Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Rugby Union announcements and open tasks
watch · edit · discuss
Announcements and News

Articles for deletion

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Templates for discussion

(40 more...)

Good article reassessments

Articles to be merged

Articles for creation

Request for review: Limassol Crusaders

Collaboration

Current Collaboration - None
Nominations

Requested articles

more

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


Stadium names discussion

[edit]

I am noticing a lot of inconsistency with stadium names on many rugby seasons articles as to whether they use the stadium sponsored names or using the common names that the articles are under. So I would like to start a discussion here to determine whether we use the sponsored names or if we follow the unofficial rule that football articles do and only use sponsored names if the venue has never had a non-sponsored name. My personal opinion is that we should use the non-sponsored names of the stadium articles across rugby union articles for consistency but what do others think? The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My preference would be to use the WP:COMMONNAME for the stadium. This in Europe/Northern Hemisphere tends to be a non-sponsored name, whereas in the Southern Hemisphere tends to be a sponsored name (if there is one). In the past 5/10 seasons or so I don't think I've seen Lang Park used more than once of twice, with Suncorp Stadium being used almost exclusively and this seems to be a common theme in NZ/Aus/SA. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Rugbyfan22. From my experience, the USA also follows the NZ/Aus/SA pattern. The UK is 100% the opposite though. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly do agree there are exceptions in the Southern Hemisphere and in the USA where some sponsor names are COMMONNAME. I'd say, in the Northern Hemisphere in the British Isles and Europe at least, the only stadium we should be using a sponsored name for is the Aviva Stadium as that has only borne that name since it was built. The reason I was asking to go for the COMMONNAME/non-sponsored route is simply to follow the unofficial guidance FOOTY does in trying to avoid product placement where we can on Wikipedia. (We already see the big arguments that go on about referencing Twickenham's sponsored name off-wiki for example). The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest FOOTY use this way because football isn't particularly big (in comparison to European countries anyway) in NZ/AUS/SA/USA. If you were to look at A-League (Australia) or MLS (USA) articles I'd imagine all the stadium are listed as their sponsored names. I'd be in preference of being different from FOOTY for this reason and just use the WP:COMMONNAMES for the stadiums depending on competition (UK and Europe use non-sponsored with exceptions (Aviva, Swansea.com etc) and in the Southern Hemisphere comps such as Super Rugby, NPC the sponsored ones. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you agree. Its been becoming endemic on English rugby seasons for both men and women and it just doesn't look right at all. Do you think we need to formally put this on the MOS or on the project page? The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 15:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest we need more participation for formalisation (although engagement has been poor on the project recently). There have been others in separate discussions who may wish to offer a view. I'm guessing on English rugby seasons people are using the sponsored names which I'd suggest would be incorrect? Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'd suggest that for the URC (featuring SA teams) we should wholly use non-sponsored, rather than sponsored for the SA teams/stadia and non-sponsored for the other, just for consistency in the tournament. The Currie Cup should use sponsored stadia names. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think we should go for a formal RFC @Rugbyfan22:? The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure a formal RFC would be needed, just a bit more participation in this discussion here. This would just be local policy for this WikiProject so really just needs input from rugby union editors, rather than a full on RFC with wider WikiSports input which likely would differ from the consensus discussed so far. Perhaps notifying regular rugby editors on season/tournament pages in both European and Southern Hemisphere competitions. I know I have discussed this topic with @Ruggalicious: before (a regular NZ rugby editor) on similar changes he was seeing to tournament articles on the removal on sponsored names. Not sure if you've discussed with any editors on talk pages previously. Just need a few more opinions really before confirming local consensus. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 13:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sponsored names should be standard practice for accuracy. Sponsored names should only be removed for World Cups per world rugby guidelines. There should not be one practice for uk and one practice for rest of world. Either go with or without sponsors, I support sticking with. SimplyLouis27 (talk) 23:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do you square that with WP:COMMONNAME? I highly doubt people are going to be regularly saying "Cinch (other used car retailers are available) Stadium at Franklin's Gardens" and they certainly are never going to be renaming the Twickenham article to name it after Allianz. As has been pointed out above, the sitation is different between the British Isles and Europe with the Southern Hemisphere and US. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As much as I know it will cause consternation amongst other sports and some MOS diehards, I think we have to go with the common names used by these stadiums; I'd never heard of Barnet Copthall until clicking on a StoneX Stadium redirect, and Sydney Football Stadium (2022) is just a rather clunky way to talk about Allianz Stadium (and "cinch Stadium at Franklin's Gardens" is a dumb name and rightfully not the article title). The only issue with this might be multi-purpose facilities, though, in particular pitches that are used for both footy and rugby. Primefac (talk) 13:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Rugbyfan22: and others that WP:COMMONNAMES should be used and in the SH and USA that's the sponsored name (if there is one). There's another good reason for it that I haven't seen mentioned yet: verifiability. In the AUS/NZ/SA/USA, you'll find the sponsored names in sources like competition draws and match announcements, match reports and other publications about games and tournaments, usually not the unsponsored name. Rugbyfan22 already mentioned Lang Park. Another example is Lancaster Park. Very few – especially younger – rugby fans will even know where Rugby League Park is; in previous years all sources mentioned "AMI Stadium", then "Orangetheory Stadium" and currently they refer to the same stadium in Christchurch as "Apollo Projects Stadium". Wellington Regional Stadium is also much better known as "Sky Stadium"" and previously as "Westpac Stadium". I'd prefer using the name that's in common use during the season.
If unsponsored names are the WP:COMMONNAMES in Europe, obviously unsponsored names should be used. However, if one stadium changes its name to a sponsored name and that name becomes commonly used and appears in sources about matches, a competition or tournaments, then I think for that stadium the sponsored name should be used. This shouldn't be a cause for confusion. The stadium name in an article should link to the article about that stadium via a piped link, e.g. [[Twickenham Stadium|Allianz Stadium]]. Ideally (in my view), the article keeps the unsponsored name in its title, but should explain clearly that the sponsored name is currently in use where that's the case. Changes in naming rights should also be included. Ruggalicious (talk) 01:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a minor nitpick on your example, I don't think I've ever heard Twickenham called by any other name than that; I guess that's where a lot of the arguments will come from (on both sides of this). Primefac (talk) 10:03, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given its only hosted 3 games as Allianz Stadium it is quite early to expect loads of sources for it. I would expect match reports in the upcoming 6N to use it a lot in their narrative reports, but time will tell! Skeene88 (talk) 10:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would explain it :-p Primefac (talk) 12:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guarantee you that Twickenham will never, never, ever have any other name be the COMMONNAME. We need to be careful not to fall into a WP:RECENT argument. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should use whatever name the article has. We are not beholden to the stadium's sponsorship deal, we're beholden to what reliable sources call the stadium. Sponsored names are also temporary by definition. Unless a stadium has had a sponsored name since its inception, e.g. Emirates Stadium, Aviva Stadium, U.S. Bank Stadium, we should stick to the unsponsored one. – PeeJay 15:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Being referred here from Template talk:Super Rugby stadiums after attempting to apply WP:COMMONNAME, it certainly doesn't appear that there's consensus for using the sponsored names for South African rugby stadiums. I strongly disagree with the use of sponsored names in the case of South African stadiums, where the common names are strongly entrenched. Stadiums are widely known by the common name, which is used in the article title. In that template, Griqua Park is listed as Tafel Lager Park. The Griqua Park article doesn't even make mention of this particular, short-lived, sponsored name. Similarly, Kings Park Stadium is listed as Jonsson Kings Park, thanks to a brief sponsorship deal. I would like consensus here to use the common names before I make these changes again. Greenman (talk) 16:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears there is consensus for using WP:COMMONNAME. I will make the changes. @Rugbyfan22: please discuss here first if you wish to revert to the sponsored names. Greenman (talk) 09:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COMMONAME was my opinion anyway on the main, as sponsored stadiums have been used mainly for the southern hemisphere. In terms of the examples you have used, the common name used is for when the stadia was used in Super Rugby (for the template), the stadia may well have different common names used in other sports/competitions. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Ross Ford#Requested move 23 February 2025

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ross Ford#Requested move 23 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 10:01, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Linking of rugby union clubs in Germany

[edit]

Hi all, I want to gather consensus to change the links of the leads of the articles that currently exist in List of rugby union clubs in Germany. In some of the articles (FT Adler Kiel Rugby (I've edited), TSV Handschuhsheim, RG Heidelberg, RG Heidelberg, Heidelberger TV, and many more). All of these articles in the lead, say "(CLUBNAME) is a German rugby union club<--red link ...". I figured out the red link happened because the category page was moved from Category:German rugby union clubs to Category:Rugby union clubs in Germany, with no redirect left behind. A good idea would be to fix all these links to point to the new category, but I think an edit like I did here, would be nice, since the category page lists only the clubs that exist as articles, but the list includes a full list. What do you all think? Justjourney (talk) 03:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't require an RFC, and I would encourage you to remove that part of this post. We shouldn't be linking to categories from the article space, so replacing the cat link with a better article link is obviously the best way to proceed. Primefac (talk) 14:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So I have changed the links for the articles under "Baden-Württemberg" heading, so  Partly done, may contiune to do this later Justjourney (talk | contribs) 19:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Tonga national rugby union players

[edit]

I raised a topic on this article's talk page, but I figured it probably doesn't get much traffic, so I'm raising the issue here too: how come Tonga's cap number 207 and 213 are held by the same person (Viliami Tupoulahi Mailefihi Tukuʻaho) under two different names? Am I missing something? – PeeJay 19:26, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Going to assume this was an ESPN error. I've seen a couple of other examples where ESPN have had two profiles for the same player due to different names being used in team lists. The only other thing I can think of if it's not this error would be that the England XV games weren't fully capped games or something like that. Whether these numbers correlate to the official Tongan cap numbers though I don't know. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I've ever seen an official list of Tongan cap numbers, which makes me wonder if we ought to remove that column from the list and remove the duplicate name. The source is adequate, though; it's dead but has been archived at the Wayback Machine. – PeeJay 20:25, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there is no official list, then I agree that column/information should be removed. Primefac (talk) 22:06, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just asking, but why does there have to be an official list? If there is an adequate source for the number of caps of a player, isn't that enough? If there is no adequate source, you can leave it open. Ruggalicious (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We're not talking about the number of caps, we're talking about the cap number, i.e. the order in which the players were first capped for their country. New Zealanders might know it as the "All Black number" for their national team. – PeeJay 11:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk: Super Rugby #Requested move 20 April 2025

[edit]

There is currently a move discussion in place Talk:Super Rugby #Requested move 20 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:43, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for History of the Highlanders (rugby union)

[edit]

History of the Highlanders (rugby union) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 21:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for opinions: order of items in league competitions

[edit]

A bit of a dispute I'd appreciate some comments on. @PeeJay keeps changing 2025–26 Ulster Rugby season to put URC fixtures before the league table. I'm of the opinion that it's natural to put tables before fixtures, because the table is the summary of the competition and the fixtures are the details. I've looked up a selection of examples (2024–25 Premier League, 2024–25 United Rugby Championship, 1986 FIFA World Cup, 2020 Indian Premier League, 2024 Currie Cup Premier Division) and they're all arranged that way. I can't find any counter-examples that aren't PeeJay's work. Any else have any thoughts? Nicknack009 (talk) 14:32, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree and say table before fixtures. It makes the most sense in my opinion. Louis (talk) (contribs) 15:33, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd always go table before fixtures. I don't think I've seen it any other way in any rugby union or other sports examples I can think of. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union&oldid=1293787269"