Talk:Wales national rugby union team

Older entries

"The Welsh supporters have a reputation for being amongst the most fanatical in the rugby union world, making the Millennium Stadium, the team's home ground, a particularly intimidating place."

The above is a matter of opinion....The millennium stadium isn't in the least bit intimidating - especially if you've ever been to an English sports stadium, where fans like to boo the opposing team. I've therefore removed it.Trystan Morris-Davies 15:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't write it, but England at least do find Wales a difficult place to play rugby, which is why they tend to stay overnight in Bristol and simply drive to Cardiff on the day of the match and return immediately afterwards. I think there is a certain amount of truth to it.GordyB 16:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Logo

I think Image:Wru logo.jpg should be used instead of Image:Wru logo.png, which was swapped around recently. The current version, which is a little transparent, is not really used anywhere else, notably the WRU website...Cvene64 12:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Notable players

Was thinking that the list of notable players is quite large. Although it's good to have some names on there I think a large list doesn't add much useful content to the article (see WP:LIST). I think there should be some common criteria for inclusion that reduces the size of the list. Also at the top of the section there could be a link to the category of Welsh Rugby Players. I think the one universal criteria should be that there is an article of more then stub quality (start, B-class, GA class or FA class) on the player. Other then that they could be:

• Inductee into IRB hall of fame
• A Captain
• To have played more then 50 tests?
• Captained Lions

Any other suggestions? - Shudda ^talk 10:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

See criteria posted on the talk pages of All Blacks and Australia national rugby union team.GordyB 20:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I was thinking something along those lines. Thought I would post something up here before going ahead and doing it though. If you look at the English teams article they refuse to change their criteria. Didn't want any arguments. However I'll do as per above as there doesn't seem to be any opposition. - Shudda ^talk 04:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I think we should have a universal criteria for all teams. With reference to the England page, the disagreement was whether players that currently lack articles should be deleted. IMO they should not be.GordyB 18:14, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Other useful criteria would seem to be record holders in various categories (different forms of scoring, most appearances in each position), captains during notable periods, other "star" players during those periods, and those who went on multiple Lions tours, or who were noteworthy poachees of RL. Lions captain would be an unfortunate category, as many of those were not noteworthy players.

Percy Bush, Ray Cale don't have many appearances, they are not Notable players. Do you agree ? Ddfree 14:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with that. They may have been great players for their clubs, but not for the national team. - PeeJay 15:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I dont think a list of 50 or more Notable players in the history of the team (100 years) is a problem and there are certainly names in the current list that younger readers would not be aware of. The risk of a short list is that modern day players take preference, partly because the team plays more international matches each season than in the past which makes it much easier to accumulate caps/points. I'd suggest a list of players over 50 caps would be useful and a separate list of Other Notable players.

Past players (in Talk:Australia national rugby union team)

What type of criteria is being used to determine who goes in this list? Is there any at all? If not, I think we should discuss what should constitute a players notability for inclusion. I don't really have any huge problems with it at all, I just think we should come up with some sort of set of guidelines..yeah?Narrasawa 10:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

When I started editing Wikipedia, there were only a few national team pages which were little more than stubs. I tried to bring them up to a reasonable standard as quickly as possible and give them a common layout. Hence the 'famous / notable players' sections were created by cannablising an existing list of famous players (List of footballers (Rugby Union)), I then added players that were in the IRB hall of fame. Since then other players have been added. The lists are not complete and tend to be biased towards the modern era.

There was a proposed criteria list on the Talk:All Blacks page which I am re-posting

Some suggestions for criteria, in order of importance:

• Those with widespread international media coverage (ie Jonah)
• Those in the International Rugby Hall of Fame
• Those who have notable achievements outside of rugby (eg as an MP or in business)
• Those awarded honours (MNZM or MBE, or if that includes too many players then ONZM or OBE)
• Those who played in most tests over a long period (8 years?)

I would add involvement in a major incident or 50+ caps.GordyB 13:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

This has now been changed so that it is consistent with All Blacks and France national rugby union team articles which are both Featured Articles. The criteria they use is International Rugby Hall of Fame inductees. Now the section is prose with a brief (two to three sentences) on each member. There are nine from Wales so that is quite a few. Any comments let me know, but I know that this is not considered WP:OR as when the France article went through WP:FAC we had a list of ten players. There were objections and it was changed. So this way will avoid that. - Shudde ^talk 10:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Flags

Is there any purpose in using the flag to note that the players in the squad are Welsh? If we want to be pedantic then surely the flags of England, New Zealand and Australia would be better for Charvis, Parker an Cockbain, but if we are saying that those three are Welsh by virtue of them being in the Wales squad, the flags are redundant are they not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blogdroed (talk • contribs) 16:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree, there's no point using flags for players in national squads.GordyB 17:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That template is supposed to be for club/provinces. Using it on a national team is pretty pointless. Would be better to follow the All Blacks, Irish and English pages, which use a different style. Cvene64 01:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any point either jojo 15:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojonesey (talk • contribs)

More images

There is a lack of photos in Wikipedia Commons... So if you're a welsh contributor or if you see some Wales national rugby union team's match, please take some photos and the rights to put them in Commons to better Welsh footballer articles and Wales national rugby union team's article... thanks a lot and good work... Many pleasure... Specially for the period 1920-1990 Ddfree 09:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Wales national rugby union team (version française)

Nobody wants (or is able) to better this article in order to make a featured article...

• The article in french language is now nominated for a featured article ( « Article de qualité » )

• ... And it should be easier if the english article is better... And it is easier to better english article with the help of french model... in order to better rugby union in Wikipedia... Ddfree 09:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• The article in french language is now a featured article. Ddfree 11:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Australia winning the Grand Slam?

I come from Wales and I want to know what this buisiness of Australia winning the Grand Slam in the Five Nations Tournament is about. As far as I know, the Five Nations were Wales, England, Scotland, Ireland and France. Please tell me if I'm wrong!!! jojo 15:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you've mis-read the paragraph. Australia won the grand slam on their tour of the UK and Ireland, i.e. they beat England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland in the same tour. - PeeJay 16:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

"Modern era (1983–present)

... Australia defeated Wales 28–9 at Cardiff Arms Park. At the time, this was the most points scored against Wales at Cardiff, and the first time they conceded a push-over try there; Australia went on to win their first Grand Slam.[44]"

Incorrect. Scotland beat Wales 18-34 in the 1982 Five Nations championship. Further, the [44] link takes you to 'Rugby Milestones', granted, but there's nothing on the page about Australia's Grand Slam tour in 1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anselm53 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Succesion box

Removed again. The reason being that it doesn't fit. If you are prepared to do the immense amount of work that would make it work properly then go ahead but otherwise don't add it please. Currently it is not a succession box at all because it has not been added to England or France.GordyB 10:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want to add it, the succession box is, I think, as below. The full details are on the England/France/Ireland/Scotland pages, but as smaller versions have previously been removed from this page, I will leave it up to others to add. KeithW (talk) 16:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Good article review

I have assessed this article for Good Article status, and have decided to put it on hold for a week. It almost meets the Good Article criteria, but there are a few minor improvements that need to be made. If these are corrected, then it can be promoted to GA status.

• Is it well written? Mostly, but there are some problematic areas:
  • Editorialising in the lead. 'This was a major shock... the disappointing performance...' Unless reliable sources can be provided describing the outcome of the 2007 World Cup in such ways, this is non-neutral language and ought to be avoided.
    • I've removed this, no need for it in lead anyhow. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Some use of jargon. This is not a major problem, especially since anyone reading this article is likely to know about rugby, but it should still be avoided where possible. For example, the line 'a Six Nations Grand Slam in 2005' in the lead could easily be expanded to 'achieved a Six Nations Grand Slam in 2005 by beating all their opponents'.
    • Grand Slam is wiki-linked, do i still need to change this? - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • This section on the 2007 World Cup should be improved and expanded: "In the 2007 Rugby World Cup Wales once again failed to achieve, getting knocked out in the pool stages of the competition. Another south pacific defeat this time to Fiji. Subsequently the welsh coach Gareth Jenkins was sacked. Wales are still looking for a head coach."
    • Done. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • The writing in the 'World Cup' subsection is better, but this line is again editorialising: "Ironically, once more they scored more tries than their opponents." Also, the term 'the most recent World Cup' should be replaced by 'the 2007 World Cup', so it will remain true in future.
    • Done. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
• Is it factually accurate and verifiable? Again, mostly. This article has plenty of references to reliable sources, but they are missing in a few areas:
  • There are no references provided for Wales' performance in the 2007 World Cup, and for Gareth Jenkins' subsequent resignation. These should be easy to find, but it needs to be done.
    • Done. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • In the 'notable players' section: 'Widely regarded as the greatest rugby union player of all time' needs a specific citation to someone calling Gareth Edwards the greatest player of all time, or should be removed as non-neutral.
    • Believe it or not this is actually a non-controversial statement. He is widely regarded as the greatest player of all time. I've not seen an all time World XV without him in it. The first citation (number 90 at the moment, url: [1]) has Cliff Morgan saying "The greatest rugby player ever born, in any position, anywhere in the world.". Hopefully that is ok, although if you'd like another I can dig one up. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• Is it broad in its coverage? Yes, definitely. Easy pass here.

• Is it neutral? Yes, apart from the few lines already mentioned.

• Is it stable? Yes - there are no ongoing edit wars over this page.

• Is it well illustrated? Yes. More pictures are always appreciated, but the current number and quality of illustrations is fine.

Overall: On hold for a week until these improvements are made. If they are, it should pass. Terraxos 15:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. A lot of those problems are about the 2007 Rugby World Cup material. The article was actually nominated before the tournament had finished (was nominated on 26 September) so that material has been added since. I should have kept a closer eye on it anyhow. I think I've addressed all your problems. Let me know if you want more done. - Shudde ^talk 03:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright then, time for an update:

• Is it well written? Yes, now changes have been made.
• Is it accurate and verifiable? Yes.
• Is it broad in its coverage? Yes.
• Is it neutral? Yes.
• Is it stable? Yes - the only recent reverts have been to remove blatant vandalism.
• Is it illustrated? Yes, to a sufficient level.

Overall, this article now meets the Good Article criteria. (Sorry for not saying more here, but my main points about the article were made above.) Congratulations to everyone who has added to it, and happy editing in future! Terraxos 02:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Succession box discussion

A discussion has been started about the breadth and formatting of succession boxes for national rugby union teams at WikiProject Rugby union. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union#Succession boxes. - Shudde ^talk 22:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Coaches

I don't think a comprehensive list of coaches is needed at all. The head coach is listed, who cares who the physiotherapist and nutritionist are? Let us put it this way, would they warrant there own article on wikipedia? My guess is no. Gatland is the head coach, and there are no co-coaches appointments. I have removed this for now, certainly at the FAC there was no complaint's that the misc staff were not included, and it's the same at the other national teams that have passed through an FAC. - Shudde ^talk 01:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Strip

Can someone update the new page with Wales's new strip? I would myself but i dont know how! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Welshguyowen (talk • contribs) 11:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

A 'golden age' ending in 1982?

Why is 1982 selected as the end point? My ancient BBC video The Crowning Years covers the period 1969-79. A book on the subject[2] defines the golden age as 1968-80. 1982 does seem too late - in 1980 and 1981, Welsh performances in the Five Nations were mediocre and England and France (respectively) won the Grand Slam. Pondle (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Well... the book in question was published in 1980, so they probably wouldn't have risked guessing any further ahead, but I'd agree, 1969-1980 is a fine period. I would keep 1980 as it was the centenary year of the WRU, so although Wales weren't that successful it was a period of celebration for Welsh rugby (and a fitting point for the era to end). FruitMonkey (talk) 18:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

OK I will make a few amendments to that section shortly, if no-one else objects. Pondle (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Non Standard Usage in the Title of This Article - Wales national rugby union team

Titles should always be capitalised in including the first and last word no matter the length, minor words should be lower case but all other words in a titles should be uppercase (captialised), see: Collins Cobuild English Usage Helping Learners with Real English 1999. Ieuan Sant (talk) 12:05, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• The article title is fine. If this was changed it would fly in the face of every sports article. The name of the team is just 'Wales', all the other words are qualifiers to differentiate this article from the country, the football team, the netball team, the baseball team, etc. FruitMonkey (talk) 12:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Section retitled: Cwm Rhondda

I show a posting below that I received last night on my talk page, together with my reply, and the user's response:

Bread of Heaven

I enjoyed your collection of flags at the top of this page.

I know (the English version of) the hymn that includes the line "bread of heaven". In fact, it is right up at the top of my favorites. But please tell me what is the specific connection between Welsh rugby and "bread of heaven".

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 22:35, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Cwm Rhondda is a very well known Welsh hymn tune. First performed in 1907. Cwm Rhondda translates as "the Rondda Valley" in English, and more often than not, sung to the words: Guide me, O thou great Redeemer. Wales rugby union supporters adopted it years ago, although the reason is not understood, apart from the fact that it is an inspiring song which everyone knew (Sundays in chapel) and could keep repeating, and repeating... I think it splendid.

It was sung at the funerals of both Princess Diana and the Queen Mother, and at the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton.

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

It is indeed splendid, both tune and words. The version I learned (in the United Church of Canada) began Guide me, O thou great Jehovah.

The part of the story I did not know was its adoption by the Rugby union. A great anthem, known to everyone in Wales. I guess it is a natural. Wanderer57 (talk) 03:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Leeks for sale: Are you ready for The Six Nations?

I am wondering if you would be kind enough to add below any knowledge you may have on this topic.

Many thanks for your time.

With kindest regards,

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk)

The words are by William Williams, Pantycelyn 1717-1791 originally as "Arglwydd Arwain Trwy'r Anialwch" it was translated from the Welsh by Peter Williams 1723 - 1796. The tune is by John Hughes, 1873-1932 — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlwynapHuw (talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for that. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Featured status

• I was looking at scheduling this for today's featured article for February, but the quality of the article is lacking. There are numerous unreferenced statements, and the last updated information appears to be from 2012. This article needs some serious work, or it may lose its featured status. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Welsh Rugby Edit-a-thon

Hello! For all those interested in improving content relating to Welsh Rugby there will be a Rugby World Cup Edit-a-thon at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff on September 7th. Please spread the word, and sign up hereJason.nlw (talk) 13:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Splitting off some of the history section to History of the Wales national rugby union team (2004–present)

I have split off the material from the "Revival (2004–present)" section: History of the Wales national rugby union team (2004–present). I've done this because that section was regularly getting material added to it, and often it was adding undue weight to more recent results (a case of recentism). If superfluous material is added to the history section, would any watchers of this talk page please move the material to the new article, and keep the subsection a brief summary of results since 2005. Thanks. -- Shudde ^talk 00:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Article status

This article was promoted way back in November 2007. Things have changed since then, and the quality of the article has regressed. I've been going through and polishing it up to try and get it to a state where it can be proudly featured on the main page. This is ongoing, but at the moment I'm focused on getting all the references up to scratch. I've been copy editing as I go, but there is still work to be done. I've been trying to ensure that all the web-based references are reliable, and to replace those that may go dead. Other than that the notable players sections probably needs to be copy-edited as well, as it's size has increased since 2007. Any help would be greatly appreciated. -- Shudde ^talk 00:22, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Statements that could be better sourced

Listing here does not imply that their current sourcing is inadequate, just that better ones may exist. In fact many are well sourced, but finding offline sources would be very useful.

• Wales played their first international on 19 February 1881; organised by Newport's Richard Mullock, Wales played against England, losing by seven goals, one drop goal and six tries to nil (8–0).
• On 12 March 1881, the Welsh Rugby Union was formed at The Castle Hotel, Neath.
• Two years later, the Home Nation Championship – now the Six Nations Championship – was first played and Wales did not register a win.
• However, rugby in Wales developed and, by the 1890s, the Welsh had developed the four three-quarters formation. This formation – with seven backs and eight forwards, instead of six backs and nine forwards – revolutionised the sport and was eventually adopted almost universally at international and club level.
• With the "four three-quarter" formation Wales became Home International Champions for the first time in 1893; in the process winning the Triple Crown.
• They won two more Triple Crowns in 1902 and 1905,[9] and were runners up in 1901, 1903 and 1904.
• In 1906, Wales again won the Home Championship,
• In 1909, Wales won the Home Championship and then, in 1910 – with the inclusion of France – the first-ever Five Nations. In 1911, Wales took the first Five Nations Grand Slam by winning all their matches in the Five Nations;[9][c]France were heavily defeated by Wales at St Helens in 1910 (49–14) and Ivor Morgan scored two tries in the match. It would be nearly forty years before they achieved a Grand Slam again.
• The Great War came in 1914 and rugby was suspended for the duration.
• they won their first Five Nations Grand Slam since 1911 in 1950.
• They achieved another Grand Slam in 1952
• In 1956, Wales again won the Five Nations, but they did not regain the title until 1964 and did not win it outright until 1965.
• Wales dominated Northern Hemisphere rugby between 1969 and 1979, and attained an incredible winning record, losing only seven times during that period.
• The following year Wales recorded their first Five Nations Grand Slam since 1952. Using only 16 players in four games,[46] the 1971 side achieved their most notable win of the tournament in their victory over Scotland;[47] after a last minute try by Gerald Davies that reduced Scotland's lead to 18–17, flanker John Taylor kicked a conversion from the sideline described as "the greatest conversion since St Paul" to give Wales a 19–18 win.
• In the 1972 Five Nations Championship, Wales and Scotland refused to travel to Ireland at the height of the Troubles after receiving threats, purportedly from the Irish Republican Army.
• Wales next won the Five Nations outright in 1975, and in 1976, Wales won their second Grand slam of the decade. Just like the first in 1971, they only used 16 players over their four matches.
• They repeated the feat in 1978 and, in the process, became the first team to win three consecutive Triple Crowns.
• Wales then went on to win the 1979 Five Nations with a Triple Crown.
• In 1980, the WRU's centenary year,[59] Wales lost to the All Blacks in Cardiff by 23–3 after the All Blacks scored four tries to nil.
• Wales won two matches in each Five Nations of 1980 and 1981,
• Swansea continued to be used as an international venue until 1954, when Cardiff Arms Park became Wales' primary home venue.
• Wales first won it in 1893, when they achieved a Triple Crown.
• Somerset-born Frank Hancock, a 2011 inductee into the World Rugby Hall of Fame, changed the game of rugby when he was played as a fourth three-quarter for Cardiff. When given the captaincy of Wales in 1886 he trialed the system against Scotland, the very first international match to see four three-quarters play. Although the system was abandoned during the match, it was readopted by Wales in 1888 and was quickly absorbed by the other Home Nation countries. It is now the standard formation in world rugby.
• Known as the "Prince of three-quarters", Gwyn Nicholls played 24 Tests for Wales at centre between 1896 and 1906.[148] He was the only Welsh player in the British Isles team of 1899, and was the star for Wales during their first golden era. Not only did he captain Wales to three Triple Crowns, but also led them to their famous victory over the All Blacks in 1905.[149][150] On 26 December 1949, gates bearing his name at Cardiff Arms Park were officially opened.
• Both captained Cardiff and Wales, made their international debuts in 1947, and were on the Lions squad that toured Australia and New Zealand in 1950. Williams, nicknamed the "Prince of Centres", earned 22 caps for Wales and five for the Lions in an eight-year Test career. Wales won all five Tests in which he served as captain; at the time of his induction, he was the only Wales captain with a 100% winning record. Williams went on to become a prominent rugby commentator. Matthews, renowned for his strong tackling, earned 17 caps for Wales and six for the Lions, calling time on his Test career in 1951. After his playing career, he became the Lions' first team doctor, serving in that role during the 1980 tour to South Africa.
• Named the greatest Welsh player of the 1950s by the WRU, Cliff Morgan played 29 Tests for Wales,[152] and four for the British Lions between 1951 and 1958.[153] Morgan played at fly-half and was one of the sport's biggest crowd-pullers during his career.[154] He played during Wales' Five Nations Grand Slam of 1952, and their victory over the All Blacks in 1953,[155] but he is most famous for captaining the British Lions in South Africa in 1955.
• Although most notable for his coaching record, James appeared for Wales in two Tests in 1958. He coached the British Lions to their only series victory over New Zealand in 1971, with a team including many Welsh players.[157] He also coached Welsh club Llanelli, and the Barbarians side that defeated the All Blacks in 1973. Despite this, he never coached Wales.

Checking source:

• The Championship remained unresolved with Wales and Ireland unbeaten. Although the Five Nations was a five way tie in 1973, the Welsh did defeat Australia 24–0 in Cardiff. -- Smith (1980), p. 432.

-- Shudde ^talk 06:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wales national rugby union team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=198%3Bopposition%3D4%3Btype%3Ddecade
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160306103346/http://stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=199%3Bopposition%3D4%3Btype%3Ddecade to http://stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=199%3Bopposition%3D4%3Btype%3Ddecade
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141205050422/http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1%3Bteam%3D4%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dteam%3Bview%3Dopposition to http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1%3Bteam%3D4%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dteam%3Bview%3Dopposition
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131022052949/http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1%3Borderby%3Ddrop_goals%3Bteam%3D4%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dplayer to http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1%3Borderby%3Ddrop_goals%3Bteam%3D4%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dplayer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:48, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Trivia?

It wasn't official, but would it still be considered okay to mention the fact that they were number one? Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections says that occassional exceptions can apply to sources that may otherwise be considered trivia. source is here--114.23.252.56 (talk) 02:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Table placement

In the ‘Overall’ section are two tables: “Men's World Rugby Rankings”, and overall scores against all opponents. If the browser window isn’t very wide, these two tables bump up against each other. At least one table should be moved. My preference, but not strongly held, is that the scores table should be at the start of the ‘History’ section. can anybody else see a better place for it? JDAWiseman (talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Scoreline fixes

@PeeJay2K3: Hi, you reverted my scoreline fixes saying "the higher score always comes first". Yes that is generally true when match scores are quoted on TV and in other media, but for encyclopedic purposes this is not the case. When scores are stated inline within the text you would normally put the score that applies to the subject of the sentence first, i.e. if England defeated Wales and the final match score was 14–12 to England (say) then Wales would have lost 12–14 because Wales is the subject and their score appears first in the scoreline. It would make no sense to say "Wales lost 14–12" because 14 is higher than 12 and if Wales (the subject of the sentence) got 14 then they must have won. I do a lot of work on snooker articles and although there isn't an equivalent MOS for rugby, I can point you to the place where this scoreline rule is covered for snooker: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Snooker#Score format says "generally give scores in the same order that the players are mentioned in the sentence" i.e. Team/Player1 suffered a 5–8 defeat to Team/Player2. I'd assumed this rule applied to other sports as it does seem logical, but maybe not. Certainly the England rugby article follows that rule and always has done and no-one has ever questioned it. Maybe this is a good time and place to have a general discussion about it? Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I’m sorry, but that’s utter nonsense. How can you make any sort of conclusion from the statement “Wales lost 14-12” that Wales won the game? The higher score is always written first, that is just the way this works, even for “encyclopaedic purposes”, whatever you meant by that. – PeeJay 04:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

It's not utter nonsense as I've explained in some detail my reasoning above. Did you look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Snooker#Score format? In cue sports, the figure that comes first in the scoreline applies to the player that is the subject of the sentence, i.e. the one that is governed by the verb. This purely hypothetical example might make it clearer what I'm talking about:

Match score: Wales 42 — 0 England (as it might appear on a match report)

From Wales' point of view, looking at it from their side of the scoreline, the score is 42–0, i.e. they won by 42 points to zero, but from England's point of view, looking into the scoreline from their side, they lost by zero points to 42, i.e. they lost 0–42. So the team that is being talked about in the sentence is the one whose score appears first in the scoreline because that is the number of points they scored compared with the number of points scored by the other team.

I can't put it much plainer than that. I can ask some other people for an opinion. Maybe it only applies to cue sports, or maybe no-one's actually stopped to think about it logically before? Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:24, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I understand your argument, but in normal speech (and thus on Wikipedia too), you should say "Wales lost 42–0". I don't think your argument actually applies to cue sports either, or perhaps it's just a regional thing, but in either case, it shouldn't be applied here. – PeeJay 07:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Rodney Baggins: Just so you know, the England article is quite inconsistent throughout with its usage of each style. – PeeJay 08:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Rodney pushed me in the direction of this conversation for clarity. I've never seen "X lost 14-0" etc. on wikipedia. It should be noted that wikipedia doesn't follow normal speech. If anyone knows if there is a MOS on this outside of cue sports, then it's SMcCandlish. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:54, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I would think this is covered at MOS:NUM. The plan for lots of sport-specific MoS pages basically fell apart in the late 2000s. There are MOS:CUE and MOS:SNOOKER, and various sport wikiprojects also have WP:PROJPAGE essays that may touch on such matters. I think they're all consistent on this, and if merged into an eventual unitary MOS:SPORT (which would be a good idea), I'm certain the advice would remain to a) ensure that the order of scores matches the syntax of the sentence (i.e., in a game in which a higher score is better, it not possible to "lose 15–3"), and to prefer to list winning then losing scores in that order, unless there's a compelling reason not to (e.g. because the sentence is about the losing team/player, or the table is a list of one team/player's score history).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I think that supports what I've been saying. I get that Wikipedia doesn't exactly follow "regular speech" per se, but you absolutely wouldn't say "Team X lost 14-25" in any circumstances. Even in cue sports, I think the same would apply. Check out this article, specifically the third paragraph from the end; the paragraph is written from Ronnie O'Sullivan's perspective and says he went "into the afternoon break 5–3 down". It does not say "3–5 down" as that just wouldn't make sense, but that appears to be what User:Rodney Baggins is suggesting should be the case. – PeeJay 23:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

On the contrary, it's clear that what SMcCandlish is saying supports my original argument... "the order of scores matches the syntax of the sentence" so if the subject is the losing player/team, then their score is placed first in the scoreline. He also says "it's not possible to lose 15–3" The fundamental point is that this is all about grammar and semantics, in that the sentence needs to be structured using logic and it's not a matter of "common parlance". It's simply not logical to say "Team X lost 25-14" because if the 25 applies to Team X (as it should because it follows directly on from subject/verb) and the 14 applies to the other team, then Team X won. It's just logic. We're not stating a match result, we're trying to construct a grammatically correct sentence. The longwinded solution would be to say "Team X lost the match; the final score was 25-14" which implies that Team X got 14 because they lost, but the true abbreviated statement would be "Team X lost 14-25". In other words, "Team X lost by [their] 14 points to [the other team's] 25 points". We might not be able to agree on this, but it's an interesting conundrum. I might start off an RfC at some point as it would be great to get other POVs. The BBC Sport article does say that Ronnie was "5-3 down" but that neither proves nor disproves the point. I do think the BBC writer got it wrong, or was at least careless with his choice of words, and of course I'd prefer "3-5 down". We might say the player was "at the wrong end" of a 5-3 scoreline, but not that he was "5-3 down" because that is logically nonsensical. Thanks to Stanton and Lee for your input. Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes. It should be "3–5" down. It's not really possible for "O'Sullivan to be 5–3 down" except in a game where getting a lower score is better, as in some card games. If we think that some sports fans are "hard-wired" to always put winning/leading scores first and losing/trailing ones second, then we need to write in a way that keeps the parties' relationships in the same order as the score reporting, e.g. "With Higgins holding a 5–3 lead, O'Sullivan was still down by the afternoon break." However, I don't think people's brains are hard-wired this way. I've regularly used expressions like "O'Sullivan was down, 3–5", and never once been reverted on it, nor reverted on fixing confusing constructions like "O'Sullivan was down, 5–3". PS: And, yes, "Team X lost the match; the final score was 25-14" is also a solution.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

You may not think it is possible for "O'Sullivan to be 5-3 down", but that is the prevailing way of writing that state of affairs, not just in Britain, but in American media too. I have never seen an American news source say anything along the lines of "The Broncos lost 14-23"; it would always be "The Broncos lost 23-14". Anyone who thinks otherwise is either unfamiliar with how scorelines are actually written or overthinking things. – PeeJay 07:17, 22 November 2019 (UTC)