Talk:History of Plaid Cymru

Ideologies of the Presidents

I've been reading this article and I have to say that it is very helpful and informative, and for the most part admirably neutral in tone. However the table of leaders giving the political ideology seems a bit problematic. It is uncited and therefore looks like original research. This may be a bit oversensitive but I detect a slight tendency to make a political point about the successes of the various leaders compared with their ideologies (this could be jumping to conclusions). Sam Blacketer 22:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Sam for your review! I agree with you, it does feel as if origional research. The idea to have 'ideology' as a catagory stemmed from this statement found in a very early draft on another page (not my contrabution though):

"Though Wigley described his own politics as right-wing, at the time he represented a moderate, pragmatic social-democracy policy, in sharp contrast with rival candidate Dafydd Elis Thomas' far-left socialism."

I have not yet fully fleshed this section out, but feel it does need more sourcing. I do believe that having their ideology as a catagory is valid however, as with most political parties there are sometimes seemingly opposing positions under a wider umbrellia. But lacking definate sources, I will remove them.

Continue to review for other issues!Drachenfyre 22:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The statement itself - about Wigley's ideology - is, I'm sure, both true and informative. It's just finding a way of evidencing it that's the issue. Deb 12:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Article formatting

I've just spent a few hours copyediting and reformatting the article. There's quite a lot still to be done, but I haven't any more time at the moment. If anyone else wants to do some too, here are a few points that I've been applying:

1. As stated by the peer reviewer, references should come after the sentence punctuation - i.e. don't put the reference between the bulk of the sentence and the full stop.
2. There's a fair bit of American English crept into the article (Princess Di being killed in "an auto accident", American spellings and standard punctuation (putting the closing full stop inside quoted text, for example)). As this article is on a British subject, per WP:ENGVAR policy we should be using British English. See American and British English differences if necessary.
3. I've made the reference list 2-column to save some space. Oh, and can we please stop using all-numeric dates in extraction dates in references - in the example below it's not at all clear whether the reference was extracted on 11th January or 1st November 2007.
4. I've made a start on using common links to references. That is, if the same reference is used several times in the article, don't duplicate it. e.g. if we have the reference: <ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1818955.stm Q&A: 'Garbagegate' Thursday, 14 February, 2002 extracted 11-01-07]</ref> several times in the article, then in one occurrence put:
   <ref name="garbagegate">[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1818955.stm Q&A: 'Garbagegate' Thursday, 14 February, 2002 extracted 11-01-07]</ref> (the name can be anything as long as it's unique), then for all other places where that link is needed simply put <ref name="garbagegate" />
   Instead of giving each reference a separate number and entry in the reflist, you will get a single reference number with the suffixes a,b,c... appearing in the reflist. I've reduced the size of the article by over 3000 bytes today simply by using this technique.
5. If we ever want to put this article forward for GA or FA, then any spaces between the ends of sentences and their associated references will have to be removed.

By the way, all the links in the "Bards under the beds" section all merely link to the front page of the South Wales Police website. i'm not sure if it's possible to link to a more direct URL within the site, or if these links should simply be removed, but they're not very useful as they stand. -- Arwel (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've just finished reformatting to my satisfaction. There may still be the odd occasion of a full stop or comma included within a quotation mark, but I think I've caught nearly all of them. Could someone look at reference 22 "Canadine op cit" which doesn't appear to be previously cited?! Regards, -- Arwel (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:D.J. Williams 1936.jpg

Image:D.J. Williams 1936.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Cymdeithas-logo.svg

The image Image:Cymdeithas-logo.svg 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.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Walescw.jpg
• Image:Saunders Lewis 1936.jpg
• Image:Plaid.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

DrFrench Targeting Plaid Membership images

DrFrench is targeting Plaid images for deletion without posting flags or posting on the discussions page. I object to this, as Crown Copyright allows us to use these images for Encylopedia purposes.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 21:51, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record, I'm not 'targeting' anything, I'm merely complying with Wikipedia policy on the use of non-free media - see WP:NONFREE. I have noted this clearly in my edit summaries and posted on your talk page to advise you and point you in the right direction so you can see for yourself.

Crown Copyright does not allow free use and is not compatible with the GFDL (this is actually noted on the copyright tag on the image page of each of the affected images). To claim fair-use for a non-free image requires completion of a valid fair-use rationale template for each and every article that the image is used in. Without such a fair-use rationale, the image should be removed from the relevant articles - this does not require discussion or tagging. Wikipedia regards non-free images of living people as 'replaceable' - as in you or I could go out, take a photo of that person, upload the photo to Wikipedia and license it under a GFDL-compatible licence. As the non-free image is replaceable, it would not be possible to create a valid fair-use rationale for its use. That is why those images have been tagged for deletion.

