Talk:Rugby football

Name of the article

Shouldn't it be just "Rugby"? I've never heard or seen the phrase "Rugby football." Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:31, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Then there might be a conflict with the town. Rugby football is not a neologism or even particularly rare outside countries where it is the dominant sport. However, I do question whether having just one article for both codes is a bit like having one article for both tennis and badminton... --222.127.76.207 03:46, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

It is technically called w:Rugby_football, which does indeed help differentiate it from the town of Rugby. I wouldn't be against just calling it 'Rugby', but is would cause some headache in the disambiguation.

In terms of splitting the article between league and union, I truly believe efforts should go into editing Wikipedia if you really care about the minutiae of the details, which are frankly far less than 'tennis and badminton'. See w:Comparison_of_rugby_league_and_rugby_union and tell me if this level of detail really belongs on Wikivoyage. A good example why not to split is w:Rugby_sevens which is yet another code variant and will feature in the Olympics from 2016. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

You raise an interesting question. I presume that you think we can add something that is lacking in the various Wikipedia articles?

Incidentally, Rugby Sevens was always intended as a mini version of the "large" game of Rugby Union - even down to the time-wasting and dangerous scrums.

In countries like Afrikaaner South Africa and New Zealand, Rugby has qualities akin to a national religion so you might want to ease up a bit with the idea that we need not bother too much about accuracy or the finer details. I've never subscribed to the idea that we're an inferior version of Wikipedia. --222.127.76.207 11:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I never subscribed to the idea that we should be Wikipedia. We are a travel guide. Also caring about the sensibilities of Rugby fans in South Africa is also not in our remit, but rather serving the traveler as per TTCF. From a global perspective the games are similar.--Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:44, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Interestingly enough there is a similar debate on Talk: American Football on whether to include Canadian Football which is also (depending on whom you ask) either a minor rule variation or a fundamentally different sport. However as per TTCF I would think our time and energy is better spent expanding the League and Union sections rather than splitting them. I however can't contribute, as I know next to nothing about either game ;-) Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Are the All Blacks just another RU national team?

It's not yet clear to me (especially after recent edits) what exactly this article can achieve that is not already better covered by Wikipedia.

Does the US originator of this article understand that the New Zealand All Blacks are probably the most dominant national team in any major sporting code and "have won over 76% of their Test matches and are the leading Test match points scorers of all time. They are the only international side with a winning record against every country they have played, and since their international debut in 1903 only five nations have defeated New Zealand in Test matches. Since the introduction of the World Rugby Rankings in October 2003, New Zealand has held number one ranking longer than all other teams combined, and they are the first team to win 400 Test matches." ? --222.127.76.207 01:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Before doing anything else, you need to read Wikivoyage:Keep_Wikivoyage_fun.

w:Rugby_Football is indeed better covered in Wikipedia. If you feel the content of this article 'dumbs downs' various statistics regarding your nation's particular prestige in the sport, then perhaps you are lacking objectivity, and being patronizing about the nationalities of other people hardly lends you credibility. Seriously no-one suggests the 'all blacks' are anything but a very successful team.--Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Usually the scope of our articles means that we can assist travellers with pertinent information that can not be included in WP. With this article it's still not clear to me what it can possibly add that will be of assistance to travellers. I only mentioned your nationality because it is exceedingly rare to find US nationals that are knowledgeable about rugby. If I have offended, then I unreservedly apologise. The All Blacks are not just another very successful team. They have been, as the previous wording suggested, the dominant RU team for more than a century.

Incidentally, "my nation" (actually it's several) don't do well in either RU or RL because of their typically smaller Asian stature. Although I'm not a Kiwi, that doesn't prevent me recognising the overwhelming dominance of the New Zealand All Blacks, however. --222.127.76.207 02:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I guess we have a semantical difference of opinion over the word 'dominance'.

Anyway, Wikivoyage articles are to assist travelers, period. What may or may not exist in Wikipedia has no bearing on our work here. Content maybe replicated between WP and WV as long as it is relevant to the mission of WV.

This is also a new article. It is designated as an outline. It would be nice to allow it to develop in a manner that does serve the traveler before judging its Raison d'être. Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that travelling without a destination in mind can be an enjoyable experience. It's just that I genuinely wondered where you might want to take us.

