Jump to content

Talk:Wasps RFC: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
m Skeene88 moved page Talk:Wasps Rugby to Talk:Wasps RFC over redirect: moved without discussion or citing of sources/references. Also appears likely to be a conflict of interest.
(No difference)

Revision as of 18:54, 12 January 2021

Untitled

You can add the following userbox to your user page by inserting this code: {{User:PabloVergos/Userboxes/LondonWasps}}

Allez, Allez, Allez!This user supports
Wasps RFC.


Wasps on England Team

"The 1980s saw an all time high representation of Wasps players in the England national side."

How many is that? Over what period? What was the most players at one time? Murkee 18:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Suspect this may have been equalled or surpassed in the last couple years. Atomicwasp 30 March 2007 (UTC)


As do I, especially with the back row. That's why we need stats, so an objective judgement can be made. Does anyone have any stats?

Murkee 10:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

I'd like to see this article worked up to featured article status, unfortunately I don't have the nitty-gritty waspish knowledge.

Obvious topics for expansion could include breaking down the professional era, more detail on how the club is managed (e.g. the role of Mr. Wright), and what is known about the future plans for the club, and our record.

Also, player biographies, many are blank. Murkee 11:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

I've added a peer review request in order to get feedback on what the article needs to push up it's class....

Murkee 11:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review Results

The results will start to appear here

Murkee 10:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Peer review is here

I really must find the time to start working through it.... when will *that* happen?  :)

Murkee (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Two things... Firstly, in the infobox, the club's full name is listed as "London Wasps Holdings Ltd". Surely this should be "London Wasps" or "London Wasps RUFC" rather than just the name of the holding company which owns the club? That's a bit like "Manchester United FC" listing thier full name as "Red Football Ltd"!!

Also, the 1866 formation of Hamstead FC is noted as "citation needed". Is this necessary? Particularly given that this is stated as fact within the Harlequins article! -- MLD · T · C · @:  16:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is about the rugby football club, not the holding company. I'll change it to London Wasps unless anyone objects. Pollythewasp (talk) 13:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Is the name a reference to White Anglo Saxon Protestant, given that London Irish and London Welsh also exist? Or am I reading too much into it? I'm not being provocative, just curious. 157.190.228.23 (talk) 21:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are reading too much, Wasp here means the insect. WASP is a designation mostly used in the USA, we don't use it much in the UK. In addition to which the word "London" was only fairly recently added to the name.GordyB (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Peacock Terms

I note that a header has been added about 'peacock terms'. I've had a glance through it and I can't see any which have not been justified - although admittedly I could be rather one eyed on this issue, as a Wasps season ticket holder.

One did spring out:

"London Wasps are one of the most successful English rugby union sides in recent years, having won at least one of each of the major European competitions or knock-out tournaments in the past decade. The team compete in the English club competition, the Guinness Premiership, the Anglo-Welsh competition the EDF Energy Cup and the European knock-out competition, the Heineken Cup."

The 'one of the most successful' is, I think, admissible given the justification that follows it.

With the 'peacock terms', can anyone spot the ones which are not justified? As I say, I may just be blind to them on this topic!

Murkee (talk) 11:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riki Flutey

I have changed Riki Flutey's postion to centre (CT) as that is where he is usually active for Wasps. 88.106.143.1 (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Burchill - WWE wrestler a former Wasps player?

Englishman Paul Burchill is currently a WWE wrestler on the RAW brand. It was announced during a match that he used to play for Wasps and was called 'ripper' as he ripped through opposition. Is there any truth to this claim? 87.127.178.28 (talk) 21:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wycombe Wasps"?

I've not heard us called Wycombe Wasps, excpt as a derogatory reply to me calling London Irish "Whitley Paddys" (no offence intended), should Wycombe Wasps be cited as a nickname? Pollythewasp (talk) 13:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing prose

The first paragraph states "The men's first team, which forms London Wasps, was derived from Wasps Football Club who were formed in 1867 at the now defunct Eton and Middlesex Tavern in North London, at the turn of professionalism in 1999." Does this make sense? I've re-read it so many times now, I'm word-blind. Should I change it? Pollythewasp (talk) 13:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasps FC history

It occurs to me that the history here listed is actually the history of Wasps FC, and London Wasps (nee Wasps RFC) didn't exist until 1996. Would the history be in a more appropriate place if it was on the Wasps FC page? This is an encyclopedia, after all, not a book about 'The Wasps'. Pollythewasp (talk) 13:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership

I have added in a sentence reflecting the change in ownership from Steve Hayes to Derek Richardson YossariansChaplain (talk) 21:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ownership and new ground sections seem to be mixed in together - should these not be split out or merged? OuEstLeBob (talk) 09:26, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wasps RFC. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 17:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Wasps RFC. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 04:51, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hands, David (12 November 2007). The Times reference

What is going on with that reference? It goes to the home page of the website and offers a free trial. If there is a paywall surely there should be a warning. Mobile mundo (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move without discussion

This page was moved without any discussion and a claim that it was merely "technical". Who ever wants to move the page should put a comment here, with the references that say this is the "common name" or the official name. I would also question whether there is a violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest given the name of the account making the request is "Wasps Official"Skeene88 (talk) 18:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wasps_RFC&oldid=999942203"