You'll notice that I only removed the images of contemporary politicians, not those of historical politicians. Where the subject of the image is dead, then it may be possible to create a valid fair-use rationale for the use of a non-free image. I also removed the S4C logo, as again it has no fair-use rationale for inclusion in this article - and it's unlikely that you can create one, as it does not add substantially to this article and is used merely for decoration. (Obviously it's easy to create a fair-use rationale for using it in the S4C article, but not here.)

Repeatedly adding back images that violate copyright is disruptive editing which could lead to you being blocked from Wikipedia, so please don't do it. All it does is make things harder for other Wikipedians to 'tidy up' afterwards and makes the atmosphere a bit less pleasant for all concerned. Thanks. DrFrench (talk) 22:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

DrFrench already deleted Adam Price's image from Wikicommons that he and his office had posted up, even though it met all requirements! It was done recently. I will rewrite Mr Price to have his office reupload the image.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 11:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

If you are removing these images truely in good faith, and in accordance with wiki policy, for some reason that they do not meet wiki standards, then I sincerly apologize for my rash rush to judgement. I am not offering this as an excuse, but the pages for Plaid have been vandalized and vandalized often, with much misinterpertation. Because you did not post any warning boxes, which seems standard, it raised alarm bells at a questionable motive.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 15:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Dr French's interpretation is indeed correct. Crown Copyright images are considered as Fair use by Wikipedia and must follow Wikipedia:Non-free content and related policies. The specific point in this case is:

"Unnaceptable uses:

12. Pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) would serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image. This includes non-free promotional images."

If you have a reason why Wikipedia policy should not apply in this case, please discuss it here before reverting again. Regards. Road Wizard (talk) 18:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Claim that " Burke's peerage links the Anwyl family of Tywyn as dynastic successors of Owain Gwynedd of the House of Aberffraw, "

We've been through this elsewhere. Source 1 - Burke's peerage online - so far as I know, does not use the phrase 'dynastic successors' Source 2 - can be searched here [1] - can't find any mention of Anwyl Source 3 - "Lewis, Hurbert; The Ancient Laws of Wales, 1889. Chapter VIII: Royal Succession; Rules to Marriage; Alienation pgs 192–200. According to Hurbert Lewis, though not explicitly codified as such by Hywel Dda, the edling, or Heir apparent, was by convention and custom the eldest son of the prince and entitled to inheirit the position and title as "head of the family" from the father. Effectively primogeniture with local variations. However, all sons were provided for out of the lands of the father and in certin circumstances so too were daughters. Additionally, sons could claim materinal patromony through their mother in certin circumstances." this is apparently used to prove something, which is classic original research. No suggestion it specificlly makes this claim. Source 4- A History of Wales from the Earliest Times to the Edwardian Conquest By John Edward Lloyd which can be searched http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uuZpGDGcOWAC&pg=PA272&dq=A+History+of+Wales;+From+the+Norman+Invasion+to+the+Edwardian+Conquest,&hl=en&ei=N8m5TPjiKseo4AbirLnXDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=Anwyl&f=false[ here], again I can find no mention of Anwyl family.

I'm reverting this claim for two reasons, one is it appears to be OR, the second and equally valid one is that there is no specific connection made to Plaid Cymru, the subject of this article. Dougweller (talk) 16:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I dispute. Burke's Peerage links the direct familial decendents of Owain Gwynedd living today. This is important in the discussion of a restored monarchy in Wales. Source 2 A History of Wales gives more info on the Aberffraw family, their history for Wales, and buttresses Owain Gwynedd and decendents. Source 3 details the laws of succession before the Edwardian Conquest of Wales. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 16:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

See WP:NORN#Editor arguing that he can use a book describing Welsh law to make a claim for dynastic succession Dougweller (talk) 18:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Plaid Cymru. 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/20070928162655/http://www.comisiwnrichard.gov.uk/content/template.asp?ID=%2Fcontent%2Fevidence%2Foral%2Fwlga%2Findex-w.asp to http://www.comisiwnrichard.gov.uk/content/template.asp?ID=%2Fcontent%2Fevidence%2Foral%2Fwlga%2Findex-w.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 21:23, 4 November 2017 (UTC)