Talk:2009 Super 14 season

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

Sponsor names

Should we really have all these references to "CA Brumbies" and "HSBC Waratahs" and so on, in the table and schedule?

Teams are never referred to as such when tables and results are printed anywhere else. I'm inclined to change it to the more normal "Brumbies", "Waratahs", etc. if nobody speaks up. --Stormie (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do think that it is nessesary to have the correct names of the teams in point tables and fixtures. These are the correct names for the teams. In South Africa we have to franchises for each team, each with different sponsors. -- Jonathanburger (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not normal practice in the media to do so: [1][2][3]. Nor generally on the websites of the involved unions: SARFU ARU NZRU (SARFU use the Vodacom prefix for the South African teams in the links to team profiles, but nowhere else, and never use the Australian teams' sponsor's names). Why do you feel it is necessary for Wikipedia to use the sponsor's names when nobody else does? --Stormie (talk) 04:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you saying that nobody uses the sponsor names for the teams. I feel that it is wrong. I company or organisation had paid for the right to changed the team name. I feel that Wikipedia is suppose to be a encyclopedia where everybody can get the correct information. In South Africa on our radio's and TV's we do use that sponsored names when talking about the teams. NZL, AUS or RSA teams. I think it must be done on every media level. Either do it correct or don't do it at all. -- Jonathanburger (talk) 11:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My changes

The player stats section should be placed lower down the page as the league table and the match results are much more important. Also, I have replaced the flags that were next to the referees' names with text, linking to the union that the referee represents, per Northern Hemisphere rugby articles. – Pee Jay 10:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

missing attendances

I found some of the missing attendances I didn't edit them in because I didn't want to screw up the formatting. This site has some attendances: http://www.sarugby.co.za/tournament.aspx?newscat='sarugby/super14'&leagueid=716&vidcatid=3&section=super14&year=2009 Cheetahs vs Stormers 18049 Lions vs Waratahs 8000 Stormers vs Western Force 24340 Bulls vs Cheetahs 37550 Lions vs Highlanders 4500 Stormers vs Chiefs 25400 Bulls vs Western Force 24214 Cheetahs vs Waratahs 15309 Lions vs Crusaders 16500 Cheetahs vs Chiefs 5000 Lions vs Hurricanes 14250

The above website also has most of this years Currie Cup attendances if there's anyone interested in rugby who wants to edit that page as well.

For the missing Australian attendances I found from this site http://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp.php?sid=5 Force v Highlanders 18310 Reds v Hurricanes 19025 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.47.92 (talk) 19:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]