User talk:Pondle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Pondle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Latinus 22:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Swansea Economy
Thank you for your excellent work in the Economy of Swansea and Economy of Wales. It's very interesting reading for me. (Sloman 15:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC))
No problem. BTW it was mainly down to the new Welsh Assembly Government economic development strategy, "Wales A Vibrant Economy" - it actually has some very good analysis in it (a change for the Assembly).Pondle 16:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, excellent work on the Economy of Swansea section. The section is looking quite large now in proportion to the article on the Swansea Unitary Authority region. Do you think it would be ok to split this section off to a new article called Economy of Swansea? and just to leave a summary with a link on the Swansea article to the more detailed article. (Avebury 11:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC))
[edit] Finasteride
You were right in removing the paragraph from finasteride that has been inserted so many times. I'm not sure why my edit led to its reintroduction; it may have to do with my being stalked by WP:TOJO, a rather prolific sockpuppeteer and vandal. The article is protected again now. JFW | T@lk 06:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cardiff
I'm glad you took out the section "Cardiff could also be included with Newport and other large towns in the region in a much larger metropolitan area with a population of around 1,400,000 (South-East Wales)"....it was really getting on my nerves...calling Newport part of Cardiff metropolitan area is insulting to Newport (and I live in Cardiff)...any way good work Seth Whales 09:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Stalking
Rather than checking what edits I've been doing and undoing them (often for no reason), please could you make constructive edits on Wikipedia. Thank you Welshleprechaun (talk) 20:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Specific changes I've made are explained in my contributions list and all are intended to be constructive. I was concerned by your use of inconsistent stats and misunderstanding of (admittedly confusing) administrative geography in the Swansea article, which prompted me to modify a number of other articles you've recently updated. No malice intended. I believe that my edits help to make the respective articles more accurate, informative and objective, and they comply with good practice re: citation of sources. If you have specific objections to particular text or sources we can discuss in the relevant articles.Pondle (talk) 22:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Swansea
Ah, I didn't mean it as a seperate legal entity, I edited it to clarify that it was located in the county, rather then the actual city but it ironically leads to ambiguation. Welshleprechaun (talk) 14:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I do not believe that there is a hard-and-fast divide between the 'city' and the rest of the 'county' since local government reorganisation in 1996. The former Swansea district had city status and was styled "City of Swansea", but that entity was abolished in 1996. The ONS has defined an area of Swansea as "urban", but as with Cardiff and other cities, this urban area isn't co-terminous with the administrative geography and is only a statistical construct.Pondle (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Since 2001, more recent and accurate official estimates have been given such as Cardiff Unitary Authority (2006) as 317,500. Do you know if Swansea has a more recent figure as well? Anyway, to keep things clear, I think we should only compare city propers rather than unitary authorities and particularly not urban areas because the Swansea Urban Area include Neath, Port Talbot etc which are not even in the Swansea unitary authority, the page which we are putting these comparisons on.Welshleprechaun (talk) 19:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually, yes we should compare unitary authorities. Sorry Welshleprechaun (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you reinstating the 'Three day Blitz' I previously changed to dates. There seem to be plenty of citations to it, although none are referenced in the article. Canol (talk) 21:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bay Pointe
How is it giving it undue weight? It's likely that Bay Point will be built and will be taller. You may not like that but that's how it is. Welshleprechaun (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
For the record, I don't care either way - but please note that the granting of planning permission does not necessarily imply a start of construction. A significant period often elapses between the two; sometimes developments with planning consent are not actually built! Pondle (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Disagreements
It seems that we have some disagreements on certain articles. Rather than letting this deteriate quality of Wikipedia, I suggest that when either of us makes an edit to which the other disagrees, we should discuss it on the talk page rather than revert it straight away and cause an edit war. If we then don't reach a compromise, we should then ask for adminstrator intervention. What do you say? Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Agreed.Pondle (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cardiff
I disagree with your removal of a sentence in Cardiff. It can't really be called POV because it's true. There's no more important place in Wales when it comes to shopping, media, politics etc. Welshleprechaun (talk) 22:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
