Talk:2021 AFL Grand Final

The name of the stadium

Our article is called Perth Stadium, with Optus Stadium being a redirect to it. A critical element of this event is that it is in Perth. We should make that clear right at the start of the article and throughout it. Calling it Optus Stadium is not at all clear as to where it is. It is not in the city of Optus. I made the changes I felt made sense. @Aspirex: reverted them, declaring in an Edit summary that we should use the contemporary name. I don't live in Perth. Nor do most people who will read this article. I would never call this arena Optus Stadium. I doubt that a lot of other readers would. I have no idea how a redirect of ours, a commercial name, became the contemporary name, whatever that means. I submit we should use our primary name, and the obviously more helpful name for most readers. Nobody will be confused by Perth Stadium. Many will be confused by Optus Stadium. HiLo48 (talk) 07:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

We've had this debate several times before and the end outcome has always been that short timescale articles use the sponsored name of the time they're set in (i.e. the contemporary name). This is the long held consensus. Aspirex (talk) 09:25, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Aspirex: - You cannot convince me my logic is wrong with a claim about an alleged long held consensus. You have completely ignored my comment about telling readers where the game is. Right now, because of your rigid adherence to this apparent consensus, it takes to the end of the third (long) sentence to tell people what city the game is in, and that's one of the most important aspects of this game. I explained my position quite thoroughly. Your approach has been quite rude. HiLo48 (talk) 10:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

It is not confusing. If a critical element of the event is that it is in Perth, then that problem is solved because the first sentence of the article mentions that Optus Stadium is in Perth. There are many stadium names that don't mention the city they are in. Docklands Stadium is not in a city called Docklands. Stadium Australia is not in a city called Australia. This problem is solved by simply mentioning the city in the first sentence along with the stadium. "I doubt that a lot of other readers would". My experience is that in real life, almost everyone calls it Optus Stadium. Almost all sources refer to the stadium as Optus Stadium, except the ABC. It is commonly known as Optus Stadium. Steelkamp (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Small text for brackets

The precedent set for the other Grand Final articles is that all have those brackets in small text. Should those ones be changed as well? Thanks. Loqiical (talk) 11:28, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

We had a discussion earlier in the year re: MOS:SMALL at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football/Archive 8#Small font in tables, recognizing that the precedent was against general Wikipedia style guides. So there's a gradual shift towards meeting the MOS in future. Aspirex (talk) 11:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2021

Eskimo Joe performed “Kick” featuring saxophonist, Erin Royer.

The text currently says:

Eskimo Joe performed "Black Fingernails, Red Wine" and INXS's "Kick".

Please change to:

Eskimo Joe performed "Black Fingernails, Red Wine" and INXS's "Kick", featuring saxophonist Erin Royer. Superwoman9011 (talk) 23:50, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I have added that. Steelkamp (talk) 01:57, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2021

Change profess to process in paragraph 4.3 Macca 95 (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Good article nomination

There is no way this can be a good article while nobody is posting it at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. Its nomination has been sitting unloved for some time. It's now three days since the event! Find out the concerns there, and address them. I also cannot accept that this is a good article while it uses a misleading redirect for the stadium name. (See above.) HiLo48 (talk) 03:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree that this article is not close to meeting the standards of a good article. I recommend this nomination be withdrawn. The match summary should be expanded and written better. The entertainment section should include reactions and reviews to the entertainment. The media coverage section needs to talk more about the television coverage, including mentioning all the commentators in the infobox. The entire article needs a copyedit. There are other things I have not mentioned.

I disagree with HiLo48's assertion that the stadium should not be called by its sponsored name. That should not stop the article from reaching Good article status. Steelkamp (talk) 07:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

The sponsored name is a redirect. We should use the primary and obviously much more helpful name for our readers. HiLo48 (talk) 08:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

A lot of footy articles suffer from "footyspeak" - the kind of language used during commentary "scoreboard pressure", "gaining the ascendancy", "game changing move", "every day of the week", "recent acquisition" just to name a few. The language doesn't need to be rigid and formal but neither must it stray in the other direction. 2001:8004:15A0:103E:F9F0:E75D:DC65:66B (talk) 11:44, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Third Quarter

It talks about momentum shift (which is absolutely true), but feel an important (but unmentioned) aspect of that was a very quick succession of 3 goals shortly before 3q time (reported in different media slightly differently (3 in 30 secs, 3 in the last min etc), but almost certainly the moment where everything shifted into Melbourne's court). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.211.120.74 (talk) 06:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2021 AFL Grand Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sportsfan77777 (talk · contribs) 05:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I'll review this article. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 05:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Lead

• "played with a crowd" ===>>> "played with spectators" (unless you definitely mean "a lot of spectators", instead of just "any spectators")
• Can you adding where they finished on the ladder? And that both teams were top two for most of the season.
• Can you add a bit about the progression of the game? The final score makes it look like a blowout, but the game was fairly close until near the end of the third quarter?

all but point 3 are handled; seeking opinion on new intro (perhaps you'd pare it down? Not sure). As for point 3, seeking a second opinion on this... Or perhaps specific pointers where it can be improved (and not just from an article).

