Talk:2024 Women's Six Nations Championship

Rugby union Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union 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.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's sport

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

World Rankings[edit]

@House of Laughs what is the reasoning behind adding the world rankings, it doesn't seem necessary and hasn't been on any of pages of previous tournaments other than the men's. LouisOrr27 (talk) 00:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for discussion[edit]

"Ban" is the more commonly used wording surrounding player sanctions. I have provided legitimate sources in previous edit summaries which were thrown out. I will list them + more here.

Suspension is used in the official press release as pointed out, however under WP:PLAINENGLISH the word "ban" is much more suitable than "suspension" as "ban" is used across all sport. LouisOrr27 (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @House of Laughs as they have made contributions to this section previously. LouisOrr27 (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel: I've asked twice that you please discuss this matter. I'm going to go ahead and make the change I've described above. If you revert without responding here, then I'm going to have to file a complaint against you at ANI for disruptive editing by reverting without discussing.— LouisOrr27 (talk) 21:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Since this was a thing started by the two of us, I want to hear a third opinion before I weigh in. Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested at WP:3O LouisOrr27 (talk) 23:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion declined. This process is for resolving disputes that have been discussed and come to a standstill. Try to agree amongst yourselves first. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 14:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel LouisOrr27 (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel: Your reverts with the summary "GO AWAY" are not a good look. You have not discussed the changes with LouisOrr27 at all, not to mention the incivility. You cannot ignore and/or dismiss other editors to make a content dispute "go away" (no pun intended). Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 21:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the edits you have reverted don't even have anything to do with this dispute, which leads me to believe you are engaging in ownership. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 21:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, this person never uses the edit summary and never talks, so therefore I cannot possibly make a conversation with them. They are consistently making the same edit which both Louis and I disagree with and are never explaining why. That's why I have enough and told them to go away. Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 21:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an excuse to be uncivil. At least explain your reason's against it. LouisOrr27 (talk) 21:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking more of a third opinion of someone who actually edits here. So here is the official term used regarding players not allowed to player for being naughty:

The disciplinary updates of all three players suspended, including both the report on the Six Nations website and reports of their hearings, the Six Nations Committee use the word "suspend" six times and "ban" none at all. World Rugby also used "suspend" in disciplinary update for literally every player that gets cited. Never ever do they use "ban". Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 21:23, 2 May 2024

What you have listed are the official press releases, official releases use official language and terminology which isn't always necessary. As pointed out by myself originally, the term "suspension" and "ban" mean the same thing, "ban" is a lot easier to understand. News outlets, clubs and other sports use "ban" when discussing player sanctions". LouisOrr27 (talk) 21:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then why is the official release name, the name used by WR, of Falmer Stadium in the article of the next WRWC, "Brighter and Hove Albion Stadium", which is not the real name at all, appropriate, but not the term "suspension"? Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 21:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In major sporting event's stadiums often change names, all articles on major sporting events use the name that the stadium has during the event. You are comparing apples to oranges. Like I have said twice, news outlets, clubs and other sports use "ban" when discussing player sanctions as it is easier to understand. And please don't call this an "absurd claim" like you did in this edit summary, stop claiming ownership of the article. Further more, all of the following articles (and more) use the term "ban" -

1. 2023 Rugby World Cup statistics

2. 2019 Rugby World Cup statistics

3. 2023–24 Premiership Women's Rugby

4. 2024 Six Nations Championship

5. 2023–24 Premiership Rugby LouisOrr27 (talk) 22:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you prove I "claim ownership of this article"? Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Telling other contributors to "go away", using emojis in edit summaries, describing legitimate sources as "absurd" because they don't match up with your beliefs, removing content because you don't think it's right even though it is used on the much larger and more recognisable Men's six nations page. On this version of your talk page, you mention "narcissism", "go away" (again), "not have to interact with anyone else I dislike" here you describe sources as "left-wing" and the "The Internet must push back". This sounds a lot like WP:JUST. You are obviously not going to change your mind as you haven't done so previously and I don't really want to consider discussing this matter with someone like yourself. I want to make Wikipedia a better place for all. I'm considering this discussion as stalled. LouisOrr27 (talk) 22:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And how is comparing what WR says about naming places and how the address citings "apples and oranges"? What difference is there? Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 22:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries[edit]

You both really oughta start using edit summaries or the edit warring between you two will never cease. Stop reverting each other and discuss. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 12:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel has been blocked indefinitely. Not even sure why they were reverting the edits. House of Laughs also blocked for 24 hours. LouisOrr27 (talk) 09:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]