This is Tipcake's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Please read this box first! Welcome to my talk page! Questions, information, warnings? Say it here! Please post new topics at the bottom of this page, please sign your topic by placing ~~~~ (four tildes) at the very end, and please remember, assume good faith! You can click here to start a new topic.

This user does not mind criticism. Feel free to let them know if they did something wrong.

	Archives:
	2025: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2026: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
	This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 5.

Apologies, didn't see the IP squeezed another revert in there in between my series of edits just now. I'd have reverted it right away if I'd noticed. Apologies for making the revert slightly harder for you. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also to be aware, you are arguably over 3 reverts in 24 hours there. You might want to self revert the last, in case this goes to the edit warring noticeboard. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, ok, I'll leave it, then. I was just asked to help out to improve the article to GA status, that's all. Tipcake (talk) 15:05, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh don't leave the article. I'm happy to support your edits. Just trying to avoid an accidental 3RR block. Self reverting will remove any breach of 3RR (not sure if it is one, depending on whether your first edit is considered a revert or not). But the IP is edit warring, and that never works out well. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Peidiwch â phoeni, diolch am eich cytuno a'ch cymorth, te! Tipcake (talk) 15:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dim problem. Hwyl. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's happened again, I'm afraid, if you're not aware. Sometimes I wonder if people have basic reading comprehension or even care about faithfully quoting sources..! Tipcake (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I readded the note based on years of work on this article and a consensus of multiple experienxed users on Wikipedia where we wrote the section correctly. Please stop an edit war as the work is all fully referenced and applicable to an aspect of Glyndwr's ancestry, a missing link sort of. So, talk here and please use talk for more consensus, because you are late to the discussion. Cltjames (talk) 12:24, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does it matter if it's untrue? Lots of mad things are said in antiquarian books, but there's no reason they should be included in a modern encyclopaedia. Tipcake (talk) 12:27, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, you mentioned Glyndwr was 27 years in 1386 trial, this kind of information is key for the text... Can you please provide a source for the note I created? Cltjames (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Scrope and Grosvenor Controversy, ed. Nicolas (1832), i. 254-5. Tipcake (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you deleted it and are refusing to better the article, what is the source please ? Cltjames (talk) 20:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is implicit in the ODNB article. What I just posted is the edition of the proceedings of the trial. Tipcake (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So, you don't want to insert an explanation as to how we have a date, honestly for me it is noteworthy as a reference at least. Cltjames (talk) 20:09, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I put it where the Scrope trial is discussed, otherwise you would have to explain the trial at his birth which seems unwieldy. Tipcake (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pennant is noteworthy, I don't know where you were yesterday, but the internet went viral about Glyndwr's birthday. Thus it is worth explaining in a note. Just like the Battle of Orewin Bridge, it doesnt have to be deleted, just for the wording to be improved to better explain the situation. You really seem to be deleting a lot of key info and making this difficult. Cltjames (talk) 06:30, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's not key info. And it's not his birthday. We have a contemporary record saying that Owain was born in 1359. The 28 May 1354 date was made up by John Jones of Gellilyfdy in the 17th century and is rejected by all historians. It doesn't matter if it nationalists celebrate it. Tipcake (talk) 06:35, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well the whole point is like we've seen with the death of Llywelyn II, it is viral on the internet. And really, it if was John Jones, then what is you're source in explaining this, and why isn't in the article ?? Cltjames (talk) 06:43, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Cambrian Chronicles video is disingenuous. It isn't a 'hoax' and Llywelyn died on the banks of the Orewin on 11 December 1282. One chronicler just added a handful of extraneous details that unfortunately were part of the title and main body of the Wikipedia page. Regarding the rest, it says so on the page of Lloyd I added this morning. I added the link to the online copy to the book on hathitrust, you can check it yourself you know... Tipcake (talk) 06:46, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just feel you are taking this DOB issue too far and need to take a breather and allow someone else to take control a while... The work is sound on the article, it is mostly fully referenced, besides, you said you would help but haven't even started with any of the {{page needed or {{cn work that is suggested... Anyway, to reiterate, it is viral and note worthy of the article for Glyndwr. How can I voice my concern to you over the issue of creating awareness for the reader, and that is without any main body text and solely a note??? Cltjames (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's still a lot of problems with the article, it is generally poorly written and sourced. Take the 'early life' section. Somebody linked Arundell family, a totally unrelated family to the Earls of Arundel whom the original source must be referring to. I shall rewrite the article over the summer using modern academic sources. It has just been too much of a commitment for me to do now because of real-life commitments. Tipcake (talk) 07:15, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You missed the point a bit, I want to include the conundrum about Glyndwr's birthday in the article and if necessary in note to please all parties... Can you write a short sentence to add please then audience... Because it really is a viral day of the year for the Welsh. I thought the argument for inclusion far outweighs exclusion. Cltjames (talk) 07:24, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really a 'viral day of the year for the Welsh'? I heard naught of it yesterday... nevertheless I aded a note explaining why Pennant's two dates (and he does give two dates, why did you only insert one?) are fictitious and of far less authority than the contemporary record of Owain's age in 1386. Tipcake (talk) 08:25, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert the simple referencing and one sentence from the Cadelling (south Wales) ? All I did was added the Dictionary of Wales Biography reference and expanded text... Cltjames (talk) 10:18, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because it isn't true that Rhodri ruled over all Wales. See the edits I made to the Second Dynasty of Wales article which explains how the region was conquered and brought under the sway of the Merfynion. Tipcake (talk) 10:30, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You've changed Cadeling to Deheubarth, so shall we change Lleision (dynasty) to Powys - Lleision (Powys)? Cltjames (talk) 19:00, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's necessary there as there's only one dynasty called the Lleision, but there's two Cadelling, one in Powys and one in Deheubarth, so there the distinction is necessary. Tipcake (talk) 09:20, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Iorwerth Drwyndwn is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mr Serjeant Buzfuz -- Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to let you know, I'm working on Iorwerth; going through refs. I'm learning a lot from the article. (I have some north Wales ancestry, which is why I snagged this one to review.) Hope to have comments in the next day or two. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:56, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Perffaith, diolch! Tipcake (talk) 20:26, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I even understood that! Thanks, Duolingo! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 22:30, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

