:A demographics article would probably help, and be useful in any event, but equally I'm slightly wary, as noted, of the risk of heading down the road of making a definitive split between "real" ethnic Cornish people, and others who live in the county. There's a whole range of "Cornishness" of course - people whose families have lived their for centuries and who buy in wholeheartedly to a non-English Cornishness; those who can trace a similar ancestry but don't have much truck with it; those who moved more recently but have signed up to the idea; those who consider themself both English and Cornish; those who would claim to be "Cornish" but don't mean much more by that than that they happen to live in the county etc etc. As long as this article tones down the claims it makes from the intro onwards, it can plausibly cover that whole range. However, I don't see how it can claim to be a "Good Article" when it has this level of fundamental problems, relating to the very definition of what it purports to describe. I'd suggest, as I have previously, something along the lines of the following, which simply waters down the current wording somewhat - "The Cornish are the people of Cornwall, a region and county of England that has historically seen itself as to some extent distinct from the rest of England, having more in common with the other "Celtic" parts of the United Kingdom such as Wales/retained its own Celtic identity. For some, the Cornish represent a distinct ethnic group within the UK that can trace its roots to the ancient Britons who inhabited central and southern Britain, and many in the county today continue to assert a distinct identity, separate or in addition to their identities as English or British." ''' /'''