Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby league/Archive 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dodgy articles again

I'd like to know the opinion of others on these.

I have PROD them, unless someone would like to improve or suggest otherwise. They are all from User:Sjb007, who has been blocked again for substituting {{nrl2009ladder}}.  The Windler talk  12:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised you think it's ok for clubs to have articles for their records but you want the Kangaroos' speedily deleted for being trivia. The finals records can definitely go. The Super League records should definitely stay. I'm also mystified as to why you'd want them speedly deleted. (Oops, I thought that was a list of Super League (Europe) records) I have a feeling the Rugby League World Cup records were created in response to the existence of Rugby Union World Cup records having an article. That user does do some contructivee things, but as with a lot of RL editors it's mind boggling that so much energy can be put towards certain things while three quarters of the New Zealand Rugby League team of the centuary and almost all international rugby league tours are without articles.--Jeff79 (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand Sjb007, he/she seems persistence in making the ladder fully substituted, he/she does do some constructive edits. I think the first, second and last of my list, could be quite well if they were substantial and not a complete mess/not very well done. The third, fourth, fifth should all be merged into the 2nd no matter what. It's not speedily delete, its proposed, and I have left it open for other users, to judge my opinions (which aren't always correct). And unfortunately I put the pointless trivia on all of them,  The Windler talk  13:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
The Finals don't need any records, and even if there was notability for them, they could easily be incorporated as a new heading (such as "3. Finals records") in List of NSWRL/ARL/SL/NRL records. I think there is room for an article on the RLWC's records, because of its international status, but I'd still propose its deletion on the grounds it has no sources or references (and I'm not even sure if a record exists). As for the Super League article, should that article be kept, I'd be in favour of making a clear distinction between the Australian SL and the European SL. Like Jeff, I also got confused, because an article with an almost congruent name already exists for Europe: Super League records. GW(talk) 13:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
So you deleted the Kangaroos records anyway? Why discuss it here then?--Jeff79 (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Must admint, I did read this section and then promptly forgot to go and check the articles/lists out and retrieve anything interesting. You could ask the deleting editor (User:SchuminWeb) to give you a copy of the contents of the article.  florrie  13:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Or just merging into the Kangaroos article. Really, cutting and pasting content requires very little (if any) more effort than deleting it. I thought we were here to improve things.--Jeff79 (talk) 13:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Karmichael Hunt on the main page

Just to let the project know, Karmichael Hunt will be on the main page on 27 May, which will make it the second rugby league article to appear on the main page and the second article I have written on the main page.  The Windler talk  11:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well done Joel.-Sticks66 15:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Fantastic work! GW(talk) 15:19, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Prepare for some hardcore vandalism reverting.--Jeff79 (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

2008 RLWC

Hey guys, Me and Jeff have got into a dispute over at the 2008 Rugby League World Cup page over the inclusion of a infobox and I'd like some other opinions on the matter. Cheers Mattlore (talk) 10:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Season pages

Just noticed that alot of the season pages such as National Rugby League season 2002 etc had some minor incorrect info for the Warriors (regarding captain, coach etc) - don't really know enough about other teams at the time to pick up any mistakes that may be in there for other teams so you might want to look over the summaries for any clubs you are particularly familar with. Mattlore (talk) 11:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, most of the info I put there is from what I could scrounge up from existing wikipedia articles. So definitely, if anyone can help fill in the blanks that'd be great. If you do make any corrections though, just keep in mind that the info there will most likely mirror info somewhere else on wikipedia and if you could check the individual or club in question's article and correct the info there as well.--Jeff79 (talk) 11:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

FairuseBot doesn't want us to use the File:Current State of Origin Logo.png on this year's SoO article notwithstanding we've used it many times before. Do I risk its wrath and just load it up again ? Any other suggestions ?-Sticks66 11:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it exactly the same logo again this year? I think as long as we put in another fair use rationale we'll be ok. As it is now there's only one there for 2008.--Jeff79 (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
(stupid edit conflicts) Quite technically, you need a fair use rational for every use in an article. So simply use the one for the 08 season, and put it for the 09 season, and therefore it is claimed under fair use. There is no limit on the number of uses an image has, but for fair use, it needs to be justified for every single article it is used on. It won't hurt you!  The Windler talk  11:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

1990 Great Britain Test sides x 3

There are three GB Test sides now listed in the Test Match section of this article. I'm sure more player names can be linked than I know of. Could one of our northern colleagues take a look and link -Sticks66 13:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

PS I'll get back to do the Test match reports. Sticks66
Done.--Jeff79 (talk) 15:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


This idiot is back editing again (also as (talk · contribs)). Not content with the ethnicity bits, he is now changing mentions of "football" to "rugby" within rugby league articles. If folk could keep an eye out for his vandalism, it'd be appreciated.  florrie  02:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

