Talk:NRL Grand Final

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Make up your mind

Is this article about the NRL Grand Finals, which started in 1998, or about all the NSWRFL Grand Finals since 1908? Some parts of the article reference both, some only the NRL. This would be extremely confusing for an unfamiliar reader. Mdw0 (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on NRL Grand Final. 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) 00:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:AFL Grand Final which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

1909 Grand Final (Under Notable Grand Finals)

There is no publicily stated evidence that proves both teams agreed to stage a protest. Balmain is mentioned solely and repeatedly in all media as having grievances with the time of the match (it had been moved forward to be the undercard of the Kangaroos v Wallabies game, which made it harder for all of the Balmain players to get to the match in time from their jobs), they also complained about the game being the minor attraction to an exhibition game - the main gripe being that the gate takings from the final should be going into the League's coffers for Insurance/Ambulance Fund/Ground rent, but instead the money was going to be handed to James Joynton-Smith, who had outlaid a huge sum of money to pay for the Wallabies to play in the game and after the original 3 match series had been played, there was still a shortfall).

Balmain even protested the result and not once in their protest did they ever mention South Sydney, let alone any agreement with them.

Balmain even begun fund raising so as to hire a legal team to challenge the decision. In the end, they gave up and accepted the decision. AndrewRLP (talk) 08:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 2 June 2025

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Closed as not moved; consensus is clearly against the proposed moves at this time. BD2412 T 01:00, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

– Not nearly consistency capped in sources, so per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS, we should be using lowercase grand final here. Dicklyon (talk) 02:49, 2 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 16:07, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

