Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby league/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

English rugby league stadia by capacity

This article is rubbish, I know as I wrote it. Hopefully it can be the start of something better.

I have tidied it up somewhat. I suggest changing it to British rugby league stadia because there is no point having a Welsh page.GordyB 21:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration

What about selecting an individual article for a collaborative effort? Maybe we could look at potential FA subjects. I know there are some great writers in this project. A lot of other projects do this in one way or another, so maybe we should trial it? Forever young 08:07, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Thats a good idea, but perhaps only useful for large projects? I seem to have so many articles that i'm doing at the moment, i dont have a lot of time for anything else. I think it should at least be tried. POds 17:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Feature Articles

An idea from Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby union is to have articles to collaborate on for a fortnight to improve them up to feature article standard. I have created Template:RugbyLeagueFortnight and we can open up a new section under this link to discuss what article we will work on to improve. Perhaps if we get it established, a section on the main page just showing articles that have been improved previously or up to feature article standard, including the fortnight's current article for collaboration. What do you all think? --JRA WestyQld2 08:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

A good idea. One problem is that sometimes in the union project something gets nominated that I don't know very much about and then cannot help. This collaboration works best if the nominated articles are neither about Northern Hemisphere subjects nor Southern Hemisphere subjects e.g. the main rugby league article or rugby league world cup etc.GordyB 13:00, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I doubt there will ever be rugby league as a feature article. Looking over the rules, I am scared shoitless that I will be banned for uploading images that I myself have taken of footballers, so it will always be a hard thing to do. Rugby 666

Infoboxes

Please can I ask why we have separate NRL and ESL infoboxes and also why both of these include variable fields for {{{Sport}}} and {{{League}}} when they are league-specific rugby league templates?

I suggest we make a {{infobox_rl_club}} from {{infobox_nrl_club}} (since it contains the most info) and redirect the existing NRL and ESL templates there, and that "Sport: Rugby league" should be hard-coded into it to save entering it into every article.

Any objections?

The ESL infobox is used on a number of union teams as well I think. I dont know why. I created it because the ESL clubs did not have logos/infoboxes at the time, and I guess union clubs just used it because it was there. I think it is on a number of gay clubs as well. So yeah, redireccting it or whatever probably isnt the best idea until it becomes completely useless. I know its a pretty crappy template, so I too would like to see it phased out. Cheers Cvene64 16:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that means we need to keep {{{Sport}}} and {{{League}}} as variable fields then.

Why don't we direct the lot to {{Rugby Team infobox}}? We could add all the extra fields that {{infobox_nrl_club}} as optional ones (so the ESL and RU articles don't end up with big, ugly, empty, infoboxes). {{Infobox England place}} is an example of a template that has optional fields (which are completely omitted if not defined) and others with titles that can be varied ({{{DistrictType}}} controls the {{{District}}} title). I believe we could use similar code to make {{Rugby Team infobox}} into a one size fits all template.

Better still: I could start work on new global rugby club template, test it on ESL, NRL and RU teams then redirect everything to it, if it works. Any thoughts?

Sydney Roosters

[[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg -->|150px]]
Club information
Full name	Eastern Suburbs District Rugby League Football Club
Nickname(s)	Roosters
Founded	1908 as Eastern Suburbs
Current details
Ground(s)	Aussie Stadium Moore Park, Sydney (41,159)
Chairman	Nick Politis
Coach	Chris Anderson
Competition	National Rugby League
2006	National Rugby League, 14th

Coincidentally, I just thought of this issue whilst doing work on Sydney Roosters. I don't like how the template drags on and includes a few too many details such as premierships, minor premierships, runners-up, wooden spoons and record scores. I think it'd be better if we simplified it to something like what Arsenal FC have (the football template). So I made this one: Template:Infobox rugby league club, which is essentially an appropriation of the football one. The good thing about this one is that it's very variable, and things such as "coach" can be easily renamed to "manager" if need be. What does everyone think of this - it is simple, useful and gives out only the essential information that userboxes are meant to serve for. It is also much shorter than the older one which is what I was trying to get to. --mdmanser 02:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I like the new template, do we have an agreement that the old infobox was probably excessive? --JRA WestyQld2 06:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I certainly think so. The only difference between this one and the football one is that they have team jerseys in their infobox. I quite like the idea of them, but to be honest, it'll take a lot of time setting up and maintaining it. At the moment I think the priority is to move every rugby league club's old template onto the new style. For the moment, however, only move existing clubs, as there is not an option in the coding that allows for a "left league" date to be put in. I will look into that in future weeks. --mdmanser 07:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Can someone explain why we can't show jerseys anymore?--JRA WestyQld2 02:09, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

What exactly are you referring to? Did jerseys ever feature on pages? --mdmanser 02:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe so, I just can't believe I missed it for so long :-s --JRA WestyQld2 01:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I preferred the other template, more information at your fingertips. Rugby 666

Danny Tickle

Could I ask someone with better knowledge to go over to this article. We have an anon user who keeps changing from the cited source the player's place of birth. They have provided another source but won't wait for further checks before part changing the article. I'm not fussed what is right, but just that it's right. Thanks for any help --Regan123 03:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

Too few players' pages have pictures. An idea I had about fixing this for the more noteable (and picture-worthy) players and coaches would be to use their book-covers. Most famous players and coaches have written books which feature a photo of themselves on the cover. Jpeg files of these covers would be easily found on the internet and I think they woudln't create any copyright problems. What do people think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.78.141 (talk) 03:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Suspect fair use of such only applies when used to illustrate an article discussing the book in question. So article on a player / coach would need to refer to the book. Jbuzza 20:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

Too few players' pages have pictures. An idea I had about fixing this for the more noteable (and picture-worthy) players and coaches would be to use their book-covers. Most famous players and coaches have written books which feature a photo of themselves on the cover. Jpeg files of these covers would be easily found on the internet and I think they woudln't create any copyright problems. What do people think?--Jeff79 20:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Western Reds v WA Reds

Although I'm not a member, I'm having a conflict with myself as whether or not to start a new page for the WA Reds or to update the Western Reds. I believe both franchises are different and for the fact that the Western Reds is in the toolbar as a defunct NRL team whereas the WA Reds is a new club. While incorporating some of the information of the Western Reds to the WA Reds is an option I think that for the article itself and for the benefit of the rugby league network on Wikipedia it would save much confusion if the separate article was created for the simple fact that people will be confused as to whether its a new team or a dead team. I'd like to go ahead with the new article, are there any objections? Sbryce858 09:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you are correct, two pages seems the best option to me.GordyB 09:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd have to agree that 2 pages would probably be best. However.. if the club decides to incorporate the records of the old Reds into the new club, then the 2 pages could be combined Steeden 06:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Since the announcement of the Perth side in the NSWRL Jim Beam Cup I have been updating the Western Reds site with the revamped side's information - as far as I'm concerned they are, in most respects, the same club playing in a lower grade. This will be especially true if the WA Reds become an NRL side as is envisaged. I support one page at this point - also because there isn't really a lot more to say about the WA Reds at this time and is best covered in a paragraph in the main article. As an side, I think we need some guidelines over what a 'defunct club' is - a club is not 'defunct' just because it no longer plays at the highest level, this is a mistake too often made in Australian RL circles. CumberlandsAshes81 03:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Archive

As this page was getting overlong, I've moved old discussions to an archive page. If you feel that any particular discussion was on-going and should not have been moved then just move it back.GordyB 10:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Challenge Cup

There is a discussion about whether the Rugby League Challenge Cup should be moved to Challenge Cup. Those with an opinion see Talk:Rugby League Challenge Cup.GordyB 09:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about two Rugby league related categories

There's a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 27#Category:Rugby league clubs about whether there's a difference for categorization purposes between a rugby league club and a rugby league team. I think the proposal is that Category:Rugby league clubs should be merged into Category:Rugby league teams, but whatever is actually being proposed, I'm sure that contributions from this WikiProject would be welcomed. Bencherlite 01:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Nelson Bay Blues

i am very new to wiki, can some one let me know how to create a club colour picture and load it on, or if some one can create one with blue white and yellow and add it to the blues that would be great.

Doncaster Lakers colours

Could someone with better wiki knowledge than me please change the club colours icon for doncaster lakers to blue and gold. The little square picture which goes next to the clubs name. It is currently black white and red but we have reverted back to blue and gold.

1911 rugby league premiership final

I don't know a thing about rugby league to even tell what's going on in this article. Someone want to take a look? NickelShoe (Talk) 03:12, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

This article has now been cleaned up and merged into the Aust RL season article New South Wales Rugby League season 1911 and redirected.--Sticks66 14:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject RugbyLeague template

Currently, there are two templates for WP:RL.

• Template:WikiProject Rugby league (about 89 articles use this)
• Template:RugbyleagueWikiproject (about 800+ atricles use this)

Why is this? The first one, is a proper one, while the second seems to be used on player pages. My suggestion is we merge all into the first one. Now I don't know a simple way to do this (can we redirect templates?) but my suggestion is put the syntax of the first template onto the second one, thus meaning we only have to change the 89 articles that have the old one rather than the 900 that have the second one. Any opinions????? SpecialWindler 03:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• I can't see why 800 rugby league articles can't be rated like the other 89 articles SpecialWindler 03:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I created Template:WikiProject Rugby league so that it could be used to rate/assess articles. I purposely made it separate from the original so that we could easily track which articles had not been rated. In the long-term it was my goal for us to go through each talk page one by one and rate the corresponding article using the new template. I think we should aim to move each of the old articles onto the new system and then delete/merge the old template into the new one, but not until each of the articles using the old system move onto the new one. What do you think about that suggestion? --mdmanser 04:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thats seems fair. But if an article isn't assessed then it automatically goes on the Category:Unasseessed rl articles (whatever), so there it is already. But if thats the plan, I didn't know so I'll start straight away. SpecialWindler 04:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Once all the articles have been assessed though, the original template should be removed. SpecialWindler 04:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think about that point actually regarding the unassessed category. It may have been my original intentions to force article assessment if we moved over to a new template. If we stuck with the old one then we may have just lazed around without bothering about the assessment (and people may not have been aware of the syntax to rate an article). Hope that makes sense. I'll start assessing some articles now too.--mdmanser 05:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Eligibility Lists

Anyone fancy doing eligibility lists for the upcoming world cup. I can imagine a far few Aussies will be asked to represent the likes of Ireland, Wales or Scotland. Does anyone know if there are sources out there to do this. Londo06 14:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

A virtual impossibility, who knows where every single player's granny was born?GordyB 15:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

QRL.com.au has the eligibility listed for all the players in the Queensland Cup here: http://qrl.com.au/competitions/player_profiles.php Bongomanrae 22:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a bit more complicated in England. A lot of people have mixed English-Celt ancestry. It could be that half the English-born players could qualify for one of Ireland, Wales or Scotland (in that order).GordyB 11:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's a bunch of Samoa and Tonga eligible players. http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=3435549&postcount=1 Bongomanrae 06:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Australian seasons' article titles

For accuracy and consistency's sake I proprose changing the titles of each Australian rugby league season's article from:

New South Wales Rugby League season 1908 - 1983 to NSWRFL season 1908 - 1983
New South Wales Rugby League season 1984 - 1994 to NSWRL season 1984 - 1994
Australian Rugby League season 1995 - 1997 to ARL season 1995 - 1997
National Rugby League season 1998 onwards to NRL season 1998 onwards

• This is in line with other sports' season articles, i.e. 2000-01 NHL season, 2000 AFL season, 2000-01 NBA season, 2000 CFL season, 2001-02 NBL Season, 2000 NFL season. They all seem to prefer putting the year first, but I don't mind having the year last.
• It will also mean less typing when creating links to them.
• Currently seasons from 1908 to 1983 are named incorrectly, as the NSWRL only changed it's name from New South Wales Rugby Football League in 1984. Since we can make it absolutely 100% correct if we want, why don't we?

I don't mind doing all the work myself once a concensus is reached here first. Cheers.--Jeff79 07:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your point about title accuracy, and perhaps including the "Football" part of the NSWRFL is a much-needed addition. I do, however, feel that it would be wrong to rename the pages to include acronyms, according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions Wikipedia:Naming conventions (abbreviations), where it is stated: "Convention: Avoid the use of abbreviations, including acronyms, in page naming unless the term you are naming is almost exclusively known only by its abbreviation and is widely known and used in that form. NATO, NASA, laser, radar, and scuba are good examples of acronyms that are commonly thought of as words." Spelling the the title out properly has no drawbacks - all new season articles can be created directly through the redlinks in the seasons box located at the bottom of pages.

I strongly suggest that we keep the names as they are except for the inclusion of "Football" for articles from 1908-1983. Also, we're not the only ones to have the year at the end. Both the cricket and football projects (the two most active and successful projects on Wikipedia by FA count) keep the years at the end - I'd vote to keep it this way although it doesn't bother me too much.

