User talk:Kidsoljah

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to share your thoughts.

Your GA nomination of Asafo Aumua

The article Asafo Aumua you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Asafo Aumua for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gonzo fan2007 -- Gonzo fan2007 (talk) 04:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pita Gus Sowakula

The article Pita Gus Sowakula you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pita Gus Sowakula for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack (talk) 12:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ricky Riccitelli

The article Ricky Riccitelli you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ricky Riccitelli for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gonzo fan2007 -- Gonzo fan2007 (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wish

Hello. Help copy edit and proofreading the article Akane Yamaguchi. Thanks you very much. 123.31.43.63 (talk) 07:12, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mitre 10 Cup articles

Hi mate, I have made a start on updating the articles. I have edited the Bay of Plenty Steamers article so it is more up to date and removed all the unsourced information, which I think would be better placed on the main Bay of Plenty Rugby Union page. Personally I think these should just be small pages listing the squad and maybe a season summary or list of Super Rugby players. What are your views on it. Also I noticed in your sandbox a Taranaki start page. Firstly do you think the page should be called Taranaki Bulls as that's the team with it's nickname or just Taranaki (rugby union). Interested to hear your views. Thanks. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: It seems all very debatable. For instance, the official website for the Mitre 10 Cup use just the provincial name without including their nickname or known as name. Also the broadcasters do the same. So for now I believe just the union’s name itself would be fine. However if we are to keep both pages and seperate the two, the articles that represent the union will have to all be shortened down to its origins and information. The inclusion of their professional sides will just confuse readers. Hence why I’d like to merge pages. If you look at the National Rugby League clubs, like the Warriors, they have a section stating a women’s side. Same with football teams like Arsenal F.C.. These are all alternative ideas. Kidsoljah (talk) 10:26, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I feel if a team has a nickname, it should be used in the page title as has been done with the Bay of Plenty Steamers as I think some people may well just search for the nickname. What are your views on the two pages I've tidied up (still working slightly on the Auckland one) though, They give the details that people are likely going to be looking for, and more extensive detail can then be added to the main Rugby union pages. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: I understand your argument in regards to names but not every province has a nickname. Like such I believe it’s better for the readers we keep things simple and title it as just the union names for now due to the how the official website and broadcasters have done so. Furthermore in regards to creating new articles, I think it’s best we get more opinions before going ahead. I would like to tidy all these articles up once and for all as they are well overdue. Creating more without further opinion will make thing’s messier. Kidsoljah (talk) 12:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, I will move Bay of Plenty Steamers to Bay of Plenty (Mitre 10 Cup), think they're the best disambiguation in this situation as rugby union could be too confusing, I have created one more page but will move to a draft page for now. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 12:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have moved Canterbury (Mitre 10 Cup) and North Harbour (Mitre 10 Cup) to draft pages. I have tidied up Bay of Plenty and Auckland pages and their relevant templates to a simple form with just the squad and current super rugby players. Interested to hear your views on them and further opinions on where we go from here. The Tasman page has recently been tidied by another user after I flagged it for being poorly written in the past. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 12:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22:: I have to agree with what you have done. It’s starting to look much better. I will help add more information and tidy up the pages. The only problem I have is a lot of the New Zealand player’s infobox will have the union page linked, the Mitre 10 Cup pages also. Have any idea how we can correct this? Kidsoljah (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the Rut template has been used (for example Auckland (Template:Rut Auckland) I have already changed it for Auckland and Bay of Plenty and they are very easy to change, on the others you can just use what links here tool on the left hand side to find players that link that way. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:48, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if we are to go down the new pages for Mitre 10 Cup team route, the main Rugby Union pages are all still going to need to be tidied up. I'm not removing anything apart from the squads and a couple of templates/infoboxes when created the new pages though. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's now draft pages for all of the remaining Mitre 10 Cup sides. In full:

These are ready to go if we go down that route but of course could have additional information added to them if required. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 13:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: I have edited Taranaki Rugby Football Union with what time I’ve had. There’s still sources, tables, and further information I’d like to add. However let me know your thoughts of what I’ve done so far, I’ll most likely have it finished later today. Thus is in case we don’t seperate the teams and unions. Kidsoljah (talk) 22:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks much tidier having looked at it. I would say though it's currently very table heavy, perhaps the second All Blacks list could be removed or both of them merged in. Perhaps the history section could be increased slightly as well with Taranaki having some significant history. For the more modern regions like Tasman and Manawatu this can obviously be shorter. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The two pages you have tidied look much better now. Have had another suggestion that the Mitre 10 Cup sides should have separate pages on the talk for the Auckland page merger though. There does seem to be some consensus on having separate pages for the Mitre 10 sides, which would just leave the union pages with history, statistics and women's team information. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: Thank you, if you and others think it's best on having separate pages then it should be done. I'm however still undecided, although I am going to continue editing the union articles to all look around the same. At the moment I think it's easier for readers to go to the union page and find all the squads there but I understand there is a case of separating the two. Also, I know at this stage the history sections are pretty thin with information but over time, more history can be added by users with sources from websites and books. Kidsoljah (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it a bit longer to see if anybody else comments, and then start implementing them if more consensus or no other comments. With the two pages at the moment, are you happy with the way they are set up, and how the union pages are set up? It's likely things will have to be added to the Mitre 10 Cup team pages as well as they don't have too much detail. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: You could always extract the information from the union article. It’s all based around the men's Mitre 10 Cup 10 team. If you look at all the unions websites, their history pages are about their representative sides. You create a new page there is no point having two articles based on the same information. That is why I’m a still undecided but I can’t argue with the consensus. Kidsoljah (talk) 23:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, just a note when adding replacement players to the squads, they really should be accompanied by a source (whether this is a team release or something else). Appreciate the updates you are doing though. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 12:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: No worries, the Hawke's Bay replacements were announced via their Facebook page, but the others I’ll reference to the line-up in which they were first included in.Kidsoljah (talk) 19:06, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed I've probably removed quite a few of them with the new page implementations, will try and re-add them. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have re-added Southland and Northland replacement players, Hawke's Bay replacements were already named in the squad so no need for tags on them. Injured players shouldn't have a tag if they were ruled out during the tournament, only before. Have added them to templates also. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:29, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NZ Super Rugby squads 2021

Hi mate, do you know if all the team squads are being released on the 3rd. Have seen Chiefs, Crusaders and Hurricanes confirmed for that date but no usual build up tweet or similar from SR NZ. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: Yeah mate, I believe all squads are going to be announced on Sky Sport. However last night, all coaches named players on the Breakdown. So expect the Crusaders, Highlanders, and Blues to showcase them today sometime. Kidsoljah (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks, mate will put edit tags on pages at some point as we usually get a lot of unsourced or messy edits. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NPC team pages

Hi mate, now that we have team pages for all of the NPC sides, can we now link to them instead of the regions. Historical players pre-NPC and other competitions players should still link to the regions, but NPC players should really link to these new team pages. Many thanks. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 11:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rugbyfan22: No worries, I'll update the players infobox using those links from now on. Currently doing the Māori All Blacks representatives and will then move onto the All Blacks when they are announced. Cheers Kidsoljah (talk) 22:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I've noticed a few come up on my watchlist. I would say if the Rut template is used it tends to be fine as they all link to the team pages now anyway. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPC tries

Please stop changing the tries on 2021 Bunnings NPC from for and against to offensive and defensive. There is no such thing as either an offensive try or a defensive try. These are tries for and against. Grutness...wha? 07:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there @Grutness:, the ‘offensive’ and ‘defensive’ definition is used to explain the points scored on attack and points scored on defensive. This has been used on nearly all previous Bunnings NPC articles. If you’re in favour of ‘for’ and ‘against’ then will you be happy to change and tidy the other articles? Regards Kidsoljah (talk) 07:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will do so. No-one would understand such meanings - they are neologisms which do not seem to exist outside Wikipedia (a google search of "defensive try" lists only references to try areas or try line as a description of them being in the defensive team's half. Grutness...wha? 07:32, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thankfully, other than the NPC (and only about a dozen of those articles) there was no mention of the term in any other NZ rugby seasons articles except for two Heartland ones. Grutness...wha? 07:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Grutness: Thanks for tidying that up. I’m in the process of tidying some of those articles up. Let me know if there’s anything else you recommend changing. Cheers Kidsoljah (talk) 07:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No prob - will do :) Grutness...wha? 09:37, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Gonzalo Vinuesa

Hello, Kidsoljah. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gonzalo Vinuesa, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Parker (boxer) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Parker (boxer), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Parker (boxer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi @Kidsoljah:, I've noticed that you've been busy editing the pages of rugby union players whose 2022 Super Rugby Pacific season has ended, recently. Unfortunatley – on the pages that I follow – I have had to revert some of your edits, because they were either:

incorrect: in some cases where the number of appearances or points scored for a team were incorrectly changed (I've double checked);
unnecessary: the addition of a player's middle name to the main tex is unnecessary, because that's what the full name section in the infobox is for. In the main text, we only use the player's first and last name (the name he uses in his daily life and is known under); or
undesirable/ambiguous/incorrect: adding an end-year in the infobox to the period a player is playing for a team, while he is still playing for that team is confusing and gives the wrong impression. An end-year should only be added when a player is known to have left the team, is no longer eligible to play for a team (for example, by moving overseas) or has retired. I vaguely remember this being discussed over a year ago somewhere, and now I see you've been making these same edits, so it seems useful to let you know;

I have also noticed that you're changing rut templates used for teams to a longer template name. I'm not sure why you bother, as the rut templates are perfectly fine. I remember you having a discussion about this with @Rugbyfan22: and if I remember it correctly, you had come to the understanding that using the rut template is absolutely fine. I have not reverted these changes, because both templates can be used, I just don't understand why you bother to make them as they are unnecessary.

I've noticed that you've made all these changes to far more pages than I follow. As I appreciate all the work you do as an editor, I thought it would the right thing to do to ask you to re-think some of the edits that you are or have been making. Ruggalicious (talk) 14:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ruggalicious:, apologies if I’ve incorrectly added the wrong information to players you currently follow. I use New Zealand Rugby History for players appearances and points. I find it to be the most accurate source online compared to other sites such as Itsrugby. In regards to your other concerns such as adding individuals full names in the heading, I wasn’t aware that it’s only common to use their first and last name. Lastly, adding an end-of-year to certain teams. I’ll be sure to erase wherever I have done this but was only doing so to players that were on short-term contracts and representing teams that are commonly changed yearly or throughout the year. Kidsoljah (talk) 09:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kidsoljah:, thanks for your reply! I agree that the New Zealand Rugby History data are much more reliable than those of Itsrugby.co.uk and other sites, but unfortunately they're not flawless either. That's why I started keeping my own records (including links to stats sheets and match reports) a few years ago. An example of a mistake on the NZ Rugby History website is the number of games Gareth Evans has played for the Highlanders from 2014 up to and including 2017. If you add up the games played in each individual year, you come to a total of 44 games. Yet, they have a total of 47 games. The total of games for the Hurricanes also don't add up. In Devan Flanders' case they missed a try he scored for the NZ Under-20 team (I have a match report from World Rugby from one of those games and a stat sheet for another). One advice I can give is that if you use NZ Rugby History stats, always check whether the totals (of individual years) add up.

As to adding an end-year: players on a short-term contract in one particular year, usually only have that single year mentioned in the infobox (without an – at the end). In the unlikely event that a player gets a short-term contract in consecutive years, it may be better to wait until the next season's squad of that team is known. If the player isn't in the next season's squad (or has signed somewhere else), you can add the end-year. As regards rep teams, I agree the squads may change every year, but a player's eligibility doesn't. So for the Māori All Blacks, for example, don't close the period until the eligibility ends, because basically, a player could get a call-up any time (for example, in case of injury). I hope this clarifies it. Ruggalicious (talk) 10:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to mention something related to this. You closed off Napolioni Bolaca's Fiji sevens career here in March 2022, with seemingly no source for it (presumably assuming that because he plays for Fijian Drua in 15s rugby, he wouldn't play 7s for Fiji). I've reverted this as wrong- he played for Fiji just last month. Please can you actually stick to what sources say, rather than making assumptions about who people do or don't play for. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, noted for next time. As you know a lot of rugby players biographies (infobox’s) are in need of updating and there are a lot of articles that have players representative history still present after no longer having played for them. I find it sometimes easier, especially for national or representative honours to complete the individuals year with that team when they weren’t selected for the following competition or tour. However if for any reason I have made an error I apologise in advance and am happy to change if they are reselected. Kidsoljah (talk) 20:47, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It would also be appreciated if you stop removing the expand tag on these pages without any justification. The correct way to proceed is either working on the article to catch up with french wp, or keeping the tag (Then readers can easily access to a superior version). Thank you, and have a pleasant day. Ginkgobiloquad (talk) 13:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And, you've done it again! Sorry @Kidsoljah:, it isn't about what YOU find easier or about fixing things afterwards. It's about what's the correct thing to do at the time of an edit. Now, you've prematurely put an end-year in the infoboxes of Brad Weber, TJ Perenara, Tyrel Lomax and possibly others. Can you please stop doing this when players are still eligible to play for a (rep) team and haven't retired? It's consuming too much time to check every edit you make, but that's exactly what you're forcing other editors to do. The same applies to the type of pedantic/unnecessy/undesirable changes you've made to the articles about, for example, Zarn and Bailyn Sullivan (the word "and" between schools is unnecessary and just a line-break is fine in an infobox; an infobox is not an essay!) and Tyrone Thompson (being a twin is actually relevant to his story and early career). As I said before, your efforts to keep Wiki articles about rugby players up-to-date are appreciated, but please stick to correcting things that are clearly wrong or outdated. Ruggalicious (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kidsoljah:, thanks for removing the "Additional bye points" from the standings table in the 2022 Bunnings NPC article; that had escaped my attention. The removal of "clutter" is all a bit trivial to me; it was good the way it was and it would have disappeared anyway, but I don't mind.
I have a more urgent question though. What's the point of the first cell (or column) that you've added to the quarter-finals in the play-off schedule? For the casual rugby follower and Wiki user, 1O, 4O, 2E, 3E etc means nothing. It's confusing and adds nothing to the second cell/column (which is straightforward). Also, why did you remove "Quarter-final 1", "Quarter-final 2" etc? I had thought long about how to do it after writing the "Format" paragraph and I think it made things clear. It could have been removed at the end of the season, although there's no real reason to. Ruggalicious (talk) 12:32, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right in regards to the issue in the first column, I've now removed the letters. That column just informs the readers what positions the teams versing one another finished during the regular season. I've added the old template close to how you had it, however it is hidden so you'll have to remove the current version and make the other visible. I didn't realise it complimented what was described in the format section of the page. Kidsoljah (talk) 23:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kidsoljah, I'm sorry for the late reply. I have just removed the seeding cells from the play-offs schedule by setting the seeds parameter to "no". The reason is that it is confusing for visitors to the page when they see two teams ranked 1, 2, 3 and 4 in one combined bracketed schedule. A schedule with seeding is only useful for competitions with one single pool and ranking table, or for competitions with multiple pools that each have their own, separate ranking table and play-offs (like the NPC until this year). I looked at examples of competitions with more than one pool/conference and combined play-offs, and they either don't have a bracketed play-offs schedule at all, or they use the Round8 template (or variants thereof). Good examples are the 2019 Super Rugby season and 2023 Rugby World Cup articles.

However, I liked your solution for including "Quarter-finals 1 & 4" and "Quarter-finals 2 & 3" in the schedule and I couldn't find a way to do that in the Round8 template. Also, the 8TeamBracket template is far easier to populate with data (more user-friendly). That's how I came to the solution of keeping the 8TeamBracket that you used, but hiding the seeding cells.

During the regular season, the seeding cells are superfluous as well, as the explanation of "who plays who" in the play-offs is already clear from the text in the "team cells". Obviously, the contents of these cells will be replaced with the name of the team, once they are known. If it is considered useful to explain why these teams played that paricular quarter-final (in addition to the "Format" section of the article), we can always add a few lines of text at the end of the season, similar to this parargraph in the article about the "Road to the Final" section in the 2019 Super Rugby Final article.

Finally, I've added the parameter "boldwinner=yes". I forgot to remove the hidden code that you added (with the Round8 template) and will remove that in a future edit.

Question: Do you intend to help keeping the article up-to-date during the season? Mabye it's a good idea to coordinate who does what, to avoid double work? I'm happy to do the stats and standings tables, for example, if you add the scorers. Or, you add some of the scorers and do the standings tables, and I add some of the scorers and do the stats tables. I have no idea who else is usually contributing to the NPC pages in terms of updating. Looking forward to hearing from you. Ruggalicious (talk) 06:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again @Ruggalicious, those changes makes sense and good logic. I’m happy with it. Usually throughout the season I try my best to keep it up to date as much as possible but some weeks I might be busy. However it would be good for a change for someone like yourself that helps and is committed to contributing. Historically myself, @Rugbyfan22, @JaumeBG, and @CYBSSY have been the only few that have given time to edit these pages over recent years and make edits when we can. Lately I’ve been restoring previous seasons, so if you have any thoughts on what changes you think would help and are necessary feel free to add it in. Cheers Kidsoljah (talk) 18:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm happy to help out with the editing, thanks for tagging me @Kidsoljah. I'll tag the 2022 Bunnings NPC page occasionally, and will sometimes create players' articles too. I can't commit to doing it fully but will update and make edits when I can. Some weeks I'll be able to be pretty active, other weeks not as much. Cheers. JaumeBG (talk) 07:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kidsoljah, I have partially reverted your latest edit to the 2022 Bunnings NPC article. I have removed the seeding from the play-off schedule again, because it incorrectly suggests that the 8 provinces that played the Quarter Finals were seeded 1 to 8 (on a single table) instead of 1 to 4 in the two separate conference tables. Although I don't think it's necessary, if you'd like it to be clearer why province X played province Y in the Quarter Finals, I'm happy to add an internal link to the format section, where it's all clearly explained. That will be enough. Also, the coding of the winners (and their scores) in bold was correct (see the 8TeamBracket template), so I've restored that. Ruggalicious (talk) 11:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Luka Matkava, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Hi there, to explain my recent reverts of your edits, it's because you are introducing broken links, removing existing good links, and adding unnecessary size to the articles. MunsterFan2011 (talk) 10:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MunsterFan2011,

First and foremost, I appreciate your time spent on rugby union articles. However, I must disagree with your assessment as I can't help but notice that some of your adjustments breach a few criteria.

A brief summary of these are as follows;

According to the infobox rugby biography template parameter descriptions, spouses and children must be prominent people. Furthermore, there is a current discussion about deleting these parameters, which is why the BRD tag exists.
Linking country of birth is prohibited by the manual of style and should be avoided.
Per the infobox rugby biography template style guide and the manual of style, years should not be linked as they do not provide much benefit to the user.
Including amateur teams is again under discussion of removal with most users suggesting this parameter should only be used for players playing prior to the professional era. Hence once more why the BRD tag was used.
International sevens teams should be placed under their appropriate subheading.

I hope you can revert these edits back to follow wikipedia guidelines. Kidsoljah (talk) 11:36, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I didn't know about these discussions, thanks for your summary. Should I just remove the spouse and children parameters now, or should I wait for the outcome of that discussion? I'm not sure I fully agree with removing amateur teams as there are still cases where professional players represent those teams. I can only speak from a Munster perspective, but players professionally contracted to the club (not academy players) have played for their amateur teams this season. As we are supposed to be creating a biography of the player, surely this is relevant information? And even if the consensus reached is that the amateur teams should be removed, shouldn't we wait until that consensus is reached before making any changes? If a player has never played for an international sevens team, why would we add those parameters, surely that is just wasted space? MunsterFan2011 (talk) 12:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spouses and children can be listed as long as they’re notable people. This then would be adhering to the suggested guidelines provided. As for the amateur teams, it’s slightly trivial but again can be listed as long as the correct information is provided. I’ll leave that with you, in my opinion as long as it’s not cluttering the infobox I don’t have a problem but feel free to join the discussion on this issue. All national sevens teams must instead be inserted beneath the "National seven team(s)" subheading. It was briefly discussed if they could be incorporated with "National team(s)" and the feedback resulted in keeping them separate. Kidsoljah (talk) 13:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your source for Conor Murray? I see little option but to revert that change unless you can introduce a source to the article proving the accuracy of your change. Also, you have introduced redirects on Jack Crowley and broken the weight parameter, hence by changes today. Furthermore, I am restoring the amateur teams pending the outcome of these discussions you have mentioned. It would be good practice to reach an agreement for these changes before making the actual changes; until a consensus has been achieved, no changes should be made to these teams, and it seems you are making changes before that consensus has been reached, which I don't think is the correct and appropriate course of action to take. If those discussions conclude that the teams should be removed, I will gladly make the changes myself. MunsterFan2011 (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to Connor Murray's birth name, view both ESPN scrum and Rugby World sources. If you have information disputing these claims please add it to the main text. I have no argument with your other changes other the just be aware of the manual of style recommendations in connection to rugby union articles. Kidsoljah (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thank you for adding those sources for Conor Murray. MunsterFan2011 (talk) 14:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to rugby union biographies

