Jump to content

Talk:York Knights

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Assessed as "Start" standard with "High" importance. A section on amateur RL in the area may be useful, as would some photographs (particularly any from previous eras) and a section on notable players. Tim Fellows 03:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Squad needs updating to the 2009 squad, info can be found on club website —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.61.234.13 (talk) 19:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm running the new Knights website and can provide new images, historical photos, squad lists or indeed pretty much any info you may need and I am authorised to do so. I can't however get to grips with Wikicode, although I've made a couple of updates. If you'd like to contact me regarding getting the Knights article up to date, please email: dsom 73 (at) hot mail . com 86.159.118.27 (talk) 13:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any copyright on the images and text or are they available on a license compatible with ours. Keith D (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ever play for York?

[edit]

Did Colin Forsyth, ever play for York? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 08:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

F. W. Oliver: Both Hull and York? and Birth?

[edit]

A player named F. W. Oliver[1] won a cap for England in 1909 against Wales while at York, a player named F. W. Oliver played for Hull[2][3] during the 1904–05 season are they the same person?

According to FreeBMD, the births of two people named F. W. Oliver were registered in the East Riding of Yorkshire, the county in which Hull resides, and the North Riding of Yorkshire, the county in which York resides, between 1874 and 1889, i.e. coinciding with a circa-1904…1914 playing career, they are; Frank William Oliver (birth registered during October→December 1875 in York district), and Frederick William Oliver (birth registered during October→December 1878 in Hull district), are either of these F. W. Oliver?

As an interesting aside, the botanist Francis Wall Oliver (F. W. Oliver) was educated, but not born, in York

Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 11:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:York Knights/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

.
  1. Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates
  2. Switch existing inline external links to references or move to External links section
  3. Copy edit for WP:MOS e.g. dashes for years/scores
  4. Requires photographs
Keith D 12:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 12:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on York City Knights. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on York City Knights. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 October 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

result:
No consensus. See below much good discussion with some support, perhaps growing temporary resolution to York R.L.F.C. or York RLFC; however, we don't see anything firm yet. A merge with another article is discussed, and as we know, that is a separate conversation from move requests. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors can come up with new arguments, strengthen old ones and try again in a few months to garner consensus, preferably for a specific name change. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 09:13, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