I'm also preparing to draw up a discussion for a few conventions for team and season pages in order to keep them consistent. Stay tuned. --mdmanser 07:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Just on the use of abbreviations in article titles: I think that is referring to the main article for a subject, i.e. not naming the National Rugby League article simply 'NRL'. All of the leagues mentioned above use the full words in the title of their main articles, but revert to acronyms for series of season 'sub-articles'. This is because it's unlikely any other article will share the title '2000 (abb.) season'.--Jeff79 07:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. Bongomanrae 15:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Did we reach a consensus on this somewhere else? I don't mind moving the articles, I'd just prefer to know whether to move them to New South Wales Rugby Football League season 1908 or NSWRFL season 1908. Bongomanrae 18:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Waiting for more responses. My vote's for acronyms, as outlined above.--Jeff79 19:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Leave it as it is. SpecialWindler 10:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Why?--Jeff79 23:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Well it appears we at least have consensus on adding "Football" for 1908 to 1983. So I'm going to go ahead and do that.--Jeff79 05:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Queensland Cup and NSW

On the infoboxes should players playing for clubs like the North Devils be a junior club or senior football. A player can be 28 and play Queensland Cup and then be called up to play for an NRL Club Article here.. But would Michael Roberts the Mackay Brothers junior, would his career at the Redcliffe Dolphins go on the Senior games or not. Alot of people put it in as big players get called up to NRL at 18, but others can stay down in Queensland Cup for a long time. Where would it belong. Londo06 22:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to add another section, other than Youth Clubs and First Grade Games. Maybe a premier league or other games. See my proposal to the right. . SpecialWindler 10:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

This would allow everything from 3rd Grade to Premier league and other leagues, showcasing the entire rugby league career of the player. For Example Michael Roberts. SpecialWindler 11:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• • Youth Clubs
    • Mackay Brothers (XXXX-XXXX)(most youth clubs don't have a link but if there is)
  • Other Clubs
    • Redcliffe Dolphins (XXXX-XXXX)(should be wiki linked so readers can understand where the club is etc)
  • First Grade Clubs
    • Brisbane Broncos (2007)(wiki linked)

SpecialWindler 11:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

State of Origin Article

It's that time of year again. Does anyone else think we need to have Rugby League State of Origin semi-protected so only people with logins (who can be held accountable for their contributions) can edit it? Alot of clowns are vandalising the statistics these days and it's a hassle to fix.--Jeff79 09:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we should wait for a couple of days. Now that Game 1 is over, I don't vandals will be interested as much. Perhaps we should prepare ourselves for Game 2 when the next period of frequent vandalism will come. Gizza^{Chat ©} 09:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Colours

The use of team colours has become very popular across rugby league pages, and has even spread into A-League and Australian Football League pages as well. However, I think their use needs to be minimised wherever possible. I initially created them as a subsitute for team logos following them being banned from lists (for some ridiculous reason), so that teams could have an identifiable image next to their name in ladders/tables for season summaries. The problem is, they have started to spread uncontrollably onto main pages (see Super League (Europe) for example). It is my belief that the use of these images should be restricted ONLY to season summary pages for the time being. If we set ourselves and other editors limits now then it will save us the trouble of having to do so in the future in what could be a more complicated situation. What's more is that if we use them too often, they begin to become really annoying and detract from the text (which should be the main focus). What does everybody else think? --mdmanser 05:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, I like the colours (personally the logos are better but the rules are the rules (unfortenely)), i don't know if removing them would be the best thing. I don't really know??? SpecialWindler 10:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I also like them, but I don't know that they are needed in (for example) a list of winners of a competition.GordyB 11:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Exactly my point Gordy. I think they should be removed from all pages except season summary pages. They just don't seem to belong on New South Wales Rugby League premiership and National Rugby League in my opinion. I made that list with colours on the NSWRL premiership page but on second thoughts it looks pretty bad compared to the one I created at Australian rugby league champions. I propose we restrict colours to just the NSWRL season infobox, season ladders and finals series tables. mdmanser 11:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I like them on Super League (Europe) and National Rugby League and the top two sections of

NSW Rugby League premiership but the summary of grand final winners is just a mess as a result of the colours.GordyB 11:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess if a club's name is there, the colours don't really need to be next to it. But I think they could be useful in the same way icons for national flags are next to players' names, such as in the team lists in 2007 Rugby League State of Origin series and in season infoboxes for top scorers. They do seem to be overused somewhat, particularly in the NRL season 2007 article where they appear over and over and over. I don't feel too strongly about it though. Didn't occur to me as a problem until it was mentioned. Just my 2 cents.--Jeff79 18:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

But when you remove them all, who's going to stop someone bring them back up? SpecialWindler 09:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I like the colours, it can make teams easier to pick out in a wall of text. They can also make it easier to spot trends. Bongomanrae 08:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't really know alot about it. But maybe the reason little club logos couldn't be used in the past was because whoever uploaded the logos to wikipedia in the first place included no fair use rationale. Some of them are up for deletion now for this reason. Maybe if we upload new ones with proper fair use rationale we won't need the colours squares anymore.--Jeff79 05:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan, I wouldn't know what fair use rationale to use though. Bongomanrae 07:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:Rugbyleaguebox - extended version