Hi @Kidsoljah, You know that I appreciate your efforts to improve rugby union related articles and I'd like to acknowledge that again, but I've noticed recent edits you've made to several players' biographies and many of these changes are not only unnecessary, but also go against common practice and terminology in rugby biographies. I'm particularly referring to changes to section headings such as changing "club career" to "professional career" and "international career" to "national team career" (but not only those changes).

You're more than aware of the discussion about changes to the infobox rugby biography. Many of the suggestions there reflect common terminology, including your own proposal to list all teams a player has played for during their professional career under the heading "senior career" and to change the heading "national teams" to "international career". For that reason it's hard to understand why you are making these changes to section headings in rugby biographies. I also think it's completely wrong. I think it's okay to keep "club career" as it is, but if you really want to change it, please change it to "senior career" (if the text under the heading is about senior clubs) and keep the "international career" heading as it is.

Also "rugby union player" should be coded with only "rugby union" between square brackets, not with "rugby union player" after the |. The defining terms here are "rugby union" and the link also goes to the "rugby union" article. The word "player" has to stay outside the square brackets. Finally, a player's middle names don't need to be included in the main text. The main text uses the name of the player as (s)he is publically known. The full name (with middle names) only needs to be included in the infobox. More of your changes are unnecessary, but I kindly ask you that you revert these particular edits. It causes a lot of unnecessary work for other editors to change them back. Kind regards, Ruggalicious (talk) 12:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Ruggalicious for your feedback. Before I go ahead and make the necessary adjustments, can you please explain where it says middle names are not necessary in the main header so that I can proceed with making the changes you've suggested. This information appears in the lead of numerous other articles about athletes. Everything else I can see your point, with other issues being subjective within reason. I would want to place it under a single category like "Professional career" if the article lacks a lot of content about their career. However, if there is plenty of information, I'll split the headings with your advice. Kidsoljah (talk) 13:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kidsoljah, I was advised by another (then more experienced) editor a few years ago about the inclusion of full names. I can't remember whether reference was made to guidelines or anything like that. I've done some digging, and the guidelines are more nuanced than what he told me and they make an exception for the first mention of the person's name in the lead/introductory sentence, so my apologies for making the wrong comment. See Manual of Style/Biography for some helpful examples where including full names may cause problems of readability.

About the section headings: if there's very little info (not enough to split a player's career in sections), you may want to consider first whether a (one) section heading is necessary at all.

Finally, if you're editing old articles (like the one about Jamison Gibson-Park) are you also checking whether there are any dead links in the article and whether those can be fixed? I've found many dead links when editing older articles and there are very often archived versions available; also the references are sometimes really bad (using numbers in the "name" section of a reference, forgetting the date, use of capitals, old parameters like accessdate instead of access-date etc). Ruggalicious (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following up with me on that query. I’ve began reverting some the edits made by myself to what you’ve advised. If there isn’t much content, I’ll instead leave it as is. I’m currently working on going through all the international teams and cleaning up best I can. If you’d like me to look out for dead links, I’ll try repairing them as well. Kidsoljah (talk) 01:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Roiman Villa

Hello, Kidsoljah. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Roiman Villa, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:National Provincial Championship (merged)

Hello, Kidsoljah. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "National Provincial Championship".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 23:49, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for applications for position of Wikipedian-at-Large, Aotearoa New Zealand

Kia ora! The Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand User Group invites you to read about the call for applications for a Wikipedian-at-Large for Aotearoa New Zealand in 2024. Group members are happy to explain the process and discuss ideas with interested editors.

Sent by Zippybonzo on behalf of MurielMary using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 06:37, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to rugby union list of internation tries

Hi @Kidsoljah, I want to start by saying that I appreciate your efforts to improve rugby union articles. However I am a bit confused about why you changed all the "List of international tries" tables and only for the French players I might add. I don't see how the new tables are any better and as a matter of fact I find them quite worse. They don't add any useful information that wasn't already there and honestly they are quite aesthetically unpleasing and unenjoyable to look at. I will say that adding a reference section was quite a good idea though. I have spent a lot of time maintaining the tables for the French rugby union national team and was hoping we could maybe meet each other halfway? Something like keeping the old tables and adding the reference section maybe? Let me know what you think

Kind regards, FrenchFootball (talk) 12:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, I have no issue with you reverting my edits regarding this issue. However, I think it might be a good idea to discuss amongst other editors around designing a table that everyone is satisfied using. With my experience, like now for instance, there has been conflict between people about what it should and shouldn’t look like. How do you feel about doing this instead? Kidsoljah (talk) 06:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Kidsoljah, yes I'm up for that. I also think it's annoying how depending on the players and the nations everyone has different table, doesn't make sense and there should definitely be a common one for everyone. Maybe shouldhave it on the WikiProject Rugby union ? Thanks. FrenchFootball (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @FrenchFootball, just checking in if you made progress on this topic at all. Would be interested to view any discussion. Cheers Kidsoljah (talk) 06:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Kidsoljah, I just posted the idea on the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union. Any idea are greatly appreciated! Thanks. FrenchFootball (talk) 10:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries for the above

Hi, I just wanted to ask that you please make sure your edit summaries actually match the edit you are making. For example, Special:Diff/1172914863 has nothing to do with the style guide; all you are doing is updating the infobox. As a minor point, the style guide says nothing about headers and how they should be laid out, which makes me wonder why you are making edits like Special:Diff/1174002661 and claiming it is "to follow the style guide". Primefac (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Primefac, I appreciate you bringing up those edits. By adhering to the standards outlined in the template or style guide, I'm attempting to tidy up headings and infoboxes. I'm aiming to resemble the Rugby union/Style § Nationality in player biographies and Rugby union/Style § Naming Conventions when referring to the headings. The objective is to maintain some consistency in the player bios and infoboxes. I'll make an effort to match my edit summary to the actual edit next time round. Kidsoljah (talk) 20:21, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay

Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.

Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.

Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede 66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heartland Championship history

Hi @Kidsoljah, I saw your most recent edits of the article about the Heartland Championship. I have the impression that you're misunderstanding the history of this competition. The text that was there before your edit was correct. The competition started in 2006 as one of two successor competitions to the NPC that existed prior to 2006. It's historically incorrect to say that the Heartland Championship started in 1976. As such, for example, Hawke's Bay and Taranaki have never played in the Heartland Championship and, therefore, never won Heartland Championship titles as your text suggests. Also, the Farah Palmer Cup is not the concurrent women's tournament of the Heartland Championship, but of the NPC. There is, however, a quite recent Heartland women's competition (separately for the North and the South Island), which unfortunately isn't mentioned on the official website (possibly because it's organised by the provincial Heartland Unions and not NZR, but I don't know this for sure).

Basically, you should consider 2006 as a clean break. There was a competition before 2006 with several divisions; from 2006 there are two new competitions, the NPC (initially with two divisions; now only one) and the Heartland Championship. You didn't include me in your post on @Rugbyfan22's talk page about merging the two National Provincial Championship articles. I'm not in favour of such a merger, exactly because the NPC from 2006 onwards is only one of two competitions that emerged from the NPC prior to 2006 and is basically a new competition, just like the Heartland Championship is a new competition.

I would be very grateful, if you're planning considerable changes to articles, to first make drafts in your own draft space or in the main draft space and when you're done, ask us to review it before editing the existing articles. This could hopefully prevent historical inaccuracies from creeping in. Thanks, Ruggalicious (talk) 14:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ruggalicious, if I’ve misunderstood any history regarding the competition, I'm happy to correct my edits. However, after reviewing original articles from New Zealand Rugby, it appears that the competition established in 1975 underwent a restructuring due to financial constraints. This led to the current NPC format, featuring the fourteen most populated and financially stable unions, rebranded as the Air New Zealand Cup. The league has seen several name changes between 1987 and 1994, and despite various structural and format adjustments since 2005, it has consistently remained one competition, as confirmed by recent New Zealand Rugby reports. This complexity can be confusing for international readers trying to understand the competition's history. I believe the abundance of information in separate articles isn't a sufficient reason to avoid merging them.

Regarding the Heartland Championship, the 2002 season introduced the Meads Cup and Lochore Cup for second and third division unions, with North Otago and Hawke's Bay as the inaugural winners. These trophies continued in the Heartland Championship, which features twelve unions outside the major centres competing in a revised format that eliminated the two divisions. Merging the premier division history from 1976 with the current article and consolidating all second and third division information within the Heartland Championship would simplify access for new readers. Kidsoljah (talk) 00:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From 1976 onwards, there have been many changes in the structure of the NPC, both pre- and post 2006. For example, changes in the number of divisions and geographical changes (mergers) and the existence at some point of pools within divisions. However, the changes that took place in 2006 were more fundamental. In the pre-2006 competition, there was promotion/relegation, so – at least in theory – provinces could move between divisions 1, 2 and 3. From 2006 onwards, the "top" 14 provinces are in the top tier competition (NPC), while the 12 Heartland provinces are locked in the new Heartland Championship. There is no promotion/relegation between both competitions. That's a fundamental change. Obviously there were more, like the introduction of a salary cap in the NPC; changes due to the financial constraints you are alluding to. All sources that I've seen, most notably on the websites of NZR and the Heartland Unions, make it very clear that the Heartland Championship started as a new competition in 2006. Saying otherwise is just historically incorrect. Past Division 2 winners have never won a Heartland Championship title! The list of Heartland Championship (Meads Cup and Lochore Cup) winners starts in 2006 for a good reason!

The Colin Meads and Sir Brian Lochore Cups that were introduced in 2002 were different from the current Meads and Lochore Cup. They were not awarded to the winners of Division 2 and 3 respectively. They were division specific challenge trophies, similar to the Ranfurly Shield! Mid-Canterbury were designated the first holder of the Colin Meads Cup as it was the lowest placed team in division 2 in 2001 that wasn't relegated. South Canterbury were the first holders of the Lochore Cup in division three. After that, these cups were the subject of challenges at each home game of the holder. So these trophies, while named after the same NZ rugby greats, were not the same in the new Heartland Championship, when they became championship trophies instead of challenge trophies.

Merging the articles will not make it clearer for new readers if they're overwhelmed with a lot of information, unless it's clearly structured. The current structure; pre-2006 NPC (divisions 1,2 and 3), post-2006 NPC and the Heartland Championship is clearest. In no way should information about pre-2006 divisions 2 and 3 be lumped together with the post-2006 Heartland Championship! That could possibly have worked if – pre 2006 – there had been a clear separation of division 1 on the one hand and divisions 2 and 3 on the other (no promotion/relegation) and the provinces had been exactly the same, so if there had already been two clear separate competitions, but that's not the case.

Any merger of articles should first be written as a draft by someone who understands the fundamental differences between the competitions and trophies, the changes that took place and why, and the broader context. If you want to be that editor, you first have to get a good historical understanding of the competitions. I'm sorry, but you don't give me the impression that you have that understanding yet. Ruggalicious (talk) 04:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand if you feel differently, but all the information I've gathered comes from books and reputable websites about the competition, which I’ve consistently cited in my edits. I will draft articles for both competitions that include all relevant historical information, and I’ll continue to provide sources for my edits. This way, you and other editors can verify the information, and any inaccuracies can be addressed with the sourced material. If the proposed articles contain too much information, we can easily distribute the content across the existing articles. Kidsoljah (talk) 06:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't publish the draft articles before we have been able to have a look at them. Keep them in the draft space until then. Ruggalicious (talk) 06:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]