Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proposal for new article[edit]

I have just been creating another page (Tony Shaw (rugby)) when I came across this link. I was thinking if we should create a similar page on wikipedia, possibly called list of australian wallabies or list of australian international rugby union players etc etc you get my drift. Or would we not be able to do it because of cipyright (what if we find more links). Await feed-back. De Mattia (talk) 08:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are already pages for complete lists of other nations players, including England, Wales, Ireland and New Zealand. None follow a standard style, with the Irish being the most basic and the Welsh the most data heavy. There is no problem setting up an Australian list but I'm unsure if the Project has a prefered style to use. Check "Category:Rugby union related lists" for the other articles. FruitMonkey (talk) 08:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where are the lists mentioned above (lists of english players etc). I looked but couldn't find them. De Mattia (talk) 22:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find the England one, but the Wales, Ireland and New Zealand ones can be found at List of Wales national rugby union footballers, List of Ireland national rugby union footballers and List of New Zealand national rugby union footballers respectively. Cheers. – PeeJay 22:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The England list uses the same naming convention as the others, i.e. List of England national rugby union footballers.Kwib (talk) 00:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
De Mattia, if I was you, I would avoid splitting the List of Australia national rugby union footballers into sections like the England, Ireland and New Zealand ones as it interferes with the sorting of the article. I suggest following the Welsh model. – PeeJay 08:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? There isn't a list article for 'Australia'. De Mattia (talk) 06:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which is exactly why you opened this topic of discussion. But when you do start the article, try to follow the Welsh pattern. – PeeJay 16:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would I be able to start by placing say 15 players and then everyone can slowly add more or do I have to place all names in one big hit before I save it for the first time? De Mattia (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can add as many or as few players as you want to start with, but I would suggest working on it in your userspace (say at User:De Mattia/List of Australia national rugby union footballers) and then moving it to the mainspace when it's in a condition that you believe is worthy of publication to the encyclopaedia. And of course, even when the article is in your userspace, people can still work on it with you as a collaborative effort. – PeeJay 10:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Also, is there a page of information on the type of table used in the Welsh list? That is the type of list table I will use in the list but I will need to kow some information about how to use it. Ir will I just have to go 'copy and paste' from the Welsh page and then take it from there? De Mattia (talk) 05:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is now up and running as a user sub-page here. Will need a lot of work before it can be moved onto the encyclopedia. De Mattia (talk) 07:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like this style of table. When I created the England table, I believe I did not see the Wales version and followed another style. However, the Wales table is a more user friendly version. I have just appended to De Mattia's user page the complete table for all Australian internationals, but left out details such as birth date, death, and the points breakdown. However, I have added to each player's line a hyperlink to the profile of that player on scrum.com in order to make filling in the details easier (because you can navigate to them quickly). I hope that helps.Kwib (talk) 10:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These tables are excellent and the work is great. However, I'd caution against linking every player's name - many of the links in the England article point either to disambiguation pages or to articles about a different person with the same name. Maybe better to set links up to "name (rugby union)" where there isn't an existing article.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely agree about not linking all the names, as apart from the disambiguation, it also helps us know which players we have addressed. Just thought I should state that I went with the type of scoring achieved by each player in the Welsh list as the points system changed so much from the early days to present times, and can not be compared. Early tries, for instance, carried no points. Not sure if anyone wants to change that?FruitMonkey (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of automatically putting a redlink with rugby union as a disambiguation marker I think it would be better to not link to missing articles at all. As for the problem with scoring, maybe split the table at the points where the scoring changed with a brief explanation of the scoring system at the time preceding each table? noq (talk) 23:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is now also a List of South African national rugby union footballers in need of collaboration. Please pitch in! Sahmejil (talk) 18:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of Irish Rugby player Bios[edit]

Some of the Irish Rugby Bios aren't of great quality. I'm starting a clean up of them, beginning with current international players and working onwards from there. Plan is to have them in a similar style as I've done here with:- Alan Quinlan. Any input, help, suggestions etc. would be appreciated. I'm starting with the current Internationals as listed here:[1], first up:- Rory Best GainLine 12:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just the Irish rugby bios that aren't good quality. In fact, most rugby bios are complete crap, IMO. – PeeJay 16:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tis true! Thought I'd start with the current irish internationals and work form there, could take some time GainLine 18:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that I was suprised by both the lack of content within existing bios, and the general lack of bios altogether when browsing for rugby players. This is most apparent with historical figures in the game (and indeed with historical clubs) but does extend into the modern era quite significantly. However, I suppose the predominant reason for a project is to elevate the quality and content of the subject. Does wikiproject rugby union follow the guidelines set out by the overarching wikiproject biography, or does it have its own slant, i.e. a specific rugby union biography template?Kwib (talk) 08:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wikiproject rugy union doesnt seem to be one of the more active projects hence my proposal to start cleaning up Bios, begiining with the irish ones. GainLine 14:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the past few months I have created a few Ireland player articles (Philip Matthews; Nigel Carr; William Tyrrell (RAF officer)) mainly because I happened to be looking up these particular players and found nothing on them. It astonishes me that rugby is so poorly represented on wikipedia in the biographies, but projects such as yours will help enormously.Kwib (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a project, there isn't much in the way of standardisation and individual editors tend to do their own thing - the bios I've created for example have tended to be very short stubs giving a few basic statistical details.Kwib's ones quoted above are good patterns and also the ones which FruitMonkey has created, usually for Welsh players from historical days - e.g. Billy Bancroft. I've found that newspaper obituaries are quite good sources of biographical information about a player's life outside rugby. Good luck with whatever you do, we need more rugby union contributors!--Bcp67 (talk) 06:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, I kinda got sucked into other stuff but am intending on getting back on track soon as its out of the way. GainLine 20:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of Rugby player Bios[edit]

Hello,

In fact, most rugby bios are complete crap, that's true in wikipedia.fr and in wikipedia.en. If you want it, we can better together some bios : look at fr:Sébastien Chabal. We can do the same work with Jonah Lomu and Jonny Wilkinson and...

or other players in order to have 15 good articles... Ddfree (talk) 20:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats an excellent article. I'm going to aim to get the Irish ones in order first then a bit of collaboration to maybe get some rugby Bios to good article status could be in order. GainLine 08:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here are other great players, 15 of them could have a good article status...

 South Africa[edit]

 England[edit]

 Argentina[edit]

 Australia[edit]

 Scotland[edit]

 France[edit]

Wales[edit]

Ireland[edit]

 New Zealand[edit]

Ddfree (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello !
We are working on fr:Jonny Wilkinson... If you want to do it too... Ddfree (talk) 21:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have finished fr:Jonny Wilkinson... with many references and works. If Wiki.en, it or fr could better a few bio ( to choose : Serge Blanco, Keith Wood, David Campese, Jonah Lomu, Gareth Edwards, Martin Johnson... ) that would be so fine !!! Ddfree (talk) 20:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can I suggest Eric Liddell as well? He isn't well known for his rugby career, but it would be good if the article reflected the fact that he was a Scotland international as well as that guy who wouldn't run on Sundays... --MacRusgail (talk) 16:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, he is a great name and a good bio wolud be fine... The French language article fr:Jonny Wilkinson is a featured article. We try to better Serge Blanco, David Campese, Jonah Lomu. We hope you'll do it too... Ddfree (talk) 09:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases, some great players don't even have articles, or at least not until recently. I had to create Hugh McLeod (rugby union) myself, and he appears on at least three lists of all time Scotland greats - is there some way we can get checklists for each country of their great players? That way we can clean up bad articles, and also create new ones where necessary.

One word of warning though. I think if we focus too much on the likes of Lomu and Wilkinson, we may be in danger of neglecting the older greats. There must be a huge range of them from the 1960s, and 1970s backwards.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:56, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

qv Gordon Bulloch!--MacRusgail (talk) 18:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In other not to have any bio very well written, it is better to work someones... Why not the 1990s and 2000s stars ? Of course you can do too 1960s, and 1970s. The work is done for fr:Jonah Lomu and we need your help to better it, with some contributions of N-Z fans, and people who have his books... Ddfree (talk) 20:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Why not the 1990s and 2000s stars" - Well, for a start IMHO there's far more information on them online already than most of the players before that era. (With the exception of some 1980s stars). I'm trying to create articles just now on various players who were killed in WWI, and have also created a couple about Angus Buchanan and William Cross, who scored the historic first try and points in international rugby. I think the recent articles are better able to look after themselves, but we do still have about 140+ years to chew over! --MacRusgail (talk) 13:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, the above needs better sourcing to support notability per WP:CLUB. Anyone? – ukexpat (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above suggests that you believe that the content within the article is sufficient for the club to be deemed notable, and just needs sourcing for verifiability. However, just to be clear, is this the extent of your concern, or do you think that the article content itself needs to be more indicative of the notability of the club?Kwib (talk) 08:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a change to this template to allow the entry of tries, conversions, penalties and drop goals separately as "tryX", "conX", "penX" and "dropX", where "X" can be either "1" or "2", 1 being the "home" team and 2 being the "away" team. A trial of the modifications has been rolled out at 2009 British and Irish Lions tour to South Africa so that you can see how it works. – PeeJay 12:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

League[edit]

Maybe the union and league kids can get together and collaborate a new list as well as a new cat regarding league-2-union converts and vice versa..--Warpath (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that covered within List of players who have converted from one football code to another? Has sections within for converts in both directions.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, but doesn't that page look a little bit messed up ? ..--Warpath (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Dual-code rugby internationals if you aren't aware of that page Mattlore (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the dual internationalists, there are a number of converts who are single internationalists, or who have had notable careers without being capped.--MacRusgail (talk) 22:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what happened?[edit]

Is it me or since Shudde left, people have stop paying attention to articles and WP:RU completely? ...--Warpath (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speak for yourself, I still see hard work going into many regions of rugby articles; just may not be your region of interest. Also I don't see how this statement moves us foreward. FruitMonkey (talk) 21:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This used to be a busy section of WP:RU bu bad wikipolitics killed it ...--Warpath (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that statement; misdirection like the Irish flag debacle, I believe, has driven people away from the project. Though there are still quality articles being created and maintained. FruitMonkey (talk) 21:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Largely, because of my experience on the Irish flag issue, I for one have given up on the whole section because of, what I see as, the small-minded intransigance of a tiny clique who police any changes to these pages; I do not see it as a rational, open-minded collaborative effort at all. . MukDen (talk) 13:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you've given up on the project because of an issue that we have absolutely no control over, then I think you need to take a good look at your decision-making process. Personally, I can't believe you would give up on the project just because we can't use one particular image! – PeeJay 15:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are still a number of people beavering away, a number of whom use this talk page. I've been trying to create articles on rugby heritage from all corners of the world, and have created one or two Scottish ones. (Although Scottish rugby isn't really receiving much attention on wikipedia unfortunately - especially considering we're the second oldest rugby nation!)

I didn't like the Ireland fiasco myself, since there were several viable all Ireland alternatives available...--MacRusgail (talk) 22:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article names of RU tours to Northern Hemisphere[edit]

I'd like to open up a discussion which is going on around 1984 Australia rugby union tour of the British Isles and Ireland. This, and a number of other RU tours have been subject to multiple page name moves and I'm hoping that between us we could thrash out a policy for such tours to establish a definitive name which we can stick with.

Should it be "Britain and Ireland", which is my own preference, "British Isles" - politically controversial... "British Isles and Ireland", which doesn't seem to make a great deal of sense... or "something else"? Suggestions please!--Bcp67 (talk) 07:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not just the naming conventions for the countries, but the whole title should be discussed. I believe it should be YEAR / TOURING COUNTRY / rugby union tour of LIST OF TEST COUNTRIES PLAYED. Therefore if a tour takes in Canada, America, France, Ceylon, Zimbabwe as part of a larger tour, but no caps were awarded for the encounter, it is not named in the list. Also "Touring Country" is the actual name of the country and not the team's nickname. FruitMonkey (talk) 07:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would go for "Britain and Ireland", as you say "British Isles" while technically correct could annoy some people. The "British Isles and Ireland" is just wrong. I would also endorse FruitMonkey's suggestion on the wider naming convention. noq (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not entirely happy with that, but certainly less clunky.--MacRusgail (talk) 22:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

Came across a new article Harold Dingwall Bateson at first I thought it was a hoax as it said he played for Liverpool F.C. so I added speedy tag editor has now added source that he was capped for England could do with expert eyes. BigDunc 21:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he was capped for England in 1879. Just the once, but he's valid.FruitMonkey (talk) 21:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thats great thanks. BigDunc 21:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try and push Arthur Gould (rugby player) for Good Article status. If anyone wants to give the article a quick look over, or better still knows of a photo that can be used would be appreciated. FruitMonkey (talk) 21:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No idea on a photo I am afraid, but I'm willing to run a critical eye over the article and see how it stacks up against the GA criteria.--Bcp67 (talk) 17:07, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have managed to add two images since initial statement. A team photo of Gould as captain would be welcome. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see Arthur Gould has made it to GA status - good work!--Bcp67 (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-code rugby[edit]

Can I suggest that we should have an article on cross-code rugby? I have put some notes on the hybrid sports page, but it would be interesting to have some material on league-union games. I think these are probably more common than people realise, and took place during the wars in military set ups etc. --MacRusgail (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pontypridd RFC[edit]

Numerous people have, over the past few months, been working dilligently on the Pontypridd RFC wiki, trying to bring it up to scratch. We'd very much appreciate some solid feedback. Thanks so much. --Monkeynuts2008 (talk) 15:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone offer some help? I don't know anything about notability requirements for rugby union teams. I declined the speedy deletion on this userpage, but I had to block the username per WP:ORGNAME. - Dank (push to talk) 12:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of 1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team matches[edit]

I have nominated List of 1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team matches for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Idi Amin and the Lions[edit]

I have nominated myself Template_talk:Did_you_know#1955_British_Lions_tour_to_South_Africa

Did you know that "... that a young Idi Amin was reserve for the East Africa rugby union team when they played the 1955 British Lions tour to South Africa?"

Bcp67 has told me my edit made him/her "sit up", and this encouraged me to put this up. I don't know how many unusual rugby facts we get on the front page, but I hope you will support this one for the "Did you know?" section.--MacRusgail (talk) 19:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a him! Fruitmonkey gets a few facts on there from time to time. I'll give it my support.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry guys, it will get rejected. To be accepted for a DYK, the article must either be created within the last 7 days or be expanded by 500% over the same length of time. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did wonder about that and have stuck a note on MacRusgail's talk page to that effect - the fact also appears in his newly created article on the East Africa rugby union team but I fear that might not be long enough to meet the criteria.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then that's our way in; I've got some books with info on the East African team, but not much. It should be enough to get accepted as a DYK though. I'll give it some attention tomorrow.FruitMonkey (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Definitely a him!" - Sorry, no offence meant! --MacRusgail (talk) 01:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And none taken either!--Bcp67 (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The East Africa rugby union team page is now over the 1,500 character minimum for a DYK, I did a bit of expansion of the material. So I may try and resubmit this under the EA article rather than the Lions one. I also suspect that EA may have played other games, but it is very hard to track them down. The article got created yesterday (2:45 am here and I must go to bed), so there's still six days to play with.

By the way, if anyone's interested in the unusual corners of rugby, someone's created this article - Rugby union at the 2009 Maccabiah Games. The Maccabiah are basically the Jewish Olympics (and are partly a political exercise to get people to settle in Israel - but let's not go there!), and the teams that enter are amateurs from the various countries, and not up to the standards of the "real" national teams, but something I wasn't aware of until this year.

I'm hoping this isn't the last rugby DYK I can get. I'm sure there's more. (The South Sea Islanders playing their first international with a tree in the middle of the pitch?) Guid publiceety fur the eggba' an aw that... Thanks for the support. --MacRusgail (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

East Africa's on the front page today! Thanks for your help.--MacRusgail (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The oldest rugby club outside Europe?[edit]

Or so they claim.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation[edit]

As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to add a link to the source of the infomation found in players infoboxes? I'm thinking of something like the "|source=" field found in template:Infobox cricketer biography. Nev1 (talk) 17:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recently created an article on Angus Stuart, a little known Cardiff and Dewsbury player who toured with the British Isles team of 1888. On completion I found he linked to a New Zealand tour of 1893, and a list of New Zealand rugby union players. Does anyone have any information linking Angus Stuart from Cardiff to Angus Stuart the New Zealand player. They are surely the same person as Stuart settled in New Zealand after the tour, but I have no proof such as a date/place of birth or death to link the two together, and I don't want to enter information built on assumption. Cheers FruitMonkey (talk) 12:19, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've come across an article named The South (rugby) which describes the South district team which used to play against touring teams (and in the SRU district championship) in the amateur era. The title doesn't seem fully descriptive and I'm proposing to change it to something along the lines of South (Scottish rugby union team) or similar. Any thoughts from anyone?

The books I have that list the South Africa and New Zealand tours call this district side 'South of Scotland'. Is 'The South' a term used within Scotland to describe the team? FruitMonkey (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the Rothmans Yearbooks they use the phrase South of Scotland for the tour matches but just South in the results and tables of the SRU district championship.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article would be better with the article, or at "South of Scotland" (edit to add - SoS is probably better). Generally the name would mean anywhere in Scotland, south of the Central Belt (i.e. Glasgow-Edinburgh hinterland), but due to the dominance of the Borders, I suspect few players in it came from Dumfries and Galloway (although there are some notable players from the south west, such as Nick De Luca and Arthur Smith)--MacRusgail (talk) 20:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been bold and moved the article to South of Scotland rugby union team. I think "the South" is in common use in Scotland, but is not appropriate as an article title for several reasons. It's fine and well within a purely Scottish rugby context, but within an international one, I don't think it's helpful. --MacRusgail (talk) 20:13, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your boldness - I picked up the change and added a few links to tour articles, although I'm not here much at the moment.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might interest people to know that there was an article in The Scotsman the other day about the possible revival of this side.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, today is the 25th anniversary of their victory over Oz too, by the way.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A notable scalp, the Grand Slam Wallabies. Worth setting up a little table in the article of "games played against international opposition"? The Welsh clubs have tables like that. When I've finished with the 1975-76 Wallabies I might do it.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really sure what the best source for the info is. I'm also hoping to start an article on the (much less successful) North-Midlands/North and Midlands (etc - the spelling of that's complicated too) side. The SRU has neglected the north of Scotland, but I've got a sort of personal connection to northern rugby... so there's a personal angle there too!--MacRusgail (talk) 17:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing sections on this page?[edit]

Why is it impossible for me to edit individual sections on this page now? Is anyone else having this problem? – PeeJay 06:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've hit the same problem. FruitMonkey (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we ought to ask someone at the helpdesk for help! – PeeJay 19:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's an option to prevent section editing. Somebody had added it to this page. I've removed it. If it happens again, search the source for NOEDITSECTION and remove it.Jimmy Pitt (talk) 20:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.--Bcp67 (talk) 05:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fullback, Full back or Full-back[edit]

I've been picked up on a GA nominated article that I have used at different times all three spellings. Even the page Rugby union positions has used all three terms in different places. Could we come to a decision on the spellings as it will prevent updates further down the line. I'm going for 'full back' in the article as it appears to be the most common spelling in text books. While we are at it are there other positions that crop up with this problem, such as threequarter, three-quarter and three quarter. Cheers FruitMonkey (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say 'full back' is the most logical version and probably the most common too. And I can't edit sections either!--Bcp67 (talk) 16:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But this BBC page says "full-back"... – PeeJay 19:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is why it's a real problem. The RFU use full back in some pages while although only mentioned on the IRFU site on their Hall of fame they use fullback and full-back. Scrum.com use Fullback, but like PeeJay states, the BBC use full-back fairly constantly. I feel no closer to any option. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:56, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shute Shield RU early winners[edit]

I understood that the Sydney club Rugby comp started in 1900 but on the Shute Shield page it only has winners from 1906 onwards. I believe the old Glebe club won 4 titles and 1 each by Eastern Suburbs and the old South Sydney RU club in the period between 1900 and 1905.

It seems that things are a little confused on the Shute Shield page. First of all, the Shute Shield certainly was not contested as early as 1900 or 1906, it was presented to the NSWRU in 1923, so I guess either the 1923 or 1924 winner was the first one? Secondly, while the Shute Shield is currently the premier competition in NSW club rugby, it hasn't always been - e.g. from 2002 to 2006 it was an early-season competition which preceded the Tooheys New Cup, which was the main trophy for the year, and the "NSW Rugby Premiership 1900-2008" list I have here (in Rugby News from last week) lists the TNC winners as first grade premiers from 2002 to 2006.
According to that list, the premiers 1900-1905 were: 1900 - Glebe; 1901 - Glebe; 1902 - West Sub; 1903 - Easts; 1904 - Sydney Uni; 1905 - South Sydney. I'm reluctant to add that to the Shute Shield article, though, given that this was clearly not the Shute Shield being contested. --Stormie (talk) 23:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question on suitability of article[edit]

Hi all. I was planning to write an article about Reuben Paniora, a New Zealand-born Danish international (17 caps) who played professionally in Spain and passed away last year. Before I start writing, though (I have a good number of sources by the way), I would like to know if my article would be considered worth keeping or would be deleted for lack of notability. What do you think? McMarcoP (talk) 12:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tempted to say that Paniora wouldn't be notable, since Denmark is a Tier 3 rugby union nation, the lowest level of international rugby union there is, so I doubt that matches played by the Danish national team would be considered Test matches. However, if he played in the División de Honor de Rugby in Spain, then perhaps he would be notable. Which club(s) did he play for? – PeeJay 12:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to my sources, he played for three years for Granada University "as a professional". Must have been... let me see... 1998 to 2001. McMarcoP (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...OK, looks like CDU Granada is a SECOND division club. Weird that they could play a New Zealander's wages, for average the player could be. McMarcoP (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think, if he only played in the second division, that he's probably not notable. I mean, even players in the second division of English rugby don't seem to be notable, so I doubt that a player in the second division of Spanish rugby would be. – PeeJay 20:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, I agree. Too bad. McMarcoP (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not mention him on each of the individual articles?--MacRusgail (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banner/Template[edit]

WikiProject iconRugby Union
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rugby football 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.

Can someone help fix this? I'm trying to ad this to articles that are relevent such as Mob football.Rowlan (talk) 15:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is an existing template: {{WikiProject Rugby union}} already in use noq (talk) 17:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, added it to Mob Football. Rowlan (talk) 17:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Romania, Japan, Canada, Italy[edit]

