Talk:English Premiership (rugby union)

Discussion: When should we change the name of the article (i.e., Zurich Premiership to Guinness Premiership) to reflect the new sponsorship? Dale Arnett 01:21, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No time like the present IIRC the RFU's site uses the name Guinness Premiership.GordyB 12:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Saracens badge.png

Image:Saracens badge.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Current league table

Wouldn't it be useful to have a current league table?--161.73.14.15 (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

See 2007-08 Guinness Premiership. I've added a link to that article. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 12:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Article name

A discussion is taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union as the name of this article along with the Magners League and the Heineken Cup --Snowded (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Map

Surely Sale are in the wrong place. Greater Manchester is in the North West not the West Midlands. It looks more like Stoke-on-Trent than Stockport.GordyB (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Does this look better:

Bath

Bristol

Gloucester

Harlequins

Leicester

London Irish

Wasps

Newcastle

Northampton

Sale

Saracens

Worcester

2008-09 Guinness Premiership Teams

noq (talk) 19:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, well done.GordyB (talk) 19:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Salary Cap

I've not got a massive depth of rugby knowledge, but I've heard there's a salary cap in this league that isn't mentioned in the article. As lots of players seem to be leaving due to the salary cap (more money in France), wouldn't it be a relevant thing to mention? Sorry I can't do it myself - don't know enough about the topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.93.201 (talk) 08:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is definitely a discussion topic to be added. In particular how it affects team's ability to compete in the Heineken Cup and how Leicester F.C. hate it. Captain of the Golden Hind (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

Y Done

Guinness Premiership → Aviva Premiership — Change of sponser for the competition should have a change of name for the article. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:51, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

• Comment why Aviva Premiership rather than English Premiership (rugby union) ? Gnevin (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose This is the problem when sponsors' names are included in article titles: they change every couple of years. The usual format on Wikipedia is to omit the sponsor, particularly for venues and sports leagues. See the move proposal at Talk:AEGON Championships. I would support Gnevin's suggestion that the article be moved to English Premiership (rugby union). Anything relevant at Aviva Premiership should then be merged into this article. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support as nom. The problem is that if this move request is rejected, then the page is left in an out-of-date condition. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
• Comment I have moved the page to Aviva Premiership for the time being to try to prevent another cut and paste move. I see the logic with moving to English Premiership (rugby union), though think that the article should reflect the current name and so Aviva Premiership is the most logical (obviously Guinness Premiership is no longer relevant). Nouse4aname (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Aviva Premiership → English Premiership (rugby union) — in a other 4 years we will be discussing this again and we have 2010–11_Aviva_Premiership and 2009–10_Guinness_Premiership which is confusing . Internal consitancy is best served by redirects to English Premiership from sponsors Gnevin (talk) 17:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose I'm afraid I have to oppose this simply on the grounds of consistency and that we do have pages that do this kind of thing with sponsor moves which isn't that disruptive (ie.DW Stadium) The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Comment DW Stadium never had a standard name Gnevin (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, Imtech Arena would have been a better example. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support Having a consistent name over time with redirects from the sponsor name would mean that this discussion would be moot. Articles where the distinction is appropriate can link to the redirect page, others can link link directly. Change of sponsor is just a new redirect. noq (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support For the reasons I set out in the discussion above, plus the points made by noq. Redirects from Aviva Premiership, Guinness Premiership, Snickers Premiership or whatever would ensure that nobody had trouble finding the article. In association football we have the equivalent at Premier League, not at Barclays Premier League, which is a redirect. I know that "other shit exists" is not a good argument, but in this case, if it works for soccer's top league, which is followed by many more people than the rugby union league, it should work here too. Skinsmoke (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support. The main article page should be located at a neutral title that won't need moving every few years, particularly as the sponsor seems to change so frequently. The sponsored name can be mentioned in the lead and in relevant sections of the article. However, I think articles for specific seasons should be located at the sponsored name, as this is invariably the most commonly used and recognised name (though I recognise this isn't the issue here). BTW, apologies if my move to Aviva Premiership caused any disruption here, I simply wanted to avoid another cut and paste attempt at moving the article again! Also, yes I changed my mind from what I said yesterday! Nouse4aname (talk) 09:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Nouse4aname, I wouldn't worry about it . I was going to move it to this title anyway since it was a non-controversial move and open this RM since it is move controversial Gnevin (talk) 11:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support although I have not been involved in the preceding discussion it is akin the requested move at Talk:Super 14#Requested move. In both cases a change in the name of the competition results in a move, and then another. This move allows the whole span of the competition to be discussed in one place, but then very specific subsidiary article to be written (if as a project we decide that is required. In the case of Super 14 a full discussion of Super 6 is almost out of place, but would fall into Super Rugby handily. The question is identical here with sponsor names. English Premiership (rugby union) serves the needs of this subject perfectly.SauliH (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support - other domestic competitions in other sports are known here by their real names rather than by the names given by their sponsors. 81.110.111.164 (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
• Conditional Oppose - See Magners League where there was an extensive discussion. This should probably go to a central forum for a one time resolution on naming conventions. --Snowded ^TALK 01:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Conditional upon ... ? 81.110.111.164 (talk) 04:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
    • I oppose a change being made here in isolation from a more general agreement. APologies, I thought that was obvious but happy to spell it out --Snowded ^TALK 05:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
• Comment Previous discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union/Archive 6#Naming conventions - Sponsorship of competitions noq (talk) 09:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment Wow, that had some heat to it. I stopped reading after the first 30 or so comments. I am with Snowded that this decision should be discussed at the project level and a project naming protocol be formulated for competitions. Otherwise this could be an ongoing debate.SauliH (talk) 13:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

  Agreed, We don't want another "game" of rename ping-pong like at Eye-gouging (rugby union) The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 14:12, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Reading that the key phrase is "common use", so the Magners League and the Heineken Cup have the sponsor name . Premiership and Guinness Premiership have always been a bit interchangeable, but I would expect Aviva's deal to require use of the name. On that basis it is likely to be the common name --Snowded
  • CommentI have opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union#Naming protocol for competitions. Not trying to undermine the straw polls here and at Super 14, but enough debate has happened to indicate that this is a broader discussion than at just this article.SauliH (talk) 14:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)^TALK 14:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support - I proposed this a long time ago for the European Rugby Cup and the Celtic League. – PeeJay 12:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Image copyright problem with File:Aviva Premiership Rugby Logo.png

The image File:Aviva Premiership Rugby Logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Holders

It says in that the current holders of the Aviva Premiership title are Saracens, which is true, but it says that the season they are holding the trophy for is "2011-12", surely they are the holders of 2010-11 and this is incorrect, as the season they won the trophy in was 2010-11? Or does it mean that they will be holders of the trophy for the 2011-12 season? Thanks. SAULGNRFAN (talk) 14:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)