Municipal Borough. I've now completed the section on the Rural District, and will attempt to do something about the section on Settlements, which is nothing more than a pretty uninformative list at the moment. Will also get something done about those red links, by getting a few stubs created for the villages and communities that are missing. I do wonder whether Llŷn Peninsula should be renamed to the simple Llŷn, though.

I see you've been busy. I've added some interwiki links here and there. My only concern is with the category: most of these are not villages but parishes. Shouldn't they be in cats Geography of Gwynedd and History of Gwynedd? I think it's rather misleading for them to be put in the Villages category (for the simple reason...). I couldn't understand why the category for Welsh parishes was deleted. Most of these still exist as church parishes and some have a very long history. We have a parishes cat on cy but it needs work. Can't see why a new/restored parishes cat can't be fitted in somewhere, e.g. in the Christianity in Wales and Former subdivisions cats? Worth checking the Communities lists: many of these civil parishes survive not only as ecclesiastical units but also as contemporary communities. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to confess I couldn't be arsed with the categories. I had more than enough to do with getting the stubs up and running, and then completing the Infoboxes, to worry too much about them. Technically, you are right. But....do we want the complication of a "Communities in Gwynedd" category plus, perhaps, a "Former civil parishes in Gwynedd", and then have to roll that out throughout Wales. It's a hell of a lot of work: I think there are about 700 communities, and must be another 1,000 former civil parishes in the country. In the end, many would be in all three categories. Might just be easier to rename "Villages in Gwynedd" to "Villages, communities and former civil parishes in Gwynedd", but again, would that cause more confusion than it solves? Skinsmoke (talk) 03:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the solution in the case of the parishes is - whether former-civil and/or contemporary ecclesiastical - but when a "village" is not actually a village it doesn't make sense to have it in the Villages category. As for the communities, we actually have a (very underpopulated) 'Communities in Gwynedd' category (see List of communities in Wales for the names). So some of these could go in the latter category (if they belong there, of course!). For once we're ahead of en in this matter, having articles on almost all the communities, but they haven't all been categoried properly (same old story!) and I'm getting tired of working like a bot, and an unpaid one at that :-) Enaidmawr (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get too smug! There's actually 157 Welsh communities without articles, even after the 20 or so stubs I've created this week in Gwynedd, and that's not counting those that are inappropriately wikilinked. Bridgend, Ceredigion, Denbighshire, the Isle of Anglesey, Pembrokeshire and Powys are particularly bad. Skinsmoke (talk) 13:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS Agree wholeheartedly about the unneccesary term 'peninsula'. We have it on cy as somebody copied it from here, but we also have Llŷn - a rather unsatisfactory stub at present! - which covers the region and historical cantref. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would need an admin to perform the move. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drap! Life is never simple. Do you think it would be controversial? I know several admins here I could ask but might want to sound it out on the Llŷn peninsula (sorry: surely I meant "Llŷn Peninsula"?!?) talk page first. If there's no strong objections after a week or so, all well and good. Sound ok? Enaidmawr (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. By the way, I've combined the Settlements and Hills sections into a Geography section, got rid of the lists, and put a bit about the physical, economic and social geography of the area. Also added a note about Eifionydd not strictly being a part of Llŷn. Included Criccieth Urban District in the list of former civil parishes as it was, for many years, largely surrounded by Llŷn Rural District, but wasn't too sure what to do with Porthmadog Urban District. Have left it off at the moment, but is it ever considered part of the peninsula? On balance I would say not, but.... Skinsmoke (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what our wiki geographers' interpretation is, but Porthmadog is in Eifionydd, not Llŷn. I remember quite a heated debate about our use of Llŷn rather than the antiquated "Lleyn" on the Llŷn peninsula talk page a while back and imagine we might possibly draw some opposition. However, I'll go ahead with a move proposal and see what happens. As I see it the addition of the term "peninsula" is redundant as Llŷn is Llŷn: it's a bit like calling Cornwall the "Cornwall peninsula"! Ditto for Gŵyr/Gower. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The assumption that the Cardiganshire move would prove controversial appears to have been correct, though only with a single editor so far. Will give it another few days yet and see how it progresses. If it works out, might even have a go at Merionethshire, which seems equally illogical! Skinsmoke (talk) 06:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sound's good to me. (re: Cards into Cered. - as you note on your talk page, it's surprising that the Usual Suspects haven't turned up...!). Enaidmawr (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS Feeling rather chuffed at the moment. I've been published in Spanish! LOL. The Aberdaron page has been translated in full onto the Spanish wiki! Skinsmoke (talk) 03:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