I have had conflicting information for the first internationals of each of these countries. I suppose part of the problem is that the top tier rugby nations didn't award caps (for some reason) for teams playing these countries until relatively recently. I would be interested in any feedback on this matter.--MacRusgail (talk) 20:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? --MacRusgail (talk) 17:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Romania played against France in 1919, lost 48-5, probably no caps awarded. Japan, first matches I can find is the 1930 tour of Canada, which was reciprocated in 1932. This could be the first international competition for Canada too as their CRU was only founded in 1929, despite rugby being played in Canada since the 1860s. Though I am sure 'Canada' toured Wales in 1909/10. Italy founded their union in 1928, but their first accepted international was a 9-0 loss to Spain in Barcelona in 1929. That's the info I have, hope it helps. FruitMonkey (talk) 17:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I needed a second opinion on this. Canada in Wales sounds interesting, and is plausible. After all, if the future "SANZAR" countries sent over teams, why not Canada, where there were a good many players before Canadian football started to predominate.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Found it; in D.E.Davies' Cardiff Rugby Club; History and Statistics, he states that during the 1902/03 season a team from Canada, called the 'Canadians' toured the UK. On 7th January 1903, the Canadians had already played 11 games, losing 5, winning 5 and drawing 1 before being beaten by Cardiff. They played in blue jerseys and shorts and red stockings. I'm not sure who else they played, but it's a fairly interesting rugby fact from a North America angle. FruitMonkey (talk) 07:01, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A short sentence mentioning the tour is already mentioned on the Canadian team article, should have looked there first. FruitMonkey (talk) 07:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby union in the Soviet Union[edit]

Comrade editors, you may be interested in the article I am "growing" at my page User:MacRusgail/Rugby union in the Soviet Union. I intend to try and improve the references, and have got hold of the rugby article in the English language version of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.

So far, the article perhaps has a bit too much of an emphasis on some of the more unsavoury aspects of the USSR, but getting material has been difficult, and I would appreciate any advice. In particular, there is a story of a brawl in Moscow between Welsh and Romanian players, which resulted in the police getting involved. Some sources put it in the '30s, and others in the '50s. Or did Llanelli visit in both decades? Certainly the claim (in certain books) that it resulted in the game being banned in the USSR for several decades is untrue, although it may have diminished official support. I say this because there is evidence of the game being played in the '50s, '60s, '70s and '80s, and even around the early post-war period.--MacRusgail (talk) 20:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not cricket![edit]

There is a fascinating list of people who have played both high level rugby and cricket at List of cricket and rugby union players.

However, a quick look through the articles shows that many of them are heavily biased towards cricket, probably because they've been written off the cricinfo site. I've tried to make some amends, but some of the articles are really bad on the rugby side. For example, the English player Frank Mitchell's rugby career is given only in a tiny paragraph at the end, despite the fact that he captained the national team.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable?[edit]

I notice User:MBelgrano has tagged a number of rugby tour articles such as the 1952 Ireland rugby union tour of South America, British Lions tours, and French tours as "not notable". Needless to say, I have left a note here, and explained that these certainly are "notable". However, given my general lack of faith in Wikipedia bureaucracy, I'm surprised some administrator hasn't gone and deleted them! So keep a look out!

However, one of his/her other tags is perhaps more justifiable, since it was about context. It may be worth providing more context in these articles.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. Those teams are notable, nobody holds that in doubt, but those articles are not about the team: they are about a small number of matches and their results. They don't even seem to be about regular championships, or are they? The question is why do those matches deserve to have a specific article? This may be legitimate information but not for a stand-alone article as it is now. If those matches take place as part of a bigger tournament or championship, they should be merged in there. But if they were just exhibition games, if there isn't any more than the existence and results of the matches themselves, they should be deleted. MBelgrano (talk) 18:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect you might be a bit unfamiliar with rugby union history, which isn't intended as a criticism of you. These matches are about "tours" - in the amateur era of rugby union, before the World Cup and Tri-Nations and regular internationals between national teams in different hemispheres, it was commonplace for international teams to undertake a tour of a country or countries, playing matches both against the national side of those countries and against local clubs, select teams, and representive teams. The tradition lives on in the British and Irish Lions tours. It makes perfect sense for a rugby union tour to have a stand-alone tour - the games and players of the tour are notable, and generally notability is asserted on these sort of articles by citation of a written reference or a website. Some of the tour articles are fairly bare stubs but others (e.g. 1981-82 Australia rugby union tour of Britain and Ireland) are more detailed. Hope that helps to clarify.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:08, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair comment about context though - I've just had a look at 1954 France rugby union tour of Argentina and it's dreadful - no lead, no context, headings without content, I can understand why it looks worth deleting.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]