My main problem was with the IP's bias - describing Cardiff as a "major UK financial centre", without substantiation, is unacceptable POV. Cardiff is already described as the capital of Wales and home of the National Assembly in the intro, so I don't see your problem re: the city's political role in Wales. Pondle (talk) 17:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Thankfully this page and Wales have now been semi-protected for three months so that should put an end to this IP vandal business for a while. Bettia (talk) 09:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Primate city
Look you may not like it but Cardiff is the primate city in Wales. There can be no arguement for any other city in Wales to challenge that position, just as in Northern Ireland. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
This seems to me to be an example of POV. You have not cited an external reference to support your contention that Cardiff qualifies as a primate city. See the discussion on the Cardiff talk page where I expand on this point.Pondle (talk) 23:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
What exactly is your arguement against it being a primate city? Cardiff is:
- the financial, polticial and population centre of Wales
- almost twice the size of the next largest city - around 305,000 to Swansea's 169,000
- expressive of national capacity and feeling
...and just to clarify, we are talking about the primate city of Wales, not the UK, as per the list on primate city. It doesn't necessarily have to be already cited by an academic source as a primate city, just like other primate cities, a slong as they fufill the criteria, which Cardiff does. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Also, if you want to remove Cardiff from the list of primate cities because of your argument that there's no academic citation, I suggest you abide by the guidelines of not giving undue weight and spend the night searching the internet for evidence of citations of other cities' status as primate city and remove every other city on that list which isn't cited as one. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
We've discussed previously how Cardiff isn't "at least twice the size" (Jefferson's criteria) of Swansea. As for it being "exceptionally expressive of national feeling" (Jefferson's criteria) - that's arguable. Cardiff was part of 'British Wales' in Dennis Balsom's famous 'Three Wales' model of identity in Wales, and a majority in the city voted against the establishment of the Assembly. Unless you can find a reputable source which supports your contention that Cardiff is a primate city, this is simply a matter of opinion.Pondle (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Please stop waffling. You are missing the point that, and I quote from Primate city, a primate city is a financial, political and population centre...not rivaled in any of these aspects by any other city in that country. Also, it doesn't have to be twice the size. It is undoubtable that Cardiff fufils this criteria. A source is simply not needed, just as it isn't needed for the other cities on that page. See the page! Please keep your anti-Cardiff POV out of Wikipedia contributions. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for requesting the 3rd opinion. I added primate city of Wales because we aren't talking about the UK, where it clearly is London. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Also I ask that you don't revert the edits on Cardiff and Primate city. The last thing we need is an edit war and break of the 3RR. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I am not going to edit these pages until a consensus emerges. I respect your opinion that Cardiff is a primate city, but I disagree for the reasons I stated above and on the Cardiff talk page. I'd like to expand upon these for the benefit of the debate:
- 1. Size. Using consistent data, Cardiff is not at least twice the size of Swansea. If we compare Census 2001 stats for built-up areas: Swansea - 169,880 Cardiff - 292,150; Census 2001 stats for wider urban areas: Swansea - 270,506 Cardiff - 327,706;[1] Census 2001 stats for local authorities: Swansea - 223,301 Cardiff - 305,353.[2]
- 2. Political significance. No-one disputes the fact that Cardiff is home to the National Assembly of Wales and most of the Assembly Government senior civil servants, but remember that unlike some other capitals, the Welsh Assembly Government also has national administrative offices in other towns and cities (including Merthyr, Carmarthen, Newtown, Swansea, and soon Aberystwyth and Llandudno). Also, while Cardiff has the lion's share of Welsh national institutions, some are outside the city - the National Library of Wales is in Aberystwyth, the Wales National Pool in Swansea, the National Velodrome is in Newport, various bodies like the Urdd, different unions etc. have their HQs outside Cardiff.
- 3. Expression of national feeling. This is subjective, but I think that the sense of Welsh national identity in Cardiff is arguable, as witnessed by the 1999 devolution referendum result when a majority in Cardiff voted against devolution - see Denis Balsom's Three Wales model discussed [here http://www.swansea.ac.uk/history/research/Wales%20the%20Postnation.pdf]
BTW Please don't accuse me of anti-Cardiff POV, I feel that that is unjustified.Pondle (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Third opinion
I'll be giving a third opinion over at Talk:Cardiff#Primate city?. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wales intro
I didnt mean to take so long with this, but was distracted with editing elsewhere. What about:
... vibrant music scene and engaging sporting events?
or
... vibrant music scene and energetic sporting events
rather then "... vibrant music scene and dynamic sporting venues".
