Talk:Cornwall/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Economy

I think facts about poverty and deprivation and prosperity are probably best put here under Economy.

I have amended the references to Cornwall as "the poorest" to "one of the poorest."

Generalised judgements on the prosperity and deprivation of Cornwall are of limited value because the official statistics at council district and 'sub-ward' (super output area, SOA) level show that there is a large range within Cornwall, even within wards. I think to use only the per capita GVA data is too restrictive.

Other official data - the indices of multiple deprivation, free school meals, child poverty, education spending, health, etc - do NOT show Cornwall and the areas of Cornwall to be the poorest in England. They show that some areas of Cornwall are poor, some very poor, and some are among the top half of prosperity. An encyclopedia should acknowledge this variety. Crococolana 16:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added two further references about poverty in Cornwall. Crococolana 12:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this and the link to "LINK": Local Intelligence Network Cornwall. ===Vernon White (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I have updated the data for GVA and GDP. Crococolana 23:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, yesterday I used a wiki-illicit url for the economic figures. I have now removed the url from the references. Crococolana 09:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"The area now known as Cornwall was first inhabited by Neolithic and then Bronze Age peoples, and later (in the Iron Age) by Celts. The Kingdom of Cornwall was an independent entity, often coming into conflict with the expanding kingdom of Wessex: in the reign of King Athelstan the boundary between English and Cornish people was set at the Tamar. It is unclear when Cornwall was absorbed into England, but it certainly was from the mid 11th century. The Cornish language continued to be spoken until the 18th century in the west of Cornwall alongside the predominant English. A revival of Cornish was begun in the early 20th century and has progressed further over recent decades. Today, Cornwall's economy struggles after the decline of the mining and fishing industries, and has become more dependent on tourism. The area is noted for its wild moorland landscapes, its extensive and varied coastline and its mild climate." This passage has altered over the last few days: perhaps it is too detailed but another concern is what is meant by 'Today...{the] economy struggles': is it the period since 2001 or earlier still? Decline in mining and fishing was not something that just happened once.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 21:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

It is referring to now, the present situation. Cornwall's economy is struggling, because of the recent declines of fishing and mining, and has become dependent on tourism. --Joowwww (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Cornwall is also the historic home of the Cornish people

Is this statement necessary? Talskiddy 18:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It seems tautologous to me, unless a Cornish Volk is implied. === Vernon White (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes its needed because the Cornish people are one of the distinct features of Cornwall. Cornwall and the Cornish are intimately connectedBretagne 44 16:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering how useful it was, I've just tidied the lead paragraph, and decided to leave this sentence, but moving it into a more sensible place in the paragraph where it also looks less obtrusive.

The sentence also serves as a way to introduce the Cornish people link.

Mdcollins1984 17:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I wonder what the intended meaning of "historic" is in "historic homeland" and "historic Celtic nations"? The word nowadays means important-in-history and this strikes me as otiose in this context. I suggest we delete the word.Crococolana 23:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Bona Vacantia and Duchy Status

Added the following fact with link plus small modification, it seems not all government bodies are so sure that Cornwall is just an English county:

Cornwall is often described as county of England but some government bodies such as the Treasury Solicitors agency for Bona Vicantia Divison consider The Duchy of Cornwall to comprise the County of Cornwall Bona Vacantia - See Jusrisdiction.

Bretagne 44 21:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a slight misrepresentation of their position. Under 11(i) they state

If the company's last registered office and the asset was in England or Wales (other than in the Duchies of Cornwall or Lancashire)

This makes it clear that they still consider it a county of England as well as part of the duchy. josh (talk) 22:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Yawn:

v) If the company's last registered office and the asset was in the Duchies of Cornwall or Lancashire its assets fall to be dealt with by Messrs Farrer & Co, Solicitors, of 66 Lincolns Inn Fields, London WC2A 3LH. The Duchy of Cornwall comprises the County of Cornwall. The Duchy of Lancaster comprises the Counties of Lancashire, Merseyside and parts of Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Cumbria. Further details as to the precise boundaries of the Duchy can be obtained from the Duchy Office, 1 Lancaster Place, Strand, London WC2E 7ED (tel: 020 7836 8277).