or should I say "diolch Duolingo!" Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 22:30, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the delays. Some stuff IRL intervened. Hope to complete soon. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dim ots! Or, no worries! Tipcake (talk) 09:43, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good! Just one cite I suggest you check. Thanks very much for your patience - it took me a while to get the hang of the sources: "This one is Welsh; this one is Latin; this one is Old French..." Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:55, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The term for Nannau, "place of many streams" has been confirmed to me by a Welsh language professional and is referenced on the website. I don't know why you think otherwise.... Cltjames (talk) 15:07, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's the simple plural of the word nant. I can say about my garden 'Mae nannau fan hyn' but it doesn't mean 'many streams'... Tipcake (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your information on Dinefwr is such a sloppy mess. Lord Rhys ap Gruffydd coat of arms is in his effigy in St David. Talbot took the arms from Rhys Mychell and lord Rhys is not the last ruler Rhys Wyndod was - this is such nonsense what you did. There is literally 100’s of books and you just changed history for what reason ~2026-28719-60 (talk) 09:22, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the comment! Rhys' effigy is not contemporaneous, it is in fact from the same century as Talbot. There are no contemporaneous examples of the arms of this dynasty. I just added Michael Siddons has said, the leading expert on Welsh heraldry, don't be cross with me! You can change the last ruler to Rhys Wyndod if you like, the 'last ruler' category is not clearly defined here. I assumed it refers to the last independent ruler, which would be a better description of Rhys, weakly under Henry II's suzerainty, than for any of his descendants who were pretty firmly under the Llywelyns or the Plantagenets. Tipcake (talk) 10:30, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Gwriad ab Elidyr has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 17:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Iorwerth Drwyndwn has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mr Serjeant Buzfuz -- Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 12:23, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Llywelyn Fychan ap Gruffudd is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amir Ghandi -- Amir Ghandi (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Llywelyn Fychan ap Gruffudd has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amir Ghandi -- Amir Ghandi (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Llywelyn Fychan ap Gruffudd has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amir Ghandi -- Amir Ghandi (talk) 23:04, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]