I do try not to be judgemental, but you've failed heroically so far to answer the question: what can we add that is lacking in the various Wikipedia articles that will help the traveller?

I'm not wanting to hamper or, God forbid, propose this article for speedy deletion, it's just that I remain genuinely puzzled. --222.127.76.207 03:38, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I am not the one who created this article, nor do I intend to participate much in the creation of its content, but I think it is a good way to expand our coverage of spectator sports. Rugby, Kricket, (team) Handball, American Football and -yes- soccer events are among the biggest single travel events (in terms of number of people congregating at the same spot for the same reason) and especially for sports with a big local or regional focus (i.e. all of them) we should assume that there is a need for people in the "diaspora" of said sport (e.g. an American (team) Handball enthusiast) to get information on how when and where to see their idols play live. I am somewhat of an American Football enthusiast who has never watched a single NFL game live, because the next franchise holds their home games about 3000 km from my home and I would have to fly there and stuff. Not that I don't intend to, but it would surely help to know how it is done... The same - I think - is true for Rugby Football. It is played even in countries where it isn't a dominant sport (or even present in media) and for example a German Rugby enthusiast would surely want to know where the best leagues are and what you should expect when going to a game. And yes I think we need an article on that because bloating the country articles or assuming a two line paragraph in the do section would be enough is imho naive... We could of course consider making articles about "Rugby in country/region x" along the lines of the (imho misnamed, but that seems to be settled now and I don't want to reopen that fight) Football in Europe however as I think there is not (yet) enough content for such an article we should try to write some with a global focus first and see where that takes us. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I certainly agree. And you've also answered the question about what we'll add that is not on Wikipedia: A travel focus. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Status

When does this article become usable or even guide? Imho it'd be nice to one day feature one of our "sports articles" Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:28, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know the answer to your question, but we have featured at least one sports article in the past - Baseball in the United States. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Was Rugby invented in Rugby?

I have heard this claim is highly doubtful, because the story only appeared years after the supposed invention and at a time when the Rugby school was slowly but surely losing its control over the game, thus making it a convenient timing to have a story to reinforce their status appear... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Singapore as a backwater

I don't know if this is accurate. While it's true that Singapore does not have a strong professional rugby scene or national team, international rugby and especially the Rugby World Cup has quite a strong following. Just read any local newspaper whenever they have international rugby matches between the top teams, and I can guarantee you it will appear in the Sports section. In fact, many of my friends back home are fans of the All Blacks. The dog2 (talk) 16:14, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Translating the Marseillaise

Swept in from the pub

So the article on Rugby football mentions the w:Marseillaise and gives a translation of the controversial line about "impure blood". Since its introduction, it has been edited twice with claims to improve the translation. Wikipedia translates the salient lines as "Let an impure blood // Water our furrows!" What should we write? Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

The line is both controversial and open to multiple interpretations. But the general poetic idea is that the impure blood will fertilise the soil of France, allowing a better future. With this in mind "furrow" (the grooves left by a plough) would be a more appropriate translation, however that has nothing to do with rugby. You could just expand the translation to read "field", or else find something else entirely for the caption. Incidentally, the caption is incorrect: the All Blacks' haka follows both national anthems, regardless of which side sings first.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

I've tweaked the caption accordingly. The point (made later in the text) was to underline the ceremonial nature of the haka. If it really was trying to scare the opposition, they should have right of reply or be free to diss it. But it's just a ceremony and no worse than the content of some national anthems. Grahamsands (talk) 11:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

What's needed for guide status and FTT eligibility?

Fans of the sport, what do you say? The article describes the sport and its history as much as a travel guide should, I think. Should we list all teams playing in the individual leagues (some leagues have teams are listed, others just have a one-liner like The main club competition is the National Rugby League (NRL) or Telstra Premiership, with 15 Australian teams and the New Zealand Warriors or even less)? Some passages need to be updated (The 2019–20 season will begin a new era for the Hong Kong Sevens...) and some sections could use an additional photo or two. --Ypsilon (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Any rugby fans here? --Ypsilon (talk) 16:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Anyone, half a year later? Ypsilon (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)