Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rowing

message: (Scope is a bit wider than rowing, but there doesn't seem to be a more relevant wikiproject)
I noticed that The Boat Race, Scottish Boat Race, Harvard–Yale Regatta among others, as well as Roses Tournament, The Varsity Game outside rowing use manually-created (i.e. non-templated) infoboxes on a very similar format. (I recently added it to The Boat Race of the North as it seemed to be standard practice for rowing rivalries).
Is it worth producing our own infobox template rather than manually creating infoboxes across a whole swathe of pages?
There is :Template:Infobox sports rivalry - I guess if we created a new template questions would be asked about why we can't use that. I don't know if anyone has tried using it, or proposing it's extended to cover our use cases (things like blade images)? TSP (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox template? 

message: Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a  parameter to , which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to , and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass  a new  parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project-independent quality assessments 

message: I thought this was a done deal back in this 2022 RFC but obviously not. A handful of editors did another rfc with no sports projects input at all. And it's being challenged because we just noticed it. This could affect almost every single tennis and Olympic article we have, and goodness know how many other sports. Some may have already been moved it you weren't watching the article. And not just the article titles will be affected but all the player bios that link to the articles. Sure the links would be piped to the right place if thousands of articles moved, but if the wording in a bio still said 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles or Swimming at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre backstroke that would likely need to be changed by hand. There is also talk of removing the ndash completely.
Perhaps this is what sports projects want and perhaps not. Either way I certainly don't want projects ill-informed as the last RfC was handled. Express your thoughts at  the following rfc. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#RfC_on_capitalization_after_a_colon_or_dash|Another RfC on capitalization]] of all our articles 

message: The article List of NCAA schools with the most Division I national championships has counted the Jim Ten Eyck Memorial Trophy winner in its tabulation of "national champions" for rowing. That seems incorrect, given the recent headlines and accounting by the Seattle Times.
Input requested by those knowledgeable about collegiate rowing history to determine the correct years and trophies indicative of the national championship:
Discussion here:
Talk:List of NCAA schools with the most Division I national championships#Men's rowing discrepancies vs. reliable sources
PK-WIKI (talk) 18:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rowing "National Championship" discussion; input requested