  • As explained previously for moves similar to this, Grand Final when used in context of an event (as in NRL Grand Final or AFL Grand Final) is a proper noun in Australian English in the same context as Super Bowl is in American English. Both policies cited have examples of this. I would ask you to kindly withdraw. Storm machine (talk) 04:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
If you compare n-gram stats for the Super Bowl with those for the NRL Grand Final you'll see that they are not even approximately equivalent, in terms of how sources treat them. One is a proper name, the other is not. Even the NRL's own site does not consistently capitalize it, as in ... lay the foundation for a charge to the NRL grand final. . Dicklyon (talk) 14:40, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
An aside — interesting that you notify the pedant project, but not the projects more affected by this obsequious pedantry. Storm machine (talk) 21:36, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
This project was automatically notified: Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league#Article Alerts. Dicklyon (talk) 14:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
There is some inconsistency on the NRL website, however, in the NRL Annual Reports (2014 onwards available on their website) capitalisation is used as standard when referring to the Grand Final. EdwardUK (talk) 13:33, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Wouldn't want to delve further that the n-gram book references (especially once the search is for NRL Grand Final rather than the NRL Grand Final) cited by the nominating editor..., where both NRL Grand Final and Grand Final is consistently capitalised. Storm machine (talk) 06:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Grand final by itself is unarguably a common noun, so both of those sources are unreliable. Local Potentate (talk) 08:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment: given the discussions taking place elsewhere, this RM should be closed as "no consensus" forthwith. Storm machine (talk) 04:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
That's a peculiar tactic. Why? Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment: Given the result of the discussions was that "Dicklyon is topic banned from (de)capitalization" I again posit this RM be closed as "no consensus." Storm machine (talk) 23:12, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Response That ban was not applied retroactively, and does not discount Dicklyon's prior contributions to the discussion. There is no reason why that ban should have any direct bearing on the outcome of this RM. Aspirex (talk) 00:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
  • Support The MOS:CAPS policy states that the title should be capitalised only if it is "consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources". A google search indicates that a slight majority capitalises, not a substantial majority; and the main major sources I found which do not capitalise are the ABC, Sydney Morning Herald and Courier Mail, all of which have different parent companies and which are certainly creditable and reliable enough to tip the scales towards the uncapitalised under the Wikipedia MOS. Aspirex (talk) 06:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Here are the supporting links, by the way: ABC, SMH, Courier Mail. And one from the Guardian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspirex (talk • contribs)
    Capitalisation seems to be fairly consistent in these rugby league specific news sources: Total Rugby League, Love Rugby League, Serious About Rugby League and Treize Mondial. EdwardUK (talk) 11:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    But it's important that we go by general sources, not specialist sources, as explained at WP:SSF. Dicklyon (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
    WP:SSF is an essay, more or less an editorial opinion, and that should be explained every time essays are cited in these type of discussions so as not to confuse editors who may not click on the links. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:16, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
  • Oppose per MOS:SPORTCAPS. Grand Final is the name of the event and should be capitalised. J Mo 101 (talk) 09:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Comment MOS:SPORTCAPS does not say that. It states "Specific competition titles and events (or series thereof) are capitalized if they are usually capitalized in independent sources", so SPORTSCAPS can't apply unless it is backed up by evidence of references. Aspirex (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Oppose I believe this discussion has already occurred several months ago if memory serves and the conclusion was oppose. Either way "Grand Final" is part of the event's name thus should be capitalised. The article titles aren't referring to grand finals in general. Mn1548 (talk) 13:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Here's what I'm able to find among concluded discussions with Grand Final or just Final, at WT:MOSCAPS#Concluded and WT:Manual of Style/Capital letters/Concluded RM archive. Did I miss what you're thinking of? Maybe you're thinking of the "no consensus" at AFL Grand Final?
    Dicklyon (talk) 14:53, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Also there was Talk:2009 NRL Grand Final#Requested move – 5 articles "* grand final" → "* Grand Final" Result: Uppercase – EdwardUK (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Wow, yes, over 15 years ago it was capped with almost no participation. Hardly relevant today, though the supporters at that time said they didn't much care upper or lower, just wanted to see consistency; by that logic, they'd probably be supporting lowercase like all those other RM closes. Dicklyon (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
    Agreed that the 2009 NRL grand final example is irrelevant since it served only to make a handful of lower cases consistent with a larger body of upper case, without addressing the question of correctness. The AFL grand final "no consensus" discussion was also very much muddied by the bundling of a lot of non-AFL/non-Australian football articles into the same discussion; and since that made it impossible to make an n-gram or reference-based conclusion which was generic across the whole nomination, there were many valid procedural opposes which again didn't address the correctness of the chosen case. Aspirex (talk) 02:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    The VFL Grand Final move is also irrelevant on the ground of the time of year when this specific editor targeted those articles.
    Almost all of these other RMs are not involving Australian English; or are often plurals, where the singular final event series (Stanley Cup Final, NBA Finals) remains capitalised as a proper noun event. Storm machine (talk) 03:35, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    The Gaurdian (Aus edition) has extensive rugby league coverage, and always use lowercase in "NRL grand final". That's their style, like ours, nothing to do with Australian English. Dicklyon (talk) 00:22, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
    The Sydney Morning Herald probably speaks good Australian, too, and they pretty consistently use lowercase in NRL grand final. Dicklyon (talk) 00:39, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
    The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) actually uses lowercase in NRL grand final. So it's certainly not an Austalian English thing. Dicklyon (talk) 00:48, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
    The Sporting News, Australia edition, sportingnews.com/au uses mostly lowercase in NRL grand final, but is not totally consistent. Dicklyon (talk) 00:48, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
