Talk:Leinster Rugby

Leinster Rugby was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 13, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Rugby union High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This page is potentially disputable for two reasons only though. One, it could be construed as fan description in descriptions relative to other teams (although this will occur on any team page, see Munster Rugby was disputed for same reason), secondly, it uses the Irish flag next to Irish players, but as Irish rugby it is inclusive of Northern Ireland, it should use the white field with green shamrock, e.g. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Bordered_Ireland_rugby.png/20px-Bordered_Ireland_rugby.png All the best Whoelse 17:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Leinster rugby badge.png

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

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

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

BetacommandBot 05:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Jersey

Leinster have a new jersey for this season. Could someone change the jersey in the infobox? I don't know how.ThanksIP213.202.189.10 (talk) 09:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you can add a link to an image, I will have a look at what needs to be changed. Guliolopez (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Here is a link.IP213.202.189.10 (talk) 20:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Current

Possible

(Deindent) Hi. I've had a look at the "new kit", and personally I'm not sure it's significantly different enough from the "old kit" to warrant a template change. That said, I had a quick look at the existing jersey templates, and the option far right *may* be a little bit better. Although, personally, I think the existing template that includes the white collar is a little bit closer to the overall feel of the colour scheme. Without creating a new and entirely custom jersey template, (which I'm not really gonna do myself) I'm not sure that there is a much better option out there. Though you may want to look through the jersey templates, and see if you can create a better one on your own sandbox... Guliolopez (talk) 18:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the new template is better certainly. I changed one or two colours of the kit to this:

New Possible

|} Do you think thats ok?ThatsGrand (talk) 18:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template help

I created the following template for Leinster Rugby but as you can see it needs some tidying up. I would appreciate if someone with more wikipedia experiance could help, thanks.

Template:Leinster_Rugby

Fionnsci (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leinster Squad Nationalities

I understand and agree that the Internationaly Capped Players section lists the Irish players as "Ireland" rather than using any flag, but surely replacing the word 'Ireland' with the Tricolour under the Nationalality column in Leinster Squad 2009/2010 would be more appropiate?

This column is headed "Nat" (presumably short for nationality) as opposed to the international team that they play for. Their nationality should be represented by the flag of their country rather than the name of the international team they play for (be that the Tricolour for players from the ROI or the Union Jack for (future)players from NI).

3rd White Kit

Whats this 3rd white kit about? Leinster havent had a 3rd kit before, and Ive seen no white kit this year. Should it be deleted? Btw, theres a white training jersey, but also a navy and grey training jersey, so thats not applicable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.37.220 (talk) 23:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other records and trivia

I propose deleting any of the assertions until references can be found for each. I'd also add that the section is probably unnecessary and seems more like fandom than encyclopedic. --HighKing (talk) 00:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quick review and pointers

1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations.

N Most major point covered though there are some major claims without cites, such as "Leinster are currently the best supported team in the Pro12, with the highest average attendance." The European and Celtic success section has whole paragraphs uncited.

Done Far better, I have no issue raising this article to at least a class B article. FruitMonkey (talk) 17:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.

YAppears to cover most major topics, although the article will face problems at GA status with the fact that a club with a 130 year history is only given a very small paragraph to cover the first 115 years.

3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.

YThe lead is of appropriate size and contains the major points of the article. The sections of content appear sensible and cover the major elements expected from a sports team.

4. It is free from major grammatical errors.

YReads well with no major grammatical errors. Will probably be challenged at GA level for such terms as 'Leinster went professional', 'a rise in crowd numbers' and 'only the second side ever to retain'. There are also proper nouns missing capital letters.

5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.

Y Infobox and appropriate images and tables supplied.

Areas which will raise issues at GA status are.

Cites are not uniform, many missing dates.
The article is too list based, not enough text.
Some sections are vague. Notable former overseas players states 'The following is a list of notable non-Irish qualified former Leinster players'. How are they notable, this is subjective.
The amateur period is under sourced and too short.
Several claims without cites.
It has a list of 'Other records and Trivia'. This will probably get the article rejected straight away. It needs to be placed into text format, and 'Trivia' needs to be removed. If it's trivial, it’s unencyclopedic.

Hope this helps. FruitMonkey (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that is very helpful, I will look to address these issues when I get a chance. LeinsterLad (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed the above issues and believe the content is now sufficiently referenced, I've removed unsupported information and trivia, and I’ve made substantial additions to the amateur era and fleshed out some more of the article with relevant detail and clarified vague headings.

Hopefully this will be sufficient for Good Article status.

Any more feedback is very welcome.

(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, this article contains a lot of good content. I'd still rate it as "B" class, not yet GA status, so my main suggestions & observations are:

The "Early History" section would flow better if it followed chronological order instead of jumping around. Also, it is quite a long section, so perhaps split up into two sections. And the first paragraph re the formation of the Leinster Branch could use a citation.
The section on recent history from 2007-08 to the present is too lengthy. It also lack an obvious structure and might be better organized if one paragraph were devoted to each of the seasons. And it seems like it was written by adoring supporters, and not written in an encyclopedic (neutral, balanced) style.
The tables in the "previous seasons" section are very hard to read. Perhaps move the information from the knockout rounds over to an additional column the right, instead of mixing this information in with the pool play tables.
The "current standings" section from 2011-12 seems out of place. Certainly out of date.
Once you get about halfway through the article, the rest is mostly tables and lists (with overuse of the flag symbols) without much text.
"Les Bleues"? Really? I didn't know that was a common nickname.

Barryjjoyce (talk) 02:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. Much of the above has been addressed via several contributors which is greatly appreciated. I feel the article now warrants a Good Article status and hope that those reviewing would agree based on the criteria. Much of the content is sourced directly from existing publications online, such as Leinster Rugby official site (www.LeinsterRugby.ie) or from European Rugby official site (www.ercrugby.com) in terms of statistics etc., beyond this I feel it is a well rounded and well put together article worthy of recognition.

Aviva Stadium

I am getting tired of the edit warring regarding Leinster using the Aviva Stadium. The fact is that they play a number of their games at Aviva each season. The argument that

The aviva stadium in Dublin is a National Stadium currently held 50:50 by the FAI and IRFU. It is not a home Leinster Rugby stadium and should not be listed or added as a home stadium, it is not and never will be.

is, in my opinion, spurious. No one is claiming that the Aviva is a home ground, merely that Leinster play there. If you wish to remove the Aviva, then remove the RDS as well. Hamish59 (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As there are two articles that are suffering edit warring, rather than splitting the discussion, please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union#Leinster. Hamish59 (talk) 07:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Good" Article

Myself and several others have spent a lot of time maintaining and promoting the Leinster rugby article to try and make it as detailed and accurate as possible (sometimes I edit not logged in as LeinsterLad and didn't have an account for a long time, but have added much detail over the years).

I nominated the article for "Good" status previously (see above) and the main issue seemed to be with the sources and referencing that it fell down on, but I believe other than that fact that needs addressing, it is of excellent quality and deserves the designation.

I'm not very good at formal referencing (as my college days will profess), but I was hoping that perhaps someone or a group of people could take the time to begin to work towards having fact checked and referenced the main points of the article where possible.

Presumably we maintain this article by way of our love for Leinster, so it would be great if we could get it recognised as a "good" article, both as a testament to the fans who come here and also the province.

Thanks to everybody who has worked on this useful and informative article. But might I suggest that you stop trying to get it recognised as a "good" article, on the grounds that, at least judging by some of the recommendations made to achieve this status, to do so will probably disimprove the article, by making it more 'encyclopedic' and thus more interesting to 'academics', but less informative, interesting and useful to ordinary sports fans, by removing things like tables, and trivia, and replacing them by irrelevant waffle that just happens to be backed by citations from so-called reliable sources, etc (Note: if a legalistic justification is needed, WP:IAR, one of the 5 pillars of Wikipedia, instructs us to ignore all rules that prevent us from improving the encyclopedia, as some of the current rules for a 'good' article would seem to do, at least in my opinion). Tlhslobus (talk) 01:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile two things that might improve the article for sports fans:

1) Get the fact that Leinster is ranked number 1 in Europe and has won 3 Heineken Cups into the opening sentence instead of the 3rd paragraph.

2) In the infobox, translate "2012/2013 2nd(Champions)" into something that can be understood by the unitiated.

(I may or may not try to make those changes myself some other time, but for various reasons I'd ideally prefer to leave them to somebody else) Tlhslobus (talk) 01:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As above, Thanks all. Much of the above has been addressed via several contributors which is greatly appreciated. I feel the article now warrants a Good Article status and hope that those reviewing would agree based on the criteria. Much of the content is sourced directly from existing publications online, such as Leinster Rugby official site (www.LeinsterRugby.ie) or from European Rugby official site (www.ercrugby.com) in terms of statistics etc., beyond this I feel it is a well rounded and well put together article worthy of recognition.

LeinsterLad (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Leinster Rugby/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shudde (talk · contribs) 02:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this one. -- Shudde ^talk 02:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start the review shortly, but I thought I'd just say how I normally conduct these before starting. I may or may not finish the review in one sitting, so I'll explain my thinking so you have an idea what I'm doing! Normally I go through and just add comments as I read the article, I'll read the lead last, but otherwise go through in order in which it's written. My comments are not necessarily just about the Good Article criteria, but if not, I'll probably try and make that clear – I figure if I'm going to review an article, I may as well give any feedback I can, rather than just that related to the GA criteria. I'll review the images and sources last. If I find any cases of copyright violation or close-paraphrasing (see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing) I will fail the article rather than place it on hold.

If you have any questions feel free to ask me. I see this as a collaborative process. We both have the same objective – to get this article to Good Article standard. -- Shudde ^talk 02:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History

"In amateur days, the four Irish provinces played against each other in the Irish Interprovincial Championship and also played touring international sides. " -- this is not backed up by the source
"The first Interprovincial matches between Leinster, Ulster and Munster were held in 1875." -- a number of problems here, this is a copyright violation ([1] archive of the dead link) and doesn't relate to the previous sentence clearly.
in fact compare the wikipedia article The first Interprovincial matches between Leinster, Ulster and Munster were held in 1875.[5] At this time, the matches were played with 20 players a side. Leinster lost to Ulster by a converted try and beat Munster by one goal to nil. Since then there has been a match between these teams annually, with Connacht joining the fold in 1885. to the source (here) that says The first Interprovincial matches between Leinster, Ulster and Munster were held in 1875. At this time the matches were played with 20 players a side. Leinster lost to Ulster by a converted try and beat Munster by one goal to nil. Since then there has been a match between these teams annually, with Connacht joining the fold in 1885. – clear and serious copyright violation here
Actually the page that's taken from is still up, just moved address to http://www.leinsterrugby.ie/branch/about/index.php -- I'm going to have to fail the article. With a copyright violation like that I can't have confidence that more don't exist. I will continue to provide feedback though because I've already started, but I'm sure you understand why I can't place this article on hold. -- Shudde ^talk 02:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing with review

General comment on the history section. Everything here should be clearly referenced. If multiple consecutive sentences are referenced by the same source, then the citation only needs to be included following the last of the sentences. However if it's the last sentence of a paragraph, then that should have a citation regardless.
It's not been made clear that Leinster is a union composed multiple clubs, and that the province represents these clubs. This should be made clear early on -- not everyone reading this article will have any idea about this.
You need to go through and scrub the entire article of any copyright violations. Rewrite the article in your own words, and make sure to avoid close-paraphrasing.
I'm not sure why the provincial club and school competitions are discussed here, or is this article on the entire Leinster Branch? If it's on the branch then a lot more information needs to be added on other aspects of it's function and responsibilities. If a separate article does not exist on the Leinster Branch of the IRFU, then it may be worth creating the article.
Amateur period -- maybe it should be made clear early in the history section that rugby union was amateur from it's founding. The amateurism thing will pop out of nowhere for some people.
Also you should be explicit about when professionalism was sanctioned, rather than saying mid-1990s.
Generally, I think that the pre-professionalism history in the article could be expanded a little bit. Especially regarding the Interprovincial Championship matches.
Before the days of professional rugby union, there was further emphasis on Irish club rugby as opposed to the provincial game. During these times the provincial sides were purely representative sides and games were far less frequent than now. Between 1946 and 2002 the sides would meet annually to contest the Irish Interprovincial Championship and on rare occasion would be tested against touring international sides. When rugby union was declared 'open' in 1995, these four teams became the four professional teams run by the Irish Rugby Football Union and therefore much of the history of the side has been made in the modern era. -- this whole thing needs to be referenced.
Leinster became a professional outfit in the mid-1990s. -- this needs to be clearer. When exactly? How was this decision made. There is nothing about what the team did between 1996 and 2001.
More needs to be said about how the Pro12 (Celtic League) came into existence. As well, there is nothing about their early European matches.
The Leinster mascot is "Leo the Lion". needs a reference
In 2002–03, they became only the third team in the history of the European Cup to win all their games in pool play. -- see nothing about European Cup matches had been mentioned up until this point. Readers have no context. When did the competition start and when did Leinster join? How had they done up until that point?
The second paragraph of Leinster Lions (1990s–2005) is not adequately referenced.
Leinster improved during the 2004–05 season -- of what competition? Celtic League or European Cup?
The section Title misses (2004–07) is very short. Maybe expand it, or merge it with another section?
The next two seasons of the Celtic League were to end in near misses for Leinster, as they lost out on the 2005–06 and 2006–07 league titles on the final day of the season. These seasons also saw progress in the European Cup. In 2005–06, Leinster progressed to the semi-final but were eliminated by Irish rivals Munster at Lansdowne Road and they reached the quarter-final the following year where they were beaten by eventual winners London Wasps. -- paragraph is completely unreferenced.
Section European and domestic success (2008–Present) has a number of single sentence paragraphs. These should be expanded or merged.
Current standings tables in team articles (rather than season-by-season articles) are not permitted. I'll remove it (see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union#Transfers on club articles).
Previous seasons -- I'm not sure these tables are clear. I would not have them collapsed, and would consider simplifying them. They're very hard to follow. I look at the Season standings section in Crusaders (rugby union) it's just a lot easier to follow. Maybe consider trying to clean these tables up a little bit.
Honours -- these need to be referenced. You can probably incorporate the information in the notes here, will no reason not to have it directly above or below.
More copyright problems. Legend has it that the harp was adopted Leinster Symbol in the 17th century when Eoghan Ruadh O'Neill flew a green flag with a golden harp from his ship, the St Francis having anchored it at Dunkirk. O'Neill later returned to Ireland to help the Irish Confederation whose headquarters were in Kilkenny, Leinster. compared to Legend has it that the harp originated as the Leinster Symbol in the 1600s when Eoghan Ruadh O'Neill flew a green flag with a golden harp from his ship, the St. Francis as she was anchored at Dunkirk. The Leinster connection came when he returned to Ireland to help the Irish Confederation, which was headquartered in Kilkenny. from here. -- scrub this please.
Other sentences of Colours and crest need to be referenced adequately.
I'm going to skip past Stadia and Supporters sections now. Hopefully my comments above may guide you as you what may need to be done within these sections.
Have a look at the WP:WIAGA criteria 1b, the article needs to comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists. In summary, you need to try and delist the sections Notable players & staff and Personnel honours and records where you can. My advice is to look at something like Wales national rugby union team (which is a Featured Article). Not how in the Wales article Notable players is not a list, but rather a prose section with criteria. My advice is split off some of the notable players stuff, or decide a criteria for how players are "notable". For example is their a team hall of fame? Same goes for the records section. Would be better to split into a separate article (like List of Wales national rugby union team records) and instead have a paragraph summarising the notable records (like Wales national rugby union team#Individual records). Hope this is clear. If you need any clarification on what I'm talking about feel free to ping me.
Head Coaches (Professional era) make sure this is referenced. Also consider simplifying. (see Wales national rugby union team#Coaches).
The lead does not need citations unless they're for something particularly controversial, or a direct quote.

References

The references should really be consistently formatted. Bare URLs are more-or-less the worst way to add a reference. Consider using citation templates such as {{citation}} or {{cite web}} as these make formatting a little easier. For news articles {{cite news}} is quite good.
Many of the references are dead links. These are permitted, but if you can fix links for pages that have changes address, or you can find archived copies (such as at web.archive.org) that would be great. Makes verification easier.

Images

File:Heineken Cup Final 2009 Programme.jpg -- this does not have an adequate fair use rationale for this article and should be removed.
I have not checked the other images, but make sure they're appropriately licensed.
Is there not a public domain image of the team from the 19th century around? This would add greatly to the article.

Summary

It's a shame this article will fail, but there are serious copyright problems. I'm not sure who/when they were added but that is inconsequential. Please go through the article and carefully check that there are no more. I'll make a few changes to the article for you, so please excuse me for that. The other piece of advice I have is dig around and see if there are some books (or a book) out there on the team. That'll help with referencing, and will maybe give you some more material to add to the article. If you have any further questions feel free to ask me on my talk page. I would recommend a peer review before you nominate the article for GA again -- they can linger at WP:GAN for ages, and it sucks when after such a long wait the article gets failed. A peer review would reduce the chances of that. -- Shudde ^talk 03:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Leinster Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121024101406/http://www.irishtimes.com/leinster-rugby/sad-as-leinster-fail-to-show/ to http://www.irishtimes.com/leinster-rugby/sad-as-leinster-fail-to-show/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:04, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Leinster Rugby. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 18:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leinster Rugby. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721125315/http://www.marketing.ie/index.jsp?p=362&n=367&a=477 to http://www.marketing.ie/index.jsp?p=362&n=367&a=477

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leinster Rugby. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 18:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leinster Rugby. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524043603/http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2011/0521/heinekencup.html to http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2011/0521/heinekencup.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 10:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]