Talk:Australian football at the 1956 Summer Olympics/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sportsfan77777 (talk · contribs) 20:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll review this strange event. At first glance, it looks like it's in good shape. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Lead

 * Expand the lead
 * Talk about the outcome of the match, who participated, and the aftermath
 * Explain the participants were restricted to amateurs, in accordance with Olympic rules.
 * State that Australian rules football has never been a part of any other Olympics
 * For the most part, you shouldn't need citations in the lead. (They should be in the main part of the article, if needed.)
 * State that Australian rules football has never been a part of any other Olympics
 * For the most part, you shouldn't need citations in the lead. (They should be in the main part of the article, if needed.)
 * For the most part, you shouldn't need citations in the lead. (They should be in the main part of the article, if needed.)
 * For the most part, you shouldn't need citations in the lead. (They should be in the main part of the article, if needed.)

History

 * the Games of the XVI Olympiad ===>>> the 1956 Summer Olympics (then known as the Games of the XVI Olympiad)
 * Australian football ===>>> Australian rules football
 * Related to the above point, even then, it was known as "Australian rules football", right?
 * ✅ – The sport is officially "Australian football", and although terms do vary when referring to the sport throughout history, the official programme shows that it was referred to as Australian football at the 1956 Games
 * southern states of Australia <<<=== if it's just Victoria and South Australia, then just state that?
 * ✅ – I have changed to "western and southern states" as it was WA, SA, VIC and TAS where the game had popularity.
 * The AAFC had an affiliation with the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) and this would prove vital as discussions progressed. <<<===Cite this.
 * ✅ – Removed, couldn't find a ref.
 * all competitors would not be playing football for money at the time of the tournament ===>>> none of the competitors would be playing football for money at the time of the tournament
 * AOC was still yet ===>>> AOC had still yet
 * The choice of "foreign" sport remained undecided until baseball was chosen later in the week. ===>>> Baseball was chosen as the "foreign" sport later in the week.
 * AOC was still yet ===>>> AOC had still yet
 * The choice of "foreign" sport remained undecided until baseball was chosen later in the week. ===>>> Baseball was chosen as the "foreign" sport later in the week.
 * The choice of "foreign" sport remained undecided until baseball was chosen later in the week. ===>>> Baseball was chosen as the "foreign" sport later in the week.
 * The choice of "foreign" sport remained undecided until baseball was chosen later in the week. ===>>> Baseball was chosen as the "foreign" sport later in the week.

Format

 * The Sporting Globe <<<=== Italicize
 * the VFL conspired to present ===>>> the VFL had planned to present
 * The above point never happened?
 * ✅ – Expanded that sentence to confirm the point, I'll try and find another ref.
 * subsequently confirmed ===>>> was subsequently confirmed
 * You don't state what the VFA is.
 * ✅ No longer necessary now that I have reworked the lead to include what the VFA is.
 * State the abbreviation for the Victorian Amateur Football Association in parentheses.
 * ✅ Again, the full name and abbreviation for the VAFA is now included in the lead hence the change in this section.
 * ✅ No longer necessary now that I have reworked the lead to include what the VFA is.
 * State the abbreviation for the Victorian Amateur Football Association in parentheses.
 * ✅ Again, the full name and abbreviation for the VAFA is now included in the lead hence the change in this section.

Squads

 * Each paragraph in the VFL/VFA Combined Team section should end with a citation.
 * ✅ – A number of new refs found.
 * The headline act was arguably ===>>> One of the headline players was
 * Coincidentally <<<=== Is this really a coincidence? They wouldn't be able to be selected if this wasn't true, right?
 * ✅ – Removed the 'coincidentally' at the start, but the sentence was more a comment on the fact that many Combined Team players would have been familiar with their opponents having been players in the VAFA previously.
 * ✅ – Removed the 'coincidentally' at the start, but the sentence was more a comment on the fact that many Combined Team players would have been familiar with their opponents having been players in the VAFA previously.

Lead-up

 * This can combined into one paragraph.
 * Is the first sentence backed by any of the sources?
 * ✅ Reworded and sourced.
 * (won by the VAFA), <<<=== that comma is not needed
 * The journalists' predictions were realised: Anderson was one of the best on the ground, kicking three goals for a winning team. <<<=== You can mention this later on when talk about the result.
 * ✅ – Moved some of that sentence to the 'Match' section in the "Leading the way on the scoreboard..." sentence.
 * The journalists' predictions were realised: Anderson was one of the best on the ground, kicking three goals for a winning team. <<<=== You can mention this later on when talk about the result.
 * ✅ – Moved some of that sentence to the 'Match' section in the "Leading the way on the scoreboard..." sentence.

Selected teams

 * Okay.

Match

 * , and this early dominance proved pivotal to the final result. ===>>> . After this early dominance, the VAFA never came close to relinquishing their lead, maintaining a margin of at least  for the rest of the game.
 * ✅ – Restructured the sentence but it's impossible to know what the smallest margin mid-game was as we only have the quarter-by-quarter results and not a full scoring history, hence I just used the term "healthy margin"; this can be changed if you like.
 * The journalists' predictions were realised: Anderson was one of the best on the ground, kicking three goals for a winning team. <<<=== Some rephrasing of this goes here, after the Hibbins sentence.
 * ✅ – See 'Lead-up' section review for where I moved it to.

Aftermath

 * he played off in three Grand Finals <<<=== Is "off" the right word here?
 * ✅ – Removed 'off' as it's unnecessary, thanks.
 * Cite the "VAFA players recruited to VFL" section
 * ✅ – Found multiple refs.
 * The Shinboners <<<=== too informal, just North Melbourne
 * Cite the "VFL/AFL players's future careers" section
 * ✅ – Found multiple refs.
 * Cite "Box Hill's Dave Plunkett was named at centre half-forward in the club's "Greatest Ever Team", announced in 2000, after a career spanning 115 games and 91 goals."
 * ✅ – Found ref.
 * Clarify what was the state of TV broadcasting of football before the match? If there was no broadcasting before, this is a big point.
 * ✅ – Added a bit at the end of the last sentence stating that this was the first time Australian football would be broadcast.
 * ✅ – Added a bit at the end of the last sentence stating that this was the first time Australian football would be broadcast.

Overall

 * Main points: Expand the lead, some parts are not cited, and say what the VFA is.
 * Everything else is minor.
 * Everything else is minor.

Placing on hold! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks Sportsfan77777 – my laptop has been getting repaired the last fortnight hence I've only been able to get to this now. Will start going through your suggestions. Cheers Gibbsyspin 06:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * All done for now Sportsfan77777, now to search for some refs, and then hopefully we get to the next step of approval! Thanks, Gibbsyspin 08:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Status query
Sportsfan77777, Gibbsy, where does this nomination stand? It's been on hold for over two months, and the nominator hasn't edited it or posted here for over eight weeks, despite many "pending" replies above. What is left to be done, and how soon can it be completed? If it can't be soon, perhaps it's time to close the nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * User:BlueMoonset – thanks for the reminder. I have just finished going through and making all requested changes that were pending (a.k.a. finding about 15 new references to complete the article). I think this should be fine to progress to the final review stage now. Please let me know if there is anything else that needs doing. I'm really keen to see this come to fruition :) Thanks, Gibbsyspin 00:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , there are still a few paragraphs that don't end in citations. (Though, I think the existing references may cover them. They just need to be moved or duplicated.) Sportsfan77777 (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * For the VFA, I wanted you to explain what the league was. (Back then, the VFA was to the VFL what the VFL is to the AFL today, right? The VFL is explained when it is introduced, but the VFA is not.) Sportsfan77777 (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks – I've added the following sentence about the VFA: The VFA, a competing semi-professional league also headquartered in Melbourne, was waning in popularity during the 1950s but still regularly featured matches of a high quality. I've also made sure that every paragraph ends in a citation, either by finding new references or reusing existing ones. Happy to hopefully progress to the next step of the GA review now! Thanks, Gibbsyspin 00:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, passed! It was in pretty good shape from the start. I was just waiting for those last few points. Good work! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Woohoo! Thanks for your review. Gibbsyspin 01:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)