User talk:PeeJay

This is PeeJay's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31Auto-archiving period: 21 days

I'm not sure why your claiming the buzz word for flag of "disruption" the union opened it doors in 1995, the NZRFU created the NC in 76.

2006 as you wrong put it - is not the start of pro rugby in New Zealand. Pro rugby started in 1996. NPC aligned teams started paying players in 1996.

In the early 00's the unions had a meeting and started to make changes, in 2006 those changes were made. They were made again 2009, 2010 and and 2012.

I might add that understanding the history of New Zealand based rugby is a good idea before changing something "somone else did" before clearly not doing any research.

It would appear now your trying to add buzz words like "disruption" - in what world do we live in where the actual truth is disruption? PukeHoopster81 (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other user that you speak of that seem to think is "doing it right, or has the right version" is also factually incorrect. Do some actual research, its not realy hard. as mentioned I am in talks with the union (I live in the area the team is based) get the latest info and historical info on the team. Are you doing the same? I hardly think so PukeHoopster81 (talk) 21:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being "in talks with the union" is actually somewhat frowned upon. You need published, third-party sources, not just someone related to the subject telling you things. For consistency's sake, it's better to treat the team as having begun in 2006 and then put the pre-2006 info on the Counties Manukau Rugby Football Union page. For one thing, you're creating inconsistency between the Counties Manukau page and the rest of the NPC team pages. – PeeJay 21:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frowned upon by whom exactly? someone such as yourself because the information I have provided here is correct and you don't like it? Can you please link to where on the internet the NZRFU in 2006 became a professional outfit then?

You'll find if you knew rugby - it started in 1996 like the rest of the world did. Its very simple for you to point out "I'm doing something wrong" though isn't it - to create more buzz words to have a user blocked.

the team didn't begin in 2006, I'm not sure what this consistancy is you speak of? when the competition if self did not start in 2006 and if your going to have the top points scorer and try scorer stand on the page - then your doing the same thing, because neither of those stats are alinged to the 2006 team, those two players were retired before 10 years before 2006. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, so professionalism itself didn't arrive in New Zealand in 2006, but you know full well that 2006 is the year that the NPC was reorganised into a two-tier competition with professionals in the NPC and amateurs in the Heartland Championship. That's the bright line I'm referring to, and if you weren't being so obtuse, you'd have already acknowledged that. – PeeJay 22:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need a slur thrown at me thanks, you can save that for your personal betterment.

Enjoy the page you have created - its always going to be partially unfinished page that hosts records from playes that have no connection to this "2006" idea your using. You should remove the top try scorer and most points holder, because neither of them played in or after 2006 when as you seem to think "this team was created".

The only inconsistance created - is the jibbirish your talking about 2006. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What slur do you think I've used? Or are your feelings just hurt and now you're lashing out? I'm happy to take a look at the article to make sure everything is consistent, but your edits certainly aren't helping with that. – PeeJay 22:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you refered to me as obtuse, there is no need for that kind of talk. Again labelling my edits as "unhelpful" and speaking of "consistance". This is a team that started in 1955, if you were consistant as you keep preeching, you'd list that.

The page also contains stat leader that never played in or after 2006. Not much use speaking to me about "consistancy" when your not even doing it yourself.

Only person talking about feelings and lashing is you. You seem to be using a lot of buzz words for some reason. not sure why. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can characterise my comments as "buzz words" if you like, but they're entirely accurate. As I said, if you have problems with the content of the article, provide sources to back up your changes and start a discussion at the talk page; however, you have to wait for the conclusion of the discussion before making edits, and those edits must conform with the consensus reached by the participants in the discussion. Starting a discussion by itself is not carte blanche for you to make whatever changes you want. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, just so you know. – PeeJay 22:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should follow your own instructions your so happy to give out. You removed my data before you entered the discussion page and have only done so since being citied. Seems to be a lot of "do as I say" rather than do as I do suggestive comments being thrown around by yourself.

As mentioned - super hard to provide a source when your editing something and its being removed. Where is the source to suggest Alan Dawson has scored the most tries for the union since 2006 as you suggest the page is being registered from as a time point then? there isn't. Because said player never played in this team for the era your listing. So if removed it should not be reinstated. There was also mention of an "away" kit. The union has no such kit. There is a speical kit that is worn in matches against the Wellington (the wellington lions, no the hurricanes based franchise team) for a memory to Jonah Lomu. Unless the team has made a change for the 2024, (of which they may because the new kit coming from a new manufactorer) then at this point there is no reference to an away kit. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 00:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. You added content without a source to the article, that’s what we’re dealing with right now. If there is content in the article that you think should be removed, that can be addressed too, but Alan Dawson was not part of your changes. – PeeJay 00:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know you haven't got a clue, because your intital suggestion doesn't warrant anything.

