Talk:Wigan Warriors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Rugby league (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Wigan Warriors is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby league, which aims to improve the quality and coverage of rugby league football related articles. Join us!
If you wish this article to be re-assessed, go to our Assessment Department and add it to the list.
If you wish this article to be peer-reviewed, go to our Peer Review Department and add it to the list.
If you rated this article you may want to leave some comments here on how the article can be improved.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Greater Manchester (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
  • "Wigan's academy has produced some of the greatest ever rugby league players and some of their players have gone on to play rugby union. "
    • This makes it sound like going playing rugby union is a step up from playing rugby league. That's a joke. Why must we always talk about rugby league in terms of rugby union?
You have a point. In addition, I don't think it is a particularly notable that some Wigan players went to play union. We are talking about only a few players and the way things are these days, this will be fairly true of any club soon enough.20:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Wigan players are not known as the "Pie Eaters", the inhabitants of the town are. The team's nickname is "The Riversiders" due to the proximity of the river Douglas which ran next to Central Park before the team moved to the JJB Stadium, the river Douglas still runs next to the ground, however not quite as close as the old ground.

Also the 58-3 previous greatest defeat was beeten 18 June 2005 Leeds v Wigan 70-0 to Leeds, however the previous defeat tries were only worth 3 points, 4 now. Technically the 58-3 should still stand as the greatest defeat.

Both the town and the team are known as 'pie eaters'. They also have the nickname of 'riversiders' as noted above, earlier they were known as 'the colliers'.GordyB 12:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pie Eaters is a reference to the local delicacy of meat and potato (pronounced Meyt 'n Prayter) pies, a variation of scouse (eaten in Liverpool, lobbies eaten in Leigh and Lancashire hotpot (Eaten in the Rovers Return). Wiganers are proud to be pie eaters although it is often thought of as a term of insult.

Another theory is that Wigan miners were forced to return to work earlier than other miners during a strike. Hence they had to eat 'humble pie'.GordyB 19:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
And here's my source. I have reverted accordingly.GordyB 19:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
1926 • • Wiganers Are Amongst The 1st To Break The General Strike Earning The Name Humble Pie Eaters. from here

yeah the word humble was added to the existing name pie eaters mate.

Do you have a source for this?GordyB 14:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Not as such Gordy but I've lived in Wigan for over 60 years.

What you say does make a fair amount of sense but I have never heard it before. I'll try to do some research into it when I get a minute.GordyB 14:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Harry Sunderland[edit]

Should a mention of Harry Sunderland managing the club be inserted in the History's Early 20th Century section?--Jeff79 (talk) 02:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Irish flags[edit]

Have replaced the tricolour with the shamrock as the Ireland team is an all-Ireland team not the team of the Republic of Ireland. This is an agreement to do similar on the rugby union pages.GordyB (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

"Formerly" based in Wigan...?[edit]

[This] edit states that the club is formerly of Wigan, yet their web-site shows the stadium in Wigan... Is Wigan Warriors of Wigan or not? --Ormers (talk) 21:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Im afraid youve stumbled into a long running debate/edit war on what constitutes Wigan that takes place on the Wigan Town/Borough wiki pages. Wigan the town itself is relativley small but the Wigan Borough is one of the largest boroughs in the country. The stadium itself is in Newtown, technically a village in and of itself on the edge of Wigan town Centre and home to a retail park and industrial estates. But for the most part the argument is semantics and Newtown is Wigan. (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


This version of the Wigan Warriors article features lists which are far too long and hostile for the unknowing reader, specifically sections 7-10. I propose splitting off such sections into a new article, a la List of South Sydney Rabbitohs records vs South Sydney Rabbitohs (a good article), so what content remains can be improved and referenced properly. The trivia section can also be dissolved and filtered afterwards too. GW(talk) 11:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

In the Wakefield Trinity Wildcats article the notable players and international caps sections were moved to List of Wakefield Trinity Wildcats players. I suggest that this would be a good first step.GordyB (talk) 12:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Players earning international caps should definitely be split off. I'm not sure records needs to be. For notable players the list simply needs to be reduced with some qualification. Perhaps simply the Wigan Hall of Fame along with those having had testimonial matches? The usual format for club articles is to have sections for 'History', 'Players', 'Records', etc. Under the 'Players' section there's usually a For more details see... link to the complete list of players and subsectons 'Current squad' and 'Notable players'. I think that format works fine. For some NRL clubs the "List of (club) players" is a complete players register. While this is a lot of work I think it's what works best for a list titled as such. Here we don't have a "List of Wigan Warriors players" but rather a "List of Wigan Warriors internationals".--Jeff79 (talk) 12:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
There's a fair amount on RLP. Unfortunately, the fansite that keeps a database of its own doesn't have much information and is questionably a primary source anyway. There are books out there listing all of Wigan's players throughout history, however. I've made a start with 2009's players in my sandbox, and I'll aim to get three seasons' worth done before releasing it as an article. Looking good? GW(talk) 23:48, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


I've RVed WiganWarriorsFan's new lead which despite a request for him to discuss here he inserted again.

Apart from some stylistic points, the only two additions that I can see him wanting to make are these:

This [Wigan's run of success in the late 80's/early 90's] is arguably what the club is most famous for. To support this, The Daily Mail selected a list of the top 50 most entertaining sports teams in history. Wigan's team from 1988-1995 finished 8th out of the 50.


Wigan Warriors was crowned Club of the Year 2010 at the annual Super League 'Man Of Steel' awards dinner.

The first sentence strikes me as undue weight for the lead: surely it is enough to describe Wigan's run of success in terms of the trophies they won and leave it at that. I also have doubts about the notability of a Daily Mail poll.

The second sentence is just too recentist for the lead. Haldraper (talk) 07:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The continued edits for the lead of the Wigan Warriors page are being made to ensure that Wigan Warriors, as a club, is represented appropriately on Wikipedia. These edits are consistent with those of other clubs on the same website, even using one of the Australian clubs leads as a guideline. It seems that only the lead for the Wigan Warriors page is being constantly undone and edited back to it's "bare bones" format. A fan of the club I'll admit which you claim impinges on the tone of the lead at times means that I would like to see the lead improved considerably. The concept of a more appropriate representation may be unclear and vague to you but as someone who, aswell as being a fan of the club, edits it's Wikipedia it is particularly frustrating to see this happening. WiganWarriorsFan (talk) (WiganWarriorsFan (talk) 20:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC))

It's not Wikipedia's job to be representing anyone, and saying other clubs are like this one isn't an appropriate rationale to use. If you notice other club articles are not up to stratch, improve them instead of arguing here. The fact is winning the SL trophy in 2010 is quite a small part of Wigan's much wider history. GW(talk) 23:06, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Rivalry article?[edit]

I was just wondering, would it be worth creating a Wigan-Saints rivalry article, similar to the Liverpool-United derby and other such examples in football? The game certainly has undoubted history (no one needs me to state that), and there have been many Cup finals, League finals and other notable games that could make a substantial article. Statistics, largest scores and transfers between the clubs are other features pf the above example. Hopefully, with Saints and Wigan fans alike contributing to making the article as neutral as possible, more articles like this could be created for rugby league derbies.


Ymron (talk) 10:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

This is currently going through a GAN, so why not? The review may provide some general guidelines for this style of article. Be bold! GW(talk) 15:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Started here, feel free to contribute.
Ymron (talk) 09:17, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Nice one. I can tell there's a few MOS issues on the article so far. I just fixed all issues surrounding hyphens and em dashes being used in scorelines, for which en dashes should be used instead. I'll fix whatever else I can find later.GW(talk) 10:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
It's absolutely a work in progress, nothing strict to the MOS yet, but thanks.
Ymron (talk) 08:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Greater Manchester/England or none[edit]

Hi all, I think we all may need to clarify the situation regarding the lead in relation to geographical location and come to a consensus. It was my understanding that the lead included the county even though, as a fellow editor pointed out, Wiki is written from a worldwide perspective. During my time as an active editor I understood to include the county was good practice. As I've been far less active the past year I could well now be wrong about that? I've seen the lead altered on both this page and the DW Stadium page several times recently and think its time we clarified it. What are your thoughts guys? Cheers Man2 (talk) 09:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Your understanding is correct; and it is correct to indicate the country. A consensus of the form to use already exists. It is along the lines: "[X] is an English [sport] club in [town], [county]." So, here it is Wigan Warriors is an English rugby league club based in Wigan, Greater Manchester. We don't have the opportunity to use "English" in ground articles, where the consensus form gives us (e.g.) "The DW Stadium is a sports stadium in Wigan, Greater Manchester, England, that is home to Wigan Athletic football club and Wigan Warriors rugby league club." Mr Stephen (talk) 22:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was. I personally always thought inclusion of the county was important. Hopefully this can put a stop to the constant revisions. cheers Man2 (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The convention is to include the county and I believe there's space in the opening sentence to show that the club is based in Greater Manchester (which is tailored to a UK-based audience) and England (for an international audience) without conflict. And that's pretty much what this edit does. Nev1 (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The convention should remain the same. Several recent edits on both this article and the DW Stadium had moved away from convention and I just wanted to double check that since I was last a regular editor the convention had not changed. I think the inclusion of a county is important to provide regional geographical reference to both domestic and international audiences. One editor in the edit notes had commented, "if you don't know where Wigan is, adding county isn't much help, esp for those outside GB" - I disagree. The inclusion of Greater Manchester allows for audiences not familiar with the town to know that it is in the vicinity of Manchester, thus providing a geographical frame of reference. Man2 (talk) 23:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I won't step in the way, so long as the nationality of the subject is clearly mentioned, as has been suggested here. GW(talk) 22:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)