Talk:Arabian Gulf rugby union team

Rugby union Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Western Asia: Kuwait Low‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Kuwait (assessed as Low-importance).

Arab world Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bahrain Low‑importance

	Bahrain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bahrain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Kingdom of Bahrain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BahrainWikipedia:WikiProject BahrainTemplate:WikiProject BahrainBahrain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please change the name of this article[edit]

Arabian Gulf does not exist but in the minds of Arab nationalists. Please correct this article. Lanov, is not sport a highly political issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.150.207 (talk) 13:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

stupid[edit]

Another stupid thing (the section about the name) by some Persian users in Wikipedia. It is an article about sport, will you leave at alone for god's sake? Can't you find something useful to work on here? --Lanov (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the name of your rugby team is highly offensive to Persians. Why not call yourselves 'Gulf Rubgy Team'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.203.119.32 (talk) 18:31, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd agree that the section seems out-of-place here. It doesn't really have any connection to the rugby team, and barely mentions them - I know there is a dispute over the body of water, but is there any evidence that the naming of the team is controversial? If the subject is worth a mention at all it should probably just be a sentence and a link to the naming dispute article.Lord Cornwallis (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article be protected? I assume that once they split into their constituent parts that this page will remain valid (though there won't be much updating to do, of course). Sensitive Persians will probably continue to vandalize it.Alanmjohnson (talk) 20:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think it is very stupid that the IRB allowed such an inflammatory name to begin with - rather than something sensible like "Arabian rugby team" etc - but I'm not in a position to do this.

However, the controversy about the name is relevant.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree the current text is irrelevant . As per above I've left a link to the naming issue but I don't think any more is required Gnevin (talk) 12:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the fact that it stops persistent vandalism to the page. I think they were wrong to call themselves such an obviously provocative name. I don't think you appreciate how emotive this name is for some people in the region. Either you rewrite the paragraph, or you go and get protection for these pages. The paragraph's there for a reason - people don't even seem to like the use of "sic" after the name.

A single link to the name won't cut it either, or stop the vandalism. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing will ever stop vandalism on wiki. This like many other pages can and will be vadalised,we don't have a link to Derry/Londonderry name dispute in the middle of Derry GAA . This information is not relivant. There is a undo button to deal with vandalism we don't try to appese by adding nonsense paragraphs . This is about Rugby not Politcs and the consenous is to remove this . Gnevin (talk) 16:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's is a bit rich considering the long Irish flag dispute you just caused Gnevin. Curiously, I notice that you haven't been so obsessive about other flag problems, e.g. South Africa's, which would be important.

This page needs a solution, and I think that the naming dispute should be edit protected from new and unregistered users. I have produced a list of vandal IPs below. If I put this up for page protection, I trust you will back me up.--MacRusgail (talk) 09:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You come to my talk page looking for help and what do I find your attacking me again. Well good luck with this Gnevin (talk) 16:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disbanding in 2010?[edit]

As unlikely as this possibility is, what will be done if AG qualifies for the 2011 RWC (or even to the Repechage)? I assume they will continue to exist until their participation is finished? Has anything been stated definitively?Alanmjohnson (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is almost impossible. AGRFU seems only interested in English speaking expat players, and some figures within it seem to want to steer the better ones towards European/Antipodean teams. C'est la vie. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

Look at the list of vandals of this page, probably all the same person, but we still can't get page protection!!!!

User:AliAsghari123, User:Eghlidonline, User:Shahinbaba , User:Navid83, User:86.186.96.108, User:85.25.120.147, User:97.65.61.9, User:130.113.224.83, User:79.132.213.1, User:85.3.134.4, User:91.98.72.63, User:91.98.2.31, User:89.221.84.129, User:122.104.140.100, User:94.182.4.80, User:84.241.16.198, User:91.98.85.216, User:77.237.93.111, User:131.180.150.25, User:84.241.27.36, User:212.6.32.15, USer:131.180.139.102, User:217.218.77.19, User:207.161.140.182, User:68.55.220.179, User:84.241.53.54, User:145.94.48.255, User:131.180.139.82, User:84.63.71.236, User:84.63.71.236

--MacRusgail (talk) 08:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another vandal reverted in the last couple of days - PAGE PROTECTION PLEASE! --MacRusgail (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done but not by me. (I do not have the sysop.) – Allen4names 06:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I hope this is a long term/permanent thing, not one of these two week jobs though! -MacRusgail (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This diff shows that the protection is indefinite, but remember that any admin. can remove the protection. – Allen4names 16:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection (WP:RFPP) is how to get administrator attention for this sort of thing. Bold text!!!! on a talk page won't work unless an administrator happens to have it on their watchlist, or stumbles across it while browsing. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:23, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why on earth have you protected it when its grammar is so dodgy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.16.207.165 (talk) 16:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Arabian Gulf rugby union team (sevens)[edit]

little content in the sevens article and team is defunct Mattlore (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - These are separate sports, so no overlap in tournaments played; different teams, different entities, regardless of both now being defunct and being split into national constituencies. -- Ham105 (talk) 00:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]