In the side bar there is a metion of Alan Dawson listed as the top try scorer and Danny Love as the top points scorer. You and your "we" you refer to are harking back to a 2006 reset. Neither of those players listed on the page have played since 2006. Therefore based on the idea this page runs from 2006 only, are not the statistical leaders. I haven not suggested anywhere in my text you placed them on their. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 00:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

again - more buzz words. Not replying to a talk page subject as you suggest I need to, can be taken the same way. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 00:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any more mention of buzz words and slurs and I will request that you be barred from editing my talk page. Your baseless accusations are becoming tiresome. – PeeJay 00:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh yip so your ok with labelling me as "Obtuse" as you suggested, which refers to a person being slow, based on what medical evidence exactly? I haven't thankfully met you in person.

Tiresome - apparently tiresome because you've suggested they are. You had no place to use such slang / slur / suggestive words (whatever correct english lanaguage angle your now attempting to cover your tracks with) and direct them toward me in the first place.

But its the same ole story with the internet isn't it. Your challenged and your answer is, na I'll have this person cancelled instead, that will sure show them. nothing more than a yarn at this point. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 00:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m actually just amused at how personally you’re taking this whole thing. Don’t talk to me any more, kid. – PeeJay 00:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again - your the person who made the use of a word that is uncalled for, furthermore now with the attempt of the belittlement of labelling me a "kid". As mentioned previously in a suggestive postive way - from decent human being to another you seem to be projecting a personal issue you have onto me through the use of words that are not needed. You've decided to now attempt to block my useage on the website or page as a whole, you've personally decided that my edits are "bad" "wrong" or whatever the suggestive word you want to use at the time is. You are 100% right, I did take it personally - you directed it to me. Its not needed or required. PukeHoopster81 (talk) 00:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Courtesy reminder: I'm sure you're familiar with WP:3RR, but just a reminder that not only are the edits at Counties Manukau (National Provincial Championship) subject to 3RR, but also an admin (*waves*) is now watching the edits on the page a little more closely. —C.Fred (talk) 21:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This legal Name is own by the Tasmanian Team. NSW have District in their Name and Queensland do not have suburbs in their name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmunji1 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, please sign your posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) after a post. Second, Wikipedia does not care about full legal names, especially when it comes to suffixes like "Inc." Those should definitely be left out. – PeeJay 06:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have issues with NSW and persons from that state trying to take ownership of the name and their name is quite different. By keeping inc. this shows the legal registered name. The name you are using it is never known by that name.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmunji1 (talk • contribs) 06:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so you're admitting that you have some association with Eastern Suburbs RUFC (Tasmania). That is a big problem here on Wikipedia; per WP:COI, users with a conflict of interests should not edit articles about a subject they have external ties to. Please familiarise yourself with that policy before continuing to edit articles related to that subject. I would also suggest that you read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) and Wikipedia:Article titles. The "Inc." is not necessary since the article talks about the club, not the company that owns the club, and we have other, more natural ways of disambiguating between your two clubs. I would also say that your statement that the club is never known as "Eastern Suburbs RUFC" is counter-indicated by their logo, which quite clearly reads "Eastern Suburbs R.U.F.C.". Finally, you must learn to assume good faith on the part of other editors. You have no reason to assume I'm associated with the New South Wales club; I'm just a concerned Wikipedia editor who noticed something wrong (and it is wrong) and fixed it. Please do not revert any further. – PeeJay 06:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are missing the point. Why did you change both ACT and TAS and not NSW pages. This is why it is a problem. What I did say is Eastern Suburbs RUFC (Tasmania) is not used anywhere and we do use the full name Rugby Union Football Club not RUFC. Legally Tasmania has registered to use that name and no-one else. BTW it is ACT mot Canberra. Mmunji1 (talk) 06:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My dude, the issues with the other articles are separate from the issue with the