This nationality debate is really starting to irk me, because it is such a grey area. He seems to have placed categories for national descent on the individual player's article on the Falou account, and then updated the club's squad list with the wrong flag on the IP. As far as I'm concerned, any claims to descent from a certain nationality should be properly sourced, else it should be removed completely. This also applies to categories, such as this player (is there any proof whatsoever this player is from America?). Do I have permission to remove such categories/flags where unreferenced? (Indeed, shouldn't all national flags be removed anyway?) GW(talk) 11:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Apparently Leaeno was born in American Samoa but I can't find a reference for it. I've removed it from his infobox for the moment until/if a source can be found. National flags should be removed from infoboxes but they can be used in player lists. They are supposed to represent the country the player has nominated they wish to represent or have represented, not necessarily their heritage or country of birth. I remove any categories which seem dodgy and aren't referenced.  florrie  13:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


do we really need all the info in the Rugby League in Australia template that is in the Rugby League in New South Wales one because there are pages like this one where both templates are used

--sss333 (talk) 01:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that all of the NSW content goes into the Rugby League in Australia template? It would make it rather large.  florrie  13:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
There is only one section that is similar on the Australia one thant the NSW one. I think we need both.  The Windler talk  22:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Some sections, such as the CRL bit are identical or very similar. Perhaps some of the information on the Australian one could be reduced to make it smaller? Both are needed. Mattlore (talk) 00:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't the 'Rugby league in Australia' template simply contain the 'Rugby league in (state)' links and everything else put into the appropriate 'Rugby league in (state)' templates? There's really no excuse for anything to be duplicated.--Jeff79 (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind having both templates but i don't think we need all the info that is in the rugby League in Australia one, bit more like how the rugby union in australia one is and then states ones are split up, pretty much what Jeff said--sss333 (talk) 05:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Is the Co-operative Championship considered "first-grade"?

I'm in dispute with another editor. I recently prodded a rugby league biography article, namely Martin Mitchell, because he only plays in the Co-operative Championship, which acts as the division below Super League. The author removed the template, stating the player met WP:RL's notability guidelines because the Co-op Championship was considered top-flight in France, above the Elite One Championship. There is some logic to that, in my opinion, in that Toulouse Olympique are better than any Elite One side, but it is still below the Super League in which a French team already compete, the Catalans Dragons, so thus cannot be considered top-flight. Where does the project stand on this? GW(talk) 18:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Agree with you. For the same reason players in the Auckland side that competes in the NSW comp aren't top-grade. The thing that makes it tough though is that a player from Toulouse could probably be picked for the French national side, which is definitely notable.--Jeff79 (talk) 19:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd say until he plays internationals he probably isn't notable - Co-op by itself won't do it. Is a bit of a fuzzy area though. Mattlore (talk) 00:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I've fixed his infobox and removed mention of Parramatta as that was only reserve grade. Should Toulouse even be in the infobox if it is second-tier?  florrie  04:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Sydney Roosters

Thanks to everyone for helping to lift it to modern FA standards. Well done YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 06:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

World Club Challenge

Do we include the appearance of a player in a World Club Challenge game in his club stats? If we use NRL Stats or League Central as a source, the WCC game is not included as they are only looking at NRL games played. RLP includes WCC games in Club matches played. So which total is the "correct" total? I don't want to be continually correcting stats when editors use one source over another. I favour including WCC as it is a club game.  florrie  11:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

RLP, I believe also has a part ignoring those matches, e.g. Darren Lockyer has played 2 WCC matches, but there is also a section that doesn't include that. I generally like to include what the mainstream media includes, and Darren Lockyer has played 46 Tests/World Cup games but 47 games for Australia. Channel 9, and media said Lockyer equalled Meninga's record of 46 earlier this year, so I would be hesitant to have him at 47, same thing with club games and WCC. Its one I don't generally include.  The Windler talk  11:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm for including it too as it's not a mere exhibition. The problem is, as you say, referencing it. I assume that stats from official sources only include NRL games, but it's not stated explicitly anywhere that that's the case so I don't really know. I've said before on a number of occassions and I'll say again that the mistake-riddled rugby league project figures should not be used as a source for playing figures. Perhaps the body text will have to do. I mean it usually only amounts to the difference between 265 and 264 matches anyway.--Jeff79 (talk) 11:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I can include it in text. Might be something that can be updated when players retire. In addition to his 321 club games, Joe Bloggs played in two World Club Challenges while with the Frisbees.  florrie  02:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Can I just add a couple of things - firstly, Jeff79 is correct in that RLP shouldn't be used as an *authoritative* source on playing figures, particularly for Australia pre-1987 or so and GB pre-1998. It is called project for a reason! And secondly, Lockyer played more than 2 WCC matches (in 1997 he would have played a few), but I don't have individual appearances for the 1997 WCC; hence, those appearances aren't included in his total. Azkatro (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Tony Zappia

Eyes on this would be helpful. Mattlore prodded it but the originator has contested and removed it. As far as I am concerned, as an administrator Zappia is not notable and the whole thing should be on the Cronulla Sharks page.  florrie  11:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it should be on the Cronulla Sharks page, albeit a small sentence in the history section, but hardly worth an article.  The Windler talk  21:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Whether it's one sentence or a paragraph on the Sharks' pages, Tony Zappia doesn't warrant his own article. All of Cronulla's recent "issues" should be tied into one para in the history section or main article page.  florrie  23:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Ideally the Zappia stuff would just be on their season 2009 page, but one doesn't exist at the moment. Mattlore (talk) 00:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
NB: Its at AfD now btw. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tony_Zappia_(football_administrator) Mattlore (talk) 00:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of South Sydney Rabbitohs

I have done a GA Reassessment of the South Sydney Rabbitohs article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found several dead links in the article that need to be repaired. I have placed the article on hold for a week. I am notifying all interested projects about this in the hopes that someone will come forward to address this issue. My review can be found here. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. H1nkles (talk) 16:06, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Rugby sevens page move

I've proposed on the Rugby sevens talk page that the article be moved to Rugby union sevens and that Rugby sevens become a disambiguation page for the articles of both codes. If you have any comments or arguments to make about this please head on over! LunarLander // talk // 23:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

History of NSWRFL foundation clubs

Now, I'm not certain about this, but what we've been saying in NSWRFL foundation clubs' about them being founded in 1908 might be completely wrong. I thought that the foundation NSWRFL clubs already existed as rugby union clubs and simply broke away from the Union, much like clubs in the north of England like Wigan did. Wigan's foundation year is not 1895 (the year they broke away to form the RFL), it is many years before that when they were members of the already existing RFU. We have all the NSWRFL foundation clubs' histories starting from 1908, as though they suddenly sprung out of the ground then, with no mention of the pre-schism years. I might be wrong. Maybe a second Eastern Suburbs RL club existed alongside the first Eastern Suburbs RU club, but I just have a feeling the Australian situation mirrored the English one more closely and that this has been overlooked.--Jeff79 (talk) 22:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that they were new institutions with defected players. I only base this on my opinion and what I know about Cumberland. But I believe that Cumberland RL team was new club that run by different people but getting (pretty much) all of their players from Wests RU club. Other clubs I think were similar, but I can't be sure. The foundation year should be the year that they started, the year they became officially a group. But in todays context, if say a Central Coast team gets in the NRL, it isn't founded in say 2012, but they have been founded for a while now. Same with Gold Coast Titans, they came in to the competition in 2007, were officially let in to the competition in 2005, but they must have been working under a consortium for some time before that. History can span back before the foundation year. But most 1908 clubs, (I believe) were created that year, I don't think there was as much mucing around with todays new teams. But no doubt should history sections acknowledge the history of the area in sport, and defection.  The Windler talk  05:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I guess the problem is we need sources, either that they were founded in 1908 or they were founded before that. Unfortunatley finding old online sources is hard, and getting offline sources can be incredibly time consuming :) Mattlore (talk) 05:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, as I was saying I may be wrong about all this and it looks like maybe I am. Having done a little more reading it does seem that the RL clubs were formed by individuals who left the RU clubs and so they existed side-by-side. But there's not a lot of detail about this. I think the clubs' histories should mention the existing RU clubs somewhere around the beginning instead of ignoring them completely. It's hard to find sources on this but it'd be nice to have more detail about how it all worked. If individuals did walk away and create new clubs it'd be nice if it said that.--Jeff79 (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd think it would be hard to find sources about that, generally all sources I know of, just speak of meetings held. There is no info about why and how these meetings were initiated in the first place.  The Windler talk  09:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
One of the things that got me thinking about this is also the lack any pre-schism playing info for these defecting players in our new you-beaut infobox. Dally Messenger I think played for Easts RU and the Wallabies before switching to RL but his infobox had him starting his football career in 1908. Just not accurate.--Jeff79 (talk) 09:27, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You'll see Jeff that for all of the Dual-code rugby internationals I use the combo-box to list both their RU and RL careers. You're right that Messenger's box fails to show his RU career. I'll fix that. Regarding this thread, notwithstanding that many of the RU clubs such as South Sydney and Newtown shut down after the defections (mostly after the 2nd wave post 09) the new RL clubs of the same district were distinct entities. I can't imagine the RU purists at any club giving RL a leg-up by handing over their club. I expect Sean Fagan's body of work will give clarity on this.-Sticks66 14:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I have noticed that you use that crappy old rugby infobox with DCIs. I've often wondered why.--Jeff79 (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Generally, I believe that whatever sport you played professionally first, should be the one your infobox is. So really Dally Messenger should have (yes the crappy) the RU template, wheras someone like Wendell Sailor should have the RL infobox. But I believe if you discuss it on the page of the individual, you could probably get away with it. Also, I don't think statistics are that great for RU in the early 1900s, not that I've ever investigated, It just seems odd, it would be left out of Messengers infobox.  The Windler talk  21:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

That's pretty wierd. In what way exactly is the union infobox better than ours? I've racked my brain.--Jeff79 (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say it was better than ours, I just believe that if you play RU first, the other infobox probably deserves to be the infobox. There isnt a blanket rule that they should use one infobox or the other, but its only being fair in my opinion. If everything was ideal, of course we'd use ours, but I suppose those over at WP:RU would disagree.  The Windler talk  10:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I dont care about the RU one anymore, change them all, I can see that this is much better than this.  The Windler talk  12:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Right on. It's actually quite remarkable how much the union infobox sucks. I saw a player from 1910's interstate rugby league under the heading "State of Origin".--Jeff79 (talk) 11:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
True, while our infobox might have more parameters, in general it is far simpler than the RU one or our old one. Theres is extremely complicated, and unless you know everything on it, the infobox is all mudled up. The only complicated part of ours is how you make the RU section come first. Thats why I believed there shouldn't be a eg. representative=yes, because it complicates it. Retired=yes is our only one I believe.  The Windler talk  13:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to add to this, I have spent some time looking through the Daily Telegraph in and around the 1908 season and the majority of RU matches played involved the same teams (as in same names) as the RL counterparts. So if that's the case, there is no way the clubs "defected" to RL. The outcomes of the meetings we read about were to form new football clubs, and I have never read or heard of an existing Australian RU club switching to RL. Sean Fagan would probably the best person to contact regarding this though ( Azkatro (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

They were all new clubs in Australia. Only the players defected from Rugby Union. The foundation dates for the original clubs are as follows:

  • Glebe (January 9. 1908)
  • Newtown (January 14, 1908)
  • South Sydney (January 17, 1908)
  • Balmain (January 23, 1908)
  • Eastern Suburbs (January 24, 1908)
  • Western Suburbs (February 4, 1908)
  • North Sydney (February 7, 1908)
  • Newcastle (April 9, 1908)
  • Cumberland (April 20, 1908)

Peter C Jones (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Penalty article

There are currently two articles for penalties in rugby, as you'd expect, one for rugby union, and another generic one. Would it make more sense to merge the two, and have a section for each sport highlighting the differences, or should this WikiProject take over the more generic article and make it into a rugby league specific one, leaving the rugy union article to the union WikiProject? In either case, two similar articles currently exist - one needs to go. GW(talk) 18:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

As you can probably guess (!), I support having a separate RL article. Union and league have different rules that utilise penalties because they are different sports; this is a reason to have our own article - not to have a comparison article. We wouldn't consider comparing aspects of our sport with most others but we are left with horribly muddled articles such as Try which has a bit for league and then a bit for union and then a bit that applies for both in every section. LunarLander // talk // 19:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I find with most rugby football concepts they are shared (and quite similar) concepts and thus have shared articles. I mean really, both can be covered fully in one article without being so large as to require being split. The union halves of these articles are invariably longer and better written than the league halves, and I think that's what this project shoud be putting its energy towards rather than creating a whole bunch of league-only articles and the disambiguation pages that will inevitably go along with that. But the truth of the matter is that a rugby (either code) penalty should be detailed in a section of a larger article. It's just that one by one other sports wiki-projects over time have created their own articles for concepts like penalties, goals, whatever. So I do understand rugby league wikiproject members' desire, right or wrong, to keep up with that trend.--Jeff79 (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
You're right, improving the RL content should be the main aim right now. LunarLander // talk // 23:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

As a slightly interested bystander, when I wander through Wikipedia, I don't care for the convention that seems to be entrenched that league and union are seen as different flavours of the same thing.. kind of like singles and doubles tennis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing-Sticks66 13:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


I have found a great source of Images from Flickr of Rugby League World Cup images and others that I am now uploading to Commons. Because it is a long process just uploading them, and there are quite a few of them, I'd appreicate if other members, would get around to adding them onto articles. Also, if you need any cropping, I'm happy to do it, just leave a note on my talk page. Heres the list (to be updated alot):  The Windler talk  06:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

These are great, but I wanna trim them before putting them in articles. I can trim photos no problem, but how does it work then? It'll be a different file with a different name if I upload it again.--Jeff79 (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I could do Steve Ganson, but the project has guidelines on referee articles, so it wouldn't be appropriate to add this image unless in a different context. As for names, I'm uploading them under any generic name, if this is a problem, I'll request a move on Commons later (if that's actually possible). I'll also work on any Super League players I recognise, I see two from Wigan here alone in Tim Smith and Amos Roberts. GW(talk) 21:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
If its a photo like File:Peter Sterling (26 April 2009).jpg, and you want to just crop it, do it and re-upload over the same image. If it is like File:Braith Anasta, Sam Perrett and Amos Roberts (10 August 2008).jpg, then crop the indiviudal players, and create new files (not altering the original file), under similar names, and link back to the original (and use same licence). All this is on Commons, so you will need a Commons login, also if anyone wants to help, (see for full list, particuarly RLWC 08), see my talk page, I have outlined a process for Florrie. Also GW: If you could upload them in similar names, and put them in the category Category:Rugby league players, I would appreciated it. And place them here, as I dont want to re-upload them.  The Windler talk  22:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Joel, could we save this list to a project page? Then I won't feel bad about adding my strike-outs as often as I like!  florrie  12:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Done, but it will be transcluded here as Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/May 2009 Flickr Image drive.  The Windler talk  22:04, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks!  florrie  01:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Joel, this is extraordinary work - an absolute treasure trove.-Sticks66 12:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm ill at the moment, but I will get around to finishing it, thanks  The Windler talk  22:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't be bothered finishing them, and will only do so on request now. I might find an urge to do it myself one day.  The Windler talk  11:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

18 May

18 May (2)

18 May (3)

18 May (4)

19 May

20 May

20 May (2)

Note: There is more pictures of Daine Laurie, but there are enough already and I couldn't be bothered uploading any more

I have completed the Wests Tigers set

21 May

21 May (2)

Note: There are alot of pictures from the earlier game Indigenous Dreamtime vs New Zealand Māori, but have chosen not to upload them as there are alot of players I don't know. I may get around to uploading the ones I do know, but unless requested, I wont immediately.

22 May

Alex Laidlaw

This chap played both rugby union (including earning one cap for Scotland) and rugby league. I have created a basic stub, but as a WP:FOOTY member, my knowledge of rugby is embarrasingly lacking, and any improvement would be appreciated! Cheers, GiantSnowman 17:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Was he a rugby league international ? -Sticks66 13:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Opinions on new template

In order to improve the quality of club season articles by encouraging the writing of detailed prose as opposed to vague notes and tables, I propose making a new template for an infobox, similar to that of the football WikiProject's. I'll keep it on my sandbox until the idea has either been scrapped completely, or passed on and released as a template - an example is at the bottom. I'm trying to figure out how to put in parameters for the kit template, but I can't work it out and it's to no great loss anyway since it can be put in manually without the template specifically facilitating it, although I understand that won't work for SpecialWindler's kit images. I'll work it out later. In any case, I'd like to know your opinions on whether you like it, whether it's needed, and whether it should be released as a template and used. GW(talk) 09:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Like Template:NRL Team Season which i coincidentally discovered earlier today? Mattlore (talk) 09:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I prefer {{NRL Team Season}} over your sandbox version.  The Windler talk  13:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I dunno. I admit I didn't design the NRL Team Season template with Europe in mind and I think GW's version suits Super League teams better.--Jeff79 (talk) 14:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
In that event, I'll adapt mine to be more like yours and apply it for Super League teams only. GW(talk) 17:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree with that, I think we should make a generic one, that is also properly name along with and similarity with {{Infobox rugby league biography}} and {{Infobox rugby league club}}. I will help if need be, with the coding of the template if you like.  The Windler talk  23:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Retired players infobox

The retired parameter in the infobox is forcing height/weight to display twice. Does anyone have time to look at it? eg, John Dorahy Cheers,  florrie  23:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

And on infoboxes, what's the go with the changing colours?  florrie  15:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

State of Origin team names

Discussion at Talk:Queensland_state_rugby_league_team#Requested_move.--Jeff79 (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Glen Harrison

Knowing little about what this project considers notable, I leave this article here for your consideration. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 00:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably not, mainly because you use one first-party source. If you were to find reliable third-party sources such as old newspapers, then I have no problem, but the notability of him without those sources, would have to be less than notable for this encyclopedia. You could possibly look at WP:RL/N.  The Windler talk  00:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately he played in that era that falls after the newspaper archive ends (1954) and before the internet started.  florrie  01:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
The version I'm seeing contains a secondary source and two primaries. Isn't that enough? GW(talk) 01:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I've put in as much as I can find but there's not a lot.  florrie  02:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

national / state / representative team article names

Prompted by Jeff's section above, perhaps some RL national team articles use of 'national' in their article names isn't appropriate. We currently have:

Should we change all representative RL teams, national/state/county, to have 'representative' in the article name?
Should some, such as West Indies, be changed but others, such as England, be left as they are?
Should we leave it as it is?
Should we remove the extra word and just name them e.g. New Zealand rugby league team? LunarLander // talk // 03:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the simpler the name the better, as long as we don't create any confusion over what the team is. Wouldn't know quite what to do with New South Wales City rugby league team & Country though - don't think they can be simplified. Mattlore (talk) 04:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I would have thought Country New South Wales rugby league team and City New South Wales rugby league team (if separate articles are needed at all: the two sides are these days inextricably linked). I think the City side may effectively be the same as the Sydney representative sides that were formed in the past to play against touring sides and maybe even tour themselves. Similar ones existed for Newcastle, Brisbane, Wollongong, etc. It is unfortunately very difficult to find data on these rep teams. In response to Lander: we're not alone in this. And other sports seem to go with the status quo. I'm satisfied for things to stay the same. If we change things, we're going to have to get consensus for all sports as it wouldn't be right to go off and do our own thing.--Jeff79 (talk) 12:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, most seem to use 'national'. Tennis use 'Davis Cup' though and cricket have a mixture (West Indies cricket team, India national cricket team, England cricket team). I'm leaning in favour of the mixed approach if we can't find consensus with other sports, West Indies is obviously not a nation. LunarLander // talk // 13:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
The correct name for the GB team is actually the Great Britain and Ireland team, "Ireland" being a reference to the whole of the island of Eire including the six counties of Northern Ireland, not just the Republic of Ireland alone. By that token, "Ireland national rugby league team" would also be wrong, since it consists of players from two separate sovereign nations. GW(talk) 13:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Yep, it could put us in the position of having to debate politically contentious issues to decide names too, a weakness of the mixed approach. I think the correct name is Great Britain (I'm not sure the "& Ireland" was ever official) but on the badge it does say "British Isles XIII". LunarLander // talk // 13:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, we have to decide what we're really trying to do here. Is there a burning need for change? I say there isn't. The only one that perhaps could be changed is West Indies. Although I just had a look and couldn't find it, I imagine this dscussion has already taken place about the cricket team so they decided to ditch "national". Other than that though, if it ain't broke...--Jeff79 (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Politics doesn't (well, shouldn't) enter Wikipedia when it comes to naming conventions. When a clear name for something isn't clear, the most used term used by the public should be used. So, to take a completely independent example, grey is used instead of gray, since the latter is only used by the US. "Great Britain" is the most used term to describe the national team, thus it should be used, but the article for the team should have Great Britain and Ireland rugby league team in its leading sentence (the badge says something different because the name is too long to fit and all nations are represented with emblems already). On that, I agree with Jeff - "Great Britain" is the must used term and so no change is needed. GW(talk) 16:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I wasn't advocating changing the 'Great Britain' part of the name, you are correct to say that is the most commonly used name. I was drawing attention to the term GB not fitting using the term 'national'. LunarLander // talk // 19:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Catalonia, New Zealand and Scotland are all nations. Ireland is also one nation, despite the UK's attempts to divide it along religious lines. Great Britain is not a nation! Never has been. Part of the reason that there has been such a low take up of RL in Scotland, Ireland and even Wales is because of that nonsense. I could never back a GB "national" team as a Scot, but I'm happy enough supporting the Scottish national RL team (if and when the media bothers to cover it!). The Windies are so small individually that they field a united team for a number of things, most famously cricket. (There is apparently a WI rugby union team too)

By the way, "X national Y team" seems to be the usual wikipedia format, and probably RL should follow that line.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't matter, see WP:IGNORE. I'm also confused as to your opinion. Are you suggesting we should remove "national" from all Team GB rugby league articles and categories because technically GB + Ireland isn't a nation, or are you suggesting we should keep it there because other sports WikiProjects do so? GW(talk) 18:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
This is a project aimed at improving rugby league articles; it's not here for you to vent political opinions and 'facts' (which are incorrect: GB was a nation). LunarLander // talk // 19:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Rugby league footballers by descent

Can i start the category:rugby league footballers by descent or is that just over crowding the categories? (talk) 06:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It is my interpretation that the discussion above resulted in the WikiProject not favouring categories for descent specific to rugby league players. For example: Category:Australian rugby league players and then simply Category:Australians of New Zealand descent; NOT Category:Australian rugby league players and Category:Australian rugby league players of New Zealand descent. GW(talk) 10:55, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Agree with GW.--Jeff79 (talk) 10:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Yep, yep, yep. Supported by reliable sources!  florrie  06:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

So does that mean i cant do it? (talk) 13:49, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to do it Category:Australian rugby league players of New Zealand descent it would just be Category:Rugby league players of New Zealand descentYoundbuckerz (talk) 14:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what the point of this is. Either they can be put under "X-ians of Y-ish descent", or they can be put under "Y-ish rugby league players", if their ancestry is close enough to play for the national team. We don't have separate cats for, say, "Russian journalists of Swedish descent", do we? Just "Russian journalists", and "People of Swedish descent".

IMHO, RL has made a mistake in setting up various "national" teams, and then stuffing them full of Aussies, this is not the way to go. Local talent should be the priority.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Help needed on Pages

Nigeria national rugby league team and 2009 Pacific Cup (Rugby League)Youndbuckerz (talk) 14:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Cross Code Rugby

Can I suggest that we should have an article on cross-code rugby? I have put some notes on the hybrid sports page, but it would be interesting to have some material on league-union games. I think these are probably more common than people realise, and took place during the wars in military set ups etc. --MacRusgail (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

There is a bit on Comparison_of_rugby_league_and_rugby_union#Cross-code_games.GordyB (talk) 20:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. Is this worth a separate article or not? I suspect such games are more common than people realise, the only problem being that many of them would have been informal, maybe people on ships from RL areas visiting Pacific islands where RU is more common. I don't believe that there were no games between '43 and the 1990s, frankly. I've also heard stories of Borders rugby sides playing against people from Yorkshire and Lancashire, and I've no doubt some games were perhaps played in WWI.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

European competitions names

There are 4 articles about European competitions: 2 named with the RLEF acronym at the beginning, RLEF European Shield and RLEF Euro Med Challenge, and 2 more named with "rugby league" between brackets, European Nations Cup (rugby league) and Euro Bowl (rugby league).

What do you think about naming the 4 competitions in the same way ? "RLEF ..." or "... (rugby league)" --Puigsacalm (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The RLEF website is conflicted.'s rotating main image shows three competition logos. The logos have the titles:
Also on that page on the scoreboard on the left, and on, they are referred to as:
and in all three places it's just "Euro Med Challenge" (WP article: RLEF Euro Med Challenge)
I think the Cup, Shield and Bowl should have "Rugby League European cup/shield/bowl" because that is what is used in the logos. The logos have no mention of RLEF. RLEF is also not a very widely know acronym.
For the Euro Med: Until I see some promotional material, I would probably leave it as it is. LunarLander // talk // 02:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me.--Jeff79 (talk) 09:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Me too. I'd say use the most commonly used phrase but to be perfectly frank hardly anyone even knows about these tournaments anyway. GW(talk) 10:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I think that could be a good idea to rename the 4 competitions with "Rugby Leage" at the beginning: Rugby League European Cup, Rugby League European Shield, Rugby League European Bowl and Rugby League Euro Med Challenge Cup. My vote is for this way. --Puigsacalm (talk) 21:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good on the first three, but the Euro Med Challenge is just a 'Challenge', not a 'Challenge Cup'. LunarLander // talk // 22:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I added wrongly the word "cup" at the end. My proposal for the 4th competition is "Rugby League Euro Med Challenge" --Puigsacalm (talk) 18:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


Can anyone offer some help? I don't know anything about notability requirements for rugby teams. I declined the speedy deletion on this userpage, but I had to block the username per WP:ORGNAME. - Dank (push to talk) 01:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

That seems to be a rugby union article, judging by the diagram on the MySpace page, whilst this is a rugby league WikiProject. WP:RU may be able to help more. GW(talk) 08:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Match report templates

I hate the {{footballbox}} template. Thankfully, they made a collapsible version: {{footballbox_collapsible}}. Whilst updating 2009 Challenge Cup with today's unfortunate result, I decided to add a template for a try: {{try}}, and added it to the {{Match report templates}}. In case you want to use them for detailed reports from now on. Cheers, GW(talk) 21:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Like a bull in a china shop. I still prefer the collapsible one though. If I find a way of converting our current {{rugbyleaguebox}} into one that collapses, I'll release it as a new template and use that instead. Sorry to bother, GW(talk) 22:11, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Finished: {{rugbyleaguebox_collapsible}} GW(talk) 23:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Biography infobox and AFL

I am planning to create an AFL section to our infobox in similar vain to the Union section unless anyone has objections. I am sure most of you will know the reason why I plan to make it, it won't affect any of the rest of the template.  The Windler talk  11:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I for one would be hoping it gets used in just that one case. By the way, how do you feel about him now Joel ? -Sticks66 12:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, personally the only thing I have against him is that he is leaving the Broncos. Other than that I don't really care. But I also like that he is staying in Australia, as it will be easy to keep referencing sources for the AFL section. If he had left of Japan or France, I doubt there would be to many sources I could use to describe what is going on over there. I was worried that if he went over to Japan/France for a few years, it wouldn't be updated correctly and soon lose it's FA status, which is my primary concern. Karmichael isn't my favourite player, it's just I wanted to make a featured article, and there are plenty of sources post 2004 (when he made his debut) and he had enough popularity to do so. I also hope it is only this one case,  The Windler talk  05:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I've begun a discussion about how we might represent the pre-1895 and pre-1907/8 records of rugby league players on the template's talk page if anyone fancies adding their thoughts. LunarLander // talk // 22:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Craig Field

I've uploaded a photo of Craig Field (as well as a video but unsure if it works) but the article needs a clean-up and a update. Bidgee (talk) 13:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

John/Johnny Rhodes

Is John Rhodes (rugby league) (linked to from Template:Australia squad 1975 Rugby League World Cup and John Rhodes where he is described as "John Rhodes (rugby league) (b. 1948), Australian rugby league footballer") the same person as Johnny Rhodes (linked to from Template:Australia squad - 1968 World Cup champions)? If so, which is the right name? DH85868993 (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

There is only one Johnny Rhodes listed in Whiticker and Hudson, born in 1947 and playing for Canterbury, NSW, Qld and Australia. The "see also" on the disambiguation page listed Johnny Rhodes as an Australian rules footballer. I've fixed that. The redlinked John Rhodes (rugby league) can probably be removed.  florrie  13:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Irish flag

I'm in a minor edit war with an IP number over the correct flag to use for Ireland on the national team page, RLI article and 2008 World Cup article.

The IP has decided that because the RLEF profile page for Rugby League Ireland and the page for Ireland use a tricolour (flag of the republic) that:

  1. Writing "Despite representing the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland the Ireland national rugby league team use the flag of the Republic to repersent the team" in the articles is justified.
  2. The four provinces flag should be replaced with the tricolour in articles.

I have started a topic on the talk pages of these articles but the IP has gone straight for the undo button so I'd appreciate it if the RL project could come to a collective decision on this.

Here is a picture gallery from the RLI website showing an Irish playing kit with the 4 provinces flag on the shirt. The IP has provided no picture of a shirt with the tricolour on it.

This is a quote from a post on the RLI website's message board from "RLI Admin": we have only ever used the 4P´s flag on the right breast. To date we have not used the any other flag and any information other than that is entirely false. This is a post on a message board but it is on the official website.

Both my supporting links come from the RLI website, neither of the IP's links (RLEF and RLWC08) do. LunarLander // talk // 19:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Having engaged in an edit war myself against an equally uncooperative user, I can safely tell you that you are unfortunately in the wrong, even though your attempts are aimed at defusing the argument. My understanding, not only from your source but also as someone who has studied the history of Ireland is that the Flag of Ireland represents the Republic of Ireland, as well as all of its sportsmen who compete representing the Republic alone – it does not represent those who compete at a super-national level, such as the RLI or the Irish national rugby league team. However, verifiability, not truth, is the threshold of inclusion on Wikipedia. Find some other sources which support your use of the Four Provinces flag. Secondly, Wikipedia is not a democracy. Just because the WikiProject agrees with you does not make you right, so there's nothing we can do but advise. Thirdly, since RLI is a super-national body, you can always use the fall back - Do not use supernational flags without direct relevance. The article on the RLEF for example should not have the Flag of the European Union, because the organisation is not part of the Union or its Council. Nor should anything to do with the Super League, for that matter. GW(talk) 20:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
In my mind the four provinces flag on the jersey is pretty conclusive.--Jeff79 (talk) 21:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if it relevant but there is an archived discussion here at WP:RU on the use of the 4 province flag and copyright/fair use. Not sure of the outcome, but it may be of interest as far as usage of the image goes.  florrie  23:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
That WP:RU conversation resulted in them using no flag for Ireland RU btw. I think with RL we are in a different boat because the 4prov flag is on the jersey and so we can justifiably use that and not run into the problems RU did about "inventing" a flag. But thats just my 2c Mattlore (talk) 00:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Representative footy

Just a quick note. I hope nobody of the project is putting "present" in the Representative section of the infobox. This was discussed once before but I don't remember the outcome of it. I'm firmly of the belief that as players are not contracted to representative sides and their selection is subject to form, injury, etc. the years in the infobox should only be updated each time they play a match with the year they played in. This will save us from doing what I just did: changing Willie Mason's time with New South Wales from being until "present" to 2008. I'm sure everyone can agree that this should never have to happen and that a player's time with a representative side is literally from match to match.--Jeff79 (talk) 13:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed.  florrie  01:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


Discussion on changes to the 2009 ladder is here if anyone would like to contribute.  florrie  05:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I've bowed out of this one and leave it to the speculators to sort out who has or has not qualified.  florrie  06:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

club season articles in firing line

I've noticed this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salford City Reds 2007 - so be aware if you contribute to these club season articles that they've been noticed and will probably be dealt with if they aren't very good. The Salford 2007 article consisted of a league table and then some empty sections. The 2009 articles for seem better although I personally doubt whether there is enough content (and enough contributors from the UK currently) to do them justice.

For content, perhaps other teams run by the club could be included. UK examples: foundation, the academies, reserves. Aus/NZ have the Toyota Cup teams etc. Maybe other people have thoughts on these articles, maybe we can come up with an ideas list of things to include in them. LunarLander // talk // 01:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)