Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2019 West Coast Eagles season/archive1

2019 West Coast Eagles season

 * Nominator(s): Steelkamp (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

This article is about the 2019 season of the West Coast Eagles, an Australian rules football club. This is my first Featured Article nomination, and the first nomination of an Australian rules football club season. I created this article earlier this year in April, and have had it pass a Good Article review. Steelkamp (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Image review
 * Don't use fixed px size. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:29, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Removed all fixed px size except for images using Template:Multiple image, because it does not support using scale factors, and by default it is too wide. Steelkamp (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments on lead

 * Please note I am approaching this from the point of view of someone who knows basically nothing about forms of football that aren't played with a spherical ball :-)
 * What's a "premiership coach"?
 * I presume a "ladder" is the Aussie word for what I would call a league table? Suggest linking to standings
 * What's a "mark"? Wikilink to somewhere appropriate
 * That's what I got on the lead, will look at the rest later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:17, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comments on background
 * Link ladder again
 * "it was announced that the West Australian Football League (WAFL) had decided to allow the West Coast Eagles into that competition" => "it was announced that the West Australian Football League (WAFL) had decided to allow the West Coast Eagles to enter a reserve team into that competition" for clarity
 * That's all I got on that section -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comments on the rest
 * All image captions which are complete sentences should have full stops
 * Need a comma after "did not play any AFL games"
 * "to replace Scott Lycett as primary ruckman" - he was only just mentioned so probably don't need to repeat his forename
 * "2018 was the first year where there was the trading of draft picks during the draft" => "2018 was the first year where the trading of draft picks during the draft was permitted"
 * In the stats table, if you sort on the name column, Hamish Brayshaw jumps to the top for some reason
 * "These teams were all regarded" - the previous sentence mentioned literally all other teams, so this needs to made clearer
 * "Going into the start of the season, Nic Naitanui," - you already linked him, so no need to do so again
 * "which meant for wet and slippery conditions" => "which made for wet and slippery conditions"
 * "a team that West Coast should have comfortably beat" => "a team that West Coast should have comfortably beaten"
 * "Both played quite well, with Gaff getting 34 disposals" - no idea what a disposal is, suggest linking somewhere appropriate
 * "when they were thrashed by Geelong" - "thrashed" is pretty slangy, change to something like "heavily defeated"
 * "Ryan went on to in the Mark of the Year" - presume "in" should actually say "win"
 * "The match was also Willie Rioli's first match" - overlinked
 * "West Coast had 24 more inside 50s" - what's an "inside 50"?
 * "but kicked twice as many behinds than goals in the first half" => "but kicked twice as many behinds as goals in the first half"
 * "Jamie Cripps kicked the winning goal" - overlinked
 * "In round 19, West Coast thrashed North Melbourne 121–72" - thrashed again
 * "Willie Rioli was provisionally suspended" - overlinked
 * "This eliminated the West Coast eagles from the finals series" - need a capital E on Eagles
 * In the Ground column of the results table, The Gabba should sort under G, not T
 * The key has QF - Elimination Final. Surely that should be EF?
 * Several players overlinked in the Awards section
 * "Behind him was Elliot Yeo (239), Brad Sheppard (234)...." => "Behind him were Elliot Yeo (239), Brad Sheppard (234)...."
 * That's what I got. Overall that was an interesting read about a sport which I really know very little about..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing this review. I have implemented all of your suggestions. Steelkamp (talk) 03:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Support from Cas Liber
Taking a look now....


 *  The fixture for round one was revealed on 27 October 2018 - should that be "fixtures"? and presumably should be "The full fixture [list] was revealed on 1 November 2018." (?)


 * The prose could do with some tightening, I ran though it and was able to eliminate some redundancy. Will have another read. probably still some minor redundancies here and there but no dealbreakers outstanding.

Overall certainly comprehensive and written in an enthusiastic and lively style making for an engaging read. I will look again at the prose but think FA is achievable. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you Casliber for taking a look. I have checked over all your edits to the article. To my ears, "fixture" sounds correct. The fixture is referring to every match collectively. These sources agree with me:    . Alternatively, this source uses "fixtures": . Maybe both are correct. Steelkamp (talk) 11:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow - I had always used "fixture" to mean "match" (usually implied in future), hence multiple matches = "fixtures", but have learnt something new today XD Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Teratix

 * Pictures are great and freely licenced many thanks to Flickerd if he returns.
 * They won only three of their first six games, but went on to win 12 of the next 14 games to be well within the top four at the end of round 21. They then lost the final two games of the home-and-away season, including a shock loss to Hawthorn at home This seems an odd way to break down the season − six matches, 14 matches, two matches − with the Hawthorn loss the only match singled out. Surely this can be expanded a bit, especially given there are only two paragraphs in the lead as it stands.
 * I have expanded that out by mentioning more matches and ladder positions, but I've kept the 6-14-2 structure, because at the boundaries of those games is a turning point in West Coast's season. The first six matches saw West Coast lose a surprising number of times. After that, they settled into winning almost every match, until the last two matches, which derailed the team's trajectory towards top 4 and even top 2. Steelkamp (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Liam Ryan won Mark of the Year with a mark clumsy phrasing that recurs a couple of times throughout
 * Hmm. I'm not sure how to rephrase this in a way that makes sense. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Latter part of the lead is oddly out of chronological order − jumping from post-season awards to injuries during the season.
 * I've reordered some sentences in the lead. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Games played → Games, and should be sortable.
 * Done. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The fixture for round one was revealed on 27 October 2018. Is this genuinely significant information?
 * Removed. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I won't go through every little prose detail in the season summary, but suffice to say there were a few recurring issues:
 * Editorialisations, which are frequent in sports reporting, but not appropriate in Wikipedia's voice: (e.g. The Eagles did not look like winning from half time, It now looked unlikely for the Eagles to finish in the top two, West Coast fell apart in the final quarter etc.)
 * Unattributed statements (e.g. Brisbane were regarded as a team that West Coast should have comfortably beaten (by whom?) billed as a possible preview for the Grand Final (by whom?) etc.)
 * Some informal diction (Gaff getting 34 disposals)
 * A couple of awkward phrasings (The only injury was to Shannon Hurn, who injured his hamstring)
 * I have gone through and reread the entire article, making many of these small fixes. Steelkamp (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * For me, the most pressing issue is that too often the article focuses on collating objective information and statistics at the expense of summarising analysis of West Coast's list management and season performance. To plagiarise my own GA review for Geelong's 2018 season, which had a similar issue: "The reader might come away from the article knowing every West Coast player, trade, match result and award recipient for 2018, but unable to discern to what extent West Coast's season was considered excellent, poor or somewhere in between. How was West Coast's trading and drafting evaluated? Considering West Coast's performance in 2018, how did they perform relative to expectations? The reader should be able to find at least a consideration of these questions and a summary of major viewpoints, even if there is no objective answer."
 * Working on this. Steelkamp (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have added some analysis and reviews to the article. What do you think now? Steelkamp (talk) 12:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Luke Shuey's second John Worsfold medal uppercase medal?
 * Fixed. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * leading goalkicker, awarded to Jack Darling bit odd to speak of this being "awarded to" Darling, since it's just a title for the player who kicks the most goals; it's not like the best and fairest, which actually is "awarded to" a player in the sense that they are selected by a committee.
 * Leading goalkicker is actually an award, with a medal presented at the awards night, as shown here and here. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Do we really need an external link to the AFL website?
 * I've removed the external links section. Steelkamp (talk) 06:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * A comprehensive article in terms of results, statistics and award winners, but the reader is sometimes left wondering about this information's overall significance, due to the article's scarce discussion of analysts' views. – Teratix ₵ 06:05, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Due to real-life circumstances I'll be on wikibreak for a few weeks, so unfortunately I'm not going to be able to follow up my review. Apologies to Steelkamp, but I'm confident the article's issues are well on their way to resolution. – Teratix ₵ 14:45, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Source review
Spotchecks not done. Version reviewed
 * The lead states this was their 33rd season in the AFL, but the infobox states "AFL season: 5th". What is the difference between these two?
 * Seems to be a poorly worded infobox. The parameter is "regularseason result", but it displays as "AFL season". I have removed that from the infobox. Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "They finished the 2018 home-and-away season second on the ladder. They continued on through the finals series to win the Grand Final against Collingwood by five points, thus becoming the reigning premiers. " Source?
 * Added sources. Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * FN3 is missing date
 * FN4 is missing agency and date
 * FN7 is missing date, check for others (there seem to be many)
 * Quite a lot are missing dates. I will fix that soon. Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have put dates in for all the references that have dates, and added agency parameter for all the references with a news agency. Steelkamp (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * On a quick check there are still a few missing - eg FN15. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:59, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * SEN don’t have dates on their articles. Steelkamp (talk) 04:23, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It appears that they embed publication date within the URL? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Good to know! Steelkamp (talk) 12:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * FN13 should have capitalization normalized. Ditto FN15
 * Done. Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * What makes afltables a high-quality reliable source?
 * The Age describes AFL Tables as a "leading footy stats website".
 * ESPN describes AFL Tables as a "statistical bible website".
 * The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has used AFL Tables as a source.
 * The Conversation has used AFL Tables as a source.
 * The Age has used AFL Tables as a source.
 * AFL Media has used AFL Tables as a source.
 * Fox Sports has used AFL tables as a source.
 * – Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Considerable formatting cleanup needed here. While I was looking at sourcing, I also noticed some persisting issues with prose and style, enough to suggest that the article would benefit from another read-through. Examples include "; Nick Dal Santo saying", "they aren't giving up the large amount of picks", and "seven year long deal". Nikkimaria (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * FN78: is Leo a middle name or surname?
 * I'm not sure. After Googling, I found out that he always goes by "Simon Leo Brown" or "Simon", so I don't see removing "Leo" as an option. I think it is more likely that Leo is a middle name. Steelkamp (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing this article. I have read through the article again, and addressed all the issues you brought up. Steelkamp (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, as this is your first FAC, it is going to need a spotcheck for source to text accuracy as well as the standard source review just completed. I posted a request in the usual place a few days ago, so it is a case of being patient. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Oppose from Sandbh
I saw the request from User:Gog the Mild for a spot check of sources. Since I know about Australian rules football I thought I'd have a look at the article. I further speak from the perspective of having FAC nominations both fail and succeed.

My general impression is that the article is not well structured; paragraphs are too long; some contain unconnected ideas; and there is not enough analytical content. The opening paragraph, for example, runs to 230 words; for better readability, 100–150 words, or so, make for an easier read. The average para. length is ca. 155 words; the round 22 para. is 269 words.

In FAC criteria terms it does not meet:
 * 1a. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
 * 1b. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
 * 1c. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature;
 * 2a. lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections.
 * There're about 60 duplicate links. The two lede paragraphs have ca. 39 links. So much blue is distracting. MOS:LEADLINK may help.
 * I have removed all duplicate links, and removed some links from the lead. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What is the significance of the "JLT Community Series"?
 * The West Coast Eagles played in the JLT Community Series. Therefore, it falls under the scope of this article. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Why is there no content cited from the 2019 AFL Annual Report? Is there a 2019 West Coast Annual report?
 * How did the season compare to past seasons for West Coast? How does a 15-7 win-lose record stack up to season win-lose records generally?

More specifically, I can't follow the logical progression of the article. Below the HR is a compilation of the lede sentences from each paragraph + some of my comments. The lede sentence of a paragraph should encapsulate what the rest of the paragraph will cover, and all the lede sentences should tell the story of the article. THE LEDE
 * The West Coast Eagles are an Australian rules football team based in Perth, Western Australia.
 * Daniel Venables suffered a career-ending concussion in round nine. [so what?]
 * Well it's not every season that a young player with years ahead of him suffers a career-ending injury. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Comment: The lede is supposed to summarise the article. The current lede falls well short of this requirement. The lede includes factoids not mentioned in the rest of the article.
 * I strongly disagree with this statement. The only thing I could see that could be considered as "not mentioned in the rest of the article" is expectations were high for West Coast in 2019, which I have now made more specific. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Background
 * The West Coast Eagles are an Australian rules football team based in Perth, Western Australia, that competes in the Australian Football League (AFL).
 * Prior to the start of the 2019 season, most of a group of 15 AFL.com.au reporters predicted that West Coast would finish the season in the top four again.
 * In October 2018, it was announced that the West Australian Football League (WAFL) had decided to allow the West Coast Eagles to enter a reserve team into that competition starting in 2019, after the idea was unanimously endorsed by a meeting of WAFL club presidents. [so what?; why is this pertinent to the 2019 West Coast Eagles season?]
 * It is pertinent because it means that the WCE are competing in the WAFL for the first time in 2019. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * West Coast's on-field leadership went unchanged going into the 2019 season.
 * In March, Sam Kerr, the captain of Australia's women's national soccer team, was announced to be West Coast's number-one ticket holder for 2019–20. [so what?]
 * I don't see what the problem is with this. It is relevant. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Comment: The first paragraph ends with, "Continuing on through the finals series, they won the Grand Final against Collingwood by five points, thus becoming the reigning premiers." What does this have to do with a background?
 * Again, I don't see what the problem is with this. The previous season's performance is directly related to the current season. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Playing list 2018 off-season changes
 * After the end of the 2018 AFL season, Eric Mackenzie retired due to consistent struggles with fractures in his feet.
 * On 7 October 2018, the day before the start of the 2018 trade period, Andrew Gaff signed a new contract with West Coast. [Who is Andrew Gaff?]
 * I've added after much consideration to leaving under the AFL's free agency rules to that sentence. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * West Coast were one of the least active teams during the 2018 trade period, making one trade.
 * 2018 was the first year where the trading of draft picks during the draft was permitted. [so what?]
 * I've now reorganised that paragraph so the significance of that statement is clearer. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Season summary
 * In the 2019 AFL season, each team played 22 games and had a mid-season bye.

Rounds 1–12
 * Going into the start of the season, Nic Naitanui, Andrew Gaff, Jamie Cripps, Josh Kennedy and Willie Rioli were unable to play.
 * West Coast won their next match, beating Greater Western Sydney by 52 points at Optus Stadium.
 * West Coast had their second loss of the season in round five against Port Adelaide, being beaten by 42 points at Optus Stadium.
 * West Coast then won their round nine match against Melbourne, despite the Demons dominating the first three quarters.
 * West Coast had another comeback victory in round ten, this time against Adelaide.

Comment: Starting each paragraph with "West Coast" is too repetitive. Did nothing happen in games 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12?
 * I have changed some instances of "West Coast" to "The Eagles" Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Did nothing happen in games 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12? I'm guessing you didn't read the entire paragraphs. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Rounds 13–23
 * West Coast had a bye in round 13.
 * Round 16 saw West Coast win the 50th Western Derby 122–31; the 91-point margin was the second largest in a Western Derby, and Fremantle's 31 points their lowest score.
 * In round 19, West Coast heavily defeated North Melbourne 121–72, placing the Eagles two wins inside the top four. Josh Kennedy kicked seven goals, one of which was his 600th goal.
 * In round 22, West Coast faced Richmond, 2018's minor premiers, in what AFL.com.au called the "game of the season", and a possible preview for the Grand Final.

Comments: What is the "Western Derby"? According to whom did the outcome of round 19 represent a case of the other team being "heavily" defeated? What is a minor premier?
 * What is the "Western Derby"? That question is answered earlier in the article, when the first Western Derby of the season occurred. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I have removed the word "heavily", although I am of the opinion that it is evident from the scores, and doesn't need a specific person/entity saying so. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Minor premier is linked. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Finals
 * West Coast had a solid 116–61 win in their elimination final against Essendon; Nic Naitanui was reported for shoving Zach Merrett into the fence after Merrett pulled on Naitanui's hair.
 * In a post-season review for AFL.com.au, Travis King rated West Coast's season a "B-", writing that "inconsistency plagued the reigning premiers", and that "the Eagles could – and should – have finished top-four". [who is Travis King?]

Comment: According to whom did did WC have a "solid" win. What happened to WC in the finals thereafter? Which teams did Nic and Zach belong to? What was the outcome of the report? The last paragraph says:
 * "In a post-season review for AFL.com.au, Travis King rated West Coast's season a "B-", writing that "inconsistency plagued the reigning premiers", and that "the Eagles could – and should – have finished top-four". He also said "their inability to put poor teams away cost them valuable percentage", but praised the decision to trade for Tom Hickey.

If that is so, how did they manage to win the premiership?
 * I have removed the word "solid". Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What happened to WC in the finals thereafter? Read the rest of the paragraph. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Which teams did Nic and Zach belong to? Nic Naitanui is mentioned earlier in the article, and in the list of players. I've now clarified that Merrett is an Essendon player. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What was the outcome of the report? The following sentence answers that question. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If that is so, how did they manage to win the premiership? Reigning premiers means they won the premiership in 2018. The post-season review was written before the 2019 Grand Final happened. This is a direct quote anyway, so it can't be changed. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

WAFL team
 * West Coast's WAFL team was captained by Fraser McInnes in its inaugural season. [So what? What is the WAFL? What does this have to do with the article?]
 * WAFL is mentioned in the Background section. WAFL is relevant because the article is titled "2019 West Coast Eagles season", not "2019 West Coast Eagles AFL season". WAFL is only mentioned in a small paragraph because the WCE WAFL team would not be notable enough for a season article on its own. No other WAFL clubs have any season articles. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Awards General comments: I some cases it transpires that, apart from the lede, the rest of the paragraph is consistent in its coverage. However, the general reader should be able to work what the paragraph is just from reading the lede sentence, rather than having to get the end of the paragraph to work out what the idea unit is.
 * Liam Ryan won the Mark of the Year award for a mark he took during West Coast's round 9 match against Melbourne. [Can we have an image of the mark?]
 * I wish we could, but no, there are not creative commons licensed images of that mark, and I don't think it falls within fair use. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * West Coast held its awards night on 3 October [so what?]
 * That tells when those awards that followed were awarded. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that the first sentence of each paragraph should outline the rest of the paragraph. I don't think this is possible in a football club season article anyway. For example, in the season summary, there would have to be 25 paragraphs for each round plus a paragraph at the start. Either there will be many small paragraphs, or the season summary would have to be lengthened, however it is quite long as it is. Looking at similar articles (2003–04 Arsenal F.C. season, 1995–96 Gillingham F.C. season), they don't do this either. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I concur with User:Teratix that the reader is sometimes left wondering about this information's overall significance, due to the article's scarce discussion of analysts' views.

The article would have benefited from listing it at WP:PR. As further set out at WP:FAC, "Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination." Sandbh (talk) 06:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for undertaking this review, Sandbh. I agree that there should be more analysis of the season included in the article, and I agree that there should be information included from the annual report. I am working on both. However, I disagree with many on whether the article is well written or whether it meets the criteria for the lead, and you can see my replies to individual points above. Steelkamp (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Withdraw I would like to withdraw this nomination to work on it without the time pressure that comes with a FAC. Steelkamp (talk) 03:22, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2021 (UTC)