¡Felicidades! Enaidmawr (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Next you should address Monmouthshire (historic). That will be very interesting indeed. You've got a lot of work to do if you mean to expunge each of the references to each of the Historic counties of Wales after you're finished with Cardiganshire. Should I wish you hawddamor? ~Geaugagrrl ^talk 20:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may indeed wish me Hawddamor, Geaugagrrl, and I'll gladly wish you the same. We've known each other a while now on Wikipedia and so I sincerely hope that you don't take this dispute (Ceredigion<Cards) personally; it would grieve me if you did. I think you might be misunderstanding the argument here. Nobody is suggesting "expurging" all references to these former administrative units in Wales. Who said anything of the sort? Cardiganshire would redirect to Ceredigion where the history of the former administrative unit will be found. It must also be admitted that there is another side in this debate who are intent on relegating the present Welsh counties to the sidelines in favour of the so-called "historical counties", in the quaint belief that they still exist. Monmouthshire (historic) would indeed be interesting, as you say. If I wanted to open an epic debate I'd propose its merging into Gwent rather than Monmouthshire as the boundaries are a much closer match... Enaidmawr (talk) 00:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your words of explanation, Enaidmawr, and the reminder of our long and fruitful editing history together on Wiki Wales. I would frame this topic discussion as a disagreement, that will not be allowed to become disagreeable. If the history of what happen during time period of "Cardi" is preserved within Ceredigion, then I think the realignment project you are undertaking will be fine. I will not oppose it. Should this be stated on the Ceredigion talk page? I guess I still don't understand taking on all this work! I double-checked today, and there are at least 500 links to Cardiganshire alone. The history section of Gwynedd would be a good model to follow. Send me a friendly warning when/if you attempt your proposed ideas with Gwent so I can make sure to be in a different hemisphere. Dymuniadau gorau. ~Geaugagrrl ^talk 06:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diolch, Geauagrrl. The chances are probably slim, but were I to propose such a move I think it would be a case of "light the blue touchpaper and retire", probably to Morocco for a month or two again! Cofion cynnes, Enaidmawr (talk) 00:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Enaidmawr! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 271 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Gwynn ap Gwilym - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I saw your comment on my talk page. I will amend the map to show Ceredigion as the sole name for the new county that was constitued in 1996 as you are correct that it replaced totally the initial name of Cardiganshire. XrysD (talk) 14:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia article space now appears to be free of links to earlybritishkingdoms.com (for the time being anyway). Cheers and hwyl!--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's amazing - there were so many of them! I noticed your edits now and again as they included pages on my watch list but was usually too busy to do more than make a mental note. I'll make a point of checking now and then and hope others will do the same as well as they are sure to begin to creep back. Thanks for bringing Q-L1968 in on Unknown goddess attested in a single inscription whose name begins with Iou- as well. Hwyl, Enaidmawr (talk) 22:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You claim that my talk page speaks for itself, all my talk page attests to is that there are a lot over-zealous editors who have repetedly speedy deleted my work, only for me to be fully vindicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darqmann (talk • contribs) 11:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the Rabbit-eating flying demon is a genuine mythical creature, which I very much doubt, it's up to you to prove that. Seems strange the ancient Greeks had no name for it. Enaidmawr (talk) 22:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, about a year ago you contributed to a debate I started on naming conventions for places in Wales. At the time, I think we agreed that 'regional' descriptors weren't generally useful when describing Welsh towns. However, User:Welshleprechaun has made an edit on Swansea Cork ferry which I believe opens the issue up again.[1] I'd welcome your input in the discussion at Talk:Swansea Cork ferry so that we can nail this down one way or the other.--Pondle (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my new book I will be quoting the following passage from a 16th century Welsh popular verse: "Mae clogyn Rowland Lee i'w foddhad yn goch o'n gwaedu ni". The proof-reader has queried this and says it should be "gwaed" not "gwaedu". Please could you give me an opinion. Deb (talk) 16:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both readings could be correct but "gwaed" does seem the most plausible ("yn goch o'n gwaed ni" = "red from our blood"). But "yn goch o'n gwaedu ni" meaning "from bleeding us" makes sense as well. I've had a quick search for the original but can't seem to place it, although it rings a bell. Silly question I'm sure, but do you have the source? Seems the only solution here. Of course, as often happens with popular verse, there may be more than one version. Sorry I can't be of more help. At least you've succeeded in dragging me over to 'yr ochr dywell' for the first time in several months - my time not on 'cy' has been spent trying to get some much needed order in the Welsh categories over on Commons. We could soon have up to 100,000 images of Wales there, thanks to Geographbot, but it needs some more lessons in Welsh geography before the next batches arrive. Pob hwyl gyda'r llyfr! Enaidmawr (talk) 20:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to but in, but it's not just in Welsh geography! It seems pretty haphazard when chosing categories, but I think that it's the nature of the Geograph website that causes the problem. If the website says a picture is 2.3 km from Porthmadog, the bot seems to opt for Porthmadog if it can't find anywhere else to put it. And it's having real problems distinguishing between places with the same name! Think we are just going to have to live with it and put things right when we find them. After all, it's better to have the images, than not. Skinsmoke (talk) 20:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was a secondary source, of course, so it could be a typo. But my thought is that, being a verse, that "gwaedu" is probably right if it makes any sense - which you're saying it does - because it scans better and may have been meant to be sung rather than spoken. Diolch! Deb (talk) 17:10, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Segolene Royal in drag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.40.171 (talk) 23:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of UK dialling codes covering Wales , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 90.208.56.217 (talk) 03:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that you reference the controversy over Dynion Mwyn - then of course you will want to see the other side of the story at http://www.dynionmwyn.net/plagerize.html