Hi all. I've been playing around with the {{Rugbyleaguebox}} template to see if an extended scoreboard can be made (breaking down the scores into tries, conversions/penalites, and field goals). Of course this can be done by using a lot of line breaks, but then it is pretty likely that the rows don't match - and the rows normally match scoreboards on TV. So I've made a test template at User:52 Pickup/Drafts/Rugbyleaguebox - see the talk page for examples. It means using more fields, but the template also supports the current fields too so you can choose whether to use a condensed or expanded scoreboard. At the moment, conversions and penalities are kept together, but that could be changed if you want to use this version. Any thoughts? - 52 Pickup 10:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it needs changing, it might be better to have players something like this eg SpecialWindler 10:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Johnathan Thurston (1T,2/2G,1FG=9PTS)SpecialWindler 10:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

But its fine at the moment. SpecialWindler 10:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I mainly did it just to see if it could be done. I'll leave the code there if you want to use it later on. - 52 Pickup 10:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, instead of such an extended template format to convey this extra information, perhaps simply some new icons would help? For example, the soccer scorebox uses single score1 / score2 fields, but has a range of templates that make things a lot clearer. See Template:Goal for more info. - 52 Pickup 19:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that'll look good. Bongomanrae 09:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Season articles

Who else thinks it makes utterly zero sense to have a brief summary of the Grand Final in the Finals Series section of a season's article, immediately before a more detailed Grand Final sub-section? To me the Grand Final is a separate, far more major event. Other sports have entirely separate articles for the grand final. They at least deserve their own detailed section in seasons' articles.--Jeff79 16:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's important we keep these season articles consistent in presentation, and since some seasons do not currently have a "Grand Final' sub-section then we should summarise ALL Finals results in the table. I think it makes perfect sense to keep a summary of each Finals game into a table in that section anyway, Grand Final inclusive. If it makes you happy then perhaps we should remove the "Grand Final" subsection heading text to rectify things. After all, the table clearly specifies its own Grand Final section - that's what makes it different from other pages such as 2006 AFL season where subheadings are done in the TOC rather than in the table itself. Without the Grand Final information in the same table, the table looks really incomplete.

In brief - keep the Grand Final in the table in order to keep it complete. If it really bothers you that there is a separate "Grand Final" section header, then remove that. It makes perfect sense to include a Grand Final summary right after the result is shown in the table anyway... Perhaps that is an acceptable compromise... mdmanser 12:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't bother me that the Grand Final is in its own sub-section of the Finals Series section. I thought I made it clear in my statement above that they deserve their own sub-section. Some seasons don't have details for the grand final that year, so in them at the bottom of the finals table will have to do for now. But hopefully they eventually will have Grand Final sub-sections. We don't reduce the quality of information in more complete articles of a series to match the less complete articles for consistency's sake. I fail to see how the table looks "really incomplete" without the Grand Final. It's a table of finals matches, and they're all there, immediately preceding the Grand Final sub-section which all finals series inevitably lead up to. The Grand Final is not just another finals match. It is the match of the season. It's a separate event, with a separate marketing campaign and a separate set of records. In addition, some articles' text contain links to Grand Final matches specifically, and with its own sub-section one can click on that link and be taken directly to the relevant Grand Final match. Removing the Grand Final sub-section ruins these links.--Jeff79 20:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's just absurd that the Grand Final match not be included with the rest of the finals matches. It is a finals match itself and should be there along with the others even if there is a separate section with further information for the Grand Final. Ideally the table should be replaced with a tournament bracket, but this does not work except for the years 1995-1997. With tournament brackets the Grand Final would be included too, despite having a separate Grand Final section (see 2006 FIFA World Cup from my recolection). But in the absence of such a thing a table will do instead, including everything the bracket normally would (including the Final). Jeff, you have a reasonable argument but in this case it will be impossible to come to a consensus between the two of us since each is a fairly valid argument. Remember, just as an infobox is a summary of a page, the finals table is a summary of that section... mdmanser 08:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd be willing to back down on the inclusion of the Grand Finals in the tables, but not the deletion of the Grand Final sub-section headings in articles with detail on the match.--Jeff79 19:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

That scenario is exactly what I had suggested originally. I think it's important that the Grand Final result be included along with the other finals games. --mdmanser 04:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I started this discussion because someone had deleted/shortened the Grand Final sub-sections while at the same time replacing them in the tables in some years' articles. It still reads wrong with them there in the tables which have the last heading "Grand final" with the teams, the attendance, the venue, the date, the referee, etc, immediately before the sub heading "Grand Final" and paragraphs mentioning the teams, the venue, the date, the attendance, etc. I'm guessing you must have created those tables and didn't like having part of them deleted. Any outsider will see that it reads totally wrong. It just doesn't look like it's been thought through with both there.--Jeff79 05:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I did make the tables like I did with the the pages themselves (1998-2007 and 1908-1918 originally plus more). It doesn't bother me that my work is being changed, but it does bother me a part of a "finals" table is being taken away. I see your point about something being repeated twice but I honestly believe that removing the Grand Final section of the table away is not the right answer (it belongs there). The table is meant to be a quick summary of events - the later Grand Final section should just be a textual analysis of the match. Infoboxes and tables summarise things in articles quickly and should be allowed to coexist alongside more detailed sections. It's a tough situation but I really do feel strongly about keeping all results together in one place regardless of what goes on around it. --mdmanser 05:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Sydney Roosters

Ace stuff guys, today's featured article! --JRA WestyQld2 08:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it's all pretty surreal really. I've never seen so many edits (100 within 7 hours or so) being done to a rugby league page within one day ever before. Mind you, the whole lot are vandalism. Hopefully we can make this a more common thing in the coming months if we work on a few more pages. mdmanser 08:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should get it semi protected. SpecialWindler 07:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Great work! Bongomanrae 11:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RL Main Page

I'm planning on seriously restructuring the project's main page so it's more in line with the cricket and rugby union projects, which I must say, look a lot nicer and offer more information at an easy glance. It's a work in progress but here's what I've done: User:Bongomanrae/Sandbox2 Any objections? Bongomanrae 11:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant work mate. Don't have any hesistation to upload it immediately. Just make sure you include South Sydney Rabbitohs as a Good Article though. Well done. --mdmanser 13:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Just some pointers that may help

• South Sydney Rabbitohs is not a featured article and not a good article, so shouldn't be there. Done
• If theres no featured lists, theres no point in having it there. Done
• The link for Requested Articles (in How to Help) section is Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/Requested articles Done
• The sections are based on rugby union not league Done
  • Criteria guideline for article inclusion
  • Article style guide
• The external links, for History and Statistics need to be put there. Done

It's a very good job and feel free to upload it when you feel like, it will be edited greatly by WP:RL contributors. SpecialWindler 21:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

On another subject, it seems there is an added interest in WP:RL recently. SpecialWindler 21:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for the kind words fella's. It's up now so have at it! (I wasn't sure what to do about the Rabbitohs article so I just left it off for the time being until we decide where it should go.) Bongomanrae 03:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The assessment system isn't very practical for the reason that A-Class articles are classified as being better than Good Articles, but do not get given a run alongside their counterparts in lists. I think the best thing to do in order to solve the problem would be to have us all copyedit the article sometime next week and then resubmit it for FAC. --mdmanser 05:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

What if I just add it as an A-Class article in the meantime? Bongomanrae 06:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I nominated South Sydney Rabbitohs as a GAC (good article candidate), so it should get that, then we can erase A-Class articles which shouldn't be assessed. (Personally South Sydney is probably ready for FAC again, maybe it needs copyediting)SpecialWindler 06:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Have I missed it or what happened to the column that used to list comments describing articles or categories recently Updated or Created etc ? -Sticks66 13:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

That's now under Recently updated articles and News. Bongomanrae 03:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Archive

I think this page needs another archive.

May I suggest we get a bot to do it.

SpecialWindler 21:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Like MISZABOT, set to 21 days, 50000kb SpecialWindler 21:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I did this on 1/6/07 (australia time). SpecialWindler 21:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RL Collaboration

I know we've got a National Rugby League club collaboration of the fortnight (currently the Bulldogs) but I'm wondering if we can have a WP:RL collaboration of the fortnight/month on the 3 main State of Origin articles? ie: Rugby League State of Origin and the two teams, Queensland and New South Wales. There's probably more people looking at the articles now than at any other time of the year so why not take advantage of this and try our best to get all three up to good article status? Bongomanrae 04:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Part of me thinks "Jesus! After what the roosters article just went through??!!" But yeah, that could be a good idea.--Jeff79 05:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Haha, it's been a busy time that's for sure. I think seeing the Roosters making the front page will encourage a lot of inactive WP:RL members to contribute. Bongomanrae 06:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Sydney Roosters edits to be reviewed.

I review all Main Page FAs (because in the flurry of edits, it's surprising what can slip in), and a few edits to this one apparently need double checking:

• these edits made just before it went on Main Page
• A Citation needed tag addition that needs fixing ASAP

Circeus 05:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding userboxes to members pages

I'm going to go through all of our members and replace this:

RLThis user loves Rugby League

with this {{User WikiProject Rugby league}}

If they don't have the either I'm going to add the new one. Hopefully this will spur a lot of inactive members to visit the project page and will hopefully get a few of them interested again. Any thoughts? Bongomanrae 10:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I might add the teams that they follow too (according to what they listed on the project participants page). Bongomanrae 10:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. There seems to be interest in WP:RL over the past week. SpecialWindler 09:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

A lot of contributors don't take kindly to others messing with their user pages. Call me old fashioned, but I'm one of them. I'd advise against this. -Sticks66 13:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Bad idea. You should only edit other people's user pages in very limited circumstances e.g. reverting vandalism.GordyB 13:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I wasn't sure how doing that might be received. Bongomanrae 12:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Leave a note on their talk pages alerting them to a new template, and that there a team templates. It's not a bad thing to talk on somebody's talk page. SpecialWindler 08:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

2008 world cup

will the games in the 2008 world cup count as tests? SpecialWindler 09:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

they've never counted before as Tests, they're just World Cup games. In Player articles you say (for example) Mick Cronin played in 22 Tests and 11 World Cup matches between 1973 and 1982 -Sticks66 13:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but apparently, the 2000 world cup was counted as tests. I'm not sure. SpecialWindler 07:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

St George Illawarra or St. George Illawarra

St. George Dragons has a dot in its name whilst St George Illawarra Dragons does not. If you check the logos they feature a dot and even the introduction of the page shows a dot. The Dragons' Website] has no dot in the html title but at the bottom it says "Copyright St. George Illawarra Dragons." Not even the club seems to know, but in my opinion we should move it to have the dot as per the logo. Thoughts? --mdmanser 10:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed --IanRitchie 10:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think so too.--Jeff79 16:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Just on this, if we decide to follow the logo on the Dragons, then to be consistent we'd have to remove the hyphen in Manly-Warringah as it doesn't appear in the Sea Eagles' logo.--Jeff79 02:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I wonder what's with Manly. I checked the past logos at www.galahs.com.au, and up until 2003 they used the hyphen. But since then the two logos do not feature one. I guess this is another topic for debate. --mdmanser 07:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

You'd hope that efforts are made at the clubs to get the logos right. Who knows? Maybe when they're all finished and printed on everything the club's management's jumping up and down going "You forgot the damn hyphen/full stop!" But maybe we can assume that they aren't, and what they came up with on logos is intentional. In which case I think they're a solid authority for what we should use on here.--Jeff79 07:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Karmichael Hunt

I have worked on this article for a while now, trying to get it up to FA

see differences

• former
• current

But I need a free pic of Karmichael Hunt.

If anybody can help out with this, it would be much appreciated.

SpecialWindler 10:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Can't promise anything, but I'll ask. Florrie 13:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you had already checked Flickr without any copyright success, but I know that if you message the creator of one of those 5 or so images of Hunt on there then you can ask them to change the licence tag so you can use the image on Wikipedia. Other than that I don't think I can help out at this stage. Sorry. mdmanser 14:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The family over this way kindly gave me the address for their online albums and while there are some snaps in there of Karmichael, I don't think they would be what you are after for the article, ie playing for the Broncos. Let me know if you would like to see them anyway.Florrie 10:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Four Provinces Flag.svg

Should this flag be used for articles such as Rugby League World Cup. Or is the Traditional ROI flag more appropriate. Not sure if they are using it for Union as all I've seen the old flag. Londo06 16:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

As an Aussie who doesn't know alot about Ireland, I prefer just the national flag. I have no idea what country it's supposed to be when I see that four provinces flag. But I guess an Irish person would know best.--Jeff79 23:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The Irish flag represents the Republic of Ireland, using it to represent the whole island is like using the Aussie flag to represent an ANZAC team. The four province flag is not instantly recogniseable and looks a mess when minaturised. We voted on this some time ago at the union project and the consensus was that a shamrock should be used instead. Personally I find shamrocks rather twee and prefer the St Patrick's Cross as it is used widely on Wikipedia to represent the whole island.GordyB 13:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

So does Ireland have two teams? One for the Republic and one for the Northern UK part? Or is the whole island represented by one team the way Great Britain has been?--Jeff79 07:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Great Britain has sometimes called itself "Great Britain and Ireland" and the RFL was the governing body for both Britain and Ireland. England and Wales teams always existed alongside the Great Britain team or sometimes England and "Other nationalities" (mostly Welsh). The Ireland team is a recent invention largely because rugby league was not played in Ireland at all until recently.

There is no "Republic of Ireland" or "Northern Ireland" teams; what little rugby league exists is played in the Republic with Northern Ireland just slotting into the Republic's structures. Northern Ireland could not hope to field much of a team, most Ireland players are exiles and most exiles came from what is now the Republic (even in England).

To be honest I don't think there is even a desire for separate teams, despite the politics the island fields joint teams in virtually every sport. Soccer is pretty much the only exception and even then both sides were all-Ireland teams until FIFA / UEFA put their foot down.GordyB 13:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

So when it comes to the flag, shall we use the more readily-recognisable Republic flag? Personally I'd prefer either that or the clover flag rather than the four provinces. Those two are least likely to result in confusion.--Jeff79 19:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No. It is not appropriate to use the flag of the Republic to represent a united team. It is a shame that there are no Irish members of the project but my preference is the St Patrick's cross.GordyB 20:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

players

I have added a manual of style for league players. SpecialWindler 09:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

See it here:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/Players

Great respect for your work on the project and the Karmichael Hunt article is undoubtedly excellent but chronologically & using each year as a section-header is just one way of ordering an article. For some of the players of yesteryear there is not an abundance of information easily available to justify one sub-header per year. Sometimes Club career is an appropriate catch all first section header that might have sub-headers for each club they played at. Representative career can also then have distinct sub-heads between say SoO and Australian rep sections. See Herb Steinohrt as an example of setting out an article about an old-timer from bugger-all information or Bob Fulton & Mick Cronin as alternative ways of laying out abundant disparate info. -Sticks66 13:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC).

I was contemplating doing an option to do another option like that one, but it would be better to have one manual of style, but feel free to have options, for the players. SpecialWindler 10:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Assessing articles

We have been assessing alot of article lately, but there are still alot to be done, so if you come across a rugby league related article that isn't assessed. I would probably say there are approx 2000+ articles related to rugby league on Wikipedia including

• Players
• Clubs
• Season Articles
• Junior Clubs
• Stadiums (used for major rugby league, not parks for junior footy)
• and more

The following is a category, which rugby league articles need assessing

I am gradually bringing the numbers down, but it needs alot more work, please help by replaceing the current template on the talk page with the following

{{WikiProject Rugby league
|class=
|importance=
|player=
|coach=
|club=
|needs-infobox=
|peer-review=
|old-peer-review=
}}

Thanks SpecialWindler 11:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Season Articles update

I've gone through each and every one of the season article infoboxes and corrected/added all relevant information that is accessible via this website: http://stats.rleague.com . There may well be one or two addition mistakes regarding points scored, attendance or games played floating around but that's not a big issue and chances are these won't be checked until a possible GA/FA candidate comes up. What I have also done more importantly is add in each and every one of the correct fields whether or not they're used on that page. I do ask that even if they are blank that they are left there for a number of reasons: so it is easy to update them in the future once information becomes available and in the event that somebody creates a new season page and uses that page's infobox as a sample. The names of the seasons should also be fine now, and "Football" should now appear in seasons 1908-1983. The only inconsistent thing is a redirect to NSWRFL which is no biggie at this stage, although that'd be good if it could be corrected sometime too.
The next priority is to finish creating all NSWRL/ARL/NRL pages using the same style infobox and page structure. After that we can tidy up ladders and finals tables. Once all of that is done, then we can concentrate on consolidating textual additions and hopefully get a few articles through to FAC in the next year or so. Cheers all, mdmanser 08:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work, it must have been a long and boring process, your edits are much appreciated. SpecialWindler 10:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Well it was something that had to be done. Thanks, but I have to say that yours are currently far more impressive and appreciated, as in the case of Karmichael Hunt. Quite a brilliant article really. mdmanser 11:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, SpecialWindler 22:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

karmichael hunt images

As you know, I have been working on Karmichael Hunt to get to FA status

I know these following wouldn't be a free image, but do they qualify for wikipedia's non-free images. (Ps. I am not to knowlagebale of images on wikipedia so...)

2003 Australian Schoolboys Team Photo
2001 Under 15's Merit Side
2003 Australian Schoolboys Team Photo 2

All three photo's have Karmichael Hunt in them, they may qualify for wikipedia under fair use, because these would be the only photos of the time, especially the Under 15's one.

Any comments SpecialWindler 06:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

They are only free, if I ask the copyright holder for permission. SpecialWindler ^talk 03:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)