This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Another Believer (talk | contribs) at 15:58, 3 June 2015 (→Wiki Loves Pride: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:58, 3 June 2015 by Another Believer (talk | contribs) (→Wiki Loves Pride: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Wales and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Wales Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Ambiguity of "community"?
User:SovalValtos has raised a valid question here about the use of the word community in the Wales-specific sense. It would be interesting to know whether anyone has any thoughts on it. Tony Holkham (Talk) 13:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'd keep it as it is. The blue link does the job. I just think we should ensure that in Welsh articles we ensure that we don't accidently use community in its traditional sense and that we blue link each article correctly. FruitMonkey (talk) 17:19, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- I agree. The Wikilink to Community (Wales) is enough. Daicaregos (talk) 17:49, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- It does seem a bit Easter egg-y to me. In print, or for those using screen-readers, the link may well be hidden, so the text needs to make sense without the links. In this case, "Llansomewhere is a community ..." doesn't make the relevant distinction clear to people who don't already know about Welsh councils. Describing somewhere as a "local government community" is probably unambiguous, but perhaps a little awkward. "Community (cymuned)" also doesn't seem to help, because cymuned translates both meanings of "community". Is it necessary to include the local government status in the lead? If places were described in terms like "a village in Powys", "a town in Denbighshire" or "a hamlet in Carmarthenshire", then we could leave it until a later section to say something like "The community council also covers the nearby hamlet of ...". If the community council boundary and the natural boundaries of the village are contiguous, then perhaps nothing more needs to be said. There may not be an ideal solution. "Community" was probably a bad choice as a name for that class of council, but we're more than 40 years too late to change that. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Pipelinking Community (Wales) isn't an Easter egg. The bracketed Wales in the article title is for disambiguation purposes only. Pipelinking community to that page is to prevent the disambiguating word (Wales) from displaying in the aticle text. The reason it is linked is to explain the word's use as a technical terms to the reader (per WP:UNDERLINK). Daicaregos (talk) 20:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- But no reader is going to know from the context that we are not using the word "community" in its everyday sense, and that's the ambiguity we're trying to avoid. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- That's why it is linked. Daicaregos (talk) 14:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- Requiring a reader to click on the link in order to explain a word or phrase is exactly what WP:EGG is about, and is something to be avoided. Explanation by linking is bad practice. --Stemonitis (talk) 15:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- No, an easter egg link would be something like this, where the displayed text carries no indication of what is being linked to. Piping Community (Wales) to community is standard practice. – PeeJay 15:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- It is perfectly acceptable to link to an ambiguous term by using a pipelink to the correct article title. Each article has a unique title. Links should be made to them directly, without necessarily using the actual article title. As the editing guideline Disambiguation says “There are three important aspects to disambiguation:
- * Naming articles in such a way that each has a unique title. For example, three of the articles dealing with topics ordinarily called "Mercury" are titled Mercury (element), Mercury (planet) and Mercury (mythology).
- * Making the links for ambiguous terms point to the correct article title. For example, an editor of an astronomy article may have created a link to Mercury, and this should be corrected to point to Mercury (planet).” (NB. I included only the relevant first two) Pipelinking in this way does not create an Easter egg. Daicaregos (talk) 16:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not saying it's the most egregious form of link, just that it won't be obvious to the reader that the word doesn't mean what it would in any other sentence, and that we shouldn't be relying on links to make that distinction clear, because the links don't appear in all media. Outside Wales, no one will guess that "community" is used here in the sense "civil parish". We're talking about the first line of an article here, so there is no context to rely on. "In Sydney, Oxford Street runs ..." is fine, because you've provided context. Likewise, saying "the lowest tier of local government in Wales are the communities" is fine (apart from the grammar). When you open an article with "Llansomewhere is a community", however, no context has been established, and there is nothing to rule out the plain-English meaning of "community". The sense of that word is very likely to be misunderstood, and that's what matters. Whether we call it an easter egg or not is really neither here nor there. --Stemonitis (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- If readers assume the plain English meaning, I don't see anything wrong with that. The fact that the word "community" has a specific meaning in Wales doesn't need explaining in every article where it's used. – PeeJay 16:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- But no reader is going to know from the context that we are not using the word "community" in its everyday sense, and that's the ambiguity we're trying to avoid. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Pipelinking Community (Wales) isn't an Easter egg. The bracketed Wales in the article title is for disambiguation purposes only. Pipelinking community to that page is to prevent the disambiguating word (Wales) from displaying in the aticle text. The reason it is linked is to explain the word's use as a technical terms to the reader (per WP:UNDERLINK). Daicaregos (talk) 20:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- It does seem a bit Easter egg-y to me. In print, or for those using screen-readers, the link may well be hidden, so the text needs to make sense without the links. In this case, "Llansomewhere is a community ..." doesn't make the relevant distinction clear to people who don't already know about Welsh councils. Describing somewhere as a "local government community" is probably unambiguous, but perhaps a little awkward. "Community (cymuned)" also doesn't seem to help, because cymuned translates both meanings of "community". Is it necessary to include the local government status in the lead? If places were described in terms like "a village in Powys", "a town in Denbighshire" or "a hamlet in Carmarthenshire", then we could leave it until a later section to say something like "The community council also covers the nearby hamlet of ...". If the community council boundary and the natural boundaries of the village are contiguous, then perhaps nothing more needs to be said. There may not be an ideal solution. "Community" was probably a bad choice as a name for that class of council, but we're more than 40 years too late to change that. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Some good input above. I think that User:Stemonitis has a clear grasp of the problem. The text needs to make sense without the link. A reader from another continent might not even consider that community could be an ambiguous word. There is a problem in leading the reader to assume the plain English meaning, as the article does not then make sense, which I found when I first came across it. Can anyone think of a better term than "local government community"? SovalValtos (talk) 10:09, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure but if someone wrote "Llansomewhere is a Community" as opposed to "Llansomewhere is a community" I would wonder about the capitalisation, which would indicate a non standard usage. EdwardLane (talk) 10:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm glad this was raised; some interesting comments. I do worry, though, that if a consensus about a change is reached, there are hundreds of articles where the word community (meaning local government) appears. Can of worms springs to mind. Tony Holkham (Talk) 11:00, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- something in the region of 1000-1500 articles point to community (wales) based on this it might be possible for a bot to make a change. EdwardLane (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Are we getting anywhere? The choices seem to be -
- (a) Do nothing
- (b) Make a change across the board (is it possible?) such as -
- Capitalise "Community"
- Italicise community
- Don't pipe (i.e. leave as Community (Wales))
- Use "local government" (or something else) as a prefix
By the way, I try not to use the word "community" in its ordinary sense in Welsh articles because of the possible ambiguity. Does anyone outside Wales really need to know there is a distinction? My feeling is "no", in which case I favour doing nothing. Tony Holkham (Talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Under the radar
I'm confused by the phrase under the radar herewhich means invisible. Sorry if I'm being pedantic. I'm presuming the WikiProject Wales template should be put on new articles' talk pages. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:59, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think the phrase whoever wrote that page was looking for is "on the radar". Yes, the template should be put on article talk pages. – PeeJay 22:05, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Just making sure. Tony Holkham (Talk) 22:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Castell Coch
Passed FAC! Hopefully Cardiff Castle will soon enough too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Welsh Elections, constituency and regional results
I was looking through both the scottish and welsh election pages and I noticed a difference. The lists showing the wins of the constituencies and regions in the Mid and West Wales were shown as massive tables, showing not only the winners but also the candidates as well. It takes up alot of space, looking quite messy and often requires a scroll bar to see all the results across the table. The Scottish elections have tidy lists showing the winners of the constituencies and regions and is easy to read. It also gives details on how much the parties won in each region.
Therefore I am wondering if the welsh election pages could be edited to have the same format as the scottish elections. As both countries have the same voting system, I feel it would be appropriate and give a look of consistency throughout the site.
However as it would be a major change, therefore I am looking for peoples views on the matter and if it would be alright to go ahead with editing?
Humongous125 (talk) 23:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Athena Swan Edit-a-thon at Swansea
There's an Edit-a-thon at Swansea University on Monday 18th May. More information here. I've taken your suggested female scientists from our 2014 archives. Please contact Jason from the National Library for further information. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
SWALEC Stadium listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for SWALEC Stadium to be moved to Sophia Gardens (cricket ground). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
- What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
- When? June 2015
- How can you help?
- 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
- 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Misplaced Pages articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
- 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Misplaced Pages, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa
Categories: