Talk:France national rugby union team

Why the South West?
Does anyone know why rugby becam so strong in the south west of France?

Does it have anything to do with British links to the region both historic and related to the wine trade?

KH 2/6/05

Not a clue. Logically Northern France would have a more suitable climate, perhaps it has something to do with the poularity of other competiting sports such as soccer (more popular in the North).GordyB 17:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

From Vichy France: Talking about the Vichy Governments occupation of France.
 * Initially it ruled an unoccupied zone in Southern France and some French colonies

Perhaps theres something there? POds 04:32, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

That explains why union is much more popular than league in France but does not explain why both rugby codes have their heartland in the South. I don't think either form of rugby has ever been extremely popular in Northern France and so Vichy France has nothing to do with it IMO.GordyB 12:13, 8 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Nothing to do with Vichy, rugby union became popular in the South West a long time before that time, imported there by wine merchants who went to the Bordeaux region. Bordeaux was the first team, not from Paris, to win the French championship
 * Dingy 06:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Better late than never but according to this article, rugby was considered sinful by the Catholic church (due to the violence) and became popular in the "irreligious South West" partly to annoy the church.GordyB 12:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent fixture, and Upcoming fixtures lists
Please contribute to the discussion about this at the WikiProject Rugby union talk page here. - Shudda talk  22:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Current squad
I have modified it, now similar to the FR version. Dingy 02:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Notable players
Modified to have a list and Table in line with the French version. I hope that you can agree with that, an introduction will be added to justify the selection Dingy 14:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think those in the table are great. The other list should probably be removed as ten is enough for a list of notable players. - Shudda talk  04:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe we can work on turning this section into a couple paragraphs like the ABs page? Cvene64 10:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

History - Modern era
Maybe this section heading should be Professional era? I also think it should be summarised as it's probably got undue weight compared with the other history sections. Is this a good idea or do people think it's better to expand the rest of the history instead? - Shudda talk  04:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The modern section basically describes all the recent preformances. I think the other sections should be expanded a little, but the Modern section should be cut down by around 30% imo. Cvene64 10:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Expand the other sections if you can, I have tried my best with them. I don't think you should cut back relevant data because of undue weight. We should have as much data as possible as long as it is relevant.GordyB 15:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We may find if this article goes through an FAC that this is brought up though, thats is why I mentioned it. I think that Cvene64 is right, we expand the other sections then cut it down around 30%. - Shudda talk  22:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's so far away that we need not worry about it.We're not even close to Good status surely.GordyB 22:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Aim high I say! The guts of the article is there, needs a copy-edit, some additions, and referencing. We may as well prevent or resolve problems now rather then once lots of work has been done on the article. The thing is, if it's going to be bought up in an FAC then lets deal with it rather then sweep it under the carpet. - Shudda talk  23:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ironically I have now come across a new source of information for the page and the history section is much bigger than it was and will only get bigger. I think the history section should be summarised (the summary in the lead-in would do as a start) and we should link to a history article. I'll wait for responses before doing anything.GordyB 14:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You've done really good work, congratulations. What about leaving it for now, so that it gets edited whilst it's the collaboration. When the collaboration is over, or it's clear nothing is being done to improve the history section then we can split up the article. Is this a good idea? Or should we split it up now? - Shudda  talk  23:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's split it when the collaboration is over.GordyB 23:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I dunno about the move, it kind of takes the heart out of the whole article. In any case, the history section should be at least five times longer than it is right now (see all the sports team articles at WP:FA that have split historys and you'll see what the stanard is). Also, the references should be added in here as well, and that great photo against Wales. I think a proper summary should have been written first. But oh well. Good job with the article though guys! Hopefully this can be an FA soon. Goldman07 16:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay I just did the history. I guess it was a good move, the history page is really big! I'll add in all references for that section soon as well and in the Home grounds section also. Could someone look at doing the players section like the All Blacks one (and the lead needs to be expanded a little)? Goldman07 17:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Logo
Does anyone have a better logo that can be used in the infobox? The current one is actually a photograph not a logo. The FFR website has one but it is too small...? Cvene64 10:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You could import the one used in the french version (infobox) Dingy 01:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The French page infobox uses the logo for the union, not that used by the team on their jerseys. --Bob 01:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorted: cf Image:France Rugby Logo.png Saebhiar Adishatz 23:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Players
I think we should redo this section like All Blacks as that is featured, so it is probably the best way to go. Any thoughts on this? Goldman07 06:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Work to do
The article is looking much better then before we started the collaboration. The history section looks very good now that it's been split off, and the other sections are coming along. I'm going to create a todo list, please feel free to add to it. I think the major thing that needs to be added is a coaches section, as well maybe a section on the club versus country issues? Comments are welcome. - Shudda talk  10:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I am trying to compile a list of French rugby coaches, obviously the role has not always been a clearly defined one, with selectors, coaches, managers, and also technical directors it's very confusing about who is actually coach. Anyway I've started a list that can be viewed at my sandbox, expand it if you can. References would be good also. You can check it out here. Thanks. - Shudda talk  05:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to point out that I think it's amusing that this article does not mention what is likely the only way men in North America have ever heard of French rugby (or more specifically, gay and bi men): the Dieux du Stade calendar! Somewildthingsgo 06:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You might find it amusing but this article wasn't written for gay or bi men in North America that don't like rugby.GordyB 07:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia I use is written for everyone. Somewildthingsgo 08:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Very well, I demand that the Lumberjack song be added to the page on Canada since that is about the only thing that Britons associate with Canada.GordyB 09:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Dieux du Stade is related to the Stade Français, not the national team. Conscious 08:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * GordyB's comments are of course a bit strange, but Conscious is completely right. Somewildthingsgo is thinking about the club Stade Français. It has no more to do with the French national Rugby team than Calgary Flames has to do with the Canadian national hockey team. JdeJ 14:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * My point is that what may seem incredibly important to a minority group may in fact be rather irrelevant to a subject matter. Barry Manilow is largely famous in the UK for having a large nose but is that really that relevant?GordyB 15:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It was a joke! But thanks for the clarification. Somewildthingsgo 19:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

