User talk:Redbacks Rugby

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. If you prefer to be unblocked for the purpose of changing your username to a username which complies with our username policy, so that your contributions with this username are recorded as contributions of your new username and rather than creating a new account, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice instead. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 18:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Here are a few key questions:
 * Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a team directory?
 * Do you understand conflict of interest?
 * Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. In regards to the key questions:

But I didn't create the one page I did purely for directory purposes. I did it for historical purposes. I didn't know that my local club was incorporated in 1992 until the night I did the research to create the page. I live in a well established but rapidly growing area - 25 years ago only 800 people lived here, the current Wikipedia entry claims roughly 6,000, the most recent census lists 11,500 in the area (using Statistical Area, which I believe is what was used in the previous Wikipedia edit). Most residents don't know the history of the area. With only 20 years' history, I can't claim that there's a massive historical significance, not yet. Though clearly it has more history than the vast majority of the roughly 300 players would know. I don't hold all knowledge on this subject. Far from it. I believe I left an 'Under Construction' note at the top. I may be wrong, but I meant to do so. My hope is that others might join Wikipedia and add to my contribution. That said, if they're not to be too closely tied to the subject, then, with the extraordinarily poor standards of journalism around here (the club made finals in every division this year, won titles in U13's and U17's, didn't rate a single mention in the local papers), then fleshing out the article might be difficult...
 * I am being clearly shown that this is not a directory. That said, there's plenty of articles out there that appear to be little more than directories...  This one, for example.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_Zealand_rugby_league_clubs


 * I believe I have minimized any possible conflict of interest. My son plays for the club (juniors), I do not.  I am not paid by the club.  I did not write anything without external sources.  I did not cite anything published by myself.  I wasn't campaigning, self-promoting (my name's not mentioned on any of the links I posted - it's deliberately not listed anywhere publicly on Wikipedia, including here) or biased.  I don't believe that anything I posted was controversial or not able to be backed up by other sources not related to myself, and most times also the club.


 * In terms of the subject being notable... The entry was intended to be understood as still under construction.  I don't have all the information on the club.  I looked hard online to find more information, but it seems its all in hard copy format.  I found one photo of a premiership team (which I linked) and another reference in a massive pdf file (which I didn't link).  So it's not easy for me to list final table positions for each year, as other clubs might do.  I have listed some premiership wins (it's not exhaustive, ref issues with local publications).  I haven't listed former players yet as I don't have a list.  I'm not that person, I don't have those contacts.  I know that one current player made the second highest level in his age group this year (Queensland representative at schoolboy level), but I'd imagine others would have more information on those forms of lists.  Further, being a reasonably young club (20 years old, with another 8 or so years history before incorporation, compared to clubs which can be up to 130 years old in this state), notability should increase over time, and as such a page like the one I created - which could arguably be considered a place holder if current notability is not sufficient - could be a good start for further expansion.

Further to notability, I will note that my article provided as much detail as many similar club pages. It seems most Rugby clubs in Australia haven't bothered with a Wikipedia page, however, my searches on New Zealand Rugby League clubs showed that many have little if any more information than my page, and generally have far fewer references. In fact, most seem to be linked only to the club's website, and maybe other Wikipedia pages. Take a look at the following long-standing pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wainuiomata_Lions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngongotaha_Chiefs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taniwharau_Rugby_League_Club

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papakura_Sea_Eagles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manurewa_Marlins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangere_East_Hawks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Coast_Bays_Barracudas

Further again, it appears that one of my edits has resulted in the deletion of a long-established page. A page that I'm guessing has existed for a good while (I didn't create the page), and had clearly been previously approved. I don't understand why adding a few links to existing text resulted in the deletion of quite a lengthy article, given that article had seemingly previously been approved. I do recognise that it was clearly a direct copy and paste from another source, it was already clearly listed as such and listed as having shared copyright. Perhaps an email to Downs Rugby could've confirmed that to be the case, rather than deleting the page..? Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the article was written for both websites. It could, in fact, be that Downs Rugby were the offending party, the second publisher...

Lastly, I created my original username because it was late, I couldn't think of much else, I didn't pick up on the rule, and clearly, with my son playing for them (juniors), it made sense to use that as a fan name. I would appreciate the opportunity to continue, to change my username, to reinstate my page. However, if you decide otherwise, then I will accept your decision and end things here, rather than wasting everyone's time by creating a new username to make the same mistakes and have the same differences of interpretation. Not on the same topics, just in general.

Thanks. :-)


 * Of course most rugby clubs do not have Wikipedia articles: most of them fail the notability requirements for rugby clubs - we don't do placeholders while waiting for notability to occur, because that's crystal balling - same with movies and people. The fact that some articles may have slipped through the cracks temporarily is a case of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS - there are millions of articles and a thousand admins; sometimes it takes us longer to delete the chaff.  Note that in no circumstances can copyright violations be permitted to stay on Wikipedia - period - and "shared copyright" does not meet Wikipedia's requirements. (make sure you click the blue links in my comments)  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd have previously thought that most clubs didn't have entries because most clubs (such as my local one) are run by volunteers, who are often people that aren't necessarily competent online and who are almost as busy as Wikipedia administrators. I certainly didn't realize there was a rugby-specific notability section. In fact, I'd be amazed if more than 1% of your fellow administrators know, given Wikipedia's breadth, and given this is the first time I've seen it linked, yet the third time I've seen links about this article's lack of notability. And given Wikipedia's diversity, I'm a little surprised at how strict the notability test for rugby clubs is. I can understand that Wikipedia's not Facebook (i.e. no one wants to read about me, let alone what I had for breakfast), but I did think that it would be a little more broad than it clearly (as in, shown by unambiguous requirements) is.

My 'other rubbish exists' argument was more an explanation of why I thought what I'd created was up to the mark, not a request for other pages to be removed. I thought I'd followed things fairly clearly, and maintained the standard that had been set by other articles. That is, what I wrote was clear, concise, and well supported by multiple alternative sources. The whole 'place holder' thing, well, as I explained, I considered the page unfinished. Under Construction. I don't have all the details, for all I know the club might well have provided a few high level players. Sadly, any who have been through the club do tend to be identified by their school, not the club (as was the case with this year's state schoolboys representative, listed by his school, not the club). That said, I imagine if anyone had made a level high enough for notability, someone around the club would've said something, or there'd be signs up around the club house. So I'm happy to concede. I guess I just have to hope that one of the kids going through the ranks eventually makes it to the top level, then the club will reach Wikipedia's standards for notability.

Thanks for your patience with me. I've one last request - could you please delete my account? Editing/writing for Wikipedia suddenly seems like too much work! I can't imagine the headache that administering it must be.


 * We don't delete accounts - however, if you really want to disappear, you can simply blank the contents of this page and not edit again in the future. All the best, and you're right - hopefully someone someday does make it to the big time :-)  (side note: the notability guidelines for rugby, footy, etc simply expand the general notability guidelines and puts it in terms that those editors would be readily familiar with, as per WP:CONSENSUS).  Be safe!  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)