Talk:Anglo-Welsh Cup

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Felix QW in topic Proposed Split

CONFUSION ABOUT ARTICLE

edit

merging of the anglo-welsh cup with the English knock-out cup is original research

edit

You need

The English knock-out has cup continued for non-Premiership sides.

This merges the English knock-out cup prior to teh start of the AW cup with the anglo-welsh cup. if anything, the AW cup should be a separate article, and the knock-out cup continuing from there.

anything else is original research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.57.214 (talk) 21:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nonsense. The cup was re-formatted to include Welsh regions. The lower tier competition is now called the EDF Energy Trophy. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
I think there is real confused here about all the competitions and how they fit together. For a start, the Anglo-Welsh Cup is NOT the successor tournament to the old RFU Knockout cup. It is a separate tournament - in which only the English Premiership clubs can compete, where as the old RFU cup was open to all clubs. This leads nicely to the RFU Trophey which is a separate competition but run on lines similar to the old RFU cup. Lastly, there are two Anglo Welsh cups. In the mid 1990's - teams competed in a competition that to the best of knowledge was never completed. It was separate to the current A-W cup but it is worthy of an entry.

To summarise, you need three separate articles - A RFU KNOCKOUT CUP, ANGLO-WELSH INCLUDING MENTION OF THE MID 90'S COMP AND NATIONAL TROPHY (PLUS ALL THE 'JUNIOR' COMPETITIONS THAT THAT SPAWNED) RichardLowther (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)Reply


Edits made to update Grinner's and GordyB's initial articles. -FC

I had intended to keep the Powergen Cup article separate from the Anglo-Welsh Cup but I suppose there is a fair case for merger. If anybody has an opinion on this then put it here or I'll merge the two articles.GordyB 10:24, 27 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I think merger is appropriate as they are calling the Anglo-Welsh Cup the Powergen cup. Some of my additions were merely lifted from your AWC article, so I would hope you would go ahead and merge them. Thanks, FC.

EDF Energy Cup

edit

I tried to move the page to EDF Energy Cup, but it appears that that page is already set up, thus, preventing a move. Powergen are no longer the sponsors, so it really needs to be at EDF Energy Cup. I think an admin might have to fix it. Cvene64 16:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I tried following the advice here [1] but seem to have messed it up. I moved EDF Energy Cup to EDFEnergyCup to allow Powergen Cup to be moved to EDF Energy Cup but it still won't let me. I've asked for an admin to sort it out at WP:RM. Alexj2002 20:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Edf energy cup.jpg

edit
 

Image:Edf energy cup.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Move from EDF Energy Cup

edit

I moved the page as requested. Please do all necessary fixes; in particular, decide what to do with the logo (remove it or update the fair-use rationale). -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Anglo-Welsh Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:43, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Anglo-Welsh Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anglo-Welsh Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anglo-Welsh Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:06, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Tournament format

edit

How long has the current cross block format been in use for this competition? And how are the group winners decided in the event of ties. In the extreme case, all of group 1 could win all of their games against group 4, leaving 3 unbeaten teams to be eliminated and a losing team gojng through. MidlandLinda (talk) 23:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply


Current format came into use in 2009/10 season. I'm fairly certain that ties are decided by tries scored then points difference but don't have a reference for that, just memory from reading programmes etc.Skeene88 (talk) 10:07, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anglo-Welsh Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Merge with Premiership Rugby Cup?

edit

Basically if Premiership Rugby Cup is regarding as a different competition, rather than just a re-organisation of this cup, then why is the history of the RFU Knockout Cup included in this?

My view is that Premiership Rugby Cup should be a re-direct here and the page be possibly re-named but I can't think what as?Skeene88 (talk) 08:02, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Orphaned references in Anglo-Welsh Cup

edit

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Anglo-Welsh Cup's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "t":

  • From Premiership Rugby Cup: Morgan, Charlie (2018-05-06). "Exclusive: Anglo-Welsh Cup replaced by all-English competition". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 2018-05-12.
  • From RFU Intermediate Cup: Wildman, Rob (19 April 2004). "Bradford keep Old Boys at bay". Telegraph. Retrieved 7 April 2018.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 20:26, 24 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Proposed Split

edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus to split, which has already been accomplished at RFU_Knockout_Cup. Felix QW (talk) 21:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't seem right to have the history of the English Cup be exclusively under the title of the Anglo-Welsh cup. I propose that a new article, called either its original name of RFU Club Competition or its final name of Powergen Cup, should cover the tournament up to the introduction of Welsh teams in 2005.

The tournament may have been a continuation from the perspective that it was organised by the RFU and sponsored by Powergen, but otherwise, the formats were completely different:

  • Earlier tournaments were contested by English clubs only, making the current title inaccurate for a large portion of the article.
  • It followed a similar format to the FA Cup in association football and Challenge Cup in rugby league, a knockout cup where any club could apply and qualify for, with more established sides entering at a later stage. The later tournaments would use various pool formats and were exclusive to the top sides in each respective country.
  • Later years reduced the importance of the cup, with it becoming a development tournament during international weekends.
  • The current Premiership Rugby Cup is already a separate article.

The current article can still have a brief section on the history of the cup pre 2005-06, with the new article listed as further reading. RatzaChewy (talk) 20:20, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Go for it. I would use the name RFU knock out competition as I believe that was its official name for its entire life.Skeene88 (talk) 10:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

New draft page is available: Draft:RFU_Knockout_Cup RatzaChewy (talk) 17:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.