GA review
Excellent article, easily passes the GA criteria. Well done! --Phill talk Edits 14:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing it. Appreciate it. - <font color="Blue">Shudda <font color="Blue">talk  23:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Notable players
To reduce the list to those in the Hall of fame is a mistake and shows that you don't really know the FR team. The list coming from the french version (Featured article) made more sense, and had also defined criteria for the choice. I regret the change Dingy 23:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC) (one of the main contributors on the FR version)
 * Evidently the French and English-language Wikipedias have different criteria for Featured Article status. There was no way this article would get FA status with the notable players as they were. I don't like the section as it stands but unless you know of a French hall of fame or an all-time France XV then it will have to stand as it is.GordyB 14:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry Dingy but GordyB is right. We were getting accused of Original research and unfortunately there was not a set criteria before we changed it to Hall of Fame members. If there is a better way of doing it without being guilty of original research then please let us know! - <font color="Blue">Shudda <font color="Blue">talk  00:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answers. In the FR text we gave our criteria (number of caps and distinctions) and then our list, the selection corresponds better to what people in FR consider as the more notable players. It was well accepted as the article became a Featured article. Sometimes it is easier to contribute in french, sometimes not. Dingy 01:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Basically the translation that was here said that ten players had been picked based upon their achievements in the game. This is probably original research and I can understand why it was bought up at the FAC. Using International Rugby Hall of Fame members removes any possibility of original research because the notability is decided by an independent group and not us as contributors. The All Blacks notable players section was done like this and so it probably makes sense to have the French team's article the same (even if it wasn't original research). Also, doing it this way prevents endless arguments about who should be in the list. This is why I proposed doing it this way in the All Blacks article - because people kept adding and removing names from the notable players list and there were stupid edit-wars. But like I said above, if their is another way we can come up with a list of notable players without the original research accusations then please do say. - <font color="Blue">Shudda <font color="Blue">talk  01:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Jersey
What should the jerseys in the template be now? The current ones are a bit different? Goldman07 00:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Flag icons
The icons for the flags of England and Scotland aren't appearing on this page (or on others). I don't know if the files have been deleted or whether the wiki-linking is the problem. Hopefully someone more knowledgable can fix the problem. 86.129.140.67 13:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's probably your browser or something similar, I have no such problem.GordyB 14:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * A-ha see what you mean now. Apparently there is a database issue and the icons come and go.GordyB 16:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I've noticed this also - for me, the English, Italian and Scottish aren't displaying. This must affect a lot of other articles so I hope this gets fixed soon. It does not give a good impression.--86.149.55.115 12:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * See the site notice - we're experiencing technical difficulties. Raul654 19:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Name
Why is it called the 'France national rugby union team' not the 'French national rugby union team'. This makes more sense in English?Ozdaren 05:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Because there are standard naming protocols and this is the pattern.GordyB 07:27, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah I wasn't editing when the naming conventions were decided upon, but they exist and it's easiest if we stick to them. - <font color="Blue">Shudde <font color="Blue">talk  08:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I suspected such. Thanks. Ozdaren 12:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)