Talk:The Rugby Forum

Rugby union Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rugby league C‑class Low‑importance

	The Rugby Forum is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby league, which aims to improve the quality and coverage of rugby league football related articles. Join us!Rugby leagueWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby leagueTemplate:WikiProject Rugby leaguerugby league articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sports

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
Requested articles (Sports)
Requested articles (Association football)
Requested articles (Association football women)
Requested articles (Motor sports)
Requested articles (Estonian sportspeople)
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
Cleanup :
* Sport governing body (this should-be-major article is in a shameful state)
* Field hockey (History section needs sources and accurate information - very vague at the moment.)
* Standardize Category:American college sports infobox templates to use same font size and spacing.
* Sport in the United Kingdom - the Popularity section is incorrect and unsourced. Reliable data is required.
* Fix project template and/or "to do list" Current version causes tables of content to be hidden unless/until reader chooses "show."
Expand : Professional sports (crucial article explaining the salaried undertaking of sports)
* Sport industry (currently a sub-stub)
Photo : for pages listed in Category:Wikipedia requested images of sports and games and sub-categories.
Stubs : work on articles in Category:Sports stubs
Update : List of world sports championships
Other :
- Translate the page of sport in each country from corresponding article in other language Wikipedia to English Wikipedia which was marked in red.
- Categorize: Gather all (major/olympic) sports to be part of this project
- RfCs: answer requests for comment

Union with a side of league?

The article has recently been reworded to change most mentions of "rugby" to "rugby union." Is it fair to say the site focuses on union with only a small assortment of league forums? Or does it cover both flavours equally? —C.Fred (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Every single article, side panel and symbol on the front page is about rugby union with the exception of an article on liking both codes which is written from the perspective of a rugby union fan. League only has a token presence.GordyB (talk) 21:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More fairer is to say it's completely non-notable, just like thousands of other forums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.52.75 (talk) 08:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like someone is editing with a bias. The forum is for both Union and League. It's open to fans of both codes and presents an open discussion on both codes. You're editing is biased. I am reverting back. Rowlan (talk) 06:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The forum is open to discussion of all sports, should we add it to the tennis category? Just because there is the odd mention of league does not make it a league forum. You won't find a single union forum where you can't discuss league somewhere (and vice versa).GordyB (talk) 17:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That argument is ridiculous. The forum is set up for both codes with no intentional leanings towards either. Just because there is more union discussiond does not change the intent or directive of the actual forum. It's like saying the internet is only for porn because there is more of that than useful information. You sound biased and should get that in check. Rowlan (talk) 02:59, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Union & League

It is inaccurate to say that there are "rugby blogs" and "rugby games" - there are rugby union games and blogs but no league - User:GordyB

Those links should dismantle your argument a bit, GordyB. I can agree with you that there is more content for union. Fair enough. However the forum isn't just a forum for rugby union. It is a forum for both codes. However content and discussion is created by users. The objective of the actual forum (not the users) is an inclusive forum. This article is on the actual forum, not the users themselves. I think if you will look, there is plenty of league discussion. Rowlan (talk) 03:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot access the first three links as I do not have an account and the fourth is written about league but entirely from a union perspective. To say that the site is leaning towards union is putting it extremely mildly as for example the Challenge Cup final was last week; 70,000+ people attended and the game was broadcast live on BBC1 (the law actually requires this game to be broadcast on network TV as it is deemed to be one of the most important sporting events in the UK) - and yet no mention of this on the front page. The NRL and Super League are nearing their climax and again no mention. Instead these are tucked away on a rugby league only page. The "I don't mind rugby league" article is the only mention of league accessible to me on the entire site aside from a sub-forum.GordyB (talk) 19:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should join so you have access to all the league you feel deprived of enjoying? Rowlan (talk) 01:03, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]