Talk:Cornish people/Archive 2

message: Made the following changes:
# Philip Payton, Professor of Cornish Studies at Exeter University, Cornwall – A History 
# Dr Mark Stoyle, BA (Soton), DPhil (Oxon), West Britons– Cornish Identities and the Early Modern British State . 
There is a wealth of other books on this subject like the Cornish Studies series and Our Future is History by John Angarrack. Should a list of books be provided for further reading?
Bretagne 44 16:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A further reading list might be nice; I suspect that there is other relevant stuff by Payton and co, as well as things in the Cornish Studies series, old RIC journals, etc.  If you're going to do it, I could have a poke around a few libraries and see if I can unearth anything on nationalism within the British Isles more generally that mentions Cornwall.  I would be slightly wary about including Angarrack, though; at least without making it clear that he is someone who is (quite openly) writing with a political agenda.  sjcollier 20:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I have slightly reworded the sentence I keep grumbling on about, to make it clear that it is Dr Stoyle (and not the article) who is making assertions about what GoM thought.  Hope this won't be too problematic.  sjcollier 20:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: The link that formed the basis of the following paragraph was not working, so I removed it:
':Another survey, Quality of Life in Cornwall, offered Cornish inhabitants the choice between description as Cornish or English, but not both. 35.1% of the 15,000 people surveyed chose "Cornish", compared to 48.4% who chose English.'
Not sure if whoever knows about these things can fix the link, however. --Robdurbar 09:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link not working

message: Added the following to the politics section:
The Cornish branch of the Green party also campaigns on a manifesto of devolution to Cornwall and Cornish minority issues. In the 2005 general election the Green party struck a partnership deal with Mebyon Kernow .
Bretagne 44 13:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Green Party

message: taken them out from these two sentences:
Many in Cornwall consider themselves British and then Cornish, so use the term "British" to describe themselves. 
Just check the last UK census for the number of people who ticked British.
Many others use only "Cornish" as a description of their ethnic or national identity. This is a phenomenon with a long historical precedent.
1)Over 37,000 wrote Cornish on the last census
2)Just read the historic quotes for proof of a Cornish identity.
Bretagne 44 18:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed citations

message: I did a general tidy up of the references. I have used the <ref>  tag as per the footnotes how to. There were several instances of the punctuation (full stop or comma) comming after the reference, please remember that punctuation comes before the reference like this.r I included some additional references like a cite for Federal Union of European Nationalities. I have also made requests for some references to unsupported material, for example I can find no reference to the people who identified as ethnically Cornish on the 2001 census on the census page for Cornwall. I do not dispute that these people exist, but we still need a cite for it. There is also a map called 1937 Bartholomew published a Map of European Ethnicity prepared by the Edinburgh Institute of Geography, I don't doubt that this map is as it claims to be, but the source for the map is just an unatributed webpage, so we need a proper cite for the map and for it's source. Before anyone gets in a huff remember that verifiability is a policy that is non negotiable, you always have to provide it. I have also added a noncompliance tag to the article as I suspect some original research, and it is not fully verified anyway. Alun 07:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is indeed unreferenced and weasel. There is some discussion of the Morgan Stanley survey later in the article which provides some reference and more importantly, context. I don't think it is helpful to include these types of claim in the intro. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to find the Morgan Stanley survey online but could not find anything. The BBC report on the survey is very sketchy, it gives a figure of 44% for for Cornish people being Cornish first, but no data for how they responded to Britishness or Englishness. There is also no mention of this 37% of people in Derbyshire and East Sussex also identified themselves with their county first in the BBC article cited (so it would be good to get hold of the original Morgan Stanley report). The BBC article is primarily about Welsh people, and the Cornish data are given to provide a comparisson of how English people (sorry I know Cornish is not the same as English, but the article assumes this) identify more strongly with their region (ie county) compared to how Welsh people identify more strongly with their nation (ie Wales). There's a good piece of work on just this sort of thing Devolution, Public Attitudes and National Identity but unfortunately they only include Wales, Scotland and England in the study. Alun 17:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I managed to open this link that had been dead before, but it's a downloadable .doc file, it opened fine with OpenOffice.org writer.  Here they gieve a figure for Cornwall of 11% White British; 35.1% White Cornish; 48.4% White English, they also give a host of tiny minority data for Cornwall (I mean less than 2%). I'll use the data here and cite it. Alun 17:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for finding that - it's just the sort of survey this article has needed for a long time. I was going to add the year of the survey, but couldn't find it - nor could I find the question(naire). If you have either, or a webpage giving an overview, that'd be great. In respect of the census, as you may know, some 6% wrote-in Cornish (see archive). I'm not currently aware of any publication of the information, but wonder if it could be got published with a FOI request or something. Perhaps it has. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a shame about the census data not being published, I'm sure that they should not be included in the article unless they are published, as this constitutes original research. Generally speaking wikipedia policies work very well, but the verifiability not truth condition can be frustrating for this sort of thing. I wonder why no local newspapers or magazines have published the census data? Here's the website I got the data on Cornish identity from,  the year was 2004, this website is linked to in the reference for the data on the article page as well. Alun 04:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It can be a bit of a problem with the verifiability policy, but it is quite clear that unpublished information is not acceptable, how do we know it's not just made up, or OR? I suppose it makes sense really, it's about anyone being able to check any statement by getting hold of the same source. The data for Cornish people in the 2001 census are not published (there is a relatively comprehensive set of census data available online) and so should not be included. I think the Morgan Stanley data can be cited as a pamphlet or booklet, it's published. If we know the publication year, the name of the publishers (presumably M-S published it themselves), authors (names of the authors are not necessarily essential, many BBC articles do not give the names of the author) etc it should be fine, you could even mention in the footnote how to obtain a copy. Alun 17:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References etc

message: If I have understood the copyright flow chart properly then the Bartholomew map (1937) copyright expires next year (2007), in which case it can be uploaded and included in the article. Alun 21:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't English copyright law irrelevant on wiki? I thought US and Florida apply, though I don't know what that means in this particular case. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 03:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You may well be right, I am a complete duffer when it comes to copyright stuff and tend to err on the side of caution. The reason I make reference to this map is that it is used as a citation, but the link is nothing but an image of the map, with no reference of where it comes from. In this case it might just be better just to upload the image and include it in the article and cite the image as a Map of European Ethnicity by Bartholomew, currently it is the wrong way around, with the image as a link in the references section, and the source of the image in the main body of the article, this is because the image does not provide information regarding it's source. I don't really know how to address this problem without including the image in the article. Alun 07:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bartholomew Map

message: Added the following:
|-
|align=center| 1769 || The Antiquarian, William Borlase wrote that "Of this time we are to understand what Edward I. says (Sheringham. p. 129.) that Britain, Wales, and Cornwall, were the portion of Belinus, elder son of Dunwallo, and that that part of the Island, afterwards called England, was divided in three shares, viz. Britain, which reached from the Tweed, Westward, as far as the river Ex; Wales inclosed by the rivers Severn, and Dee; and Cornwall from the river Ex to the Land's-End".
|}
Bretagne 44 15:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: William Borlase

message: I have added the following:
About 34,000 people in Cornwall and 3,500 people in the rest of the UK wrote on their census forms in 2001 that they considered their ethnic group to be Cornish. This represented nearly 7% of the population of Cornwall and is therefore a significant phenomenon.
The source is from Cornish ethnicity data from the 2001 Census Malcolm Brown Cornwall County: []
Bretagne 44 16:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Numbers from the 2001 census

message: For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all  infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "related groups" info removed from infobox 

message: The bit about the MC1R gene sounds incorrect.  When one follows the link, one finds that MC1R codes all people's (and many animals) pigmentation.  From the sounds of it, there is nothing about carrying MC1R, per say, that has anything to do with being any particular ethnic group.  The Cornish may carry some specific mutation on MCR1 that is common amongst Celts, but that is unclear from either article.  I will delete this item soon unless someone can elaborate with references.Sandwich Eater 04:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: MC1r Gene

message: Why does the Cornish diaspora in the box mention Mexico and not Canada, which has 10 million people of British isles origins!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 23:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cornish Diaspora

message: Come on folks...  24.255.11.149 (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very nice, my friend. But I could only use the ones which had PICTURES in their articles. Perhaps you can provide copyright free pictures for "more famous" peeple. Fitzsimmons was certainly a star in his time.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

text: How about Richard D. James? - themodelcitizen (talk) 01:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added RDJ, and surprisingly, it doesn't look as out of place as I thought it would. - 24.57.133.60 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More famous people in the infobox? 

message: So, was Belerion really the first place named in the British Isles?  The British themselves had no names for places in their own island during the previous 8,000 years of British civilisation?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.70.222 (talk) 09:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think "first recorded name", is meant here. MacRusgail (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: It's still wrong.  Kent has that honour, having been recorded in a cognate form by Pytheas of Massilia c. 300 BC.  I have changed it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.170.240 (talk) 23:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Kent counts either. Pytheas recorded a number of names.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belerion 

message: The image :Image:Silver ball Pubsign.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Silver ball Pubsign.JPG

message: The entries for 838 AD and 878 AD have been transposed: hope it can be fixed.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 02:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Cornish in history 

message: The article says:
1360 Treaty of Brétigny: "John, by the Grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, Earl of Anjou, confirmed the aforesaid; and Richard, King of Germany and Earl of Cornwall, in like manner, confirmed the aforesaid".
I don't know where that quote comes from, but the fact is that the Treaty of Brétigny of 1360 was between King John II of France, and Edward III of England. TharkunColl 12:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Treaty of Brétigny- request for clarification June 2009

message: I have unified the fragments referring to genetics in one sub-article. I don't think genetic origins should be discussed in Mythological origins to be honest. Furthermore, there was additional genetic information in descent, therefore I put them together under the title I quoted above.
I have also included the following-
The genetic markes M167-SRY2627 forming the haplogroup R1b1b2a1b3 (R1b1c6) has been attributed to the Cornish people. This group is calculated to have originated 2,850 BP and is predominantly found in Spain (esp. Catalonia), Western France, Cornwall, Wales, and the Basque country among Catalans, Gascons, Bretons and Cornish respectively.  The so-called Italo-Celtic haplogroup R1b1b2a1b with markers P312-S116 is calculated to have originated 4,500 BP and is found in Western Europe. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#R1b
The Eupedia site has quire a lot of good information on DNA and European genetics from verifiable sources, so I hope this doesn't upset any apple-carts.
Brythonek (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Genetic origins of the Cornish people June 2009

message: It is also quoted in ANGARRACK, J. (1999). Breaking the chains. Bodmin p4
Re the comment below, I don't see how it has been taken out of context honestly, the first paragraph is offensive, the second paragraph in poor taste, in my opinion at least, and the following ones just as bad. In fact, in my opinion, it's more kernophobic than I had thought before! 
Brythonek (talk) 10:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This shows the problem with people like Giles Coren being too clever by half.  If you read the opening part of the article, he comes across as being a nasty bigoted racist - and many people will take that at face value, not read the whole article, and select the quote as evidence of racism against the Cornish.  It's only when you take the trouble to read the whole article (which, of course, many people won't bother to do) that it becomes clear (or should become clear) that in fact he is trying to be ironic, by setting out arguments that he considers to be ridiculous and racist, so that he can then go on to demolish them later in the article.  In my view, it doesn't work - Coren only has himself to blame if people think he is racist, because many of his readers will not have his refined (metropolitan) sense of irony and will inevitably "take things out of context".  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean about the Giles Coren article. He is well known for his abrasive style and I seem to read somewhere that he enjoyed being rude. Nevertheless the article is offensive whether it is parody or not. Just like Bernard Manning was considered by many to offensive and racist and yet he said he was only joking. Remember the Anne Robinson controversy involving the Welsh, that was "humour" too wasn't it? Remember when Ian Botham's team got up and walked out of a reception in Australia when they found the impersonator of the Queen to be offensive? The Australians said it was only a joke and the poms got bashed for having no sense of humour.  The Mohammed cartoons in the Danish newspaper were only a joke...weren't they? Whatever the interpretation of the presumed intentions of the creators of such articles/comments etc the fact remains that they are considered by many to be offensive. In the case of the Coren article to Cornish people amongst others. Nevertheless, I will reword the Coren quote to include the fact that it was a parody. I also think that people can be clever enough to say what they really think and get away with it under the guise of humour, many a true word was said in jest- however that is my own opinion and obviously not part of the scope of Wikipedia.Brythonek (talk) 10:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. In my view, you should add words like: "Although Coren was apparently intending to be ironic in his use of language, his words have been taken as evidence of anti-Cornish racism."  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Nah, I just see another article from an overpaid, broadsheet hack. But he is dreadfully witty for a bigot, what ho! --MacRusgail (talk) 10:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at my edit. I have stated that the article was intended as parody and I have given reference to where it is quoted neutrally and where it is taken as an offense. In my opinion it is balanced enough at this point to allow any reader to descide for themselves. Whether the article was meant to cause offense or meant to be a parody or not is of no consequence in that it describes Cornish people insultingly, relies on stereotypes and did cause offence to Cornish people. A few other points:-
*The sub-article is entitled "negative portrayals" of the Cornish in the UK. These are all negative portrayals, there are a lot more that could probably be added but lacking the references or the validity of the sources they have been left out. The article does not say "These people are racists" or "These people hate the Cornish" etc.. it simply quotes and references. 
*If the Coren article is to be read as parody then perhaps he does the Cornish a backhanded favour by naming and shaming a few of the negative sentiments that are often expressed towards the Cornish as being looney and racist.
*I also draw your attention to Anne Robinson's comemnts about the Welsh that provoked an outcry and a police investigation by North Wales police. According to wikipedia she issued an aplogy after and many felt that it her comments were not to be taken so seriously. However whichever way you look at it, her comments DID offend a lot of Welsh people. Therefore to say that comments are offensive, however they were meant, is not unreasonable as long as the comments are accurately quoted, sourced and no theorising is built around them.
Brythonek (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect also that people like Coren and Robinson are guilty of a subtler form of racism, in suggesting or implying that people in Wales/Cornwall who "don't get the joke" must be a bit stupid.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Giles Coren quote 

message: I have accessed the full article from Nexis.  As you will see it is usually taken out of context.
The Times (London)
August 13, 1999, Friday
A Truro lass can eclipse me any day
BYLINE: Giles Coren
SECTION: Features
LENGTH: 871 words
I hate the Cornish. I'm glad that nobody went to the eclipse, and that those who did couldn't see it. I hate their poxy language which they make such a fuss about, and their stupid morris dancing clothes. And I hate their fancy foreign food - like clotted cream - which makes the place stink, and I hate their fatuous demands to be treated as a nation.
I am delighted that little old Cornish ladies stood on their doorsteps crying, not knowing what to do with three hundredweight of rum-and-raisin flavoured fudge, specially cooked and parcelled into neat little hessian bags with commemorative badges. When I read that the Cornish pasty industry was in meltdown, I was so delighted that I felt like exhuming some Cornish corpses and impaling them on stakes.
And as for the quality of their workmanship, you couldn't make it up. A friend got me round to look at his fuse box the other day. It was a flipping disgrace. "Looks like it was put in by a bleeding Cornishman," I said.
I'll give them one thing, though: Cornish birds are in better shape than they used to be. Time was, you wouldn't climb over a nicely trimmed llama to get to a Cornish girl.
But these days they've sorted out the clothes problem, dropped all the bells and lacy bits, and lost a bit of weight. I would by no means say no to a bit of southwestern fluff every now and again. I wouldn't want one marrying my daughter, but that's another matter.
Salubrious, isn't it? But then, you see, I want to be a proper writer one day. And you can't unless you occasionally tempt people to wonder whether you are a loony racist.
The Duke of Edinburgh may have swiped the headline space reserved for toe-curling faux pas from Lord Archer of Weston-super-Mare. But that is irrelevant. I do not want to be a royal consort. I want to be a writer. A proper writer like Archer, Taki and A.A. Gill.
Gill, a writer who in other respects is greatly to be admired, is famous, I believe, for something he once said about Welsh people. I didn't read it - I was too young at the time - but I assume it was a bit rude and mentioned sheep.
Then he was rude about the Germans, and Taki (who I think has it in mainly for Puerto Ricans) wrote a rude response full of daft stereotyping. And then Gill called him a smelly dago lesbian.
It must be a generational thing. Because I just don't get it. Men over 45 seem to be obsessed with race, believe themselves to be proponents of free speech, believe their pronouncements to be humorous, and have no idea how spookily out of kilter they are with the way things now are.
Archer insists that if you look at his "answer in full", you will see that he was not denigrating black women but highlighting how far minorities have come in 30 years. I had a look. It was even worse in full than I thought.
"Your head did not turn if a black woman passed because they were badly dressed, probably overweight and probably had a lousy job. If you walk down London streets now, there are the most staggeringly beautiful girls of every nationality. That is part of getting rid of prejudice and making things equal."
It is not the allegations of fatness against a sexual-racial section that is most grim. It is the characterisation of Britain as a place where white men patrol for birds to ogle, and are pretty damned sad if a girl is a bit on the porky side or works in a shop. The suggestion that equality is achieved when Archer is prepared to cop a black bird from across the road, nudge his mate and shout "tits out for the lads" is as nefarious as making monkey noises and throwing bananas. Though I am sure he didn't mean it like that.
Men have never had trouble fancying women of races they otherwise did not respect. Slave owners raped their slaves. White settlers in America had sex with the indigenous women - passing on unfamiliar venereal diseases was a favourite genocidal tactic.
Archer's comments are more than a minor problem. The poor man believed he was saying something liberal and folksy. He thought that to say he occasionally fancied black women showed what a man of the world he was. He thought it separated him from old-fashioned Tories who wouldn't have considered interracial sex. Like so many men of his generation, it is when he tries to sound liberal, reasonable and progressive that he most finely highlights how far behind he is.
* As someone who once worked at Tatler, I think I know a thing or two about pashminas. I say a thing "or two" because anyone who knows three things about pashminas knows too much. That person may well be Sophia Swire. For she has declared September 15 National Pashmina Day.
The problem, apparently, is that these plain little cashmere blankets are supposed to cost Pounds 200 and to be available only to posh girls. But some Johnny Prole has started banging them out for Pounds 50. The result is that the elite cachet of the pashmina has been compromised. Extinction beckons.
Are we really going to stand up for an endangered garment? Why not a National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Pashminas (NSPCP)? Or a law that you can't make alterations to a Grade II listed pashmina without going through National Heritage?
LOAD-DATE: August 20, 1999
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1999 Times Newspapers Limited
So it should actually be removed from the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, I just see another article from an overpaid, broadsheet hack. But he is dreadfully witty for a bigot, what ho! --MacRusgail (talk) 10:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at my edit. I have stated that the article was intended as parody and I have given reference to where it is quoted neutrally and where it is taken as an offense. In my opinion it is balanced enough at this point to allow any reader to descide for themselves. Whether the article was meant to cause offense or meant to be a parody or not is of no consequence in that it describes Cornish people insultingly, relies on stereotypes and did cause offence to Cornish people. A few other points:-
*The sub-article is entitled "negative portrayals" of the Cornish in the UK. These are all negative portrayals, there are a lot more that could probably be added but lacking the references or the validity of the sources they have been left out. The article does not say "These people are racists" or "These people hate the Cornish" etc.. it simply quotes and references. 
*If the Coren article is to be read as parody then perhaps he does the Cornish a backhanded favour by naming and shaming a few of the negative sentiments that are often expressed towards the Cornish as being looney and racist.
*I also draw your attention to Anne Robinson's comemnts about the Welsh that provoked an outcry and a police investigation by North Wales police. According to wikipedia she issued an aplogy after and many felt that it her comments were not to be taken so seriously. However whichever way you look at it, her comments DID offend a lot of Welsh people. Therefore to say that comments are offensive, however they were meant, is not unreasonable as long as the comments are accurately quoted, sourced and no theorising is built around them.
Brythonek (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect also that people like Coren and Robinson are guilty of a subtler form of racism, in suggesting or implying that people in Wales/Cornwall who "don't get the joke" must be a bit stupid.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Text of the Coren article

