User talk:RugbyXIII

Proposed deletion of Jake Shorrocks

The article Jake Shorrocks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:RLN as he has yet to make his Super League debut.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Mo 101 (talk) 20:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jordan Howden

The article Jordan Howden has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable rugby league player who fails WP:RLN as he has yet to play a Super League game.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Mo 101 (talk) 23:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Warning

Dear 90.214.98.93 (talk) aka RugbyXIII (talk) aka User:Craig871018 (talk) ‎—

This is a formal WP:3RR warning. You have attempted to make the same change to the USA Rugby article three times now. You are an experienced editor, as is clear from your facility with hatnotes and knowledge of various wiki policies, so you clearly know better. You'll probably see this, since you are monitoring my talk page, but I'll post this warning on your user page(s) too.
If you are going to insist on WP:EDITWARRING, you should do so from your regular account(s), and not hide behind an anonymous IP.
Reaching out to another editor who has sided with you on previous discussions and who up until now had made few/no? edits to the USA Rugby page is something others could view as impermissible WP:CANVASSING.
Your decision to so quickly escalate a minor dispute into a heated personal battle is troubling. Your name calling violates WP:NPA. This seems to be a continuation of a trend of various posting (or "rants" as you call them) on various pages such as Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_league#Rhode_Island_Rebellion ("Turns out its another anti-rugby league conspiracy by pro rugby union editors. Since you can't beat the biased admins here, I'm just gonna leave this project. Until admins who abuse the tools are dealt with by the main people behind this website, theres just no point.") and at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rhode_Island_Rebellion_(rugby_league) (". . . I feel there is some kind of vendetta here against Rugby League. That's my feeling and I've made it well known. . . . After all, my sport has a lot of haters and Wikipedia is sadly a public place where those haters can target."). Given your strong feelings, I wonder if you should take a break from editing rugby union articles. CUA 27 (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, RugbyXIII. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jonathan Pownall

The article Jonathan Pownall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:RLN as hasn't played in a Super League match

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mattlore (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flags in European current templates

Hello there, I have been asked by another member of WPRL to widen the conversation on "Flags in European current templates", in the hope to gain a wider consensus. I imagine that this message may well never be read, dismissed, see me lose support, potentially gain some or take the discussion forwards. Please do take the time to read the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_league#Flags_in_squad_templates if you can, but the crux of my position is that the flags are prevalent elsewhere, are consistent with usage by the MOS, and their implementation for their rugby league national squad/team or representative nationality, is in line with their intended purpose. The crux of the remove side would be an IP editor may interpret a flag as indication of birth, give too much credence to the nation, and the decision was made previously. To remove them from all rugby league templates when there is a limited conversation would seem more than a little unfair I would say, hence the attempt to reach out. I'm quite happy to voted down, but would appreciate a few more voices to the discussion, else it would seem quite wrong to move from the majority into the minority.Fleets (talk) 19:53, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Delaware Black Foxes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Delaware Black Foxes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delaware Black Foxes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Ytoyoda (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Friday Derby

I'm wondering why St Helens R.F.C.–Wigan Warriors rivalry was moved from Good Friday Derby as derbies with a specific name usually have the article named as such on Wikipedia. Thankyou. Mn1548 (talk) 13:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rob Lever for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rob Lever is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Lever until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

J Mo 101 (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Brooklyn Kings

The page Brooklyn Kings has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguated only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ended in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguated zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
was a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that did not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Primefac (talk) 12:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]