Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union

Latest comment: 23 days ago by Primefac in topic Missing images
WikiProject Rugby Union announcements and open tasks
watch · edit · discuss
Announcements and News

Articles for deletion

(33 more...)

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Good article nominees

Requested moves

Articles for creation

Request for review: Limassol Crusaders


Current Collaboration - None

Requested articles


Add this to-do list to your User page! {{WPRU Announcements}}

WikiProject iconRugby union Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Fifita family edit

Hello - I have a query re: the Fifita family that I would welcome input on.

Category:Fifita professional wrestling family is about a family from Tonga that emigrated to the United States. However, one of the in-laws, Steve Fifita, is an Australian rugby union player.

Category:Fifita family is about a family of Australian rugby union players of Tongan descent.

My query is, are these two separate families that just happen to share a surname, or are they branches of the same family?

Any input welcome. McPhail (talk) 20:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Craig Joubert edit

Could someone else look over the Craig Joubert article. There are some Australian ips doing some revisionist history to the 2015 quarter final. Aircorn (talk) 09:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't call that revisionist history, but then again I do think Joubert (intentionally or not) screwed over Scotland in that match. Either way, the changes are non-neutral and disruptive so I have protected it for a bit. Primefac (talk) 10:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the protection. Definitely not intentional (mistakes happen), but the match and unfortunately for Joubert his career is known for how that game ended. To twist the narrative to say that awarding Australia a scrum instead of a penalty mid way through the second half that later led to a Scotland try is the more important call is mad. If someone can clean that up as I must be close to 3RR it would be great (I see it is mentioned in the lead too now). Cheers Aircorn (talk) 15:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Imagine finding a page where a ref made 2 mistakes that led to points for either side, editing out only one of them and accusing others of bias and revisionist history.
At the very least, the shocked pikachu face that you no doubt made when you discovered that not everybody in the world subscribes to the sob story you like to push will live rent free in your mind for many years. (talk) 08:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sports table edit

@AFC Vixen, Rugby.change, Stevie fae Scotland, BubbaJoe123456, Ruggalicious, Primefac, and Bcp67: In the last discussion I could find we agreed to use sports table for automatic formatting, consistency checking of rugby sports tables. Has anything changed since this discussion? I ask because User:Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel is continuing to revert tables back to the old format. I can understand if it is easier to update tables that are currently in progress, but seems strange to do this for tables that are no longer changing. these wholesale reverts are also re-introducing errors that need to be subsequently corrected like missing scores, typos and links to the wrong external results, ... if there is no longer consensus to update these tables to use Module:Sports table, please let me know. Frietjes (talk) 16:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Frietjes, as I mentioned in a reply to an earlier message, it's all very well to say that something has been agreed to, but people will still carrying on doing their own thing. I personally like the sports table format, it's much easier to use, you don't have to keep changing rows for league position changes, and has the automatic checking, but I think you are fighting a losing battle there. Bcp67 (talk) 17:49, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I do not see where the actual agreement to exclusively move on with the module was actually made. I see only arguments for and against using it. That being said, the whole argument was brought up by a user who chose personal beef with me and has not been active since August. I say where the module has already been used, such as the Super Rugby competitions, it might as well stay, but with Six Nations, the Top 14, the URC, every English league where it just makes it uglier, no. Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I don't appreciate you characterising me as "a user who chose personal beef with me" when the opposite is true. You started this with what an administrator described as "clear stonewalling" to prevent Module:Sports table from being used on the Top 14 pages.[1] An RfC was unanimous in upholding the change, but despite you claiming initially to accept this resolution to the dispute,[2] you later reverted it again.[3] You have since openly wrote about your hatred of me and your perverse thoughts about my motives,[4][5] called my contributions "gibberish",[6] "rubbish",[7] and "wasting time and energy",[5] called me "lazy" twice,[4][8] bullied me for a copying error,[9] and even (poorly) attempted to gaslight me by rewriting a reply, editing the page, and pretending an issue I had didn't exist.[10][11] You have also said many things coloured in battleground and ownership behaviour, such as "This is not broken, therefore it does NOT need fixing. Therefore it will NOT be fixed",[12] "I do not need you deliberately saying everything is garbage because it isn't",[4] "Stop wasting my time. We're doing it the same way [...] and that is final",[5] and "don't touch the stuff I touch."[13]
These pages and templates simply do not belong to you, Mikey. If you honestly thought you could continue to disparage me here many months after we last interacted, thinking that I somehow wouldn't be here to see that, then that's only further proof on top of what I've presented here of how little respect you seem to have for the dissenting opinions of others. — AFC Vixen 🦊 14:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bcp67 and Frietjes: The disruptive actions of a single editor shouldn't be construed as a "losing battle", or a change in the RfC consensus and the productive dialogue in the aforementioned discussion. Just revert their edits, and if they continue to engage in edit warring, there's always WP:ANI. — AFC Vixen 🦊 14:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
AFC Vixen thank you for the support, but I have already tried Just revert their edits and it doesn't work if I am the only one doing the reverting and it doesn't address the root cause of the problem (just creates more work and edit warring). is the next step an (1) another poll here, (2) RFC to get more input, (3) ANI to get more administrators involved, or ... Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I wouldn't mind 3, 2, and 1 in that order. There's no harm in gathering more opinions, further improving Module:Sports table, and trying to reach an even stronger consensus on its wider use. However, there'll be no point if an editor is allowed to continue using disruptive editing to prevent its usage. — AFC Vixen 🦊 08:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for tagging me Frietjes. I agree with AFC Vixen, if one editor is going against consensus at RfC and engaging in disruptive editing then reporting at ANI is the way to go. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I also agree with AFC Vixen (and Frietjes and Stevie fae Scotland). By the way, I have now used this rugby sports table template for a few competitions and it's so much easier to use than the old tables. I really don't understand why someone would be reluctant to accept this template. After all, albeit to be used sparingly, there is some scope for minor variations within the template to make it suitable for different types of competitions and tournaments. Ruggalicious (talk) 10:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

International caps edit

This might be a daft question, but would it make sense to have a template/module that stores the international cap/points information for the players on those teams? I feel like the international teams are more likely to have a good record of who played for them (at least moreso than the club teams) and would make updating the information in infoboxes etc a lot easier because it will all be in a central location (as opposed to for example updating the caps for each player on each team after a Six Nations weekend). I'm not necessarily wanting to talk about exact implementation or coding at the moment, just wondering if this is something that folks would find useful. Primefac (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Good idea I think, the issue is getting the accurate data. With ESPNScrum no longer reliable, there isn’t really a great pool to pull this data all from. RodneyParadeWanderer (talk) 21:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Bah... that's a good point. I was thinking of the teams' websites directly, but the second place I checked (Scotland) doesn't seem to have historical records (even for someone like Stuart Hogg who only just left). Primefac (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
It’s very hit and miss. The WRU have a decent archive, but only display match details for players who have played within the last year. Itsrugby probably is the closest, but it has some accuracy errors. RodneyParadeWanderer (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Duhan van der Merwe edit

Some recent edits at the above are junk and I semi-protected the article for a week to reduce the excitement. However I'm not sure how much should be reverted and I'm hoping someone here can fix. Thanks! Johnuniq (talk) 22:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, he most certainly doesn't weigh 100 tons :-p Primefac (talk) 10:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Missing images edit

It was brought to my attention that there may be a large number of rugby players that do not have images in their infobox, are not tagged (on the talk page) with |needs-infobox=yes, yet there does exist an image (e.g. Aaron Mauger and File:Aaron Mauger 2023.png). If I set up some sort of tracking category to indicate these "articles with image but missing an image" would folks be willing to help out and depopulate the cat? Primefac (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

if there is a tracking category I can help get through a few. Skeene88 (talk) 19:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Tracking category set up at Category:Pages calling infobox rugby biography with available image (15). It might take some time to populate though. Primefac (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wales WRU board edit

After looking at the article Wales Rugby Union, I felt it needed some updating in comparison to other articles. Not every rugby nation has a specific executive article, in fact, upon inspection, only Wales, New Zealand Rugby, and Rugby Australia have articles specific for management and executive personnel, and Wales seems to be the only nation with a President list, albeit unsourced. I wanted to look into improving Wales' WRU article with relevance to updating the content and rewriting the article to bring it to a higher standard. Any suggestions or ideas on how or if this should be done? Cltjames (talk) 13:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)Reply