Drachenfyre (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
"Vibrant" could be construed as POV unless external sources have described the Welsh music scene as such. "Energetic" doesn't seem to adequately describe, say, a rugby international. If I was forced to choose, and accept a potential POV, I would just say "vibrant music scene and sporting events." But I would prefer to talk about what makes music and sport in Wales distinctive from other places, rather than finding 'positive' adjectives. The question is, what is it? What are the unique indigenous traditions? Pondle (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I think we (the community) need to look again at the Wales intro... I'm concerned by the peacock terms that seem to be proliferating - we've got a "world-renowned" waterfront in there now - as well as a few unreferenced terms that could be construed as opinion ("vibrant") and others that aren't meaningful ("engaging"). The part about national identity is weak as well - "later influenced by other European historical events" - which ones? How did they influence Welsh national identity? I understand that this is supposed to be an intro, and not go into much detail, but surely we can do better than what's there at the moment. I know these criticisms aren't very constructive, but I wanted to highlight the problems. I know we're supposed to be "bold", but as a courtesy to the regular editors of this popular section, I'm reluctant to take the initiative in making revisions until consensus emerges. Pondle (talk) 21:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello Pondle, I understand your concerns, again. If you would like, sure, cut-out all descriptive verbs. I wont stop you. I think the intro is tight and well organized, especially compared to other country pages, and especially to Scotland's intro. I feel it is appropriate the way it is, you do not. In terms of European historical events, if you wish to flood the intro paragraphs with every single event then do so (the link to Professor John Davies History of Wales is provided). This was the delima before, when editors felt compelled to write out the history of Wales within the opening paragraphs. I do not think it is necessary to be that verbose myself. I gave the intro a try, if you can do better, so be it.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 23:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- You know, why not work on the body of the page, rather then the intro? Why focus so exclusively there, when we need more work on the body? I do not understand. There is far more work to be done in the body of the page then on the intro right now. It is in the body of the page, under history, that you sould explain what European historical events influenced Wales, not the intro paragraphs. The intro should highlight with the briefest of descriptions, using the verbs vibrant music scene and engaging sporting events, nor World reknowned waterfront (which was a compromise for someone else who wanted that in, thus preventing further reverts), is not attempting to introduce weasle words. Why not concentrate your efforts on the body?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 23:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Look, I had to sleep on it. I didnt mean to be so sharp with my comments above. I am sorry. I do not want to lose you as an editor on Wales, nor do I wish to depart as an editor there.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 04:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Grrrr! I removed the offensive 'weasle words', grrrr! LOL. It reads boringly. I am still uncertin about added more information on history though.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 10:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- You know, why not work on the body of the page, rather then the intro? Why focus so exclusively there, when we need more work on the body? I do not understand. There is far more work to be done in the body of the page then on the intro right now. It is in the body of the page, under history, that you sould explain what European historical events influenced Wales, not the intro paragraphs. The intro should highlight with the briefest of descriptions, using the verbs vibrant music scene and engaging sporting events, nor World reknowned waterfront (which was a compromise for someone else who wanted that in, thus preventing further reverts), is not attempting to introduce weasle words. Why not concentrate your efforts on the body?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 23:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Moderation call
Hello Pondle! Your edits are great, and I know they are important. Per the borders, I have left this notice on various bords and on other contributers I know here to widen the debate some. As you can see, if the consensus for the Wales community is that they do not wish to have a distincitive border and title header, I shall withdrawl my advocacy for it. But, I believe there will be others who do think it is a positive change, and have invited them to contribute to the debate
Cymru
WalesWales
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Greetings Wales community! We need your Voice! We need mediation and impute from the wider community who regularily contribute to articals of Wales interest. At issue is the use of a distinctive border around the country info box, as well title bar. The issue seems to have become a crusade against Wales by certin editors, who have almost never contributed to and practically never visit (by their own admission) the Wales page. I do not tust the motives of the editor, whome seems to be stalking my edits and reverting them purposefully. This editor even dismisses the colors of Wales red and green saying that Wales does not have any official colors! (quote: "I imagine that this use of "national colours" (of which Wales has none by custom or tradition)...", Unfortunatly, I must deal with these cyber bullying tactics if I am to contribute here. However, I implore the Wales commmunity to weigh in on the topic of allowing info box borders and title headers. Please submit views on Template talk:Infobox Country and talk:Wales. If the wider Wales community decides not to support a border and title header color in the colors of Wales then I will withdrawal from this position. However, I and other editors do feel it makes the Wales page far more distinctive. Sincerly, David Llewellyn♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 02:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gowerscapes
Can you please tell me why you have removed my latest entry - I have edited the entry - Gowerscapes - photography and guide to the Gower Peninsula. This is a true description of the site. What do you want me to put instead??????????????????????? Alunmj —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alunmj (talk • contribs) 13:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cardiff peer review
Hi Pondle
Last week I put in a request for Cardiff to get a peer review, and it's now received some comments. I'm just about to make a start on them, but it's by no means a one-man job! There's probably one or two things on that list which will need a bit of brainstorming, so any help would be appreciated!