Talk:1995 Rugby World Cup final: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 41.135.160.43 - "" |
Biscuit1018 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Does anyone have the info to put into these tables...? (using the 2007 final as a template) - [[User:Sahmejil|Sahmejil]] ([[User talk:Sahmejil|talk]]) 10:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC) |
Does anyone have the info to put into these tables...? (using the 2007 final as a template) - [[User:Sahmejil|Sahmejil]] ([[User talk:Sahmejil|talk]]) 10:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC) |
||
==Balance of Article Slated== |
|||
The textual part of the is 2029 words |
|||
The poisoning controversy is 1284 words |
|||
So the rest is only 745 words |
|||
Even the poisoning stuff is allegations and supposition |
|||
People got sick yes. |
|||
BUT should 63% of the article be about the poisoning? |
|||
Suggest we increase the main part and decrease the poisoning allegations? |
|||
[[User:Biscuit1018|Biscuit1018]] ([[User talk:Biscuit1018|talk]]) 12:44, 20 September 2013 (UTC) |
|||
==Match details== |
==Match details== |
||
Revision as of 12:44, 20 September 2013
Template
Does anyone have the info to put into these tables...? (using the 2007 final as a template) - Sahmejil (talk) 10:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Balance of Article Slated
The textual part of the is 2029 words The poisoning controversy is 1284 words So the rest is only 745 words
Even the poisoning stuff is allegations and supposition People got sick yes.
BUT should 63% of the article be about the poisoning?
Suggest we increase the main part and decrease the poisoning allegations?
Biscuit1018 (talk) 12:44, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Match details
|
Man of the Match:
|
Statistics
| New Zealand | South Africa | |
|---|---|---|
| Tries | 0 | 0 |
| Conversions | 0 | 0 |
| Penalties (attempts) |
0/0 | 0/0 |
| Drop goals (attempts) |
0/0 | 0/0 |
| Scrums (won/lost) |
0/0 | 0/0 |
| Line-outs (won/lost) |
00/0 | 00/0 |
| Turnovers | 0 | 0 |
| Tackles (made/attempts) |
00/00 | 00/00 |
| Line breaks | 0 | 0 |
| Possession | 00% | 00% |
| Territory | 00% | 00% |
| Time in opp. 00 | 0' 00" | 0' 00" |
| Errors (hands/kicks/restart) |
00 (00/0/0) | 0 (0/0/0) |
| Possession kicked (in play/touch/errors) |
00 (00/00/0) | 00 (00/00/0) |
| Pens conceded | 0 | 0 |
| Replacements | 0 | 0 |
| Yellow cards | 0 | 0 |
| Red cards | 0 | 0 |
Invictus
A Movie based on the political influence this had in South Africa's reform post-Apartheid. Does it deserve mention? hewhoamareismyself 02:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
- Ya, it deserves to be mentioned. Just a one line somewhere near the end of the article.MilkStraw532 (talk) 02:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
60% of this article relates to the "apparent" poisoning of the All Blacks and absolutely nothing around the significance of post apardheid South Africa, etc. Appears there is way too much bias for my liking. Poor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.135.160.43 (talk) 22:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)