Talk:2006 Super 14 final

2006 Super 14 final received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

A fact from 2006 Super 14 final appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 June 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the fog which filled the stadium during the 2006 Super 14 Final forced some spectators to leave the match and watch it elsewhere, just to see the players?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/June.

Wikipedia

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rugby union Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I'm putting this up for DKY. BTW, good work! --Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Gorillas in the Mist"

Oy! I coined that first :P (not exactly directing this at anyone in particular, just miffed that journalist stole "my" catchphrase! Perhaps they edit WP?! -- PageantUpdater 03:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thats pretty weird. Email them, claiming copyright infringment. Just Joking. But odd that the journalist did use your idea. --Hamedog_Talk|^@ 04:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final or final

I think the correct title is 2006 Super 14 final...thoughts? Cvene64 09:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as Political and Legal Studies is my favourite subject at school, lets go by precedence.

2006 UEFA Champions League Final Capital F
Finals - a series of knockout rounds culminating in a Grand Final Capital F.
Also, look at FIFA World Cup, the start of the second paragraph in the lead, in spells Finals like that mid sentance. Go with the precident I say--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find some articles in favour of the other, I am willing to support a page move, but at the moment, I think we should follow the trend, as mentioned above. --Hamedog_Talk|^@ 09:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Penalty

I can't remember for sure but how did the Hurricanes get a penalty from Rico Gear dropping the ball? Wouldn't that have been a scrum? This is very unclear and needs to be cleaned up. - Shudda ^talk 02:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a penalty at the scrum. Any way, how about this:The Hurricanes managed to get themselves into Crusaders territory through a high ball that Rico Gear dropped. In the resulting play, the Crusaders consedided a penalty, giving Holwell the first chance to score, near the touchline. However, his kick went under the cross bar. --Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separate quotes?

Was this all one exchange?

Commentator Grant Nisbith:"Toeava kicks off"
Colour Commentator Murray Mexted:"Not 10, is it?"
Nisbith:"I don't know" — This type of commentating was typical during the night.[12]

If so, it should be formatted differently. --Dhartung | Talk 02:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- It is one exchange. Any suggestions for new formating?

The only thing worse than having fog completely obscure a rugby game, is having no fog to obscure it.

Handbag incident

Just gotta say that the handbag incident as it is written makes no sense at all. Masoe was tripped, then beaten, and finally fined $3000? I'm assuming there's more to it than that.

YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 06:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Super 14 logo.png

The image Image:Super 14 logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]