Template talk:Rugby union stadium

Switch conversion done
, I've converted the template to be switchable and hopefully avoid the plethora of wrapping templates. This one was easy compared to rut! I haven't converted any article-space uses yet, figured I'd let you have a look-over just so that you can make sure I didn't miss something obvious. Primefac (talk) 13:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Rus Danie Craven Stadium and a few others contain sc. I haven't looked into why. Many others contain ol, which appears to have been removed from the template a while ago. The pages in are sorted by the first unsupported parameter that is encountered in the article, but some Rus templates may use more than one unsupported parameter. If ol is not needed, it might be worth a quick run through the Rus templates to remove it so that other unsupported templates can be highlighted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:43, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Probably won't get a chance to look at detail until the weekend, but will add it to my list. Will make sure there's no obvious redirects either. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ol and sc are not, and as near as I can tell never, used in this template, so it's no great loss to ignore them. Primefac (talk) 19:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Name change?
Any opposition to changing this to rugby union stadium for increased clarity? rus would still be usable as a template redirect, but I've been trying to get the template space more user-friendly by expanding abbreviated names like this. Primefac (talk) 13:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I support moving this template to a more comprehensible name, following the pattern of template renamings like tlx. Definitely leave a redirect because it is much easier to type and people are used to it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No issue with the name change, Rus can be confusing for a non-rugby union fan or even rugby union editors who don't use them regularly. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Use of this template, incl when a stadium name changes due to sponsorship changes, and adding "subst" or not
Requesting input from, , and others on a subject of a discussion I've been having with  on his talk page, before it escalates into more unfriendliness from both sides and childish "revenge" edits. The cause of the discussion is a massive amount of changes made by PeeJay to articles relating to the NPC, Heartland Championship and the Ranfurly Shield, without discussing the changes with considerable impact on the talk pages first and often lumping them all together in very extensive edits without an appropriate edit summary. Although not entirely happy with changing all instances of to  (not collapsed), because a long list of match results with scorers creates a diarrhoea of words that is hard to read for people with dyslexia, I can see that the change may be necessary for readers with mobile devices (depending on operating system), so I'm accepting change. Also the removal of icons with the provincial (NPC) team colours – while deplorable from a historic viewpoint – is something I'm not contesting. I'm willing to be flexible.

However, the removal – without prior discussion – of the Template:Rugby union team and Template:Rugby union stadium ( 🇷🇺 ) is something I would like to bring to your attention, as PeeJay seems to be relitigating the use of these templates, after bringing up his arguments before on the talk page of the rut template [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Rugby_union_team#Why_are_there_so_many_individual_templates? here].

1. First of all, PeeJay is of the opnion that templates should not be used as replacements for simple links. IMO, that's exactly what the 🇷🇺 and templates are for and the extensive use of these templates shows that many editors agree with that use.

2. Second, PeeJay is against the use of the 🇷🇺 template for stadium name changes as a result of changes in stadium sponsorship. He's of the opinion that the original "unsponsored" names should be used. IMO the template is exactly intended for usage in these situations of sponsorship changes. It's literally mentioned in the template's description! Also, sticking to the unsponsored name where that name hasn't been used for years and the sponsored names are used in competition draws, media articles and countless other sources during the relevant rugby season, makes that unsponsored name unsupported by referenced sources and, therefore, unverifiable (in violation of WP:PROVEIT). It's also unnecessary, because the use of the 🇷🇺 template with new stadium names in case of sponsorship changes, does keep the connection with the stadium's unsponsored name through the link to the article about that stadium, which should include a description of the name changes that the stadium has had over time.

3. The third point of difference is a more technical point. PeeJay is of the opinion that editors should add to the start of the template before saving the article if editors use the template to replace a "simple link". IMO that isn't necessary at all. First of all, if a new stadium name is added to the 🇷🇺 template, the instances where the template has been used with an old name still work perfectly as long as those old names haven't been removed from the template (they shouldn't). I'd like to hear from someone with more technical (coding) knowledge whether should or should not be added when using the 🇷🇺 template (or  template for that matter).

A practical example: an old sponsorship name for Rugby League Park is 🇷🇺. Due to sponsorship changes, the stadium is now called 🇷🇺. As you can see, both uses of the template (unilaterally removed by PeeJay from many articles) work perfectly fine without adding, and link to the article about Rugby League Park as they should. If has to be added each time the 🇷🇺 template is being used, I'd be interested in getting an explanation for it.

The points raised in relation to the 🇷🇺 template are also relevant to the template. Looking forward to your comments. Ruggalicious (talk) 01:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you ask for feedback by posting a link to this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union, which appears to be pretty active. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * As discussed before, I like using the templates, especially for NPC teams as they are far easier to use than typing out the full team names, especially when used frequently. Local consensus since I've been editing southern hemisphere rugby union articles has been for the use of the 🇷🇺 templates and use of sponsored names as they tend to be the common names of the stadiums. Over the years I've never in the press seen Rugby League Park called Rugby League Park, always the respective sponsored name and similar for other stadia. I appreciate this is different from northern hemisphere sides, where stadia tend to have more formal names, and then occasional sponsorship that isn't widely used my the media etc. On point 3 I'm no expert on coding, but see no issue with adding  before or not. Both  and 🇷🇺 are designed to work without having to add it as you can add new names and teams to the templates easily, but I suppose it's an added layer of protections as such, if someone edits/removes the templates. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 08:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * No, sure, thanks for finishing the conversation on my talk page before starting this one. Really good wikiquette there. Anyway, I don't care which name is used for a stadium as long as we're not using templates to perform the function of a simple link. If typing out Rugby League Park is harder than typing out 🇷🇺 then I don't know what to do. Even typing Canterbury isn't really that hard, and you only have to do it once (Ctrl+C, anyone?). Anyway, this whole discussion shows a bit of a lack of understanding of my criticism of these templates. I'll expand on this when I get home from holiday; in the meantime, I'd love to hear what arguments anyone can come up with in favour of these templates because I certainly can't think of any reason to use a template in place of a simple link. – PeeJay 09:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Regarding I certainly can't think of any reason to use a template in place of a simple link - compare  to , which both display as . In three characters I have done what you would do in twenty three. Now, your Rugby League Park example is a case where it is easier to type the link (as they're the same), but picking the most trivial example as a reason why we should not use the template at all misses the point almost as much as someone who says we must always use the template. I haven't yet read through Ruggalicious' wall of text so I too will likely revisit this discussion as more comments come in, but I did want to at least reply to that statement. Primefac (talk) 11:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)