    Looking at the source listed in the 2024 article it is 4-1 in favour of uppercase. Also on a further more general note, the policies Wikipedia has on uppercase letter is stupid. In standard English, all words appart from prepositions and conjunctions should be capitalised, which isn't what is stated on MOS:CAPS. Ironically, Wikipedia's own article on the subject (Title case) states as such while completely disregarding it for the title and subtitles of the article. Mn1548 (talk) 13:08, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    What's stupid is ignoring WP's title policy, which is to use WP:SENTENCECASE. Standard English takes no position on what style different publishers use for article titles. Dicklyon (talk) 14:32, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    Hence the "on a further more general note" ie not specific to this discussion, mentioned to hopefully promote a future discussion. Also the notion that "standard English takes no position on what publishers use for article titles" WRITTEN IN ENGLISH sets a dangerous president that sources should be followed even if they are wrong. Mn1548 (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    All those examples are entirely irrelevant to the discussion, as these should always be evaluated on a case by case basis for these sorts of things. Additionally, we keep things capitalized like Stanley Cup Finals and NBA Finals because they've proven to be considered proper names, so cherry picking the instances where unrelated titles have been downcased isn't at all helpful. It's a very poor argument and it's strange that this comment has been made, when it doesn't help us with determining whether this is a proper name or not. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
    The relevance is that these were in response to Mn1548's general notion that ' ... "Grand Final" is part of the event's name thus should be capitalised. The article titles aren't referring to grand finals in general', which is an idea that one can find in many of the linked RM precedents. But yes we are considering this one on its own. As for the Stanley Cup Finals, I don't find the discussion you're referring to where that was proven to be a proper name; n-gram stats suggest more capping recently, I agree. And the NBA Finals does look a lot more like a proper name in n-grams. Dicklyon (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Neutral The ngrams aren't overwhelming in favour but I find the argument of opposing based on a 2009 move to be quite a flawed argument. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:05, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    Yeah, that argument's not getting any traction, but what about the VRL move being irrelevant because it happened to be Chistmas day, the start of a big secular holiday season in Australia, when I started the RM discussion? Coincidentally, I was on holiday with my wife and daughter in Sydney at the time, as you can see from this photo from Dec. 26 that year. I realize that VRL comment above was inserted after your comment here. Dicklyon (talk) 04:18, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
    And the n-grams do overwhelming show that these terms are not consistently capitalized in sources. Around half is not nearly enough. Dicklyon (talk) 04:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Oppose Reference # 2 supports proper name. Reference # 6 supports proper name.
Using a word generically does not exclude it from also being used as a proper name. Any generic word will be used more often generically than as a proper name. I believe that simple Google ngram searches are not much use with proper names. Sammy D III (talk) 03:28, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
And finding a few sources that capitalize a term does not override the overwhelming usage stats. If you can show that a significant number of the lowercase uses are referring to a different topic than the capitalized ones, then you'll have a point. See what you can find. Dicklyon (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Also, those are not even good examples. Ref 2 has "NRL Grand Finals" and "Grand Final's", but not "NRL Grand Final". Ref 6 has a mix, including "The NSW Government and the NRL had agreed to hold the NRL grand final in NSW ...". Dicklyon (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus. BD2412 T 16:07, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Support—N gram results are conclusive: MOSCAPS says capping must be overwhelming in reliable sources to be used at en.WP. Tony (talk) 00:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Looking at the "Search in Google Books" beneath the n-gram results it conclusively shows me that in addition to the numerous sports biographies (which mostly capitalise) it is also based on a lot of things that would never be considered as reliable sources for any subject, such as self-help guides to spirituality and romantic comedy fiction. If the decision to rename is to be based on a Google algorithm then why not use Google Images, where the clear consensus would be all capitals. EdwardUK (talk) 12:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Note: WikiProject Rugby league and Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPathtalk 07:33, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
  • When I look at the book search, I see 6 books on the first page of 10 use lowercase. To me they all look like reliable sources, even if they're not all specialized (see WP:SSF). One that uses capitals also caps "Final Series" used generically, which is evidence that their style is not about just capitalizing proper names, so that one doesn't really support the idea that they think it's a proper name. Generally, the evidence misses by a mile the criteria in MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS. Dicklyon (talk) 17:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Grand Final is part of the official name and official names are meant to be capitalised. Servite et contribuere (talk) 21:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
By whom are "official names are meant to be capitalised"? Certainly not by any WP guideline. Dicklyon (talk) 21:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Dicklyon I think the "Grand Final" in the name is officially capitalised Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:34, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Who is the implied agent in your passive-voice statement? Dicklyon (talk) 23:42, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Dicklyon Sorry. I actually don't understand. Could you use simpler words please so we can communicate? If that is the question, I don't use an agent on this. If you are trying to say I did not use a full stop at the end, please let me know. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 01:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Grammatically, your verb phrase "is officially capitalised" is what we call "passive voice"; it has no specification of a "subject" or "agent" doing the capitalizing. Similar "are meant to be capitalised" begs the question of who is meaning that. So these come across as simply vague opinions. In WP, we have a manual of style that talks about how we decide what to capitalize at MOS:CAPS. Have you read that? See also WP:OFFICIALNAME. Dicklyon (talk) 02:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Dicklyon Yes. Good point. I am aware of WP:OFFICIALNAME but I don't think it is a good argument as this is basically a request to keep the article name but change capitalisation. Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
True that. But it does suggest not putting too much emphasis on "official", as opposed to looking to sources for usage. Dicklyon (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Oppose, have been mulling this over and decided on 'oppose' per the discussion and after considering the title games and matches of sports championships, mainly in the Northern Hemisphere. Super Bowl, World Series, FIFA World Cup, Stanley Cup Finals, NBA Finals, the golf and tennis majors, probably many others, all uppercased. Given the opposition from editors who work on rugby articles and who know and have had attention on this championship game, uppercase seems the natural title. Importantly, it is the official name, and official names count in considering casing (or so I've been told). The n-grams, which have been faulted here and elsewhere, come in at 50-50. With official name, examples of other championship games or series, consistency for major sport championships, and the long-term use of uppercase for this title, it seems uppercase is the logical titling for this event. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
    p.s., from the article's lead paragraph: "It is a major sport event in Australia and regarded as the biggest showcase of rugby league football in the world." The equivalent events listed above (Super Bowl etc.) are similarly regarded as the biggest showcase in the world of their sport. Consistency of uppercasing the world's showcase sporting events seems to fit WP:CRITERIA (per the wording "The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles") and since we have to get this one right, likely it's been right all along. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI