Talk:King of Wales

King of Wales

Ok. You decided to cull the article without a talk. So I propose an article returning the information that was added on the lines of, "legendary Kings of Wales"... What is your opinion? Cltjames (talk) 18:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

It's indefensible to add immense reams of garbled pseudohistory as fact, and this isn't the only article where that urgently needs remedying. If we can't agree on this, I propose that we ask for help from Wikiproject Wales. Richard Keatinge (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Keatinge Maybe that's a good idea. There was a lot of relevant research which was added to the article involving credible sources from the era associating Kings of Gwynedd as Kings of Wales, not just from Geoffrey of Monmouth. So I think a new article should be created or at least look into the medeival Kings of Wales list to revert some entries, because there are several individuals with claims the the title King of Wales as listed from historically reliable sources. Cltjames (talk) 18:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

@Cltjames Would you be kind enough to make on this page a suggestion for a "fact" -just one - that should go in here? We may discuss more profitably and at reasonable length. Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:21, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Keatinge My contribution for the article was the inclusion of the Book of Baglan. I wrote about the Governors of North Cambria who were also Earls of Ewias and Irchenfeld. These were the descendants of King Camber son of the legendary Brutus of Troy. I also cross referenced the Book of Llandaf, Welsh triads, Mabinogion, Historia Regum Britanniae, Where Troy Once Stood. The article previously mentioned Camber, King of Cambria (Wales). I simply elaborated the connection to the medieval Kings of Wales and Celtic origins.

In terms of a simple fact, perhaps I should firstly continue explaining that maybe a separate article could be created about the Earl of Ewyas and Irchenfeld or about the Governors of Cambria (also part of the Dukedom of Dumnonia). A similar list is found at the List of legendary rulers of Cornwall article (my inspiration for the changes). I believe Wales too should have a legendary King list on Wikipedia like Cornwall or Ireland (List of High Kings of Ireland) do, or a continuation of the List of legendary Kings of Britain

But as for fact, I believe the medieval Wales King list to be legitimate and I think it was Brut y tywysogion which was the main source. The list spans from c. 600 - c.1200 and definitely specifies Kings of Wales prior to the use of the titles of Princes. Cltjames (talk) 01:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

OK, let's keep it initially simple by considering the Book of Baglan as a source. To use it as a reliable source we would need specific references to academic, accepted, modern analyses of the work that confirm each and every point being made. The popular modern literature on the subject, varying from popular books to devoted websites, isn't reliable (it can be fun, but that's not the point here, our speculations are irrelevant), and points made in transcriptions/translations (do you have a copy of Bradney's edition?) would only be acceptable with modern academic backing. And a simple link to our article on the Book isn't adequate reference for anything at all. What do you have as reference for your points from the Book of Baglan? Richard Keatinge (talk) 10:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Keatinge Also now there is an inconsistency in an article related which mentions Rhodri Mawr with a link to this article. And also the Brut y tywysogion list is in the Ruler of Wales article as King of Wales, but not here since you've deleted the article. List of rulers of Wales#Title of "King of Wales". There needs to be consistency between both articles which link the King of Wales title. Also the Ruler of Wales article specifies the King of Britain, which you removed. Again, a historically reliable article using correct sources.Cltjames (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Here are some references that can be used to refer to the Kingdom of Ewias and a connection to the Silures tribe.

• Bannister, Arthur Thomas (1861). "1". The history of Ewias Harold (PDF). Jakeman & Carver. pp. 2–4. Retrieved 12 September 2023.
• "A Brief History of Ewyas Lacy". ewyaslacy.org. Retrieved 7 September 2023.

Not an academic work, heavily dependent on post-Galfridian material. Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Then there are a few websites that speak about Brutus of Troy and his Welsh descendants.

• "Beli Mawr And Lllyr Lledaith in Welsh Pedigrees". ancientwalesstudies.org. Retrieved 7 September 2023.

A SPS without academic credentials Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

• "Rex Britannorum". kingdomofwales.wales. Retrieved 1 September 2023.

Another WP:SPS Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Between them, you can find references to other sources that speak of the same descendants of King Camber, especially later on when talking about the family of Llyr and the Mabinogion. Then there is the Cornwall survey which confirms the descent of some members of the Governorship of Cambria.

• Carew, Richard (1769) [1602]. The Survey of Cornwall. And An Epistle concerning the Excellencies of the English Tongue. E. Law and J. Hewett.

Again, not reliable for our present purposes. page 77 onward doesn't even name his own relevant sources. Much of it has a degree of charm though. I'd like to have met M. Charles Treuanion. Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

I was also thinking that with this research there is a chance to expand on the Celtic Silures tribe research and find more information linking the Mabinogion character Llyr to the tribe and then the descent of Beli Mawr (Heli) and his ancestral connection to the Governor of Cambria. That was the research I conducted, I think it mostly verifies an Earldom of Ewias and Irchenfeld in the Herefordshire area, and there is a gap in the Welsh royal history articles on Wikipedia to include a pre-AD list of Governors and tribal boundaries of Wales. Cltjames (talk) 18:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

There's no really tactful way to say this, but none of these references are suitable for Wikipedia, or indeed as a guide to real pre-Galfridian history. They don't verify anything relevant. You appear to be going down a rabbit hole into a world of myth and legend at best, outright fantasy otherwise. May I strongly suggest that you revise WP:RS and confine your efforts on Wikipedia to reliable sources? On your own website etc you can put whatever you like, and that might be the best outlet for your recent researches.

I repeat my offer to ask for help from Wikiproject Wales, WP:3O, etc if you feel that's needed. Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Keatinge Ok, well, your right about the rabbit hole, the research is a bit of a dead end. However, that's the beauty of the subject, there is a definitive amount of information which can be correctly presented, no more, but also essentially, no less. As for the articles, I will look into creating a separate article for the descendants of Camber, nothing concrete yet, just exploration about the Governorship of Cambria. Mythological and legendary articles based on ancient Kings is a subject picked up by Cornwall and Ireland like I previously mentioned and this it would be in Welsh interests to connect these Celtic Britons articles. So, when the correct approach is gathered then I would like to speak to Project Wales on Wikipedia about the research I conducted and how to create a link from Brutus of Troy, Celtic tribes, medieval Kingdoms and the Prince of Wales. As the connection is there for 3,000 years of history, it just needs to be explained correctly, we've started something now.

I suggest that the best place for this is on your own website, or in your own novel (lots of scope there). List of legendary kings of Britain is probably as much as Wikipedia needs. I'm sorry to say that exploration of mythical kings is not suitable here, nor is "creating links". Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Otherwise the other point which you didn't address is that there is now an inconsistency between this article and the List of rulers of Wales article which has a {{see also link to this article, but this article now lacks the correct information to link both articles to do with the Gwynedd Kings who claimed King of Wales and previously King of Britain. Cltjames (talk) 13:53, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

I am just going to pop a quick word of agreement with Richard Keatinge here, largely so as not to waste your time on something. A list of Legendary kings of Britain is fine, but such a list cannot be made for Wales because Wales did not exist as a polity at the time. Nor, indeed, was it a unified polity with a single ruler at any time except for a very brief period prior to conquest. Presenting information about legendary figures is fine, but they are legendary figures of the Britons. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

As per advice on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 September 14#King of Wales the article has been restored to previous version, and will be discussed appropriately.Cltjames (talk) 17:52, 134 September 2023 (UTC)

The advice applied to a blank-and-redirect or deletion, neither of which this was. Following extensive discussion above I have reverted to the last defensible version - thanks for the typo fix. Please avoid edit warring and instead seek consensus for your changes here. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert, which I completely agree with. Sanity restored - the long rambling fictional confusion was completely unencyclopedic. DeCausa (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Seconded, and thanks again. We really couldn't have an article claiming the first King of Wales was descended from Zeus, by way of Aeneas, sourced to Geoffrey of Monmouth! KJP1 (talk) 06:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Consistency with other articles

@Richard Keatinge Also now there is an inconsistency in an article related which mentions Rhodri Mawr with a link to this article. And also the Brut y tywysogion list is in the Ruler of Wales article as King of Wales, but not here since you've deleted the article. List of rulers of Wales#Title of "King of Wales". There needs to be consistency between both articles which link the King of Wales title. Also the Ruler of Wales article specifies the King of Britain, which you removed. Again, a historically reliable article using correct sources.Cltjames (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I have removed the inadequately-referenced list and the unhelpful link that you mention. Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Keatinge Ok, the final issue now would be the King of the Britons article which has a similar list of Kings of Wales. I think this is a bigger scope than deleting the information and like you said it should go to wikiproject Wales to decide what to do. Can you make the request please? Cltjames (talk) 14:17, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if King of the Britons needs only a bit of editing, possibly a disclaimer, to the effect that none of the persons in the list was actually King of all the Britons, so the article lists people who were ever referred to by (almost) contemporaries as something of the sort, whatever their claims to kingship or to overlordship may have been. Anyway, that's best discussed on the appropriate talk page. Thanks. Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

What is this article about?

Can we clarify what the focus of this article is intended to be? Is it a list of Legendary kings, like List of legendary kings of Britain or Legendary kings of Scotland? Or does it purport to be a list of actual kings, setting aside for now the question of how you can have a king without the existence of a kingdom? If it's the former, should this not be made clear in the title, e.g. Legendary kings of Wales? If it's the latter, where is the current, reliable sourcing that supports their historical existence? To take the first, directly relevant, section as an example, "Establishing the Kingdom of Cambria (Wales)", this has seven sources/ footnotes:

• Book of Baglan - complied in the 1600s. Our article on this says "it is not considered wholly accurate";
• Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae - written in the 13th century. Our article on this says, "it is now considered to have no value as history";
• A book by John T. Koch - Unfortunately, it's not accessible online;
• A blog published on a travel website - authored by Bernard Jones who, as far as I can see, has no standing as a professional historian;
• Geoffrey of Monmouth, again - our article on him says he is "is now considered historically unreliable";
• A article by Darrell Wolcott - he appears to be a retired banker who has established his own Welsh studies centre, [1]. I've no idea of his standing as a historian, but the conclusion on Brutus of Troy states, "his pedigrees are deficient and likely fabricated"
• The Book of Baglan, again.

Assuming the Koch to be an RS, we appear to have one such source that may suggest King Camber, of whom our article states "Camber has no historical basis but is the product of Geoffrey of Monmouth's imagination, invented largely for political ends within the contemporary Anglo-Norman world", was a descendent of Brutus of Troy, Aeneas and ultimately Zeus. I am really struggling to see how we can confidently present this information as credible, if we are suggesting this is a list of actual, as opposed to legendary, kings.

Could the article's main authors (the text is showing as +90% to be by User:Cltjames and User:Titus Gold), clarify the aim/subject of this article. KJP1 (talk) 08:09, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Actually, ignore all of the above. User:Richard Keatinge has addressed the concerns by a reversion, for which many thanks! KJP1 (talk) 08:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

This is the version of the page before the edits of those two editors, so you can check that to see what may have been the original aim of the article when it was created and before these later overhauls, which seemed to be disputed. There could be something that can be re-added from these older versions, or is proof the subject itself is flawed. Nonetheless the older version has less citations, so best to be constructive if anything even minor from these later overhauls can be re-added and aren't disputed. DankJae 16:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

In my view, it should be evidence based and historically accurate for those who self-identified as "King of Wales" or who were recognised by others as a King of Wales, regardless of how much of modern Wales they controlled. Titus Gold (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

What? That includes him? That's an utter and complete misunderstanding of how Wikipedia should be, which is your core problem and why you were TBAN'd. It needs to be WP:DUE. Of all the WP policies, it's the one you should read and re-read. Random claiming in an after-the-event medieval or antiquarian source? Who cares? The only timethe WP:RS (arguably) reference a King of Wales was a decade under Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, regardless of POV pipe dreams. DeCausa (talk) 19:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Missing King of Wales claimants

I agree that the pseudo-historical Kings don't belong here and that deletion was very much appropriate and needed.

What does not seem appropriate is the removal of historically sourced Kings or claimants of the title of King of Wales/King of the Welsh, regardless of how much of modern-day Wales they controlled.

Would it be agreeable to add this table back, please? I'm open to it being adapted or simplified etc. for inclusion.

Thanks for your cooperation!

Extended content

Depiction Name & life details Arms House, Kingdom Welsh Titles Reign Death & cause Source Cynan Dindaethwy (Cynan ap Rhodri) Gwynedd(insecurely from 754) "King of all Wales" (Welsh: "Brenin Cymry oll") 798–816 Brut y Tywysogion Annals of UlsterAnnales Cambriae Rhodri the Great (Rhodri ap Merfyn) Gwynedd, from 855 also Powys, from 872 also Seisyllwg "began to reign over the Welsh" (843 AD) King of Wales King of the Britons 843 Brut y Tywysogion Annals of Ulster Cadell ap Rhodri Deheubarh "ruled over all Wales" (877 AD) 877 Brut y Tywysogion Anarawd ap Rhodri Kingdom of Gwynedd "ruled over all Wales" (900 AD) 900 Brut y Tywysogion Hywel Dda(Hywel ap Cadell) Deheubarth(from 920), from 942 also Gwyneddand Powys "King of all Wales" (Welsh: "Brenin Cymry oll" 942–949/50 Brut y Tywysogion Annals of UlsterAnnales Cambriae Aeddan ap Blegywryd Kingdom of Gwynedd "acquired all Wales from sea to sea" (1000 AD) 1000 Brut y Tywysogion Llywelyn ap Seisyll Gwyneddand Powys; from 1022 also Deheubarth "took the government upon himself...in his time the country of Wales was twelve years without war" "sovereignty of Wales" 1023 Brut y Tywysogion Annals of Ulster Gruffydd ap Llywelyn 1010–1063 Gwyneddand Powys, from 1057 also the rest of Wales Rex Walensium ("King of Wales") King of the Britons (in 1063; in 1058) Had "gained all Wales prior to 1037" Ruled modern day Wales from 1055 to 1063. The Ulster Chronicle states that he was killed by Cynan in 1064, whose father Iago had been put to death by Gruffydd in 1039. John of Worcester Annals of Ulster Brut y Tywysogion Gruffudd ap Cynan 1055–1137 House of Aberffraw, Gwynedd(insecurely from 1081) House of Aberffraw, Gwynedd(insecurely from 1081) "king and sovereign and prince and defender and pacifier of all the Welsh" (in 1136) 1137 Died in 1137, aged 81–82. Brut y Tywysogion Owain Gwynedd 1100 – November 1170 Caernarfon (Retroactively attributed with no evidence of use.) Gwynedd King of Wales King of the Welsh Prince of the Welsh Prince over the British nation (in 1146) 1146–1170 Died in 1170, aged 69–70. Brut y Tywysogion; contemporary charters. Following this period, the title Prince of Wales only was used References

Titus Gold (talk) 22:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

It was removed for good reason i.e. anachronistic and random instances of someone somewhere referencing the title rather like King Allan Evans. WP:UNDUE. DeCausa (talk) 22:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I would prefer prose rather than a table, considering how short this article is and how the table is not having too much. But we ideally should focus on those who used the term "King of Wales" rather than those who were/claimed as a king in Wales. If a King of Gwynedd happened to rule most/all of modern-Wales, they are still a King of Gwynedd unless they used the KoW title instead and with legitimacy (rather than a temporary description). In the end, this article is about the title, not a bunch of people described as kings that happened to rule over most/all of modern-Wales or the Welsh (or their ancestors) temporarily in the absence of a legitimate, Kingdom of Wales. This article indeed needs improving, but on the actual title rather than becoming Welsh kings or Kings of Wales, which is covered by List of rulers in Wales. DankJae 01:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@DeCausa actually there is a recognised claim that was added here (March 2018 revision) to the Heads of former ruling families article. And obviously the male line of Owain Gwynedd for Anwyl of Tywyn family. But Evans was joking and everyone knows that. Cltjames (talk) 06:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

What you linked to was no less ridiculous than Mr Evans. I'm glad to see someone's removed the nonsense from that article. DeCausa (talk) 07:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@DeCausa the paperwork produced by Mr. Jones was proven in international courts of law in Japan and America. The entry was only removed because he refused to make public his documentation. You can find more information in his 'self published' website. Please read kingdomofwales.wales (website not working right now, try later) to better understand the process of selecting a modern day head of house for Gwynedd and Cymru. But the claim does hold its own and deserves more acknowledgment than it had received on Wikipedia. It's simple, male Primogeniture from a King. Anwyl is proven from Owain Gwynedd until this generation and Llywelyn Jones has proven the Welsh custom of gavelkind in America as a descendant of the Welsh in exile. I don't think it's nonsense and might deserve a paragraph to explain the situation in this article. But I agree Allen Evans had no more than an advert in the Times and that doesn't hold enough documentation to prove anything significant to this claim, because he isn't persuing the title. Perhaps a paragraph in the text to explain the current situation could work, based on Mr. Jones' Wales online articles and genealogical research for the Anwyl family. Cltjames (talk) 12:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

You see, it's the kind of movement which will not hold its on in the courts of law of the United Kingdom, however when (not if) the Welsh gain indepdence, it is most likely some of these royal titles will return, for instance, such as the current de jure Prince of Gwynedd title (Anwyl), and potentially a King represented by Mr. Jones' family of America. But in all fairness, that isn't happening anytime soon, is it? Cltjames (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Cltjames, it may help you to revise, and consider, why experienced editors feel that many of your edits and suggestions are unsuitable for Wikipedia. They are a waste of everyone's time, including yours. Richard Keatinge (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

It was just a comment for consensus, I am reframing from editing in this ongoing discussion. This is why a talk page is available to create productive reasoning based on fact and not a voting system. Please feel free to talk about how you would adapt your work on the topic and about how you were going to include references for the blank sentences you added @Richard Keatinge:. But to reiterate my point, just look at other Celtic King lists and you can see there is something drastically missing for Wales' article, e.g. List of legendary rulers of Cornwall, List of High Kings of Ireland, Legendary kings of Scotland, albeit two mentioned are simply lists. But the information is there, so please can we reach and agreement to present it accordingly. Cltjames (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't mind @DankJae's suggestion of using prose rather than a table.

Would it then be agreeable to convert the table above to prose under the pre-existing heading "Use by regional rulers"?

It seems that has already been done to a small degree.

Thanks all Titus Gold (talk) 17:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

No, the table was based on a spurious misuse of WP:PRIMARY sources. The sort of thing that led to the Anwn Ddu fiasco. DeCausa (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, and also this article is about King(s) of Wales who actually existed and ruled all of Wales. It is not about mythical kings of anywhere, nor about people who ruled parts of modern Wales. Richard Keatinge (talk) 17:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Like I've mentioned in a similar discussion happening on the Prince of Wales article, then perhaps a separate article on the lines of; List of legendary rulers of Wales, similar to that of Cornwall and Ireland. Then the information available can be correctly presented on Wikipedia like the Celtic counterparts have already. Cltjames (talk) 18:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Why would you think that content that could go in an article called List of legendary rulers of Wales could possibly be included in this article? Trying to add it here where it clearly doesn't belong is just disruptive. Back in September you tried to warp the opening of this article with this nonsense edit in which you made the article open with this absurdity: King of Wales (Welsh: Brenin Cymru) royal title has origins spanning 3,000 years. Originally established by King Camber (c. 1,000 BC) of Cambria (Wales) during the European Iron Age. If you are so incapable of distinguishing between fact and fiction you need to be topic banned from articles on Wales dealing with historical fact. Stop trying to insert myth and legend into articles about history. DeCausa (talk) 23:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, we've spoken about this before, there was a method behind the madness, I was editing in good faith about the industry standard relating to other Celtic legendary King lists. And sorry for getting involved in the talk, I should have planned this better than a consensus-driven debate. I have decided to talk to relevant people concerning a lack of Welsh Iron Age content. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales#Legendary Kings of Wales for a talk I started, or even to contribute. To better explain, I wanted an industry standard relating to the fellow Celts of Cornwall, Ireland, Scotland who have legendary figures published on Wikipedia, and some content uses the Book of Baglan. Maybe I was unprofessional in my approach, but the constructive criticism has enabled me to find the correct path to take regarding publishing correctly, I believe a ban would be unnecessary, just a bit more experience is needed that's all. Cltjames (talk) 02:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty#Celtic Princes of Wales for the latest discussion. As we've spoken about before, we need a professional opinion on how to approach this conundrum of a subject. Cltjames (talk) 05:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Professional? ...we're all amateurs. Anyone can join a Wikiproject. DeCausa (talk) 09:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

We don't require professionalism. We do require competence, or at least willingness to learn. Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

The table should not be added back. GoodDay (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I've said that a table is not essential and could be added back in the form of prose instead. I also agree that secondary sources would need to be used for them. Titus Gold (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Seems the conversation stalled. I was wondering if you (@Titus Gold:) have any material in paragraph (not just list) form you can bring together from sources you've mentioned as references...? I understand there's a ban in place for you Titus, I just want to know the validity of the medieval claim in modern sources, maybe something I could look into adding if the material is in place. Or does anyone else have anything they wish to add to the conversation about the article? I feel the text needs another few paragraphs minimum to better explain the title of King of Wales, as was shown in the table, there is a history spanning hundreds of years about the title of King from its Latin origins. Cltjames (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

There is a history spanning hundreds of years about the title of King, from its Latin origins. Is there? Also you added the ping to Titus Gold in a follow up edit. This won't work, so I have added a ping in this reply. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand the aggressive response. Titus' list was a legitimate list from a primary source, it simply needs to be brought into modern times with literature, which he has found, and rewritten into prose, which we have identified would work better for this article. Back to this again, somehow... The list specifically names monarchs as King of all of Wales, reign over the Welsh, King of Wales, ruled over all of Wales, acquired all Wales from sea to sea, sovereignty of Wales... The list goes on, the evidence is overwhelming, and this traffic jam is just slowing the process, all this negativity is unnecessary. Please, can we work as a team to complete the article, because right now it is not up to standard. Cltjames (talk) 20:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

This article is specifically on those who used the term "King of Wales", not a list of every single king found to have been in modern Wales. DankJae 20:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so this can be added with correct reference. Such as a dating system; "between the 8th to 12th centuries the title of King of Wales was sporadically used in different contexts such as King of the Welsh, and sovereign of Wales". I would add just I don't have the references to cite, that's why I'm reaching out. Otherwise I've added {{tags regarding the lack of information, where in the most case in this article, one sentence should become a paragraph or more to explain the back story and contemporary perspective. I hope we can be more proactive as a team this time. Please skip the criticism and constructively respond to my comments. Cltjames (talk) 21:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I didn't intend "is there?" to be an aggressive response. The rest of my response was being helpful in pinging in the editor you wished to ping. As Richard Keatinge says above, this article is about King(s) of Wales who actually existed and ruled all of Wales. It is not about mythical kings of anywhere, nor about people who ruled parts of modern Wales. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sirfurboy but if you look at references, mythical begins before the age of the Romans as shown in Bartrum's 1993 dictionary of Welsh people on the list of rulers article. Therefore the age of the kingdoms, aka the middle ages are well documented and verified in modern literature, and they need no justification for exclusion. And I believe that's the purpose of this article in showing medieval listed Kings of Wales, not a bias opinion about 3 or 4 rulers, but an explanation of who they were and how the inherited the title and where it originated from. We've agreed the list is seperate, now we need to continue in improving this article in explaining the context. Right now it's like 30% complete. Cltjames (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

There is a history spanning hundreds of years. (emphasis mine). I am not much interested in an article about mythical kings. Neither do I think this is that article. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sirfurboy please define your interpretation of mythical kings ?Welsh mythology is a continuation from BC. Therefore the middle ages wouldn't count as mythology. Cltjames (talk) 21:57, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Clearly not just BC or else we will be talking about Uther Pendragon and whatnot as historical. Which they aren't. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Not sure if "King of the Welsh" can be used equivalent to "King of Wales" as this article is mainly about, my main issue with the table is that it tries to combine a king with a claim over Wales, rather then those directly using "King of Wales" or its latin equivalent. This article is about the title "King of Wales", not a "list of kings in Wales" AFAIAA.

Agree that the article needs improving, but a bit reserved over the pseudo-history dispute earlier. Ideally sources should mention "King of Wales" or its latin equivalent, than less direct derivatives? But not sure.

@GoodDay, DeCausa, Richard Keatinge, and KJP1: Pinging those before, who may offer sources or more help than I. DankJae 21:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

TBH, I wouldn't oppose the deletion of this page. GoodDay (talk) 21:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Nor would I. In its present form it has all that can be justified, and that's feeble enough. The idea of adding the other contents of the table, people who did not rule all of modern Wales, nor claim that they did, is absurd. Richard Keatinge (talk) 22:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The article has be nominated if you're unaware. ​​​​ DankJae 12:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I'd also support deletion or a merger. It doesn't seem that there's a vast amount to say on this subject, so it might be better as subsection of Prince of Wales. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:12, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Well the AfD is going strong keep so far. Not too into history to form an opinion. I see both sides of the argument. But the article's scope needs clarifying nonetheless. DankJae 13:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I would observe, however, that no one in the discussion has yet produced a single source that demonstrates "King of Wales" is a notable topic. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

The Turvey reference I added yesterday all but says he was King. It specifically explains he was a leader of a unified Wales as a King, and quotes y Brut, "head and shield of the Britons", make what you wish of the quote, but it speaks volumes about his position. Cltjames (talk) 14:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and as per Davies & Davies (2012) that I posted in the AfD noination too [2]. There is no doubt that Gruffudd ap Llywelyn did something that no one else did - uniting Wales as a single kingdom and becoming the king of that kingdom. Although he did not call himself King of Wales, he - and he alone - held that honour. Any treatment of Gruffudd must surely extensively cover this aspect of his reign. But, in observing the lack of any evidence of notability for a page on the subject of King of Wales, I say again that Gruffudd did not take the title himself, and there really was no one else. It has been hundreds of years. This is Welsh history. What texts discuss the concept of King of Wales? There are, of course, plenty that discuss the princes, and surely they all must mention Gruffudd's kingship too. But they don't treat the King of Wales as an academic subject. Do they? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

• There's a whole seam of WP editing that has tried to draw WP:ORish conclusions from the use or attribution of various titles by/to Welsh rulers. Actually, there's a better, and much more interesting, article to be created by someone someday into which this should be merged: Titles of Welsh rulers (not a list). It would discuss the numerous early medieval titles in Welsh (gwledig, mynawg, rhi, brenin etc etc), the shift from rex to princeps, the shift from titles linked to lineage to place/realm, the development of titles to assert/claim authority/hegemony. It would be much more encyclopaedic than this sort of nuance-less Ladybird-ish article, of which we have too many in the Welsh history area. DeCausa (talk) 20:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I support De Causa's excellent points and validating suggestion. It's the way to a better encyclopedia in this area. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I also agree that such an article would be a very good thing to do, and said as much at the AfD. We would have a good range of sources to call on for such an article. Note that at the AfD, Srnec similarly suggests Rulership in medieval Wales, so the merits of the best title might need some thought. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

That's a good topic - but, I would say, quite a bit more ambitious. Potentially quite a lot to cover in that. DeCausa (talk) 21:36, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Ambitious topic

I have boldly started the page Titles in medieval Wales, using some of the present text of King of Wales. I hope that it will prove to be a useful foundation for a far better article than King of Wales can ever be, and that we will soon find consensus here to turn King of Wales into a redirect. Richard Keatinge (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)