Talk:Rhosneigr

Map

The map doesn't look right - see http://www.multimap.com/world/GB/Wales/Gwynedd/Rhosneigr for comparison. PhilKnight (talk) 22:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right! Fixed it. -- Bobyllib (talk) 13:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Naming of places - page protection

Why the protection of the page until November 2020? The conventions of Wikipedia are not being contravened by using the most common usage of names in Ynys Mon. Wikipedia is ‘anyone can edit’. Davdevalle (talk) 18:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 August 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Davdevalle (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Over zealous protectionism Davdevalle (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

      I know how to edit thanks. 
       On the talk page I have raised this matter.  I suggest that an arbitrary judgement has denied editing the page freely. 
        Why do I have to go through a censor?  Wikipedia - anyone can edit.  Why can’t I edit this page?
        A 3 month extended protection is over the top.  They have not put any reasons on this talk page. That is the proper practice.  Davdevalle (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my edits and that of another user which have been deleted, could you point to the policy on using names in the traditional language of the area, a language where a significant part of the population speak that language. The only policies I can find refer to foreign languages, but we're not discussing a foreign language here. (Incidentally, I noted in my last comment that I would refrain from further editing until I had a clear statement of policy. Being labeled as 'persistent disruptive editing' is inappropriate.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwel2 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No rationale on the talk page by an ‘administrator’ - misuse of Wikipedia language policy to stop editors improving a page. “Administrator intervention in complex disputes is an art, not a science. It requires a calm demeanor in the face of bitter attacks, an excellent knowledge of the wikiprocess, a good sense of judgment, and a light touch. When at all possible, administrator intervention should aim to guide the participants towards resolving their own disputes rather than imposing the administrator's view of "what the article should be." Davdevalle (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Placenames

Where place-names are commonly Anglicised, the Welsh names should also be provided for historical/cultural context, and for the guidance of residents and visitors. Where indigenous names are in use, they should not be Anglicised unnecessarily. Wikipedia is a source of supposedly reputable information. It is not a tourist brochure. Kindly reinstate, or allow Gorwel2 to reinstate, his changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moelwnion (talk • contribs) 19:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The place names used in Wikipedia articles reflect the language of the Wikipedia - in this case English. The use of place names should also follow WP:COMMONNAME and their existence and use should be supported by reliable source in English. These policies were produced by much discussion before reaching the current consensus. It is always possible to change a consensus, but this needs to be done with rational argument and discussion, not by unilateral change at the article level. I do also have concern that we now have three user names and one IP account taking up this issue. It might be prudent to read socking policy before inventing yet another SPA. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 19:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"I do also have concern that we now have three user names and one IP account taking up this issue". Why is this a concern, please? With the reference the socking policy, it sounds like you are insinuating that there are not four different people engaging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwel2 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Velella’s accusation of socking to Gorwel2 is a serious accusation. Unless this accusation is withdrawn it will have to be referred to other editors.Davdevalle (talk) 21:32, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to open an SPI please feel free to do so. My own opinion, for what little it may be worth, is that, if there has been sock-puppetry or meat-puppetry, then it may have been either unintended, or done without knowledge of the consequences or out of anger or frustration. It did not strike me as a problem of any significance for the wider Wikipedia and that the potential for harm through loss of an editor exceeded the potential for benefit through the blocking of an editor. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:27, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness me. Do you not think that it should be you who opens an investigation of an SPI to get evidence rather than obey your ‘opinion’ as you describe it? Did you request an admin ohnoitsjamie to protect this page for 3 months? Why? Why did you not raise for discussion?Davdevalle (talk) 23:06, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Placenames

I am commenting as Moel Wnion. I am not a sock-puppet, and I am not the same person as Gorwel2. In general, please be advised that when commenting in English on various parts of the world, it may be necessary to reference both Anglicised and indigenous placenames, to maintain accuracy, and to avoid confusion. In Wales, where Welsh placenames and the rights of Welsh-speakers, are protected by law, it is a legal necessity. I reiterate that Wikipedia is allegedly a source of reputable and relevant information. I am humiliated by the necessity to engage in this discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:F910:3900:D3E9:4F5D:9A43:1E3C (talk) 20:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bilingual Policy on Wikipedia

I refer objectors to the en.wikipedia.org article on Tel Aviv <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Aviv>, where the Anglicised form, Tel Aviv, is followed by the Hebrew form, תֵּל־אָבִיב–יָפוֹ‎. Please withdraw these nonsensical arguments against the use of native names in English-language articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:F910:3900:D3E9:4F5D:9A43:1E3C (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The disagreement about edits should have gone to dispute resolution for neutral assessment. Instead Velella exercised their power as am administrator to protect the page. This was heavy handed and the administrator, ohnoitsjamie, should be reported for assessment and resolution. This will be done unless the administrator accepts this requires further consultation by Wikipedia editors. Davdevalle (talk) 21:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am not an admin and never have been. I am just an editor who has been here a while and who has patiently learnt the rules, policies and guidance and have applied them to the best of my ability to help provide an authoritative, comprehensive and consistent Encyclopaedia. It is also worth reading the discussion at the Teahouse here where Nick Moyes, a very experienced editor and an admin confirms the current policies and guidelines on place names. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commenting as Moel Wnion again. I must ask those who oppose the use of bilingual policy in Wikipedia articles concerning a bilingual nation to read, and seriously consider, Wikipedia's articles on cultural imperialism and racism, as well as gaining a basic acquaintance with Welsh history in the modern age. Failing this, I expect, as a matter of basic, civilised morality, this humiliating argument to be resolved at a higher level. Failing this, I will myself visit every page to which I have contributed on the culture or literature of Wales, and I will delete my changes, making clear, on the talk pages, that I am doing so in protest against Wikipedia's language policies. I must reiterate my utter disgust, my deep-seated anger and contempt at the level to which this discussion has descended.