Background

• I don't there should be a dash in "Host-selection".
• "but case numbers" ===>>> "and case numbers" (not a contradiction)
• "in front of a crowd" ===>>> "in front of spectators"
• "as [add "the"] standby venue"
• "originally fixtured date" <<<=== Is this correct? Not "original fixture date"?
• and four additional AFLW matches <<<=== remove "and" (it's not the last clause)
• Western Australia had no spectator restrictions on major events at outdoor stadiums, as well as the strictest entry quarantine restrictions on interstate travellers ===>>> "the strictest entry quarantine restrictions on interstate travellers, but no spectator restrictions on major events at outdoor stadiums"
• "or non-critical media or administrators" ===>>> "non-critical media and administrators"
• Maybe add something on Nathan Jones, even if he hadn't been in the lineup for awhile: Jones article
• Get rid of "Main article: 2021 Western Bulldogs season". (You could just link it in "much of their season" instead)
• "decider" is too informal
• Two of these paragraphs are missing citations at the end.
• Maybe add a bit about the key players on both teams?

I think originally fixtured date is fine here. Clarifies that it was talking about the date of the game, not when the fixture was made. Not sure on what to do instead of "decider"; "playoff" sounds too American. What citations specifically are missing?

"Maybe add a bit about the key players on both teams?" Suggestions that aren't covered within the "best" section? I'm going to leave this as is for now. Once we have this section fixed, we can look at doing the rest. Cheers.

Teams

• Okay.

Entertainment

• "Noongar man" <<<=== Is this correct? I would think it should say his occupation (e.g. he is some type of performer or musician?) instead of just "man"?

Match

• You need to cite an "As it happened" article. Here are two by The Guardian and The Age.
• Except in the last quarter where there were a ton of goals and it was very one-sided, you might as well mention every goal. Not all of them have to have a lot of detail or they could be mentioned "as a set of several", but a few things seem skipped over.
• In particular, the second goal by Melbourne and the first by the Bulldogs seem missing.
• A fumble by the Bulldogs' Bailey Williams in Melbourne's forward half allowed Charlie Spargo to pick up the ball and score a goal <<<=== I watched the highlights. I don't think this is what happened.
• "and give another goal" ===>>> "to set up another goal"
• "including two goals from Marcus Bontempelli" <<<=== put something like this before mentioning half time? (The sentence seems out of order.)
• "firming up his Norm Smith Medal chances in the process" <<<=== this isn't a good way to say it. He was just the favorite at the time. It didn't mean he had a good chance (in particular if they didn't win).
• "The Bulldogs continued to score quickly, Jason Johannisen took an impressive mark next to the goal posts resulting in a goal and extending their lead to 19 points." <<<=== Split this into two sentences.
• Add the time left when Melbourne first took back the lead.
• Melbourne ran away with the win, kicking nine goals in the final quarter compared to the Bulldogs, with just one. <<<=== Fix the grammar.
• "had finally been broken" ===>>> "had ended"
• "to take the record with 55." ===>>> "with the longest drought at 55 years."
• Find better citations for this sentence "The television broadcast showed reactions from many interstate Melbourne supporters...". Instagram, Twitter, Reddit shouldn't be used in most cases.
• "Coach" shouldn't be capitalized
• "but, the Demons had six more free kicks (19–13); however" <<<=== move the but fragment after the however, and get rid of the word "but"
• Throughout the 2021 finals series, Melbourne had more than doubled their opponents' scores: 53.30 (358) vs. 25.18 (168) <<<=== I think it's better to say they more than doubled their opponents' scores in each match. That's a stronger statement.
• possession tally ===>>> disposal tally
• "Due to Optus Stadium's extensive corporate facilities" <<<=== I'm not sure this is the right way to say something like this? It sounds like advertising, and also seems like it neglects other factors.
• Can you compare the A$40 million to Grand Finals in other years?

Scoreboard

• If it is possible, can you darken the "zero line" in the background so that it's clearer who is leading at each point?

Media

• "exclusively in Australia" <<<=== It sounds like they only broadcast the match in Australia, but it should be they were the only ones to broadcast the match in Australia.
• Missing a citation for 2005.
• Split the last sentence into one for BT and one for Brayshaw.

Overall

• No all caps in the references unless it's an abbreviation. (e.g. AFL, TV are fine, but "SEVEN ANNOUNCES ITS FULL COVERAGE OF THE AFL GRAND FINAL" is not)
• The biggest thing that needs work is the write-up of the match summary. Some parts seem incomplete, and it's also the section that needs the most improvement with grammar.

Placing on hold. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 07:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Status query

Sportsfan77777, Electricmaster, what is the status of this nomination? As far as I can see, Electricmaster did a couple of minor edits to the article a few hours after the review was posted and placed on hold, and nothing in the four weeks since. If there isn't progress soon, perhaps the nomination should be closed. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I've decided to continue work chipping away at this article. I'm using an iterative approach as to not overwhelm either Sportsfan77777 or myself. Cheers. Electricmaster (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to fail this nomination. The edits made since the review don't seem to be making much progress towards good article status. And in general, handling the review one part at a time and then waiting for comments before proceeding to another part isn't efficient enough, especially given the current state of the article. Beyond addressing the points above, I would also suggest looking at other example GAs (e.g. the AFL Women's Grand Finals that are GAs) before considering a renomination. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC)