Talk:Welsh people/Archive 1

message: I have been thinking about how to do this article for a week or so after a number of us were disambiguating Welsh everywhere. I am now an expert on the pages that link or will link to it :( I have just found out about this collaboration of the week thing, so here's a quick overview of stuff I thought worth including: 
* Differing tribes, not necessarily allies (Romans invaded Britain after hearing British tribes were in disarray), we only have Roman names and descriptions of them;
* Gododdin;
* When did Wales as a country/nation start? Some Very Famous  People have asked this question, so it's worth including some of the discussion; 
* political but probably needs a mention: the distinction the language draws between Cymry Cymraeg and Cymry di-Gymraeg;
* Grannygate! Sinkinson and Howarth and whether one grandparent qualifies you as Welsh :) 
* there's a bunch of pages which start "So-and-so is a Welsh actor/soldier born in London/California/somewhere". You can't just say "born inside Wales", or the ghost of Saunders Lewis will be very cross. So.. that doesn't work either :)
* Flemings, Landsker line (similarly parts of Gower?);
* ABO blood groups: can't find a reference, but I was sure that the proportions were different in Wales.
I hope someone else has better ideas, or I shall start doing some of this, and I'm not exactly qualified on the matter :)
--Telsa 18:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The related-wikiproject for this is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ethnic_Groups, I guess it might have some ideas about what to include and some best-practice. As for your suggestions, I don't object to them :P -- Joolz 18:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: Why isn't the UKCOTW on the main page instead of the talk? Falphin 15:27, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideas

message: Since this article suggests that there are more Welsh people in the U.S. than in Wales, to what extent have Welsh people who are descended from Welsh emigrants in the U.S. (and elsewhere) maintained their Welsh identity? Do they feel "culturally" Welsh, "ethnically" Welsh, nostalgically Welsh or something else? -- The Anome 22:58, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
:I think this is an interesting point. I'm guessing they don't speak Welsh, and won't have just married Welsh people - so surname only? Does that count? Secretlondon 00:46, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: We need to decide what counts as Welsh. Most of the article seems to talk about an "ethnic" welshness - which may or may not be valid. If Welshness is cultural then is it likely to have survived in the US? Under religion we have "Other religions Welsh people may be affiliated with include Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, and Sikhism." which seems to define Welshness as residency. Secretlondon 00:51, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: ok - from ethnic group - "In the United States, the collectivity of immigrants from a region of the world and their descendants are called "ethnic groups" despite their lack of internal cohesion and common institutions and their inability to transmit language to the next generation. Immigrants are socialized into identifying as a member of one of the list of "ethnic groups" provided by the US Census Bureau and with various "traditions" which, although often of recent invention, appeal to some notion of the past. Thus Mexican nationals, upon crossing the border, become Hispanic ethnics.". If this is correct this is our problem. Do we write about what Welsh-Americans believe to be Welsh - or what people in Wales do? Are invented traditions valid? Secretlondon 17:05, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: As a Welshman, I have to say I don't really see how on earth an American of some distant fourth-generation Welsh extraction could be considered Welsh.  I actually find it quite offensive. Proto 13:10, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the concept of welsh-american needs bringing up somewhere in the article. I certainly don't consider them to be the same thing at all but we need to cover it. We should cover Patagonia too.  Secretlondon 18:10, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What is Welsh?

message: Re: "Technically it is not supposed to be used in the Westminster Parliament, but several Speakers (most notably Mr. Speaker Thomas , himself born in Wales, close by Tonypandy) have turned a blind eye (or ear) to the use of the tongue within longer Anglophone speeches."
You can take the Oath of Allegiance in Welsh (or Scots Gaelic). You have to take it in English as well, but the Welsh translation is kept in the Despatch Box, just in case. I am surprised to hear Thomas mentioned in this context: I thought he was very against the nationalist moment and Cymdeithas yr Iaith? Are there any examples of turning a deaf ear? --Telsa 18:57, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Half a year (!) later, I am still curious...Telsa 22:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References on the Speaker?

message: While the Template may be incorrect it is  the requested policy by the Wikiproject Ethnic groups so I putting it back. Falphin 13:49, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a look at the Ethnic Groups page, and I see it describes the template as 'optional'.  I don't really see why an template with incorrect information should be on there, particularly  if it's 'optional'. I will try and hunt up some accurate, related and citeable figures and update the template accordingly.  Proto 14:38, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Template Removal

message: I get the impression that Welsh people look different than their English neighbours. They seem to have darker complexion than the English. Is my impression correct? Meursault2004 29 June 2005 23:24 (UTC)
That's because we wash less.  Heh, I'm kidding ... it's because us Welsh have got Celtic blood in them (certainly more on average), which favours dark hair and complexion, versus less Anglo-Saxon blood, which is fair hair and sunburn city. Proto t c 30 June 2005 08:21 (UTC)
Hey thanks! Well how about the Irish then, and the Scottish, they are also Celtic but many of them are fairly complexioned and many even have red hair. According to this article, relatively seen most redhaired people are to be found in Scotland and Ireland. Do Welsh people look like the people of Brittany Bretagne? Meursault2004 30 June 2005 09:36 (UTC)
Well, the Welsh are no more or less Celtic than the Scots] or the Irish; I think there's more Pictish blood in Scotland and Ireland, which leads to red hair.  You must be careful not to over-generalise, as a lot of Irishmen can be really quite swarthy, and there are plenty of pasty Welshmen.  As far as looking like people from Brittany, I don't know.  I don't know what people from Brittany look like. Proto t c 30 June 2005 13:49 (UTC)
:Come on, these unfounded and largely discredited racial differences should be consigned to the scrapheap of stupid Victorian ideas where they belong. Let's get some perspective. During the industrial revolution the largest ethnic minority in Wales was the English, tens of thousands came to South Wales during the 19th century to work the mines, and stayed, Welsh was far and away the dominant language at the time in Wales and so all these Englishmen (and they were mainly men) learned Welsh. I would be surprised if anyone in the South Wales valleys has no English blood at all. Conversely when the Germanic peoples (Angles, Saxons, Jutes etc.) came to settle in what is now the south and east of England during the 5th and 6th centuries they and the native population mixed, both culturally and biologically, so English people are the direct descendants of the pre-Anglo-Saxon peoples of Britain (or Brythons if you like) just as much as the Welsh, Scots and Cornish. So no there is no difference between the way Welsh and English people look, it's just your imagination. Alun 08:39, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe it and have never observed it. I have lived in Wales and England for most of my life and it is just nonsense to claim this. It is a case of circularity of argument, you find what you claim to be differences because you already know they are there before you start looking. I wonder how well you would cope in a double blind trial? Not very well I would suggest. Alun 06:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh come off it EPF there are no physical differences between people who call themselves English and people who call themselves Welsh!!!!! Enzedbrit 11:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Come on Epf, it is a classic case of a circular argument. You already know that there are differences, so you go looking for them and lo and behold find them. Anyway the original point was to contradict the statement that ther are obvious observable differences between Welsh and English people that a lay person could identify. If there are differences (which I am highly sceptical about), then they are small and would require numerous collated very accurate measurements, and then any significant difference (and I mean this in a statistical sense) would be small. It is also the case that any small differences observed could just as well be due to environmental influences such as diet etc. It is the fundamental flaw that physical anthropology has, you do not know if you are observing an environmental effect or a hereditary one, it is why physical anthropology will always be a much poorer way to determine the actual relatedness of populations of people compared to genetics. Alun 17:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Welsh people and English

message: The number of Welsh people in Wales is given here as 2.9 million, equal to the entire population of Wales. On the other hand the English people article gives the number of English people in England as 45 million, whereas the total population of England is 49 million - it seems to be taking the number of people living in England who were also born in England. Surely these figures should be consistent?  Rhion 18:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't pay too much attention to the number for English people in the UK. It is reported by the CIA Factbook, and it is quite controversial because it is not clear what it represents. The number of people living in Wales who were born in Wales was 2,188,754 . The number of people identifying themselves as Welsh ethnic group (in Wales) was 417,820 . Consistency would suggest using the ethnic group numbers. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you can deduce anything from the number of people identifying themselves as Welsh ethnic group in the 2001 Census - see the comments by Telsa above. It wasn't specifically offered as a choice, you had to write it in. Rhion 20:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest using the number of people born in Wales, the number of people living in Wales and the number of people self-identifying as Welsh from the 2001 census. I would also make specific reference to the strengths/weaknesses of each method of calculation. It's absurd to claim in the article that only 14% (417,820/2900000) of the population of Wales is ethnically Welsh. My reasoning is that the data are totally transparent (unlike the CIA data used in English people). Because someone does not write in that they are Welsh does not precude them from being ethnically Welsh, some Welsh people may have been unsure of what the write in actually means. It may also indicate that people want to give an absolute minimum of personal information to the state. These sorts of data are always difficult to determine as people have different perceptions of ethnicity. As long as the data are properly referenced, transparent and their context explained then I see no need for across the board consistency. In fact consistency is impossible as different states calculate their populations in different ways. Alun 06:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree. As long as it is remembered that ethnic group is what the numbers should try and represent, the more information the merrier. However too many numbers and definitions in the infobox can make it look cluttered - luckily there aren't too many in the first place. zzuuzz (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of Welsh people in Wales

message: From the infobox:
2001, population of Wales
->
2001, population of all citizens of Wales
What's the point of this change?  What does it mean? Flapdragon 02:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dunno, and it's wrong anyway, there's no such thing as a "citizen of Wales". -- Arwel (talk) 02:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Don't know really, just trying to show that number includes people of all ethnic origins (UK citizens) in Wales, not just Welsh. Epf 21:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree the shorter wording appears to indicate that the number represents the population of Welsh people in Wales. My preferred wording would be: 2001, total population of Wales, since UK citizens is not correct either. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I am not telling you what it says, I am telling you what it appears to say. The infobox is labelled, significant population of Welsh people in:. The word population should be requalified to reduce ambiguity. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers 

message: Substituted at 21:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment