Talk:Vaughan Gething

Please retain legitimate biographical info

I have just restored a huge passage of biographical info back to this Vaughan Gething article, some 915 words covering many significant events including "Gilestone Farm", "Pandemic preparedness report", "Unite nomination" and other items. All of this is well-written and has good relevant sources from reputable organisations such as BBC and WalesOnline. Yet it was deleted on 17th February 2024 by user 86.28.195.223 with the summary "Minor incidents written up in bias language.". You can hardly call these well-attested, documented, professionally-reported, and widely-discussed actions of a Senedd member and Welsh Government minister "minor incidents"! I am happy to reword anything that may not meet Wikipedia's standards. Feel free to comment on this Talk page if you believe that to be the case. I suspect that the anonymous user in question may themselves be guilty of bias, in deleting bona fide information for highly questionable reasons. --Ytrwyn (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Bear in mind we also try and avoid making long lists of "controversies". The fact they've been added during the height of an election campaign suggests there is a political motive behind this addition at this time. Criticisms and controversies should be added in a balanced manner into the body of the article. I'll join the anonymous IP editor in editing your additions. Sionk (talk) 23:48, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sionk, agree this article is was too weighted on such a section, which essentially was a controversies section until I actually changed the heading to such. Ofc they need to be mentioned, but not with so much WP:WEIGHT and better integrated with the overall text, which seems you've done already Sionk, thanks! Although I do wonder why Waters' comments matters (especially as he's in the other camp), but saw claims Gething's supporters were also concerned which seems more relevant, while was walking away from an interview a large controversy, as I only find it reported by ITV, who were the interviewer in question? DankJae 00:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

First black leader of any country in Europe

He's not black, he's mixed race, and Wales is not a country in the normal sense of the word. 2A00:23C5:F00C:1E01:A42D:2C38:4792:C826 (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources currently describe him as such so that's what Wikipedia should say I think. There's also precedent with this with Kamala Harris, the American vice-president, who's described as the first African-American and Asian-American VP rather than the first mixed race one. The term country also isn't really standardised. It may refer to sovereign states such as the UK, but it also refers to nations within those states such as Wales or the Basque Country in Spain and France. Since Wales is almost always referred to as a country in its own right (unlike other places like the Basque Country which is equally referred to as a region as well), I don't see any issue with saying he's the first black leader of a country in Europe. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 14:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources describe Gething as black, reliable sources describe wales as a country. Whether or not it is a country "in the typical sense of the word" in your opinion is irrelevant. 137.50.170.79 (talk) 11:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Gething is of mixed ethnicity.

He is not the first black European leader , he may well be the first HALF black leader. But let's get the facts straight here. 92.40.198.180 (talk) 08:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I changed the sentence from "...of any country in Europe", to simply "...in Europe". The former sentence, made Wales appear to be a sovereign state. GoodDay (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I reverted this. There are plenty of black leaders in Europe. Wales is a country and the sources say first black leader of any country in Europe. Sionk (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I know, but it still reads as though Wales were independent. Though described as a country, Wales isn't on equal footing with Poland, Germany, Portugal etc. Therefore I changed the sentence to "...within the United Kingdom". We must be mindful that country has multiple meanings & avoid the confusion. GoodDay (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

We should note here that GoodDay brought this up at the Biographies of Living Persons noticboard, where, despite it being off-topic for that board, a couple of us noted that the "...of any country in Europe" language was fine. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I've reverted GoodDay's edits again, which this time were hidden in the body of the article without an edit summary, rather than editing the intro. It's beginning to get to the stage where they might get mentioned at the Administrators Noticeboeard themselves. This isn't the first time I've come across them trying to insert their own opinion about Wales' status repeatedly into an article. Sionk (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not denying what Wales is called. Just trying to explain that the wording "...first Black leader of any European country..." - may suggest that Wales is on equal footing with European sovereign states. I won't get into an edit war over it. So, I'll leave it for others to decide, if the sentence should be modified. GoodDay (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Didn't Leo Varadkar get there first in any case? - Kindlecandle (talk) 22:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I think Veradkar and Sunak have Indian heritage, so would be described as Asian rather than black. Sionk (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

'Nationality'

I cannot understand how a reputable site like Wikipedia can use the term "Welsh" to describe anyone's nationality. In fact, if one clicks on that term as it is given here it leads to a page which tells one that most Welsh citizens are "British subjects" - which is correct. This is a factual encyclopedia, and all sympathies and fancies apart, there is only one 'nationality' for the citizens of all the countries of the United Kingdom - British Citizen (as stated in its passport). This is an inaccuracy often stated on the internet, and should not be encouraged else things get very confusing. I see that you do not describe Humza Yousaf (Scottish first minister) or Rishi Sunak in those terms, so why should you do so for Gething? 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:90DF:C62F:8C40:3563 (talk) 14:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:UKNATIONALS, it might answer your concerns. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I am not referring to the introduction to this subject which refers to Gething as a "Welsh politician", which is fair enough. Dylan Thomas was a Welsh poet as Sean Connery is a Scottish actor - but this is NOT the official description of their 'nationality' (as I have previously said, and can be read in our passports. My father being 'Scottish' and my mother 'English', by the way). I am referring to the "Personal details" section. Wikipedia does not seem to need to officially state the 'nationality' of Yousaf or Sunak (for example), so why should it do so in this case? Especially when it is 'inaccurate'! What I am talking about is a trend I have noticed on other sites, whereas I turn to Wikipedia for 'accuracy'. I think what I am saying should be considered as part of general editorial policy. 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:90DF:C62F:8C40:3563 (talk) 15:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

In addition to what I have said, I notice that Wikipedia does not, generally, give the 'nationality' (under 'Personal details') of it's subjects other than when they hold 'dual citizenship' (see, for example, Anthony Hopkins, Roman Polanski etc.). So why does it do so in this case? 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:90DF:C62F:8C40:3563 (talk) 16:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with describing someone's nationality as "Welsh". Wales is undoubtedly a country though, as you say, not a sovereign one. There may be other reasons for challenging the description of Gething's nationality, but not by denying Wales exists. Sionk (talk) 15:51, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Does it relate to MOS:INFONAT? As Gething is foreign-born it is needed. Apparently there is also a "citizenship" parameter, which is obviously can only be British, but as nationality is used here and can be generally applied to any nation, which Wales is, then I see no issue, especially to readers. DankJae 17:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Does it relate to that, Dank Jae? - maybe. On the other hand - checking some other pages of Wikipedia - it seems a rather 'random' policy. Given that Wikipedia is a site that I generally respect, I think that it should maintain a 'good standard' in these things (unlike some other sites). Whilst 'nationality' and 'citizenship' are not exactly the same things - I agree - it would probably be better to stick with the latter, in my opinion, when 'defining' people's status, else we also get into the waters of birth origin, ethnicity, race etc. etc. which sometimes cast doubts into some people's minds (which is probably why his 'nationality' has been stated here). I don't work for Wikipedia, so it is probably not for me to say. Anyway, thanks for the comments - especially as I doubt any change will take place as a result of mine! 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:D13D:6BF:4356:B1B8 (talk) 23:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Nationality is obviously controversial here, so as this is not exactly only specific to Gething but "nationality" overall, and what should be used to those connected to the United Kingdom, maybe a discussion at {{infobox officeholder}}, MOS:INFONAT or WP:UKNATIONALS may be needed. Although it probably has multiple times in the past, with no clear guide on what should or shouldn't be used as far as I know? Leaving to just the "what sources use" approach. So far nothing is against using "Welsh" here, even if it may not meet every criteria for a "nationality" in a legal sense, but seemed to be here for a long-time until now disputed. Gething is more commonly described to be Welsh, whether that be an identity or nationality though. Don't be afraid to question anything here, and glad you opened a discussion! Also (almost) no one "works" for Wikipedia, we're all online editors, anyone is free to join or raise their case. DankJae 23:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks. What I mean by "work for" is that someone must 'create' policy and organise publication, all the 'editors' apart. As I have said (and I have read where you recommended) there seems to be little 'consistency' here. Of those born abroad, some are 'defined' by their 'citizenship' (Boris Johnson, Cliff Richard - maybe because they both hold/held dual citizenship) and others by their 'nationality' (Freddie Mercury, Vaughan Gething). There is no mention of either in the case of George Orwell, whom we all know as a British/English writer, although he was born in India.

That seems the best approach to me, and if I had my way it would be better to leave such references aside other than when strictly necessary. 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:D13D:6BF:4356:B1B8 (talk) 04:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

If Gething was not born Welsh but became Welsh then how was that nationality conferred on him, by whom and on what date? Wikipedia requires sources. - Kindlecandle (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Hold on a minute Sionk, I don't think anyone (especially me) is denying the existence of Wales! I see we are getting into extremely 'opinionated' territory here, which was not my intention. Shortly (in an hour or two) I shall try to make a response to the comment which follows yours and is, frankly, more interesting as it leads me to a page about Wikipedia's policies on these matters, and of which I was not aware. 2A02:587:5F88:EB00:D13D:6BF:4356:B1B8 (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Many, from online loners all the way up to The Telegraph, are casting doubt on whether Wales exists. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps he will move back to Zambia and become its first white president. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.165.68.104 (talk) 03:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Birth date

Not that I'm going to get through with some people around here, but for the record, the birth date in the article is likely a Wikipedia fiction. It was added here unsourced in 2019 and all "reliable" sources now cited date "coincidentally" from after that time, even though he has been prominent, and reported about, for years before, without that date ever mentioned. Mewulwe (talk) 08:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mewulwe, Edit warring it out was probably not the best way to do it. ​​Of course at the time Gething wasn't reported a lot either. We don't known if by your argument the BBC and others copied Wikipedia, or they had confirmed it was indeed correct. The BBC is relative more reliable and should have access to confirm a basic detail.

However looking, here are a few Tweets (X posts) from Gething on various 15th of March's[1][2] where he celebrates his birthday. So likely the uncited edit may have seen these Tweets, but otherwise the date seems correct. DankJae 10:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

If the BBC get their journalism from Wikipedia, then journalism is in serious trouble. I doubt they do. Anyway, if Gething has publicly announced his 50th birthday on X then he clearly has no problem in people knowing the information. Sionk (talk) 10:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

That is a proper source and should be used instead of the others. Yes, the original editor may have seen those, but it's still likely BBC etc. neither saw those nor had another source and just went by Wikipedia. Strange that people seem surprised by that; here the BBC talks about it itself ("several national news outlets - including the BBC and The Guardian - noted [...] Of course, it wasn't true. A mischievous hoaxer had included Reach among the composer's credits in Wikipedia"). Mewulwe (talk) 15:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Still that is all speculation, we'll never know if those sources used Wikipedia or not as the uncited edit actually added the correct date, and still possible those sources independently confirmed the date. Has the BBC had past history of using Wikipedia yes, but since then more errors here have come to light, hopefully making the BBC and others think twice. Considering the BBC actually interviewed him, seems they had all the access to confirm such a basic detail, especially as his birthday was the day before the leadership election. The Hazlehurst incident was in 2007 when Wikipedia was probably seen as more dependable and less hoaxes were known compared to today. DankJae 17:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)