Talk:Brecon Beacons National Park

Expansion tag added, as this is very short compared with other national park articles. I'm sure we can find more to say SP-KP 18:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Definitely there is more to put. I think perhaps the problem is knowing how to split material between this page (on the national park) and Brecon Beacons itself. Telsa (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Geopark

A recent BBC news story ( 'Amazing' Beacons win top honour (which seems to be about six months late) points to the park authority's page: Fforest Fawr Geopark. There's lots more that could be added, so I leave the URLs in the hope that someone will get around to it before I do :) Telsa (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merge

Most of the national parks in England and Wales have one article for the NP and the geographical area, so it makes sense to do so here given the paucity of information in both articles. Of course we'd have to make clear that the NP covers a wider area than the Beacons proper. I'd also suggest that once the merger is done, the page is moved to Brecon Beacons; I'm doing it this way round because Brecon Beacons National Park has more information and contains the National Parks template. Blisco 08:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Un-merged

There has been quite a bit of discussion over the previous years at Talk:Brecon Beacons about un-merging the article. Unfortunately no action had been taken and the last action in that discsussio was in 2010. I've therefore been WP:BOLD and re-split the article. The primary reason is that Brecon Beacons is part of the National Park (one of four ranges of hills) therefore, if anything, Brecon beacons should be a sub-section of this article, not the other way around. Sionk (talk) 23:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brecon Beacons National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070509130908/http://www.breconbeacons.org/Pipeline+Consent to http://www.breconbeacons.org/Pipeline%20Consent
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141218103905/http://thebreconbeacons.org/ to http://www.thebreconbeacons.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:24, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Naming of parts

It's often rehearsed that the names of the easternmost and westernmost massifs within the BBNP give rise to confusion. To add to the confusion in the minds of some is the fact that the name of the eastern massif in Welsh is traditionally 'Y Mynydd Du' - yes, exactly the same as the massif in the west. The English names are differentiated with the western massif being the singular 'Black Mountain' and the eastern one being the plural - 'Black Mountains'. This latter seems to be a relatively recent name; the re-translation of it into Welsh is 'Y Mynyddoedd Duon' and appears on OS maps for example, but it is not the traditional name for the area. A glance at https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mynydd_Du_(Mynwy) confirms this situation.

Another of the main massifs is known widely as Fforest Fawr - it has in the distant past been known by the English name, 'Great Forest of Brecknock', but not in the modern era, hence my reason for changing 'Great Forest' to 'great forest' as simply a translation of the name, rather than appearing to be a modern English alternative name. thanks Geopersona (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Veil of Snow - Sgwd yr Eira.jpeg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Welsh as the official name

The Park has recently decided to primarily use Bannau Brycheiniog, it's Welsh language name, like it's sister to the north Eryri. I know there was debate on there as to what was most in common use vs official and thought I'd open the discussion here. I imagine that as time goes on, the Welsh form will take presidence but thought at least the formatting could be altered to reflect the Welsh being the only official name. (Not least because the English name is just a Victorian translation, at least Snowdonia was original if not a bit uninspired!) Jackass cooper (talk) 07:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that, whatever the result of a discussion about how WP:COMMONNAME applies, this page should make it clear that the Welsh name is now the official name of the National Park and authority. Peeky44 _{What's on your mind?} 08:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Totally agree. ollyhinge11 (talk) 09:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Can't see why the outcome of the debate should be differ from that at Talk:Snowdonia, which acts as a precedent. WP:COMMONNAME probably applies. Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Dave.Dunford, Snowdonia is not an exact comparison IMO, here the national park and the wider area are split into two articles, Snowdonia's reasoning would apply to Brecon Beacons that the common name should be determined as the name is used more generally, as this is specifically on the national park, it is likely "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park" would supplant "Brecon Beacons National Park", but not necessarily "Brecon Beacons". While the move would've made more sense as a discussion, and assuming the Welsh name would take over is WP:CRYSTAL, the situation here is not exactly the same IMO. As the national park is a legal entity and a separate article, I see usage being quicker to change specifically for the NP. Would benefit from a wider discussion to avoid triggering disputes. But per The National Park Authorities (Wales) Order 1995 is "Brecon Beacons National Park" still its legal name? DankJae 12:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I attempted to revert this undiscussed move but as the redirect had been edited, I have had to request it formally under technical requests. It will shortly be returned to its longstanding name and a move discussion wil be required to determine if there is a consensus to move at this time. Per WP:COMMONNAME, I do not believe the new name should be used yet. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

As with Eryri/Snowdonia, I repeat my position that there should be separate articles for the national park and for the general area. That is currently the case here and is not the case with Snowdonia/Eryri. And it is my position that the national park article's name should reflect the official usage of the national park authority; and the general area's article name should follow WP:COMMONNAME (and thus remain in English for the time being). GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@GenevieveDEon, best discussed there, and Eryri has a greater case on the national park specifically. But considering that article overall is not long, there is no overall benefit to spliting the article aside the name. DankJae 12:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Sirfurboy, yes, I guess to avoid setting a unstable precedent, where names are changed quickly, better start discussions before moves. Although the argument for the Welsh name, in principle, is more stronger here, and potentially more likely to move if specified with the "National Park" suffix, although best to wait a few days to start monitoring use per WP:NAMECHANGES. Brecon Beacons, on the otherhand, would need more extensive analysis, and overwhelming change of usage as a general term. Although as WP:OFFICIALNAMES are not used, only WP:NAMECHANGES can apply, but it does seem potentially easier here for the change. DankJae 12:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

GenevieveDEon Although we disagree, the most important thing is that a potentially controversial name change has a proper discussion. Thus the reversion. An RM is now required if you want to pursue this.

We do disagree, though. the Snowdonia article is about the national park. It is very much analagous to this one. Wikipedia articles do not change name the moment the park authority begins using a different name. Have a read of WP:COMMONNAME or the move discussion at Snowdon and Snowdonia. I don't think there will be a consensus to move this article yet. I do think there will be a consensus one day. I would suggest waiting before opening the move discussion, until sources are using the name. But I expect someone will start an RM sooner rather than later. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

And just to add, the park authority has a legal name which has not been changed. Worth noting, but again it is WP:COMMONNAME that wins here. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

If a RM is started, if citing COMMONNAME, it would likely fail due to how recent it is, but as this article is specifically on the national park, then I expect some sources to quickly use the Welsh name as the official name per WP:NAMECHANGES, quicker than Eryri, as they would specifically discuss the national park. DankJae 13:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with DankJae. The Brecon Beacons are a mountain range, but the national park is an entity overseen by a park authority, which has been renamed Bannau Brycheiniog National Park. That's what the article should be moved to. As far as I'm aware, "Brecon Beacons National Park" is no longer being used officially at all. The way I see it, this is no different than a district or a borough council renaming itself. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 13:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Still Wikipedia uses COMMONNAMES as used by independent sources, not official ones from the NPA. But as most sources are likely going to mention the formal entity, seems they should be more likely to use the Welsh one soon (but not a guarantee). But as of now, we only have one source supporting WP:NAMECHANGES, the NPA itself. So best wait a few days/weeks. DankJae 14:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

FTR, the names of national parks are defined by legislation. The official English-language name of the national park will remain Brecon Beacons National Park unless a law is passed changing it, and the National Park Authority will presumably continue to use Brecon Beacons National Park in formal contexts. But there's no law requiring that they use the official name in their branding.

The effect is that we can't present Bannau Brycheiniog National Park as the "official" name, even if the common name eventually changes (which it might, or might not). Kahastok talk 17:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The park authority says "officially known as Bannau Brycheiniog National Park" ...it's difficult to imagine they'd make this up. I'm sure the existence and boundaries of the national parks are defined in legislation but ...the name? Sionk (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the name is defined as well. It makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Much easier for future legislation or other official documents to refer to the national park if there's a clearly-established name they can use to refer to it. Kahastok talk 20:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

"The official English-language name of the national park will remain Brecon Beacons National Park unless a law is passed changing it" - have you a source for that? All the sources I've seen say that the name has officially changed, so presumably the park authority has the power to do that. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 08:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

AFAIAA, when Snowdonia tried it, it stated it did not have the (statutory) power to do so, while BB NP could be different, I think all NPAs have the same powers? "Officially" technically just means support from a formal organisation, but can be confused with confirmation of the legal name, plus regardless of what it is legally known, that does not matter for the article's title. DankJae 08:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

In any case, there is indeed a reference. [1]. See "Names of National Park authorities." The legislation is not amended, so the legal title is unchanged. What we mean by official title, however, may differ. The park authority cannot change its legal title. That is a matter for the legislature. The park authority can say it will henceforth use the Welsh name in all its publications, which would meet one definition of official (as it is the authority), although not another (because it must use the legal name in some contexts). Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The Welsh title of the National Park is "Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog" 2A00:23C4:E699:C701:2C5A:1BFB:D1C4:B496 (talk) 12:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The Welsh title of the National Park is "Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog" 2A00:23C4:E699:C701:2C5A:1BFB:D1C4:B496 (talk) 12:47, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

@Asarlaí I agree, Brecon beacons no longer exist, and Wikipedia should accept this name change officially without too much complication. Cltjames (talk) 14:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Names don't drop out of thin air. Wikipedia does not follow WP:OFFICIALNAMES DankJae 14:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Title:

There may be a potential argument that Wikipedia:Common names actually applies to Brecon Beacons, and not necessarily to Brecon Beacons National Park. Colloquially and in literature, people tend to say and refer to the mountain range, "Brecon Beacons" rather than the national park, "Brecon Beacons National Park". The full name of the national park tends to be used in more official capacities. It is perhaps difficult to separate the two in an analysis of their use. Titus Gold (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME applies to all articles. Alternatives are really only considered where there is no one common name. Here WP:NAMECHANGES applies, so if over the next few days/weeks/months independent secondary (news) sources use "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park" over the old, or "Bannau Brycheiniog" over the old in articles clearly on the national park and not the area/range, then there would be a stronger case for a RM.

Official names are not names to consider purely because they are official, and "official capacities" are not exactly independent secondary sources. So far, Visit Wales has already accepted it (to a degree) but it is only one source for now. So we have to wait and see, whether sources make the decision for us. DankJae 16:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes I agree with you. My point was that it's more difficult to analyse since the names for the mountain range and the national park are essentially the same.

Since the announcement for example, "Bannau Brycheiniog" is the most commonly searched term on Google but technically that just refers to mountain range and not the park. In reality it refers to both. Titus Gold (talk) 22:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah agree, which is why more focus is to be put on independent secondary sources such as news sources, which hopefully provide more context to whether they are talking about the range or the national park, which is what WP:NAMECHANGES prefers. DankJae 22:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Correct - The Welsh title of the National Park is "Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog" the English title is "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park". Simple. 2A00:23C4:E699:C701:2C5A:1BFB:D1C4:B496 (talk) 12:50, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The Brecon Beacons are not a range of mountains. Bannau Brycheiniog (formerly Brecon Beacons) is an area of land which includes several mountains. There is a mountain range - The Black Mountains - in Bannau Brycheiniog. 2A00:23C7:C698:A401:0:0:0:1C05 (talk) 15:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Use Eryri, not Snowdonia. That is the name. 2601:183:4601:3480:5921:84FC:5F34:368B (talk) 20:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

See Talk:Snowdonia#Requested move 18 November 2022. Snowdonia was determined to be the common name at the time. That can change over the next few months/years. DankJae 20:25, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

No, it's not. The name is Snowdonia, unless you happen to be one of the less than 30% of people in Wales who actually speak Welsh. 81.108.52.62 (talk) 14:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Lead

Should Bannau Brycheiniog National Park be bracketed or not? And should "officially" be used? (or "also known as"). I had moved the pronunciation of BB into the lead, but open to it being elsewhere. Like it is a very newly made name, but I expect it slowly becoming more common but not yet. DankJae 14:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Lead:

I agree that "legal" and "official" are not necessarily the same.

I don't think that it needs to be bracketed since priority is already given to the "commonly used" English name as a title and at the start of the lead. I would go for "official" rather than "also known as" because there hasn't been enough time passed to assess whether the new name (combining the Welsh name for mountains with "National Park" in English) is being widely used.

I would go for "...officially known as Bannau Brycheiniog National Park since April 2023...". Titus Gold (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Given that, apparently, the legal name has not changed, perhaps something like:

"... trading as Bannau Brycheiniog National Park since April 2023..."

or

"... branded as Bannau Brycheiniog National Park since April 2023..."

-- DeFacto (talk). 15:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Trading sounds too corporate IMO. Prefer branded/renamed as, although open to "officially (known as)", but that could be confused with legal names, but that confusion is not necessarily a reason not to use it. DankJae 16:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I will apply "branded" for the foreseeable future then. Titus Gold (talk) 22:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

although if we are going for branded, do we need to also include the short name they've used too? "the Bannau". DankJae 22:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

"Branded" isn't the right term, as this isn't a commercial business. The sources say "officially renamed", so we should go with what they say, rather than coming up with our own descriptions. Also, we would need a source explicitly saying that "Brecon Beacons National Park" is still the legal name, rather than assuming it is. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 08:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

In this article on Sky News, the chief executive of the park describes it as its new brand - she says "As we went through the process of looking at the brand and thinking about the kind of park and organisation that we wanted to be...", and she describes "the park's rebranding process". If it looks like a brand, smells like a brand, and the CEO calls it a brand, then why not call it a brand, especially with "officially named" being so ambiguous and liable to be misunderstood? -- DeFacto (talk). 09:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The majority of sources say the park has been "officially renamed", so I don't see why we should go against those. It's not for us to say what we might think they mean. Until we get more clarification, we can only go with what we've got. The term "brand" could be misleading, as it's typically used for businesses and commercial entities rather than national parks. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 09:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

No, "Brecon Beacons National Park" should be clause as "also known as" this is not difficult. 2A00:23C4:9B06:EB01:ED4D:E8F1:24E:5710 (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Bannau Brycheiniog is not a "newly made name". The area has always been Bannau Brycheiniog until the name was changed to the Brecon Beacons in the early 20th century. This is simply a reversion to the original welsh name of the area. 2A00:23C7:C698:A401:0:0:0:1C05 (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 18 April 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: N Proposal rejected. I also hereby withdraw this proposal. Move suggestion was premature. Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NAMECHANGES, there is clear opposition to the move. Consensus has supported appropriately waiting to see if this new name will be used by reputable sources. This move could be revisited in the future if deemed necessary. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 16:00, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

---

Brecon Beacons National Park → Bannau Brycheiniog National Park – Per the ongoing discussion on the talk page, the park has officially been renamed as the "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park". We can just as easily keep a redirect from the old to the new name. I believe WP:NAMECHANGES should take precedence over WP:COMMONNAME in this scenario, but let's discuss. ​​​​​​​​​​Pinging users involved in prior discussion for courtesy. — That Coptic Guy (let's talk?) (contribs) 20:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose - WP:NAMECHANGES says If the reliable sources written after the change is announced routinely use the new name, Wikipedia should follow suit and change relevant titles to match. At this point they clearly don't and so we clearly shouldn't. This proposal has come way too soon. We are not there yet. The Park Authority has agreed to use this name exclusively in its material, but it does not have the legal power to make this the legal name. In any case Wikipedia uses WP:COMMONNAME and policy is clear that WP:OFFICIALNAMES should not be used just because they are official, for any value of official. As and when the majority of media and common usage catch up, and the common name changes, then at that point Wikipedia should follow suit. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now - WP:NAMECHANGES cannot apply yet, per above, it is really too soon, so little time has passed to assess whether this name has become accepted by sources in their general/preferred use. WP:NAMECHANGES is merely WP:COMMONNAME but focused on a recent period following an event, and as Sirfurboy states we have to see what sources use, it is too soon. I do believe this will be different and potentially quicker than Snowdonia as this article is specifically on the national park rather than the national park, area and general use as the Snowdonia article merges into one, but it has literally been about a day. The argument used is what I perceive is WP:OFFICIALNAMES which is discouraged. What the park has officially named itself does not matter per WP:OFFICIALNAMES, for the same reason why Turkey remains at Turkey not Türkiye, Ivory Coast at Ivory Coast not Côte d'Ivoire and Bangalore at Bangalore, not Bengaluru, we wait until sources use the official names rather than appease one organisation/government. Some sources are making the move, but not enough coverage aside the name change has so far been published by independent sources to analyse whether they're on board with the change. This ideally should be at least a month from now. Of course I will check to see if enough change has occurred for the 7 days of this RM (25th?) but such a short time, not confident, although ping me if there is a wide array of sources which use the new name in general use (not discussing the name change). Wikipedia follows what the internet uses, not one authority, no matter how authoritative. DankJae 21:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
  • (Hidden) Pinging everyone again attempted in the proposal by the nominator as contributors to the discussion above, as it did not personally work for me (I'm ping-less). ​​​​​​​​​ DankJae 21:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

    oops, @Peeky44: from the discussion above, seems the nominator (see source text) and I have forgotten you, apologies DankJae 22:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

    Approve!

    It's a simple process of changing a name of a place. Wales is changing it's persona and introducing Welsh names instead if English, e.g. Wyddfa instead of Snowdonia. This process has to be regarded as legitimate, just take the example of Turkey the country changing it's name, or the in sports the Washington Redskins becoming the Commanders (Wales is considering changing the national football team name to Cymru). These changes should be taken seriously, and Wikipedia should keep up with the times. Looking at the outcome of this discussion it seems the article will remain the same for now, but for future reference it should be changed one day as a matter of respect. Cltjames (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose for now- As per WP:COMMONNAME. I would like to point out that according to Google Trends, which is a recommended source to determing the most common name for a topic, there are still more searches for "Brecon Beacons National Park" than for "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park". However, it is possible that the average tourist is more likely to search for it as "Brecon Beacons" than by the national park's full name but there are still much more searches for "Brecon Beacons" than for "Bannau Brycheiniog" anyway and it is too early to tell whether the Welsh language name for area has taken precedence in English.Tk420 (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
• Wait - a few weeks. Too early to tell as per WP:NAMECHANGES and WP:COMMONNAME Titus Gold (talk) 22:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now as per others above. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. Plainly, the Anglo-Welsh bastard "Bannau Brycheiniog National Park" is not currently the common name of this park. Obviously we should note the announcement, and perhaps a bit of press reaction, but unless it comes about that the English speaking world starts referring to the NP by this name, the article should not be moved. I think it has to be possible (for a reasonable person, not a (Wiki)lawyer) to consider the flakiness of the argument put forward by the NP spokeslady, something about arguing with a geographical name on etymological grounds. This is not persuasive. It also has to be entirely possible that within a year or few the "official" name will be changed back. We should remember that the Welsh name is "Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog", which I personally will make a great effort to remember. Sadly, I do not expect ever again to visit my favourite mountain, Waen Fach. I just noticed the suggestion of "the Bannau" for short. What a stunningly brilliant idea; I shall immediately begin a campaign to make "The Yama" the English name for Fuji-san. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  I have to say I'm not swayed by this appeal that an official statement from the National Park is somehow "not persuasive", and your tone, dripping with sarcasm, leaves a lot to be desired. Eilidhmax (talk) 15:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  I think you are struggling to realise that the name hasn't changed, the English terminology has now just officially been dropped, it's now "Parc Cenedlaethol Bannau Brycheiniog", that makes "The Brecon Beacons National Park" now effectively an alias, a limitation of WP:COMMONNAME no doubt is the representative sample and insistence on English language sources, because if most of them want to continue with the alias and the other language sources (of which there are statistically less) then don't and adopt the official name instead then which morally takes precedent? the majority or the minority?, the only question one should really be asking is who's sovereign right is it to be naming it in the first place. 2A00:23C4:9B06:EB01:5003:7F81:CF71:DE51 (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  As this is the English language Wikipedia, it is naturally only English language sources that are considered. Presumably in the Welsh language Wikipedia it is only Welsh language sources that are considered, even though they will only be a small minority of the sources covering many/most subjects there. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  I think that is ultimately a distraction from the greater point which is why I was explicit about the fact that the other language sources will always statistically be less, if the discussion were about another factor for example and 60% of a much larger group were insisting one thing and 99% of the much smaller group were saying another, which is the right course of action? this falls into many aspects of discussion including racial, ethnic and cultural topics as i'm sure we are all already aware. 2A00:23C4:9B06:EB01:646C:233C:3319:2A95 (talk) 22:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

  it's also why I said due to the nature of the discussion that the pre name is now effectively an alias, the best way you can facilitate the geographic transition is by treating it as one in the secondary cultural language and redirecting to the main article maintaining all of it's central tenets but still really in this case prioritising the domestic naming whilst also still making the secondary or even for that matter tertiary etc naming conventions, a part of the article heading. 2A00:23C4:9B06:EB01:646C:233C:3319:2A95 (talk) 22:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

  none of this is of course a new revelation because the convention is already fully established in how we treat bilingual road signs. 2A00:23C4:9B06:EB01:646C:233C:3319:2A95 (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose for now, we're going by WP:NAMECHANGES, though I notice Amgueddfa Cymru - Museum Wales has been moved without a peep of opposition. And Millennium Stadium hasn't been moved for six and a half years! But we're literally hours after the name change of Brecon Beacons NP, so it makes complete sense to have amoment of reflection before making a decision. Sionk (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  Open to those two having a review of their names. DankJae 20:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Obviously Amgueddfa Cymru's name change slipped under the radar, unlike Bannau Brycheiniog NP. But I've added a recent BBC news source that prominently uses the new museum branding, so that should satisfy WP:NAMECHANGES in theory. But based on WP:NAMECHANGES, Millennium Stadium is well due for review. Sionk (talk) 20:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

• Wait - I'm seeing plenty of sources such as the BBC (in English) using Eryri for Snowdonia now, but it's much too soon after the authority proposed the change for this one to be showing up in the same way. I do think we should be willing to make these changes, but this proposal is a bit too early. (And can we not refer to Anglo-Welsh hybrid names as 'bastards', please? It doesn't help the discussion at all, it's potentially inflammatory, and it's not exactly welcoming to users like me from Anglo-Welsh backgrounds.) GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

  I have another point you can raise in response to users who refer to the use of hybrid names as "bastardisation" of language. As well as being emotive, the use of such terminology does not sound neutral when editors on Wikipedia are meant to try to maintain a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) including in article titles (see WP:NPOVNAME). The earliest I recall seeing common hybrid names being referred to as "bastardisation" is in Talk: River Dyfi in which someone thought the use of "River Dyfi" was a horrible mixture of Welsh and English (which again does not sound neutral) as opposed to "Afon Dyfi" or "River Dovey" although the current tile of that article was later accepted as the common name for the river (in Wales anyway) in Talk:River Dyfi#Requested move 28 July 2019. Another point you can raise, which I used in that same move discussion, is the fact that many businesses in Wales use Welsh names with English words in their names e.g. Dyfi Wholefoods in Machynlleth, Henllan Bakery or the Llangollen Railway. Another point you can raise is the fact Wikipedia is not censored (see WP:NOTCENSORED) and some articles have titles that some readers find offensive e.g. articles about swear words or food and drink items named after places that have changed their names when the names of such items do not tend to be as changeable e.g. chicken Kiev, Bombay mix or Ceylon tea.Tk420 (talk) 13:34, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. No evidence that the WP:COMMONNAME in English has changed. Kahastok talk 17:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
• Wait per all above. Additionally, if a name change takes place in the future, why Bannau Brycheiniog National Park rather than Bannau Brycheiniog (used centrally by the park's website)? U-Mos (talk) 10:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Parc Cenedlaithol Bannau Brycheiniog

I vigorously opposed changing the article to the "having-parents-who-are-not-legally-married-to-each-other" Anglo-Welsh form, but the Welsh name should surely be in the article, given that a very high proportion (not 100%) of the park is in Wales. I don't want to edit the article immediately (I just reverted someone "correcting" the name), but please comment. Imaginatorium (talk) 07:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

But it is in there, in the infobox. It is also overkill. "Parc cenedlaethol" (note correct spelling) is just Welsh for national park, so the Welsh name is Bannau Brycheiniog, and that is all that really needs to be there. That is very prominently in the first line. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

And to note that the entire park is in Wales - 100% of it. Geopersona (talk) 07:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

And just to note that it isn't 100% in Wales: the National Park includes the eastmost ridge of the Black Mountains, (locally known as the "Cat's back") and the Olchon Valley, which are in Herefordshire. The national border runs down the ridge to the west of the Olchon valley. Imaginatorium (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I believe it stops at the border, although be free to provide a source stating it is partly in England.

Ofc, the English terms used are included as this is English Wikipedia, the Welsh yes should be included somewhere in the article as it is used in Wales, although could be moved to body or footnoted if determined to clutter the lead. Which I assume is why it was removed? Wouldn’t mind it back as a note.

If the “Anglo-Welsh” name is used, then it should be included. If the marital comment is an expression of personal dislike of the term, that does not matter. If sources and the park use it, it should be mentioned as a WP:ALTNAME. It being the title is determined whether it is the pre-dominant one.

Plus this article no longer exists, so not sure where this discussion is going. DankJae 12:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Ha - yes, DankJae - perhaps only of historical interest so far as this article title is concerned but for the record, it is most certainly wholly within Wales - good luck Imaginatorium with finding references for part being in England given that the area was designated by statute in 1957 as terminating at the national border, has always been shown on Ordnance Survey maps as doing just that, there is no involvement of Herefordshire County Council in its financing, nor representation of any non-Welsh authority on its board unlike the various Welsh authorities from Mons CC west to Carms CC. Yes, the pre-designation proposal for a 'Brecon Beacons and Black Mountains National Park (that was the working title) extended across the border but did not end up that way because (I understand) it was felt to be an administratively inconvenient arrangement. Visitors may well imagine the Cat's Back and Olchon Valley to be a part of the Park; they are very much part of the same landscape but (sadly perhaps), are not in the BBNP. Geopersona (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh goodness. Yes, I checked an old map, and the national park area stops in the middle of the Black Mountains. I suppose I am so used to being told that the national park includes the Black Mountain, Fforest Fawr, the Brecon Beacons, and the Black Mountains, that I sort of assumed this meant it was true. It seems to me that the current merging of the np/pc article into the more general geographic article is a disaster, because it makes "Brecon Beacons", or "Bannau Brycheiniog" if you like, refer to three different geographical areas. Imaginatorium (talk) 16:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Agree with the merger causing a lot of overlap between the three. May be in the future Bannau Brycheiniog (area and national park) and Brecon Beacons (range) could be separate articles. DankJae 10:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Bannau Brycheiniog name

For those following Welsh news, it may have become increasingly apparent that the term Bannau Brycheiniog now seems to be the most commonly used name, particularly this month.

See some of these recent examples:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/whats-on/travel/bannau-brycheiniog-named-new-york-28422186

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/travel/places-to-travel-destinations-2024.html

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/tv/bbc-one-show-welsh-ex-28418282 Titus Gold (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

To be the common name it would have to be the common name as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources. Not limited to Welsh news, nor even to Wales. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

This article doesn't exist. Whether to refer to the NP differently still needs more than three sources, which as stated above don't show a "significant majority", but it is getting there. These sources still use Brecon Beacons [2] [3] [4] [5], but yes both my selection and yours can be WP:CHERRYPICKING which is why a more general analysis is needed. DankJae 12:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)