Bretagne 44 20:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The point is that the page considers the duchy of Cornwall part of England. josh (talk) 21:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The exact words of the text are: "If the company's last registered office and asset was in England or Wales (other than in the duchies of Cornwall or Lancashire)..." The words "other than" here mean that the two duchies are in England. Since the text says that the duchy comprises the county, it follows from the text that the county is in England; Cornwall is a county of England. The addition Cornwall is often... should be removed. Crococolana 10:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Cornovii

The present claim that some of the Cornovii emigrated from Wales to Cornwall is too bold. The Cornovii were a tribe in the west midlands, apparently settled from Chester to Gloucester. There was also a tribe called Cornovii in Caithness. We do not know for certain who these people were but a coincidence of name from Caithness to the west Midlands to Cornwall is not evidence of genetic identicality. A more cautious entry is required. Crococolana 10:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I propose to remove the text about the Cornovii: see my arguments above. I also think this aspect is better dealt with in the specialist article on the history of Cornwall rather than in the general article and there the existing entry is suitably cautious. Incidentally, I am uneasy about saying the comment about Cornwall being called West Wales during the heptarchy. The trend in the Old English texts (Anglo-Saxon Chronicles and the charters) until quite late on is to refer to people not teritory, thus the English not England. The references are to the West Welsh rather than to West Wales though I suppose "West Welsh" gets glosssed as West Wales. Crococolana 12:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Demographics

I have removed the phrase "as opposed to British" in the account of the write-in numbers of Cornish as it is misleading. There were numerous alternatives to British on the form - Irish, Indian, Chinese, etc, along with whatever others may have written in under "other." I have added that the 7000 were written in not ticked. Crococolana 15:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Celts

This culture, which has influenced literature, farming, navigation and so much of European life, for 4,000 years, and covers places as diverse as Portugal and Asia Minor, would be worthy of its own project. Modern areas still Celtic include Brittany, Cornwall, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Scotland and Wales. Please weigh in at the proposal Chris 04:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Payton citation

Anyone have a full citation for the reference Cornwall, Peyton, 1998? the closesst I can find are:

• Philip Payton, (1996), Cornwall, Fowey: Alexander Associates, ISBN 1 899526 60 9
• Philip Payton, (1999), The Cornish Overseas, Fowey:Alexander Associates, ISBN 899526 95 1
• Payton, Philip (ed.), (1998), Cornish Studies, second series No. 6 Exeter: University of Exeter Press, ISBN 0859896102
• Payton, P. (ed.), (1997), Cornish Studies, second series No. 5 Exeter: University of Exeter Press, ISBN 0859895513

Lozleader 12:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggest date is wrong, as well as the spelling of the name . . . see list of Publications in WP Article on Philip Payton#Publications.

Cornwall; Fowey : Alexander Associates, 1996 ISBN 1899526609. Revised edition Cornwall : a history , Fowey : Cornwall Editions Ltd, 2004 ISBN 1904880002.

--Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 13:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Spelling

• The only correct spelling of « mineralization » is with a « z », even in British English (see Oxford English Dictionary).
• « exagerated » is unambiguously incorrect.

Elagatis 01:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Like a lot of words, it does depend on which dictionary you use, however the OED might spell it. It does apparently appear to be acceptable to use the 'z' derivative. I did not notice your correction of "exaggerated" when I reverted your edit. Bretonbanquet 13:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Google provides a large number of hits for the "British" spelling of "mineralisation", whatever OED says. The first example cited by OED spells the word with an "s". The OED does not legislate on language.--Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 16:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I would personally prefer the spelling with -z-, but not enough to make a big thing of it. OUP style is to use -z- where there is a choice in -ise/-ize. DuncanHill 16:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Flag

"Commonly understood to represent the white tin metal against the black tin ore, symbolically, however, the flag is said to represent the light of truth shining through the blackness/darkness of evil."

