Wikipedia

Talk:Anzac Day match

(Redirected from Talk:Anzac Day clash)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by HiLo48 in topic Restrict to just the match the title describes
Learn more about this page

??

edit

Do you ppl have any idea what you're doing? Brownlow votes for 2021 are there, when the count hasn't even been yet? A separate column for the team of the winning medalist? Why? Why do people try to rewrite history? Why do they change things to suit the team they support?

Stats/Records

edit

No longer available to read on here? Why? Been on here for over ten years. Now gone.

Untitled

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The ANZAC Day Medal was not introduced until 2000, with James Hird as the first winner. Do you have any proof to back up the claim that it was awarded, perhaps retrospectively, between 1995 - 1999? 58.160.125.76 13:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

The original idea for the game came from the Fremantle Dockers. They opened talks with Essendon and the AFL, however they were not included in the final format. The Fremantle game for Anzac day has always included an extended Anzac day ceremony - which was the intention of the original proposal. This was reflected in the popular media at the time. It is interesting that it is sometimes referred to as a "traditional" clash, when it only goes back as far as 1994 and was proposed by the AFL's second newest club. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.6.136 (talk) 23:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes the original concept came from Fremantle Football Club and was to be called the "Albert Thurgood Trophy" after a player who played for both Essendon and the original Fremantle Football Club. Essendon broke off talks and then invited Collingwood to try the concept. The negotiations had gone as far as actually getting the trophy cast. Article should reflect this as the origin of the concept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.80.222 (talk) 07:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)Reply


Requested move

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The ANZAC Day clash → Australian Football League Anzac Day clash — Three parts to this suggested move.

  1. Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(definite_and_indefinite_articles_at_beginning_of_name) discourages the use of 'The' unless it's part of an official name, which as far as I can tell, this doesn't have an official name. The other test it says to use is whether the 'the' would be capitalised in a sentence, and I think you would write 'Essendon won the Anzac Day clash in 2009' rather than 'Essendon won The Anzac Day clash in 2009' or 'Essendon won The Anzac Day Clash in 2009'.
  2. According to Talk:Anzac Day#More, ANZAC should only be used when refering to the actual army corps, not to anything else derived from them, such as Anzac Cove, Anzac Day, Anzac biscuits etc, so this page should be Anzac Day, not ANZAC Day.
  3. I'm not 100% sure about the word clash, but it seems that the AFL uses it more than match or similar, so I'm happy for it to remain, but I think we need a reference to AFL in the title, to make it unambiguous that the article is about the AFL game, not any other clashes that may have occurred or will occur. But then as AFL is ambigous in itself, we'll need to spell it out in full. I don't think we need to refer to Collingwood or Essendon, but maybe we should. I'm open to suggestions, but before I do the official move request to fix the previous two issues, I want some input from others and/or some form of consensus on the full title. — The-Pope (talk) 11:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Survey

edit
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

edit
Any additional comments:

Contradiction

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

One part of the article states that the RSL encouraged football on ANZAC Day because the RSL got some of money, due to legislation. Later in the article it states that the RSL was reluctant to have football on ANZAC Day until Kevin Sheedy suggested it. So which one is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.135.162 (talk) 09:01, 25 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anzac Day clash. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:33, 16 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Anzac Day clash. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 13 April 2018

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply


Anzac Day clash → Anzac Day match – Something that has bugged me for a while is the use of the word "clash" in the title of this article and the Queen's Birthday one. I prefer "match" because that descriptor is exactly what this is, a match. It is specific, as opposed to clash which seems a little generic and dare I say, somewhat amateurish. "Match" is used often in media outlets (see here and here, though I acknowledge no more so than "clash" would appear to be. In my view, "match" meets all the WP:TITLE guidelines and has the advantage of being a little more recognisable to a broader audience than clash. Can I suggest that in the event of this move being successful, the Queen's Birthday clash is also moved on the same basis. Pinging Aussie rules regulars User:DaGizza, User:The-Pope, User:SuperJew, User:Harro5, User:Boomtish, User:Reyk, User:Thejoebloggsblog, User:Flickerd, User:Aspirex as I'd love diverse input on this. Jono52795 (talk) 03:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

  • Move - I'm pretty impartial to using either, but match does seem a bit more appropriate in a sporting sense. Agree that if this page is moved then Queen's Birthday should be too. Flickerd (talk) 04:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Move - "Clash" is media hyperbole. "Match" is correctly encyclopaedic. HiLo48 (talk) 07:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment - Queen's Birthday should definitely be moved, but I'm not so sure on Anzac Day. I feel like "clash" is the more common terminology in that case, so balancing that with the more unambiguous and encyclopaedic "match" is difficult. I certainly wouldn't be opposed to moving both, but I'm only explicitly in favour of moving the Queen's Birthday article at this stage. SellymeTalk 05:38, 14 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Anzac AFL matches

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

What are peoples thoughts on trying to make this page more all encompassing looking at the history of AFL matches that commemorate the Australian defence force more broadly? It is a bit messy at the moment with "Anzac Eve" and the West Australian ANZAC Day matches shoe-horned at the bottom. A more all-encompassing history section is definitely required.Thejoebloggsblog (talk) 08:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Restrict to just the match the title describes

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article has suffered the fate of many on Wikipedia and become a coathanger on which to hang all sorts of other games slightly related to by not actually ON Anzac Day. I propose removing all of it. If someone believes they really are notable, please create more articles and convince the world of their importance. HiLo48 (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anzac_Day_match&oldid=1198842907"