Talk:2009 Air New Zealand Cup

Logo Status

There's been some back-and-forth over the use of the the logo image at the top of this article. I've done my best to learn about what's going on. For one thing, when there is a non-free image (an image like this, clearly a logo of someone or something, is effectively never "free" - the body for which it is a logo retains ownership of its use.), there must be a separate reason given for the image's use in every single article, separately and individually, on the image's own page (click on the image to get to the image's page). Therefore, the fact that someone attempted to say that this image was available for use on the ANZ Cup page "and associated pages" doesn't wash - there has to be a specific separate justification (most commonly called a "fair use rationale") for the article "2009 Air New Zealand Cup". That's why the logo was deleted repeatedly from this article earlier.

Fine - so I inserted a fair use rationale for this article, adding information as I was aware of it. Now, yesterday, that rationale itself was deleted from the image page, and the image deleted from this article again. Someone else (an I.P. address editor) added the F.U.R. back, but it was deleted again. So, now I've restored it.

The frustrating thing with ALL of these edits to remove the logo, remove the rationale, whatever, is that editors DON'T EXPLAIN WHY the image isn't allowed. That's what these talk pages are for - that's what the edit summary is for - that's what the original editor's talk page is for. I am willing to be wrong - when I'm proven wrong, that effectively means I've learned something. But it's not okay to have someone browbeat me with reversions, even if they're right, without telling me and everyone else what's going on!

I understand that there are people who patrol non-free images to make sure they're not abused. I understand their work is valuable to the encyclopedia. I understand they're not going to wrte 100 words everytime they clear away an improper use. However, when someone reverts that "clean up", then surely it's evidence that someone disagrees, or needs to learn, or something, and thus deserves a bit of an explanation? So, please, if you're going to delete the logo - and I've put a similar request up on the image page - explain yourself. Thanks. AshleyMorton (talk) 13:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Map of Stadiums

The locations on the Map of Stadiums move around depending on the width of my browser window. Probably needs a different base for the coordinates somehow. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure whats happening there, when i made it, it looked normal on my computerJaFa 01 (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Round-Robin Results Grid

While I'm at it suggesting improvements instead of fixing it| myself: The grid used is more suitable for double round robins. Either all score would need doubling, or it will end up half empty when the season is done. Removing one half is one option, the other to grey out the games that will not be played. (For example, make Ota-Wgtn grey since there'll be no such game this year, but keep Wgtn-Ota as it is until the results are added) /Coffeeshivers (talk) 21:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Did it myself/Coffeeshivers (talk) 11:55, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Joseph's refusal to pick All Blacks.

I don't think this is a milestone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.71.73 (talk) 02:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

attendance chart

The new one fails on a few levels. Its just a compact list of the attendances, the info you would get from the round robin chart. It doesn't show impartant things like average attendance or total attendance. It's out of line with the previous year's chart. I will put it back if no-one objects. Thecrystalcicero (talk) 11:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

• I actually think their shouldn't be an attendance chart because most, if not all, figures are estimates or approximates, the only team we now whose attendances are exact are wellingtons because they post the number on the westpac stadium website.

• The one right now is good. Most of the attendances are spot on and recieved from a rugby magazine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walsh12089 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

• I'm reckon the attendance chart should be deleted because there isn't enough information about the crowd numbers. I will delete if no one objects. K? JaFa 01 (talk) 05:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

1. $##I liked the attendance figures its good to go off. you know the hawkes bay canterbury will sell out. Put it back on. and update lastest figures and the game had 17000 they allowed more in —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.24.155 (talk) 09:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah, but what all the other games where we don't know the attendances, how are we supposed to put that in. For some reason someone stopped putting the attendances on the 2009 Air NZ Cup Round-Robin article, that's where I got my info from to put in the chart. JaFa 01 (talk) 19:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Grand Final or Final

When referencing the Air New Zealand Cup Championship game, do you think we should type Final or Grand Final? Or something else all together? Please comment. JaFa 01 (talk) 09:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Why North Harbour still clings to hope

With the following combination of results, North Harbour will reach the semifinals:

Week 11 winners:

• Counties
• Manawatu
• Auckland
• Otago
• Tasman
• North Harbour
• Northland

Week 12 winners:

• Canterubry
• Manawatu
• Taranaki
• North Harbour
• Otago
• Northland
• Counties

Week 13 winners:

• Canterbury
• Northland
• Tasman
• North Harbour
• Counties
• Waikato
• BOP

This assumes that North Harbour gets a bonus point in each victory and no one else (though there is a handful of exemptions) is awarded any bonus points. If we allow Northland to also get a 5-point victory in the remaining games, the standings will be:

Pos.	Team	Pld	W	D	L	BP1	BP2	Pts
1	Canterbury (RS)	13	10	0	3	3	2	45
2	Tasman	13	8	0	5	2	2	36
3	Northland	13	6	1	6	3	2	31
4	North Harbour	13	6	0	7	3	4	31
5	Hawke's Bay	13	6	1	6	4	0	30
6	Waikato	13	7	0	6	2	0	30
7	Bay of Plenty	13	7	0	6	0	2	30
8	Auckland	13	6	0	7	2	4	30
9	File:Lions.png Wellington	13	6	0	7	3	2	29
10	Southland	13	6	1	6	1	1	28
11	Taranaki	13	6	1	6	1	1	28
12	Otago	13	5	0	8	2	4	26
13	Manawatu	13	5	0	8	1	4	25
14	Counties Manukau	13	5	0	8	2	1	23

Unreferenced Statistics

I propose the deletion of the Disciplinary Cards and Goal Kicking statistical table because the are unreferenced while the points and tries tables can be referenced back through the allblacks.com website and the match reports through the respective teams websites. Any objections? JaFa 01 (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Non-free file problems with File:Air New Zealand Cup.png

File:Air New Zealand Cup.png is currently tagged as non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:Air New Zealand Cup.png. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 13:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2009 Air New Zealand 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903042719/http://www.canterburyrugby.co.nz:80/content/history/ranfurly-shield-history.aspx to http://www.canterburyrugby.co.nz/content/history/ranfurly-shield-history.aspx

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) 04:08, 20 September 2016 (UTC)