Talk:Crusaders (rugby union)

message: This article's name really needs to be changed to the Crusaders, as the team ceased to be known as the "Canterbury Crusaders" a number of years ago. Unfortunately I don't know how to do it, can someone help? Eastpaw
::There are hundreds of other teams of many sports in the world called Crusaders, some obscure rugby team from New Zealand is not the only one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.229.70 (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change 

message: Why do the Crusaders have a different infobox to everyone else? Cvene64 15:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: Er why does it say Jade's capacity is 25,000? Is it not 36,000??
: I think you are right, not 100% sur though. I'll check it later on today. Also, please sign your comments with four tides (~). It just helps to know who is saying what! Thanks. - Shudde talk 23:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jade Stadium

message: To who ever has been making these great edits, I salute you! But we need to mention the Horsemen. You know, they ride around before the games. Should this go under name and colours? Cheers.--HamedogTalk|@ 14:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I've tried to reorganise the article a bit, the horseman can be found under homeground, I figured that was the most appropriate place to have it as they don't ride around when it's an away game. I rewrote the horseman bit a while back cause it was POV and used a bit of weasel words. - Shudde talk 22:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Horsemen

message: Perhaps we should mention sevens star Ben Gollings in this article - there are current rumors of him being included on the Crusaders roster next year. He will probably be the first overseas international player to play in a NZ S14 team (excluding Pacific Islanders). --HamedogTalk|@ 07:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably not neccessary just yet, the teams for 2007 will be announced very soon, and considering it's not 100% confirmed yet prob easiest just to wait. I have been thinking about adding it for a few days but figure it's not something someone who wants to learn about the Crusaders would consider important info unless it'd already happened (ie unless it was confirmed he was playing or unless he'd actually played a game). If someone did add it I wouldn't be opposed though, as long as it was properly referenced and well written. - Shudde talk 09:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ben Gollings mention 

message: I really don't want to add anymore, I am on Wikibreak - can someone else do it?--HamedogTalk|@ 11:31, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paterson is missing from the squads 

message: Hey, I think i'm going to revert the formatting changes. I list my reasons here, and would like to discuss this before we change it back. I have a few problems:
* Why is it region not province?
* The national flags are redundant (only one non-NZer, and thats not referenced)
* Don't know about the ordering, should it not be either ordered by position or alphabetically, not some (seemingly) random order.
* The read links and incorrect player links (ie Peter Nixon, Ben May)
* The old system was simpler and seemed functional (hey, it passed GA?!)
I've moved the new squad layout to the sandbox here. Please discuss, thanks, - Shudde talk 01:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shudde, first off, congrats on getting GA Status!! I just wanted to post here to say that I have been making some movements to get all the clubs/sides into line, the first step was creating a universal infobox which is now done. A player chart was then created also, which I think should be introduced to every article. See Stade Toulousain, Stade Francais etc. The current box (on Reds/Crusaders etc) is something that I took of the NFL pages. Even though the flags seem redundant, I think we should use them, to show just that, that almost all the players are from NZ. As for the ordering, I have just been putting it in alphabetical order. Cheers Cvene64 02:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I can understand why you would want all the rugby teams to have a similar layout, I do not think that the layout Hamedog put up is an improvement on the previous one. For the Super 14 teams, I don't see why they aren't just kept like the current layout here, (and the layouts at the Blues or Brumbies for example). There is a form of conformation already. The flags may be a good idea but all could be made smaller, as for positions, I didn't mention this above but having them only listed as one position is deceiving (most players play in more then one) and the names for the positions can be different in different parts of the world (for example fly-half and first five, scrumhalf and halfback, even back row and flankers). I think the Super 14 teams should just stay as is, thats all, seems like quite a lot of effort for nothing to me. - Shudde talk 04:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is for a universal squad list though. I have made edits so that the template can display either Fly-half or First Five-Eight and similar. Perhaps changing the template for a 2nd position? We should be creating redlinked articles.09:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shudde I have plans to make the template be able to accommodate all multiple positions, and other things such as captain. I just really have not done it yet, but it is relevent, and I made the position names the same as those which are at rugby union positions. But I definantly think all teams should use it. Cheers. Cvene64 11:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I say if it ain't broke don't fix it! I think the current format is fine, it wiki-links to the players who have articles about them, lets you know what positions they play, and there is no real need to state what country they are from (they're all contracted to NZRU anyway). It looks clean, neat and is well laid out. I see no reason to go through all the Super 14 teams and change it. - Shudde talk 00:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While you may think its not broken, the point of the other version, which I placed in the article, is so Rugby union has a universal squad box, like the Infobox. Perhaps we can modify it so there is no flags??--HamedogTalk|@ 05:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Then why not the current one? Some form of box is definitely good (rather then a list), I think the concept of a universal one is a little bit over the top. I do believe that the boxes from teams within one competition should be similar though, but every competition will have different requirements. For example the NA4, Super 14 and Heinekin Cup. Also international teams would need to be diff. - Shudde talk 10:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Squad layout 

message: I have been looking over the article again lately. There are quite a few references needed to be added. During my efforts I've discovered that many of the articles referencing news from the crfu.co.nz website (mainly references added by me) don't work. The website clearly gets regularly redesigned. I'd recommend that anyone adding references finds alternatives to crfu.co.nz. Unfortunately stuff.co.nz also gets regularly purged of it's old news content as well. - Shudde talk 04:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References from crfu.co.nz

