User talk:Fleets/Archive 7

Revert on Jack Broadbent
Hello, your evert on Jack Broadbent cannot be claimed as standard as MOS:SMALL indicates "Avoid using smaller font sizes within page elements that already use a smaller font size, such as most text within infoboxes, navboxes, and references sections. This means that  tags, and templates such as and, should not be applied to plain text within those elements. In no case should the resulting font size of any text drop below about 85% of the page's default font size. Note that the HTML  tag has a semantic meaning of fine print; do not use it for stylistic changes." which means that there should be no use of small text in infoboxes. It there something that indicates there should be then it needs changing. Keith D (talk) 18:23, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * We'd have a problem if we were making the South Queensland Crushers small, but the (loan), something that is not even hyperlinked is not something covered by the overarching rule.Fleets (talk) 19:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Of cause it applies as it makes the text font too small for accessibility purposes. Keith D (talk) 19:19, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't have considered that, but then there are people who are extremely visually impaired, and as such I've addressed the issue. It doesn't look great, but the current revision does not adversely impact the visuals and aesthetics for all, and it allows the extremely visually impaired to read the word, I've got decent sight and I can honestly read the word loan within the brackets at over six feet away.Fleets (talk) 10:49, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Fleets

Thank you for creating 2022 London Broncos season.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;    (contact)   15:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Links to draft articles
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to 2021 London Broncos season and 2022 London Broncos season. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:48, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

MOS
Is the MOS for sportsball pages really to have every year broken down like that? Seems archaic. But thanks for the fix - I didn't know this. Nauseous Man (talk) 08:01, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I would break it down by club, and out into international teams, but as an Australian dominated sport, we have to follow the Australian led MOS for this sport.Fleets (talk) 08:03, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Controversy
Are you saying that the decision of each of the seven to refuse to wear the jersey is not controversial? Whether or not it is “their personal controversy”, and I wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion that it is not, is of little consequence. There is no question that it is very controversial - it is a massive story here in Australia, and as it is not about on-field performance, a new section, Controversy, is justified. In my experience, from editing a lot of NRL player pages some years back, when one of them gets into something highly controversial off-field, and plenty have, up comes a new section, "Controversy", to take note of it. This is no different. And the story is not going to go away. Boscaswell  talk  07:53, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If it were something that they had done, ie been arrested for a DUI, battery, sexual assault, etc or even a relatively minor charge then absolutely. This is the refusal to support, ie to go from the middle to the other side and actively support their position. Were the seven to go from the middle and demand a change in lifestyle that would be controversial because that would be demanding support for the sevens position. Not supporting Manchester United, NY Yankees or the Brisbane Broncos is ok, but actively campaigning against them would be. The seven are choosing not to support a position, not actively campaigning against it. The seven have the freedom to request to be stood down, and many other sporting organisations would allow their staff not to wear rainbow laces, a poppy, to kneel or not to kneel, etc. I'm afraid the world would have gone mad if a religious player not supporting a position he does not believe in (not actively against, but just not pro it) is given the same weight as sexual or physical violence, drugs or financial crime.Fleets (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Whether or not it’s a controversy in which they’ve played a major role - and I would argue that it is - is of little consequence. It is fact that their actions are highly controversial and are very notable. Do you agree?  Boscaswell   talk  09:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I see it through the prism of relativism, ie inaction vs action, and not playing vs a crime (There are many charges & crimes committed by NRL players over the years, and this does not even come close). Additionally the players are one of seven. The controversy seems to be media related, rather than related to actions taken by the individuals themselves, and on that basis there is no reason for this to be considered their controversies. Could it be considered one for the club in their season article, absolutely, but the players choosing not to play after being asked to affirm a position they do not believe in is not controversial in the slightest at an individual level.Fleets (talk) 10:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Fleets. Thank you for creating Thomas Jenkins (rugby league). User:Hughesdarren, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Hughesdarren (talk) 12:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Fleets. Thank you for creating Jack Cole (rugby league). User:Hughesdarren, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Hughesdarren (talk) 12:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Fleets. Thank you for creating Connor Moore. User:Bruxton, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bruxton (talk) 18:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

end dates for representative teams
You're flying against Infobox_rugby_league_biography#RL_representative_players by adding "present" as the end date for players selected for World Cup squads. Worth a discussion at WP:RL before changing any more. Nthep (talk) 13:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * When players have been named, the previous position that it was the accepted norm. We would be stating a player has retired from international rugby league before a tournament starts, during it, etc. Not exactly the message that we might want to send to the layperson or even the well-initiated. We are flying against the status-quo, but in and around tournament time was previously accepted as very much the logical course of action to state a player had not retired from international rugby league.Fleets (talk) 13:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)