message: I have added a sub-section about the romantic and literary portrayal of Cornish people within the greater areas of West Country and Celtic identities. The subject is vast but I had tried to keep it as brief as possible and hope it doesn't read too much like an essay. Romantic views of Cornwall and Celticity have been and are still important in forming many notions and ideas about Cornwall and also Cornish people's ideas about themselves- I also think that the iclusion of this theme helps to balance out the negative portrayals of Cornish people that some have taken exception to. 
Brythonek (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Romantic portrayals of the Cornish

message: *Have included a short list of famous Cornish people- I have only included people born in or brought up in Cornwall or with a strong Cornish family connection, otherwise it gets out of hand. I saw one website even had Guglielmo Marconi listed... no comment. I also see someone saw fit to delete "Cornish inventions" with no explanation or discussion--- any thoughts?
*I have added some images, see the "National Symbols"- could someone help to tidy them up please, I can't seem to get them to line up nicely! Sorry!
*I have expanded a little bit on the portrayals of Cornish people section, added a few references and included some more information about the origins of these portrayals- this is in order to balance the article more in the light ot the recent neutrality dispute- also because with only "negative" portrayals the article was, I admit, a little negative in itself.
*I have worked on Language in Cornwall, so we now have English, the dialect and Cornish all mentioned- I think this gives a far more balanced view of the linguistic situation in Cornwall- again comments/edits welcome!
*The timeline. I have edited the time line a little and tidied up some of the facts and links. I do however feel the time line is a bit of an eyesore on the article- could it be moved to the end, or scaled down a bit?
*The introduction is still concerning me. At last count there were 13 references where once there were a mere nine! Also all of this some people consider that the Cornish people blah, blah, blah sounds ambiguous and misleading in my opinion.
I think the article is shaping up nicely now, it's a shame the intro lets it down.
Dha weles.
Brythonek (talk) 15:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're doing a fine job, Brythonek!  Just a couple of suggestions - the "Famous Cornish people" list here seems to duplicate, pretty much, the page at List of people from Cornwall.  How would you feel about deleting the list from this article, and replacing it with a section of prose - where you could, for example, highlight the Cornish inventors - together with a link (See also..) to the "List.." article?  Regarding the introduction, that should really be a summary of the key points in the article (rather than simply or primarily a defence of Cornish identity, which is what it seems to be now) - see WP:LEAD.  If you were to come up with a section which summarised key points of the article - along the lines of, say, the one at Scottish people - I'm sure others would be happy to endorse (or edit!) it.  Finally, do you think the timeline would be better inserted in the History of Cornwall article? - again, key points (which relate specifically to Cornish people rather than, say, administration) could be summarised in prose in this article.  Just my suggestions!  Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Like it as well, but why get rid of King Mark?--Snowded TALK  17:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just looking again at the "national symbols" section, I wonder whether most of that ought to be in this article, or elsewhere.  It's only marginally "people"-related, I would have thought.  Looking at this list, I would say there's a pretty unanswerable case for a separate article on National symbols of Cornwall (though if you don't want to cause controversy you could exclude the first word!).  There is an article already on Saint Piran's Flag, of course.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking good, Brythonek. There's a small section on symbols on the Culture of Cornwall article. Perhaps you could merge them into the new National symbols of Cornwall article. Daicaregos (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't objecting to the symbols being referenced in this article, rather suggesting there was scope for a new article, along the lines of National symbols of Wales or Flags and symbols of Yorkshire, where it would be possible to go into more detail.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

text: The changes that have been made over the past day or so have been very good, especially the new famous Cornish people section and the Portrayals of Cornish people section to balance out the negative section which also has a good explanation to it now. Well done Brythonek. BritishWatcher (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: June edits 26-06.09

message: I'm currently working on a revised image for the infobox. I have been give some suggestions in a private exchange, but I need more input.
The possible "draft" image is found here.
We need more candidates, and if possible, female ones. --Jza84 |  Talk   18:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: As requested I have translated the key points into a prose form. Obviously prose is more longwinded but I think that anything is better than that "ugly" timeline what spoiled the page before. Please feel let me know how this goes. I need to find a few refs for some of the comments, but they are coming, I'll do it directly. Seeing as the sub-article is "Key" moments I have given sub-headings to the paragraphs in order to break up the text blocks- a few images too would be nice to break the monotony of "broadsheet" text. 
Let me know what you think, and root out any typos!!!!!!!!! 
Brythonek (talk) 11:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole History section (and indeed, where possible, entire article) should be prose, and about the history and development of the Cornish people. Some (3 to 5) simple subheadings (In antiquity, Mythological origins, Dark and Middle Ages, Revivalism and the modern period) which groups the text into logical, verifiable sections would be most helpful for our readers. The use of the word "Key-moments" is problematic by way of an implied forcing of a particular point of view of history upon the reader. I believe much of the body of the article needs to be entirely rewritten from scratch. --Jza84 |  Talk   12:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should be fanatical about the template, some variation and individuality with each article is also a plus. I don't really agree with wikipedia about "key moments", personally that is! Never mind! How about "principal events, "moments". The old timeline was not great to work with and I have tried to fouces on moments that had an effect on the people etc using the old timeline as a guide. The original history section at the top is not of my doing, perhaps we could adjust the key moments prose text and combine it with history to unify it more? Brythonek (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if you take a look at Wikipedia's Manual of Style you'll see that "consistency promotes professionalism and unity across Wikipedia's articles" - it's an aspirational principle of editting Wikipedia. It's not so much being "fanatical", but producing work that is helpful and familliar to our readers. the old timeline should be desconstructed, and merged into a rewritten body of text. --Jza84 |  Talk   12:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Key-moments in Cornish history

message: OK, there's been a lot of requests for citation, but if we were to have more pride in this article, we should also be using something like Template:Citation for when we add references. Something like this is only half a job - something more like this is a proper web citation.  This brings the benefits of helping find an archive of the site if it was to go dead, as well as present the material in a format that is professional and helps our readers. --Jza84 |  Talk   10:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation templates, please 

message: It seems to only include festivals and events in Cornwall only. What about that great big one in Australia? Bodrugan (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Festivals and events 

message: Was Emma Gifford Cornish? I believe she was Bristolian.~~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.119.178 (talk) 20:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this source she was born in Plymouth.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Then she is not Cornish, especially as her parents were Bristolian. Will you amend the article?Donkfest1 (talk) 17:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, done.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank ee kindly.Donkfest1 (talk) 08:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on what she identifies as. Don't forget that some Cornish people are born in Plymouth simply because the hospital is nearer. --Joowwww (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not in 1840.  She did live in Cornwall at the time Hardy met her, which probably explains it, but I'm not aware of any evidence that she described herself as "Cornish".  If you define anyone who lives, or once lived, in Cornwall, as "Cornish", it's a different matter of course.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emma Gifford 

message: Just a nudge that I haven't forgotten about this revamp to the article, infact, having had a break, I plan to complete this asap. One major criticism of the sandbox has been the lack of explanation of Cornish culture and iconography and so any assistance in this area, supported by strong references, would be much appreciated. --Jza84 |  Talk   17:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm rather busy lately but I will try and help whenever I can. I'm really looking forward to its completion, you've done an excellent job. Do you think FA status is a realistic goal? --Joowwww (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: GA should be fairly simple. FA would be a struggle, but not by too much. Feel free to jump in when you can, thanks. --Jza84 |  Talk   22:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cracking on... 

message: I think the most authoritative source on Cornwall's climate would be this, which doesn't use the word "subtropical" so far as I can see, perhaps because there appears to be several alternative definitions of the term.  The WP article on Subtropics states "the far Southwestern fringes of Cornwall in the United Kingdom meet both requirements [for meeting the definition of "subtropical"] —6 °C average in the coldest month and eight months with the average above 10 °C (specifically the Isles of Scilly)....And it is not surprising therefore that there are real palm trees growing in Devon and Cornwall." - but is unreferenced.  This site states "Newquay has a maritime subtropical climate but don’t let this trick you; subtropical does not mean ‘almost tropical’. Newquay receives all four seasons and no extremes of temperature, but the winters are much milder than elsewhere in the UK." - but probably does not meet WP:RS.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I definately read this interesting "fact" somewhere, and I'm sure it was reputable. Perhaps "subtropical-like" is the most appropriate way around this? --Jza84 |  Talk   23:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't like "subtropical-like".  The Minahan ref describes it as "subtropical", so I assume it passes WP:RS - I think the issue is that the word has no precise definition and is often misinterpreted, but I don't think that's an issue for this article.  Maybe it could be explained more fully at Cornwall#Climate.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

text: PS: Just noticed that Geography of Cornwall#Climate describes it as "the UK's only area of sub-tropical climate", but is unreferenced. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Subtropical climate?

message: I'm unsure about certain key facts about the Cornish Stannary Courts and Parliaments. I understand that they were given a charter by King John (saying what I don't know) and another by King Edward I. I know the last time the court/parliament (?) met was 1752. I know they met to discuss tin mining in Cornwall and I know that there is a Revived Cornish Stannary Parliament. Beyond that, I'm a little lost. Can anybody clear this up as the current Stannary Courts and Parliaments article is, well, not great. I also need a reference or two (if not a rewrite) for the following:
Can anybody help? --Jza84 |  Talk   15:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I don't know enough about the nitty gritty of constitutional status. The CSP's website  might be of use, it won't make for a suitable reference but it might help you find a way to narrow down what you're searching for on other sources. --Joowwww (talk) 23:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. If I can get that, and something about Cornish pixies, and the performing arts of the Cornish, then I think I will be ready to present my final draft. :D --Jza84 |  Talk   00:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Piskies, not pixies. DuncanHill (talk) 08:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I know. It's spelt that way in my draft (although not everywhere else). --Jza84 |  Talk   09:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Stannaries