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
# Support Defeats encyclopedic value if it links to a rugby team name rather than the crusades. <3 bunny 00:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: # Support Defeats encyclopedic value if it links to a rugby team name rather than the crusades. <3 bunny 00:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in support of the move

message: # No, been in this location for some time. Is a noted team around the world and is often compared to the Manchester United of rugby union. As I mentioned, been in this location for some time without opposition. For the team being noted around the world - this can be seen in the fact the team plays games in Melbourne (a whole different country) and will being playing a match in London (on the other side of the World). Surely the most successful team in Super 14 and possibly non-international rugby must be located here. Known well in New Zealand, South Africa and Australia which is a large number of people.----HamedogTalk|@ 01:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in opposition to the move

message: :Add any additional comments:
*Note to closing admin I removed a partisan call to arms from the WikiProject Rugby site and advised the editor to use only neutral language to direct attention to this discussion. It might nevertheless have been canvassed elsewhere. I have no opinion on the case (didn't even read it). Please no meta-discussions on canvassing here, that's what WT:CANVASS is for. ~ trialsanderrors 19:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry didn't know that.--HamedogTalk|@ 23:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So what is to be done now that this RM has been tainted by votestacking? --SigPig |SEND - OVER 04:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know how much of an effect the post had. Was posted after much of the opposes. An apology has been made, so lets not blow this out of proportion. - Shudde talk 22:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong. The post that told the Rugby members where to go and how to vote ("Go to Talk:Crusaders and state "Oppose" followed by a reason. No consensus is a result we should aim for.") was posted on the 30th of January. The first oppose did not appear until the next day. So let's not try to sweep this under the rug, either. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 12:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't true, the post was at 03:24 UTC on 31 January. The opposing posts 1-3 were here before then. I'm not sure about 4 because a time-stamp wasn't added. So yeah, there were three opposing votes before Hamedog posted his message. You may have been looking at your local time, rather then the UTC time. - Shudde talk 22:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears you are right. The time displayed in the history differs from the timestamps. My sincerest apologies for my assumption of bad faith. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 18:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Maps of the franchise encachment areas would enhance the article. Chainz 09:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: Please go to the comments page here and leave any comments you have. Any assistance responding to comments would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. - Shudde talk 04:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominated for Featured Article 

message: Our quote giving McCaw's reaction to the end of the winning streak seems to be missing a couple of words: "...in some ways it was almost a relief. We'd finally been beaten, the run was over, so people could stop talking about it and we could get on with playing it week by week." (My guesses at the missing words are underlined.) I don't have a copy of McIlraith's book handy - would someone please check on the wording? -- Avenue 02:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll check it tonight but you are almost certainly correct. - Shudde talk 02:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just checked it with the book. Whats there now is correct. - Shudde talk 09:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  McCaw quote 

message: The idioms "top of the table" and "bottom of the table" are not familiar to this US writer. The meaning is clear enough from the context, but for maximum clarity across the English-speaking world, perhaps idioms should be avoided. Unimaginative Username 02:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What would you propose? Nil Einne 15:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I think he is saying that it's clear in the context of this article, but should be avoided in the future if possible. - Shudde talk 23:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Idiom usage 

message: Why under "franchise area" is the word protect written in italics?--HamedogTalk|@ 07:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: # Support as nominator. - Shudde talk 00:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: Seems some careless copy-editor put a "copy-edit in progress" tag up there back in February 2007 but forgot to remove it when finished. (blush) Fixed it... sorry! Unimaginative Username (talk) 08:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Updated the "copy-edit in progress" template

message: :Image:Blackadder1998.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Blackadder1998.jpg

message: Is :File:CrusadersTerritory.PNG correct? While the overall area looks fine, the map appears to me (admittedly a non-NZer) to show Kaikoura as part of the CRFU rather than as part of Tasman (as a member of the Marlborough sub-union). Not a big issue but one a Featured Article should get right. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Franchise area map

message: Is the wider training group notable? Would it be better to remove this section? - Shudde talk 06:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say not notable. BTW Tu Umaga-Marshal is mentioned in both for some reason. I feel that the team of the decade is borderline WP:Undue too. AIRcorn (talk) 05:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  2011 Wider Training Group 

message: Regarding the requested moves above - I do agree with Aircorn's comments - "so 'Super Rugby' may be justified to prevent any possible confusion". The new naming conventions are assuming that Super Rugby will remain the only competition operating franchises.  I do feel that it would make more sense to use "Teamname (Super Rugby franchise)" as the naming convention in order to avoid us having to redo this exercise again in future. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 10:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My main goal was to have some sort of consistency across the teams. I am happy with rugby union. Unless the sport changes its name it will not need to be changed in the future. AIRcorn (talk) 22:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree about having consistency. I just think that while we're looking at moving these pages, we might as well rename them to something that is unlikely to ever be ambiguous in future - since there are teams with similar names in the Premiership in England, for example, I would suggest we indicate these are Super Rugby teams/franchises.TheMightyPeanut (talk) 23:14, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, I misread your above statement. The consensus (although clear) was weak in the previous move and if you wish to open another requested move I would not oppose it. I am however happy with the current situation so would not necessarily support it either. The conflicting premiership games are currently prefixed by Cardiff, Sale and Exeter so there is no real concern readers will stumble upon the wrong article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested moves 

message: Can someone please clarify the period this refers to?
In the text Dan Carter is listed as a "notable exception" yet he is present in the team list.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hir0cam (talk • contribs) 20:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone decided that they would just change a few players around depending on their opinion—rather than that of the "experts". As the paragraph above the text says it was printed in the Press on the eve of the 2005 final; so is only the team of that first decade, rather than an all time side. - Shudde talk 11:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team of the decade 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Crusaders (rugby union). 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.crfu.co.nz/main/index.cfm/1%2C363%2Chtml/The-Key-Moments-that-Mattered
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://xtramsn.co.nz/rugby/0%2C%2C12429-5333529%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.planet-rugby.com/Story/0%2C18259%2C3562_1692051%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.planet-rugby.com/Story/0%2C18259%2C3562_1692085%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120910195640/http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0%2C25883%2C3824_2106336%2C00.html to http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0%2C25883%2C3824_2106336%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.crfu.co.nz/main/index.cfm/1%2C366%2Chtml/What-s-in-a-name
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708150601/http://www.christchurchcvb.com/ to http://www.christchurchcvb.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726220112/http://www.amistadium.co.nz/ami_stadium/venue_overview to http://www.amistadium.co.nz/ami_stadium/venue_overview
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10702685
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sarugby.com/news/News/article/sid%3D4379.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.irb.com/EN/Tournaments%2Band%2BEvents/IRB%2BAwards/awards%2Brelease.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728051039/http://www.crusaders.co.nz/news/hewett-is-new-crusaders-assistant-coach/439/news.aspx to http://www.crusaders.co.nz/news/hewett-is-new-crusaders-assistant-coach/439/news.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Crusaders (rugby union). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926224921/http://www.keo.co.za/2006/02/21/mauger-slams-melbourne-move/ to http://www.keo.co.za/2006/02/21/mauger-slams-melbourne-move/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Looking at this one as part of the ongoing FA sweeps.  This article has not been thoroughly updated, and the coverage of post-2011 is too thin.  Additionally, some uncited text has accreted over time.  This one needs some work to get up to the featured article criteria, or a featured article review may have to occur. Hog Farm  Talk 17:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article concerns 

message: I'll just leave this here for others, since I was <reverted> for unconstructive edit and possible vandalism for removing it:
The Māori term does not appear to bring any results (new or otherwise) on Google in relation to rugby. It does bring results, but as the name of a person - which appears unrelated to rugby.
The term and the citation was added in January by a now blocked sock account in this edit: diff:1135529123. And while the sock did do other edits to other pages that don't appear bad, the addition of this term is still suspect. – 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:F4A3:CBC5:B217:C28E (talk) 12:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, the supposed Māori version of the name does not seem to appear even a single time in the official website. – 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:F4A3:CBC5:B217:C28E (talk) 12:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to agree - I seem to recall going down a similar rabbit hole at some point but can't recall whether it was for the Crusaders or a different team. It seems like a bizarre thing for something like Te Aka to just make up, but given the recent rebranding and greater adoption of te ao Māori into the club's identity I would've assumed that Whatumoana would show up somewhere if it were the te reo name. Turnagra (talk) 06:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found a couple of other sources; Scotty Morrison gives it as the Māori name in Maori at Home, and the Māori language news show Te Karere uses the name in this 2012 clip. But agree that it's weird that it doesn't show up anywhere else; I wouldn't expect to have to go digging for the Māori name like this, particularly in the context of the recent rebranding noted by Turnagra. So... I'm not sure that takes us very far. Chocmilk03 (talk) 07:07, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, I'd count that as three reliable sources for that being the Māori name, which is enough for me. It's still bizarre that it's so seemingly obscure though. Turnagra (talk) 08:30, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in that case I've removed the "Unreliable source?" template I had initially added to the current citation. No reason left to suspect that the term is a hoax anymore either, even if it is obscure.  Thanks for the help. – 2804:F14:80D1:3501:D9DF:DD9E:6742:6EC0 (talk) 04:55, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maori name