Talk:Unionism in Wales

Wales Mid‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Confusion

This article confuses support for membership of the United Kingdom with 'unionism' as a political creed. If it is to confirm with its title then it needs to deal with unionism as in the Conservative and Unionist Party, which is the UK context for that word. If it is about Wales in the UK then the language needs to change drastically. The Welsh Labour Party for example is for continued membership of the UK, but historically is an anti-unionist party ----Snowded ^TALK 18:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify - do you mean that the term "Unionism" relates specifically to the union between Ireland and GB? That's historically true in the sense that the "Unionist" part of the Conservative and Unionist Party took its name from the Liberal Unionist Party, which was set up in opposition to home rule in Ireland. But I doubt if many people know that, without checking. The term "unionist" is now used in a wider sense, to cover retaining the unity of the UK as a whole - for example here, here, here, etc. It seems like the appropriate term to use, but clearly needs good explanation and references in this (and other) articles. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It needs far more explanation and we seem to be seeing edits that attempt to make the Scottish referendum result appear as a victory for Unionism in the sense that it is used by the Unionist Parties in Northern Ireland and the Unionist Party (that merged into the Conservative Party last century) in Scotland. Given the history here we need to be very very careful how we use language. ----Snowded ^TALK 00:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I confess that I was barely aware of Unionist Party (Scotland). Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All part of fairly recent history and you and I are of an age! ----Snowded ^TALK 09:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support for the Union (section)

~~There seems to be a politically motivated wiping of information from here regarding polling on support for the union~~. The information on here is factual, referenced, clear and does not make any partisan points. ~~I cannot help but wonder that if the facts showed clear support for Welsh independence, certain contributors would be much happier for it to be kept...~~ WatermillockCommon (talk) 08:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is not at all helpful to try to judge edits on the basis of the presumed political views of editors, and I suggest that you withdraw that comment per WP:NPA. But, I agree that there is no reason to remove referenced information on recent polls, apparently simply on the basis that they are recent. Information from a reputable 2014 poll has at least as much encyclopedic merit as a 2001 poll. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very happy to withdraw that comment, and I apologise if any offence was caused. I wrote that out of frustration that researched and referenced information was being wiped from the page, rather than constructively edited. WatermillockCommon (talk) 09:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for withdrawing that comment. This is all very recent and very volatile, picking two polls and adding commentary about contradiction is very dubious. You don't know if the polls had the same basis for starters. ----Snowded ^TALK 15:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]