"

(moved from  )
Dai, ydych chi'n siarad Cymraeg? I love that language. I studied it a long time ago, but unfortunately I've forgotten most of it. Let's see, what were you asking? If I have considered checking my edits? And you were informing me about the ""Show preview"" box? Ha-ha-ha! Very funny. Have you considered checking how long a user has been on Wikipedia and how many edits he's made before asking that question? So, here is some information for you: User:Daicaregos, First edit: Apr 21, 2008, Unique articles edited: 533. User:Pasquale, First edit: Jun 24, 2004, Unique articles edited: 1,461. As you can see, I've been on the Wikipedia for five and a half years. And, yes, I always use ""Show preview"" function.

However, I did screw up when I undid your edit, because, when I compared the two versions, all I could see was the removal of the Union Jack . Of course, your Edit summary said ""Repair Wikilink, tidy"", so I suspected there was something else I wasn't seeing, but, much as I stared, I could not see the link fix. (Needless to say, when I went back now, I saw it right away.)

Look, if I could vote for Welsh independence tomorrow, I would do it. I'm all for it. Ditto for all the other unrepresented nationalities. But what I can't stand is when people take their nationalistic battles to the Wikipedia. Is Wales one of the United Kingdom's constituent countries, whether one likes it or not? I noticed you did not remove that part, so I must conclude you agree. But you chose to remove the flagicon and referred to that particular edit as ""tidy""! (Again, very funny, not to mention a little tricky.) Well that flagicon is also shown next to England and Scotland in the List of country name etymologies, so in order to ""tidy"" up the whole article you should remove it in all three places! But you didn't. Hence the inconsistency.

Frankly, I don't understand where you find the cheek to refer to my restoration of the previous status quo as ""removing edits I just don't like"" and as a ""simple/simplistic knee-jerk response"". Are you kidding me? That is ridiculous and disingenuous. Now, having said that, let me join you in saying Cymru am byth!    

Hi Pasquale, ydw. Dw'n siarad Cymraeg, diolch. I've moved your reply here for two reasons. 1. to keep it in one place. 2. to remove the union flag from my talk page (and you call my edits tricky and disingenuous). Glad you enjoyed my joke. I note your failure to WP:AGF for my edit and your accusation of nationalistic bias. Let me talk you through my process: I had seen that an editor (turns out to have been you) had consolidated the Cymru and Wales entries, but had made an error in the process (the one I corrected). I noticed the union flag had been added - which had not been on the Cymru entry previously - and that other (non-sovereign) countries (visible from W down) do not have the flags of the sovereign states that govern them. e.g: Wake Island (territory of the United States of America)Wallis and Futuna (territory of France)Western Sahara (claimed by Morocco and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic)I went to the beginning of the article to check that other (non-sovereign) countries do not have the flags of the sovereign states that govern them either. e.g.: Åland (autonomous province of Finland):American Samoa (territory of the United States of America):Anguilla (overseas territory of the United Kingdom):Aruba (territory of Netherlands)Therefore, as far as I could tell (although I concede that I should have checked the entire article for British nationalist bias), additional, sovereign state flag icons were not used on the article, and the one on the Wales entry was therefore unnecessary, which is why I removed it - thus tidying the article. That is how I found ""the cheek to refer to [your] restoration of the previous status quo as ""removing edits [you] just don't like"" and as a ""simple/simplistic knee-jerk response""."" Which seems justified. It remains to be seen how you deal with the apparent inconsistency in the article. Hwyl,   "