Since I'm Rhuddlwm Gawr I was asked to correct the wikipedia entry.

When I was in Wales in the winter of 65-66 It was cold cold cold. Then when I went back in summer of 90 it was hot hot hot in fact there was only one day when it rained. Reminded me of Georgia, now when I talked to our Wales Rep she said it was very nasty weather.

I mention the weather because of the changability of the Weather and Paganism. There are witch wars and there are people who do not like us or others. There are wars between republicans and democrats.

The "controversy" comes primarily from one person: Betsy Ashby who is now embroiled in her own controversy with the Cherokees. She tried to destroy us because we would not allow her to get away with lying about The Gathering of the Tribes which we began in 1967. (She tried to use the name and say that she was the original). They finally kicked her out of the campground she was using and she moved out of Virginia.

All other "sources" of the controversy basically come from her getting friends to put up nasty web pages telling everyone we are perverts.

Just so you understand where we are coming from. Read our plagerize page and I believe you will understand.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhuddlwm23 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cantref Llŷn has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for over five years, fails WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article George Fisher (dramatist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for over five years, fails WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if you are reading this. Your ears may have been burning on Saturday as you came up in conversation at the Monmouth meet-up. We wondered if there was any chance you would drop in to wicipedia from time to time, just to pass the time of day. We would like to know how you are getting on. Deb (talk) 11:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rwy'n gweld eich bod yn cyfrannu dipyn at erthyglau Cymreig. Mae yna brosiect newydd, Llwybrau Byw!, yn datblygu ac mae'n bosib y gallwch gyfrannu iddo. Dewiswyd arfordir Cymru fel "yr ardal gorau ar y Ddaear" gan Lonely Planet yn 2012, ond does dim llawer o erthyglau ar hanes na ddiwylliant llefydd ar hyd Llwybr yr Arfordir a'r holl weithgareddau ac atyniadau ar ei hyd. Mae'r prosiect cyffroes hwn yn mynd i wella hynny drwy ychwanegu ystyr eang o erthyglau o'r holl siroedd sydd ar hyd ein harfordir. Gadewch i ni wneud y WiciProsiect, fel yr arfordir ei hun, y gorau ar y ddaear! Cymrodor (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help rescue this article, nominated for deletion? Bearian (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, at Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge we're striving to bring about 10,000 article improvements and creations for the UK and Ireland and inspire others to create more content. In order to achieve this we need diversity of content, in all parts of the UK and Ireland on all topics. Eventually a regional contest will be held for all parts of the British Isles, like they were for Wales and the Wedt Country. We currently have just over 1900 articles and need contributors! If you think you'd be interested in collaborating on this and helping reach the target quicker, please sign up and begin listing your entries there as soon as possible! Thanks.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This month The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There is over £3000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. Wikimedia UK is putting up £250 specifically for editors who produce the most quality new women bios for British women, with special consideration given to missing notable biographies from the Oxford Dictionary of Biography and Welsh Dictionary of Biography. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate independently this is also fine, but please add any articles created to the bottom of the main contest page even if not competing. Your participation in the contest and contributing articles on British women from your area or wherever would we much appreciated. Thanks.

This Welsh-focused article is being proposed for a merger with the British page. Perhaps you would consider taking part in the discussion? ThanksTitus Gold (talk) 12:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ymunwch gyda WiciBrosiect Cymru os gwelwch yn dda! Diolch Titus Gold (talk) 21:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Welsh manuscripts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Simae Enaidmawr, it has been some time since we corresponded. The article 'Anwyl of Tywyn' which there was a huge struggle over back in 2010 is once again under attack by the "pwerau sydd yn bod" of Wikipedia. I am not strong enough to stand up to them on my own and would appreciate your input. Please vire the talk page Anwyl of Tywyn. cofion cynnes Aetheling1125 (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cantref Arfon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cantref Arfon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aberffraw (cantref) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aberffraw (cantref) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Welsh folklore, would you be interested in a taskforce on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 11:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]