Talk:Adelaide Rams/GA1

GA review notes

...but lost two of their three matches in Europe, leaving them outside qualification for their group with no possibility of playing in the finals series... - erm, shouldn't it simply be that they 'failed to qualify for...'? the bolded bit gives an impression there is something else in between going to happen.

 Done Hopefully fixed.

demised - erm, not seen this used as a verb. Saw the discussion on 'wound up'. Umm.....(long pause)...'liquidated'? 'dismantled'? There may be other verbs, have a think on it.

 Done Done by Jeff79.

• OK, gave it a bit of a copyedit. Two tweaks above needed. Otherwise it is neutral, prose is good, comprehensive and qualifies for GA status. I will think on some things which may get it somewhere further to FAC if possible overnight. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• • Thanks for the review. I'll contact you on your talk page, and hope this passes. I'm not really worrying about FA just yet, but any help would be appreciated.  The Windler talk  22:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

GA passed

Easy peasy - this one was alot more polished than hte Cumberland one. It is tricky to see if it can be substantial enough for FAC but possible..was there a book written which may have some more info? One of the super league wars books or something.

Other ideas to chase. These are a few that come to mind.

• A short para on Existing amateur league competition in Adelaide (I suspect there was/is one) and its relationship with media/league elsewhere etc.

• Reception in Adelaide, mascots, any insight on local following or lack thereof..

• Any more notable games/players

• The most intriguing is the machinations between the ARL and SL, especially at the end when plans were afoot to see which clubs ended up on the chopping block - who Adelaide were touted as merging with, why talks broke down and whether it was the ARL that really pushed for them to fold (?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casliber (talk • contribs)