This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I believe that this is still a stub. There is a lot more that could be added. Any thoughts? -- Scaife (Talk) Don't forget Hanlon's Razor 17:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Stub - according to this a stub is 3-10 sentences and too short to be classed as an article. This is eight sentences, more will be added soon. It will still need work doing on it, just because IMO it is not s stub does not mean that more cannot be done. Wiki articles aren't ever 'finished'. As for suggestions, it's largely a case of finding an internet site with data that hasn't been included, very hit and miss. GordyB 17:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the section as it seemed a bit pointless to list only three teams, two of which are virtually unknown outside of the Northeast region of the United States. It also seemed silly to attempt to list all the teams, as there's thousands. hoopydink Conas tá tú? 19:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
"The Sports Museum is set to open in New York City on May 7, 2008," I read nearly 18 months later. 122.166.148.39 ( talk) 14:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
There have been several edits and reverts recently re hatnotes. I'm not sure that the USA Rugby article needs any hatnote, but if we do add a hatnote, we should add a hatnote for the article that mistaken readers are most likely to be looking for when the land here. Readers may come to the USA Rugby article because they are looking for information about Rugby union in the United States or the United States national rugby union team. I'll think further about whether a hatnote is useful, and if so, which hatnote would have the highest chance of being helpful and the lowest chance of being confusing or directing readers to something they weren't looking for. CUA 27 ( talk) 02:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Mattlore — I appreciate your efforts to de-escalate, and I don't plan to touch the hatnote any time soon, so I'll leave it for now the way the IP insists. From a procedural point of view, I find this outcome troubling. This outcome rewards the more determined edit warrior who has made the same revert four times, despite my warning to him at 3RR, and then my request that he self-revert after his fourth revert. (If we're keeping score, I've made the same revert twice, and then made a third compromise change I had previously suggested on the talk page). So this outcome, if it remains, incentivizes the IP to continue his behavior.
On a semi-related note, the IP is a seasoned editor with experience in wiki disputes, and he thinks he knows you from somewhere. I've let him know I suspect he is RugbyXIII (they edit the same articles, and direct the same Accusations at WP:RU editors), but he has denied. Any thoughts? CUA 27 ( talk) 12:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
I have protected this page for 12 hours to prevent ongoing edit warring. The only other option was to block all parties involved.
If the edit warring continues after the protection expires I will not protect again, but will instead block the person or persons involved. Get consensus on the talk page if someone reverts you. HighInBC 16:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I believe that this is still a stub. There is a lot more that could be added. Any thoughts? -- Scaife (Talk) Don't forget Hanlon's Razor 17:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Stub - according to this a stub is 3-10 sentences and too short to be classed as an article. This is eight sentences, more will be added soon. It will still need work doing on it, just because IMO it is not s stub does not mean that more cannot be done. Wiki articles aren't ever 'finished'. As for suggestions, it's largely a case of finding an internet site with data that hasn't been included, very hit and miss. GordyB 17:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the section as it seemed a bit pointless to list only three teams, two of which are virtually unknown outside of the Northeast region of the United States. It also seemed silly to attempt to list all the teams, as there's thousands. hoopydink Conas tá tú? 19:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
"The Sports Museum is set to open in New York City on May 7, 2008," I read nearly 18 months later. 122.166.148.39 ( talk) 14:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
There have been several edits and reverts recently re hatnotes. I'm not sure that the USA Rugby article needs any hatnote, but if we do add a hatnote, we should add a hatnote for the article that mistaken readers are most likely to be looking for when the land here. Readers may come to the USA Rugby article because they are looking for information about Rugby union in the United States or the United States national rugby union team. I'll think further about whether a hatnote is useful, and if so, which hatnote would have the highest chance of being helpful and the lowest chance of being confusing or directing readers to something they weren't looking for. CUA 27 ( talk) 02:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Mattlore — I appreciate your efforts to de-escalate, and I don't plan to touch the hatnote any time soon, so I'll leave it for now the way the IP insists. From a procedural point of view, I find this outcome troubling. This outcome rewards the more determined edit warrior who has made the same revert four times, despite my warning to him at 3RR, and then my request that he self-revert after his fourth revert. (If we're keeping score, I've made the same revert twice, and then made a third compromise change I had previously suggested on the talk page). So this outcome, if it remains, incentivizes the IP to continue his behavior.
On a semi-related note, the IP is a seasoned editor with experience in wiki disputes, and he thinks he knows you from somewhere. I've let him know I suspect he is RugbyXIII (they edit the same articles, and direct the same Accusations at WP:RU editors), but he has denied. Any thoughts? CUA 27 ( talk) 12:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
I have protected this page for 12 hours to prevent ongoing edit warring. The only other option was to block all parties involved.
If the edit warring continues after the protection expires I will not protect again, but will instead block the person or persons involved. Get consensus on the talk page if someone reverts you. HighInBC 16:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)