article you're associated with. As I said, for a start, you shouldn't even be making edits to the TAS club's article if you're associated with them. Second, the "Tasmania" part was only added as a means of disambiguating from the other clubs; it's like adding "rugby union" to the Taniela Tupou (rugby union) article title - we all know "rugby union" isn't part of his name, but it has to be there to distinguish him from the American football player of the same name. Furthermore, again as I said earlier, the club's badge seems to counterindicate the idea that the club never calls itself Eastern Suburbs RUFC. Besides "Rugby Union Football Club" is hella long; in article titles, it should be replaced by RUFC (as with most other club articles on Wikipedia), but it can stay in the first sentence of the article. Finally, you've provided no evidence to support your legal claim to the name; if it were true, why is there a club in Canberra with the same name. Your argument just doesn't hold up, and if I were you, I would remove myself from this situation entirely. Unless you have an alternative preference such as Eastern Suburbs RUFC (Warrane), I'm going to move the article back to Eastern Suburbs RUFC (Tasmania) later today. If you revert again, I will escalate this discussion to the admins. I'm happy to keep talking with you about it, but you have to recognise that the current article name isn't appropriate. – PeeJay 07:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct regarding US spelling of canceled, my apologies--I'm not sure what I was thinking. I think the article only has one source for place of death, the ESPN article, which says Prince George's County. If you have a link to the police report I can add it. Celjski Grad (talk) 07:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There we go, bud: https://www.si.com/fannation/college/cfb-hq/news/khyree-jackson-car-accident-details-police – PeeJay 08:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,691		Family Matters (talk)	Add sources
36		Wollongong Showground (talk)	Add sources
614		Stadium Australia (talk)	Add sources
172		Ohio State Buckeyes (talk)	Add sources
23		Stuttering in popular culture (talk)	Add sources
27		Western Springs Stadium (talk)	Add sources
21		Palmerston North Boys' High School (talk)	Cleanup
1,084		Melbourne Cricket Ground (talk)	Cleanup
271		Montclair State University (talk)	Cleanup
123		Hurricanes (rugby union) (talk)	Expand
234		Ellis Park Stadium (talk)	Expand
777		Millennium Stadium (talk)	Expand
144		NFL on CBS (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
292		You Can't Do That on Television (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
54		Jan Smuts and the Old Boers (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
51		SR USA class (talk)	Merge
36		Pakuranga (talk)	Merge
1,492		University of Notre Dame (talk)	Merge
35		Sydney Showground (Moore Park) (talk)	Wikify
28		Jake Ryan (American football) (talk)	Wikify
6		Eastern Suburbs RUFC (Canberra) (talk)	Wikify
2		Annette Lucile Noble (talk)	Orphan
3		1965 Maranhão gubernatorial election (talk)	Orphan
5		Benjamin Chemla (talk)	Orphan
2		Trevor Malloch (talk)	Stub
3		Josh Bradnock (talk)	Stub
5		Tyler Laubscher (talk)	Stub
12		Attention bandits! (talk)	Stub
2		Rob Foreman (talk)	Stub
4		Devonport Rugby Club (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 July 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Khyree Jackson, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 03:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PeeJay, can I ask why you are replacing the Template:Rugby union team and Template:Rugby union stadium in so many articles? As far as I know, they are perfectly fine and there's no reason not to use them? Typing {{rut|Canterbury}} is a heck of a lot easier for editors than [[Canterbury (National Provincial Championship)|Canterbury]]. Particularly replacing the Template:Rugby union stadium is causing problems, because the name of a stadium can change from season to season, depending on sponsorship rights or otherwise. The {{rut}} templates in the articles provide for the correct name that particular season. Your changes have now caused mistakes and are referring to the wrong name. Examples: the 2024 round 1 game between Canterbury and Northland is played at Apollo Projects Stadium as it is called this season (and as it was called in 2023). You have changed it to "Rugby League Park", which is technically the same stadium, but not called that way at the moment. The article should show the name that is actually in use (at that point in time). If readers of the article want to know more about the stadium, they can click on the link and will see that the article about the stadium goes to "Rugby League Park" and why it's currently called "Apollo Projects Stadium". This is just one example; there are many more, especially because you've been removing the template from previous seasons' articles as well.

Also, in the 2024 Bunnings NPC article you have removed the reference to Ranfurly Shield games beyond the first RS challenge. These challenges are penciled in as potential challenges and that's why they were indicated as such in the article. As soon as the RS changes hands, the necessary changes will be made. We have always done it like that and will continue to do it like that, so please stay out of this. It's user-friendly to visitors to the page who want to know what the expected challenges are at the time they are visiting the page.

Frankly, the way you are trying to stamp your mark on articles is getting annoying. Can you, please, stick to changing things that are objectively "wrong" only and not interfere with the way other editors do things? You don't own this place and you can't impose your way of doing things on others. It's tiring, frustrating and is making me want to stop editing completely (I'm seriously considering that at the moment). Ruggalicious (talk) 01:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, let me say I'm never closed to any form of discussion. If you have any issues with my edits, you're always welcome to come to me either here or on the article talk page, as you have done. Second, I'm not imposing my own way of doing things, I'm making sure that articles are consistent and comply with Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and (most importantly) the manual of style. Regarding use of Template:rugby union stadium, I understand your issue, but let me put it to you another way: if you add that template to the article this season, what happens when the stadium changes names again? Yes, the template updates to the new name, but then you have to go back through all the old articles that use the template to replace the new name with the old one. It is for that reason that articles such as Rugby League Park are titled as they are; we try to avoid sponsored names as much as possible, especially when unsponsored names are available. Same goes for Arena Manawatu (Central Energy Trust Arena) in Palmerston North or Waikato Stadium (FMG Stadium Waikato) in Hamilton or Wellington Regional Stadium (Sky Stadium) in Wellington. Finally, templates shouldn't be used to replace simple links, unless they're going to be subst'ed when the article is saved. I agree, it's easier to type {{rut|Canterbury}} than it is to type [[Canterbury (National Provincial Championship)|Canterbury]], but you should add subst: to the start of the template before saving the article.

Finally, as for the Ranfurly Shield games, you've hit the nail on the head: those games are potential challenges. If Hawke's Bay lose to Southland in week 2, none of those matches will end up being Ranfurly Shield challenges. From my understanding of the way the shield works, every home match the holder plays is a challenge for the shield, so let's just take it one game at a time.

Happy to discuss things further if you have any more issues. – PeeJay 11:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruggalicious: Do you wish to discuss this further? – PeeJay 11:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, IMO the changes you made to the stadium names need to be reverted. I'll get back to you tomorrow. Ruggalicious (talk) 14:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only option other than the one I've implemented would be to use the contemporary names, and that would not be achieved by restoring the templates, for the reason I explained above. – PeeJay 14:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies that it took me a bit longer to respond. Things have been hectic this week. I may be wrong, but I have the strong impression that you don't know – or that you misunderstand – how the Template:Rugby union team ({{rut}}) and Template:Rugby union stadium {{rus}} work. When a stadium name changes, the existing {{rus}} template doesn't (need to) change: the new name doesn't "replace" the old name in the template, but is "added" to the template, so the template with the new and the old names can co-exist. This usage for name changes is one of the purposes of the template! It means that an article of several seasons ago can use the template with the stadium name that was in use at that time, while the article of the current season can use the template with the stadium name that is in use this season. So reverting your changes will get the desired result of showing the stadium name in the article that is verifiable in the referenced source (usually the draw) relating to that specific season as required by WP:PROVEIT. The Template:Rugby union team works the same way. Adding subst: isn't needed when you add a stadium name or team name to these templates.

The practice to indicate (one way or another) all Ranfurly Shield (RS) games that are penciled in at the beginning of the season and to change this if – and when – the RS changes hands during the season, is a long-standing practice that we've used in articles about NPC seasons. It's just a matter of keeping them up-to-date. There is no reason to change this practice as long as it's kept up-to-date (which is what I'm doing). Please, stay out of this, unless you intend on becoming an editor that keeps this page up-to-date after every single RS game (unnecessary, because I'm already doing that). Ruggalicious (talk) 00:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I'll make any changes I please to any articles that need them. I don't say this to be aggressive, but you can't say to someone "stay out of this" on Wikipedia; it's just not how the site works. Second, whether or not I understand how those templates work is actually irrelevant in the long run. Templates should not be used as replacements for simple links, full stop. If you want to use a template as a shorthand for a link, that's fine, but you have to subst: it into the article before saving. Third, as I said, it would be better to use timeless names for each stadium where possible, i.e. if it has an unsponsored name such as Wellington Regional Stadium or Okara Park, use that name; if not, by all means use the contemporary sponsored name, but do it using a link, not a template. Finally, I think the key word is "pencilled". There is no guarantee that those future games will be shield challenge matches, and just because something is a "long-standing practice" doesn't mean it should be that way. That said, if you have a source that specifically lists all future shield challenge matches and includes all the matches you've tagged, go right ahead. Far be it from me to stand in the way of sourced content being added to Wikipedia. – PeeJay 09:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]