Who by? Is there any evidence for this? Can it be verified?Serpren (talk) 01:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

As the Cornwall#Flag section is a summary of a Main Article Saint Piran's Flag, it does not need to cite references. I will remove the {{Citation needed}} tags from this section.

If the Editor who inserted them can demonstrate that the references to sources are NOT in the Main Article, "Saint Piran's Flag", they should remove the statements from the summary of the Main Article in this section of the "Cornwall article", leaving an explanation on this Talk page Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 20:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment

Hi all, The CornwallWikiproject template has been upgraded to include assessments for all Cornwall-related articles. For those who are interested, you can find more info about this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cornwall/Assessment where you can also find categories for all the different gradings. The extra template parameters can be found at Template:CornwallWikiproject. Right now most articles are in the "unassessed" category, let's try and give all the Cornwall-related articles a rating :-) Cheers, --Joowwww 12:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

List of places in Cornwall

Hi all, I have added the top 15 settlements by population to the page List of places in Cornwall, now that it is linked from the {{Cornwall}} template. There are pictures still needed for Saltash, Bodmin, Liskeard, Hayle and Launceston, if anyone lives in those towns or can find some free images it would be much appreciated! --Joowwww (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Images of all of the required ones are available on the Geographic British Isles web site which we can use. Best to load the images from that site onto Commons so they can be used on all of the projects. If you have problems then select the images you want, give me the numbers and I can load them onto Commons for you. Keith D (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Evil Cornwall

I think there should be a section that elaborates on why Cornwall has been portrayed as evil in stories. In the series "A Dream of Eagles" )by Jack Whyte), Cornwall is ruled by the vicious King Lot of Cornwall. And in the Shakespeare play "The Twelfth Night", and also in the modernized version of the play "She's the Man", the Cornish force/soccer team is shown as rude and unlikeable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.165.195 (talk)

Education section

I can't make head or tail of this paragraph:

Cornwall has a comprehensive education system, with 31 state and 8 independent secondary schools. There are no sixth form colleges, and three FE colleges - Penwith College (a former sixth form college), Cornwall College and Truro College. The Isles of Scilly only has one school. Restormel district has the highest school population, and school year sizes are around 200, with none above 270.

• No sixth form colleges? Redruth School has one, and it can't be the only one.
• "school year sizes are around 200, with none above 270" Was this taken out of context or something? It is incorrect on its own, when I was at school there were well over 300 in the year. --Joowwww (talk) 17:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

• • VIth Form Colleges - there are colleges at some schools - Sir James Smith's School certainly has one (for the time being), but I don't think there are any seperate VIth Form Colleges (there used to be oone at St Austell, but, together with Mid Cornwall College of Further Education (St Austell Tech) it has been merged into Cornwall College. DuncanHill (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Etymology

The etymology section currently reads a bit like a debate. It might be a good place for cleanup by someone who knows more. Thomas B♘talk 02:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Cornish media

For info - I am currently working on South West media on Commons. Specifically I am working up the Cornish page & adding some media that may be more recent &and representative than was used before. I've placed the standard Commons link on the page here but feel free to look around in the Cornwall category there. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Religion

I've removed the stuff about Buddhism, witches etc. Buddhists represent less than 0.2% of the population of Cornwall (2001 census) - less than the national average, and there's nothing particularly Cornish about the statements. These sections have a tendency to become a 'my church/religion' should be mentioned too section far too easily. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmybn (talk • contribs) 16:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Links

What is it with people's refusal to add new links? I suggested two sites, www.visitcornwall.com (official government-run tourist board website) and its independent (and perhaps less doggedly pro-Cornwall) equivalent, www.cornwallinformation.com.

This is not spamming, this is the inclusion of useful resources. It seems people are more interested in removing genuinely useful links which may be in competition with their own dubious external links. Pathetic! Wikipedia has a no-follow attribute anyway.

