Talk:Melbourne Storm

Latest comment: 2 months ago by LibStar in topic Rivalry with the Dragons

All obsolete discussion information on this page or information on this page that has been acted upon has now been moved to here: Talk:Melbourne Storm/Archive 1. This is to avoid this page blowing out in size.


Good articleMelbourne Storm has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 17, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 3, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
September 19, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
May 3, 2013Good article nomineeListed
May 3, 2013Good article nomineeListed
August 14, 2017Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

Removal of 2013 Jersey images

edit

Can someone please explain why the images for the 2013 jerseys have disappeared?? Can we please have them reinstated, as I am not sure how to do it? Anderch (talk) 06:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have just removed the 2013/2014 jersey images as they are now no longer current. Can someone please create some updated images based on the new design for 2015 as I am not sure how to do it. Thanks! Anderch (talk) 06:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Melbournestorm.jpg

edit
 

Image:Melbournestorm.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 this Wikipedia article 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 22:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply


GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Melbourne Storm. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The C of E (talk · contribs) 14:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

I'll review this and my first thought is that the references really need some sorting with lots of bare refs, missing access dates and error messages. These will need to be sorted in order for it to be promoted.:

The refs are the main issues that needs to be cleaned up. Once these have been fixed, I'll take another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have applied all suggestions above to get article to Good Article status. Anderch (talk) 07:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes, however the references are still a mess. They need to be formatted correctly with a retrieval date and titles corrected. Ref 8 has an error with the template for example. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ok no problem.......I will look into the refs over the next few days... Cheers! Anderch (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC) Update . All references have now been checked and links all confirmed. Over the coming days I will fix up the formatting. 03:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have now reformatted all the incorrectly formatted refs so now they are more uniform. All refs are verified and links work. Please advise if there is anything else. Anderch (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

You have indeed. I am promoting it as a GA. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 05:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Talk page clean up

edit

Can this talk page be cleaned up? There is info on here that is over 8 years old and nolonger relevant. Can old chats and info can it be deleted? if so how much can be removed? Anderch (talk) 00:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

New Talk page archive created and all obsolete conversation moved thereAnderch (talk) 04:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Melbourne Storm. 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) 05:05, 25 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Positions of Melbourne Storm officials

edit

In case anyone is ever updating the history sections or want to know what the titles in the corporate structure of the club was in the early days:

Chair

edit
  • 1998 – 2002: Ken Cowley (former head of News Limited Australia during the 1990s)
  • 2002 – 2006: TBC
  • 2006 – 2010: Dr Rob Moodie
  • 2011 – 2012: Stephen Rue
  • 2013 – 2020: Bart Campbell
  • 2020 – present: Matt Tripp

Executive Director

edit

Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

edit
  • 1997 – 2002: Chris Johns
  • 2003 – 2004: John Ribot
  • 2004: Frank Stanton (interim)
  • 2005 – 2009: Brian Waldron
  • 2010: Matt Hanson
  • 2010: Frank Stanton (caretaker)
  • 2010 – 2013: Ron Gauci
  • 2013 – 2015: Mark Evans
  • 2015 – 2020: Dave Donaghy
  • 2021 – present: Justin Rodski

Notes

edit
  • John Ribot left the club in March 2004.
  • News Corp Australia divested the companies controlling the Melbourne Storm in May 2013.

Storm machine (talk) 07:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Rivalry with the Dragons

edit

Is there really one? In my opinion no and this section should be removed. LibStar (talk) 23:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply