A fact from Lloyds Bank RFC appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 May 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that in 2000, Lloyds Bank RFC's ground was sold by Lloyds TSB, which meant the club had to groundshare with a rival bank?
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment 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.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England 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.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
I removed the sentence "Despite losing their home ground, Lloyds Bank RFC still play matches against fellow financial institutions." with an explanation, but the Cof E readded it without edit summary. I removed it again.
The article makes it clear that after losing their home ground, they groundshared with another team. The team is not disbanded and still plays. That they still compete against other financial institutions isn't strange, that they do this "despite losing their home ground" is connecting two unrelated things. Either they still play, or they don't, but the type of teams they play has little or no relationship with losing their home ground or not. Basically, the sentence tries to imply some deeper meaning but is essentially meaningless filler. Fram (talk) 08:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And while I wrote this, the C of E readded it with this time an edit summary, "It shows they now have a nomadic existence like the Barbarians but still play matches even without a home". However, this is a complete misrepresentation of the source, which is simply a report of an away game, not an indication that they are homeless and have a nomadic existence. As far as we know, and as far as the article shows, they still groundshare with NatWest. Please reremove the sentence or provide an actual source supporting your claim that they have no home ground and have a nomadic existence. Fram (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the problem is the section with the no home ground, I am OK with that being removed. I thought you wanted the whole sentence removed so I am glad that I was mistaken upon a second look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk)08:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