The internet is an open forum for sharing, Wikipedia is by definition collaborative, and while spamming is to be discouraged, genuinely useful material should be welcomed, not marched off by Hitlers with vested interests! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiminycricket2008 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

You are maybe missing the point of an encyclopaedia. External links are rarely required, if folk can get to Wikipedia they can also handle a Google (or other engine) search which will give up to date links for whatever they are after.

Wikipedia is collaborative - maybe referring to people who do collaborate as "Hitlers" may not be the best way for someone getting into Wikipedia to describe volunteers here. please contribute however with content not links. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

What baffles me is that the links were genuinely useful - and more relevant than the links that were there at the time... and I would say equally as relevant as the laughably parochial "Campaign for a Cornish Assembly" website. It seems this Cornwall page is far more concerned with alienating visitors to Cornwall than attracting them.

My links were informative and valid and I see no valid reason to take them away; certainly I resent being treated like a vandal; it's just a knee-jerk "this must be spam" response. Obviously the two links had not been investigated, otherwise it would be patently obvious that one was the official site of the tourist board (the first port of call, one would think, for further information on Cornwall) and its independent alternative.

If we are going to follow the dogma "Wikipedia is not a link catalogue" (well, dur!) then why have any links at all? No, this is just a nonsense by over-zealous people. I understand people being sick of spam-bots leaving trails of garbage in their wake, or of over-eager marketeers or underpaid Ethiopians leaving their pointless witterings spewing over the internet, but this is something different. And I don't believe it's in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia or indeed the internet as a whole.

Now are there any more opinions or objections? Because I don't exactly see an overwhelming denunciation of these useful links at present. More a couple of people with an (understandable, admittedly) axe to grind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiminycricket2008 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You said "the official site of the tourist board and its independent alternative". I agree that an official tourist site would be suitable, but there are certainly more than one "independent" alternatives. The problem is, if one independent site is linked to, then why shouldn't they all be? --Joowwww (talk) 21:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh boy - your attitude really is priceles (Jiminycricket2008).

This is an encyclopaedic not a tourist directory. The official site would be fine - other tourist links would not be. We would end up with a web page of links which is not an encyclopaedic at all.

I have no idea what you think is laughably parochial about an Assembly. That is an issue of possible governance and indicative of other aspects of discussions of Europe/the UK/England etc. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Please change your attitude & contribute constructively if you wish to. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I think you'll find you're one of the two people who aggressively and provocatively labelled me a "spammer"; who rather bullishly and snidely said on another's talk page "I'm here if you need any help" or words to that effect - some welcome! And who has refused to admit any fault in blanket-erasing any changes I made with curt, dismissive "notices" plastered on my talk page. Exactly the sort of dreary middle-management jobsworthiness that has come to personify Wikipedia and those that aspire to moderate it!

"That is an issue of possible governance and indicative of other aspects of discussions of Europe/the UK/England etc." ... to the whole world! and the universe!! Bwahahaha. No, not parochial at all. Mm, hang on... perhaps the Wikipedia entry on parochialism needs a stern re-write, sir! From wikipedia: "Parochialism does relate directly to culture and economics in regard to a local culture or geographic area's government making decisions based on personal relationships instead of uniformity. This supports and/or leads to governmental corruption and deters real economic health and outside investment. Parochialism reinforces an insular society and economy, many times to the detriment of the citizens who are the willful victims of parochialism, their local prejudices and regional attitudes played upon by politicians of all colours."

You clearly have little idea of what you're talking about. At least look up a term on the platform we're using before making such assertions. Besides, I didn't say the link was irrelevent, I said it was laughably parochial. Something that embodies Cornwall, really. Jiminycricket2008 (talk) 15:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you still wish to discuss the external links or not? Because I'm having difficulty distinguishing your rant from your issue with Wikipedia policies. --Joowwww (talk) 17:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)