Talk:2006 Scott Tournament of Hearts

message: The article says twelve teams, but 10 provinces + 3 territories + 1 returning champion = 14.  Should that be the real number of teams in the article?
:Twelve teams: 10 provincial teams + 1 team for the territories combined + 1 returning champion. C.Fred 02:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  inconsistency 

message: There's an asterisk next to Monique Gagnier's name, but it's not defined. Does she throw skip rocks, or does it mean something else? C.Fred 02:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a source: Gagnier does throw skip rocks. C.Fred 06:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gagnier for team Y/NT: Does she throw skip rocks? 

message: Thanks a lot KelvSC. I know there's not supposed to be any personal attacks, but this is ridiculous. The page is a mess with all your damn templates for deletion notices. Thanks a lot jerk. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Worse, the templates haven't even gone up for deletion yet! There's no TfD discussion about them. —C.Fred (talk) 04:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there is. It's hard to find though. Thanks for cleaning the page up though. I have a question, do you like the table with the teams on this page better or the one on the 2005 Scott Tournament of Hearts page. I have been arguing with KelvSC for quite some time about it, and I want to see what someone else thinks. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My only complaint with the '05-formatted table is alignment: if you get a long curling club (or two), it throws the rest of the lines out of alignment, so leads, skips, etc. don't line up across the rows. If that could be fixed, it would be better—and, if the colours came from approximations of the  uniform colours, so much the better. Kelv's formatting for the table in '06 leads to a lot of situation where names are split onto two lines, which I feel is an even worse issue. I guess if I had to vote right now, it'd be weak '05. :) —C.Fred (talk) 00:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your complaints are the ones I share. I will revert back in that case unless there are any objections. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shit disturber 

message: :Image:Scottlogo.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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Scottlogo.jpg