York City Knights → ? – The club is renaming itself York RLFC but nicknaming itself York Knights. Which title should be used here? Nthep (talk) 11:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The York City Knights website seems to be down at the minute, but in line with other clubs it should move to York R.L.F.C.. What you have there already is York Wasps, who are a wholly separate entity to the York City Knights, but ultimately a predecessor. I'm going to say I'd hold off an a move until those York clubs could be rationalised. The quick and easy fix is to just drop the City bit from the title, once the club website is back up and running.Fleets (talk) 11:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The new website is https://www.yorkrlfc.com/ where the men's team are branded as York RLFC Knights. Nthep (talk) 11:52, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the new link. Yeah that's a bit of a weird one. What it does do is show the claimed continuation through from 1868. To me that makes one continuous club, but because we're in the middle of the biggest exposure the sport has had for years, I don't have the time to help in combining the two entities into one. Others could read it differently to me, but on a logo front and name front they are York RLFC Knights, which doesn't really fit with any other clubs mascot names, ie does the afterthought of Knights even get included.Fleets (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on the continuity bit - there are numerous examples throughout the history of the sport.
What the club have announced is that it's going to be called York RLFC but that the men's team will be marketed as York Knights and the women's team as York Valkyrie (note singular, not plural). On that basis I'd go with calling the article York Knights and be quite pleased that the women's team has a different name so we don't have to go with the chunky [[York City Knights Ladies|York City Knights]] if and when an article about the women's team is created. Nthep (talk) 12:31, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
York Knights makes sense to me as an accurate reflection of what the club has now become, and rules out the confusion over previous entities, at least in the article title.Fleets (talk) 12:38, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
York Knights and York Valkyrie would be the names I expect most fans/news articles will use to refer to the teams, so to me it would make sense to name the articles to match these and have York R.L.F.C. as a DAB or redirect depending on if the Knights/Wasps articles were merged. The club history on the old website had this version: History of York Rugby League that seemed to be substantially duplicated from the two wikipedia articles. It will be interesting to see if the new website says anything different about the 2002 continuation of rugby/establishment of a new club issue. EdwardUK (talk) 15:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to York R.L.F.C. (for now), as that is the official name of the club. If the media does end up referring to the club by a different name then it can be revisited, but we shouldn't speculate before then, per policy. J Mo 101 (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree sense to have it under York RLFC for now. I’d also suggest merging the York Wasps page as the new club is considered the same as the old one. Bradford Bulls/Northern have gone bust a few times and it’s all in one page Northern Wonder (talk) 21:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the previous agreed position was to move it to York Knights because there was alot of work needed to merge, rationalise and then reference out two clubs that have been two clubs, with the Phoenix club now claiming ownership of the original title. I'm not against the move, I'd just say with all the page moves, merges, etc with the 2021 RLWC, it makes sense for a straight swap, and a consensus-based agreement that very well could see York City Knights ending up at York RLFC. If people have time during a RLWC in this country or they support York, and they want to put in the effort and do right by the York City Knights, York Wasps and a new title, then fair play to them, they can go for it.Fleets (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I think a merger with the Wasps article should be discussed separately. We should be careful not to rewrite history just because the new club has suddenly claimed to be the same as the pre-2002 York twenty years later. J Mo 101 (talk) 20:31, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Nthep (talk) 20:39, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But the phoenix club are now claiming to be a continuous club. York RLFC links to York Wasps as they were known as that before they added the Wasps. I'm not sure how we could entertain a move to York RLFC without addressing a merger. York Knights cuts out that merger conversation, parks that conversation for another day and allows the new club to have a proper link at the York Knights page, and then recombine or keep a separate history with whatever the consensus decides.Fleets (talk) 20:47, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. Just because the name is the same or similar to the old club does not necessitate a merger of articles (see Hunslet F.C. (1883) and Hunslet R.L.F.C.). The existing club would be the clear primary topic, and the page already has a hatnote to the previous York club in case the reader was looking for that instead. The "York RLFC" redirect to the Wasps article would need to be changed, but that only affects two articles, and would not be much work to clean up. J Mo 101 (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A phoenix club is by definition a new club. Leigh Centurions becoming Leigh Leopards, was a nice easy change, but given that the old York club went to the wall, it ended there, and given that York Wasps were a name change of York RLFC it seems that there should be work done to maintain a credible history, given the York Knights tenuous claim to their unbroken history.Fleets (talk) 08:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the Knights claim an unbroken lineage back to the original York FC doesn't mean we have to accept it unless the sources are there to say so. We can mention, as it's verifiable, that the Knights do claim an unbroken lineage but we don't have to say that there is an unbroken lineage unless we can also verify that. Nthep (talk) 09:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Someone can find a way to bring that up to scratch over time. What we know; York RLFC -> York Wasps -> ended in 2002. Other sports keep phoenix clubs as wholly separate pages. If an explanatory note is added to the York Knights page, but the York Wasps remains, with their history there, then we would fit in with other sports. I'm not sure we can ignore facts that are out there. We can reference the link, we can reference that the club sees itself as a continuation of the 19th century club, but we can't ignore facts to the contrary. We can reference it up front in the York Knights page, the York RLFC redirect can go to York Knights, but we can't go against standards and facts, but we can certainly reference a position put forward by the York Knights.Fleets (talk) 10:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A merge would impact the quality of the article needing significant work to put right, the international caps section from the Wasps would be incomplete/need updating as we currently have no equivalent in the Knights article. The Knights seasons section would go from being complete to missing over 120 years, and there would be a similar issue with the kit sponsors and manufacturers section (although I would prefer to see this replaced with a section on historical kits or club identity – see for example York City F.C.#Club identity). The history section may become long enough that it should be split off into a separate article with a new shorter summary written in its place. Also, a merge does not seem necessary when the hatnotes, intros and history sections for the two articles can make it clear what happened 20 years ago even if the new website announcement tries to minimize these events. If we do keep the articles separate, there is still clean-up work to do – the history needs more citations and pre-2003 honours (if runner-up is actually an honour) should be cited and moved. What the announcement did make clear is the "one club, two teams" theme and gives three definitions, a club: York RLFC, a men's team: Knights, and a women's team: Valkyrie. If the article is to be named York RLFC it should aim to cover all aspects of the club even if there is only a smaller section on the Valkyrie (with links to a main article once written), but as it covers only the men's team having Knights as part of the article name provides a more specific description of the contents. EdwardUK (talk) 20:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Club Colours icon

[edit]

The leagueicon and colours used for York are different on several articles and templates. This main article uses  Sunshine Coast, but others use  Castleford,  Wellington or  Balmain (as is used for York Wasps) and  York City for pre-2017 knights. I suggest for consistency that the icons for the team should be changed to match each other (with the exception of the blue icon – for use when referring to the team during seasons in which this kit was worn) and would like to establish a consensus for what to use: either one of the existing icons, creating a new flag icon in amber and black (top-left/bottom-right)    (this would be my preference- and is also the colours used on the club website), or any other suggestions. EdwardUK (talk) 16:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I have never liked using the team icons, partly because of examples like this where a team's traditional colours aren't well defined, but also because using them is against MOS:DECOR. I would have no problem with removing the icons altogether, although this would probably need to be discussed on the project talk page, as use of team colour icons is fairly widespread on RL articles. J Mo 101 (talk) 09:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They are sometimes used where they are not really needed but they can be helpful to quickly identify teams in league/cup articles and less of a problem for accessibility than some of the coloured text/background combinations used in the nrl team articles. For the York teams I have created and had this icon added - - based on the current club website using amber and black with a white highlight to make it distinct from other similar icons. EdwardUK (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 October 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

result:
Let's go with York Knights, at least for now, with no prejudice. This can be revisited (new move request) at any time under WP:OTHEROPTIONS. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 00:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

York City Knights → ? – The article name should be updated as the club no longer uses "City", the new name could include RLFC, Knights or both. EdwardUK (talk) 13:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If we postpone any discussion of merges here are some suggestions:

  1. a) York RLFC or b) York R.L.F.C.
  2. a) York RFLC Knights or b) York R.L.F.C. Knights
  3. York Knights

Whichever title is used could have a similar intro such as:

Hatnote: for Valkyrie and Wasps

York RLFC (known as York City Knights from 2002 to 2022) are an English professional rugby league club based in York. The men’s team are the York Knights and the women’s team are York Valkyrie. The Knights play…

Or

The York Knights are an English professional men’s rugby league team based in York. They represent York RLFC (known as York City Knights from 2002 to 2022) which also has a women’s team called York Valkyrie. The Knights play…

If we used 1 or 2 I would prefer to use RLFC as this is how it appears on the website and logo. As noted in the previous move request I think that as it is an article primarily about the men’s team it should include knights in the name, so my preference is for either option 2a or 3. EdwardUK (talk) 13:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number one appears to off the table as that would necessitate an immediate merge, and by the above is ruled out anyway as the new umbrella term for the two clubs, one twenty years old, and one much younger. Either of two avoids an immediate reconciliation and number 3 fits with most other clubs dropping the RLFC bit when they have a mascot. 3 - York Knights Fleets (talk) 15:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to York R.L.F.C. per WP:OFFICIALNAMES and the many previous examples of clubs re-naming themselves in recent years. Can we please agree just to move this even as a temporary solution? It's absurd to keep this article under the incorrect old name for months while the same arguments go round in circles. If they are referred to as something else next season, I have no problem with this being revisited, but we are unlikely to get much media coverage with a World Cup going on. J Mo 101 (talk) 09:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Local news coverage (The Press: https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/sport/yorkcityknights/ ) seems to favour York Knights over York RLFC - since "York City Knights unveil rebrand for men's and women's teams" (14 October) the website has posted articles with titles using the terms "York Knights" 20 times, "York RLFC Valkyrie" once, "York Valkyrie" 5 times, "York RLFC" once and "York RFLC Knights" once EdwardUK (talk) 16:11, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
York Knights allows this project to move forward. York RLFC if it didn't already, now needs to be a disambiguation page as both the York Knights and York Valkyrie sit under that umbrella. Someone closer to the subject needs to try and rationalise the history that is known, and what is claimed against the standards that are in place across wikipedia for phoenix clubs. I'd be happy with references and see also's but to me the York Knights are a twenty year old club with strong links going back alot further.Fleets (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:York_Knights&oldid=1206116579"