This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
This article has been
automatically rated by a
bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
Why is the Grand Slam not possible when France weren't taking part? According to the description, the title is according when a team beats all other teams - that's possible no matter how many other teams are playing, surely...?
This is a sports term, it has never been used as a political term. Even the Irish media and the IRFU use it with regard to the Irish rugby union team. Will people stop vandalising pages containing the term?
GordyB13:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)reply
"it has never been used as a political term" - if it sounds political, looks political and is used in a political fashion, I suspect that's good evidence that it is, ergo, political! --
MacRusgail (
talk)
14:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Table
Is it really necessary to have every year where it was not achieved listed separately? Why can't we just do what we do with the wars etc. and just say something like "1958-67: Not achieved"? It would save a lot of time browsing down the page.
Ygoloxelfer15:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)reply
That was quickly edited.:) NB a team cannot achieve a grand slam tour of Europe unless they defeat,
Ireland,
Italy,
France,
England,
Scotland,
Wales, this feat must be achieved on one tour. The concept of a grand slam tour is worth debate!
Not, it isn't. The "grand slam" is defined in the article's sources as the four home nations adding France and Italy is original research.
GordyB (
talk)
14:47, 4 April 2009 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Grand Slam (rugby union). 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.
Presumably a grand slam tour could be won by any touring team that wins all four matches against the
Home Nations. The only other contender at the moment might be Argentina. But, the point I am making is I that think the section would be improved if it indicated that this is not the exclusive to NZ, AU and ZA, its just that to date only those teams have had the ability to win a Grand Slam Tour. --
PBS (
talk)
17:43, 27 February 2018 (UTC)reply