# Talk:History of the National Hockey League

There's much more useful information here than in the NHL article, and the NHL article is poorly written. Merge that into this, maybe. But don't keep too much of the other one. --CastAStone|(talk) 21:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

The main article appears to be identical with www.barrystickets.com/hockey-tickets/index.php, but I don't know which came first. Woden325 18:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article did.  According to the Wayback Machine, www.barrystickets.com was created on March 13, 2005, and large sections of that text appeared on edits in the original NHL article before March 5, 2005.  That site's cherrypicking without attribution.  Ravenswing 05:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I just did a bit of digging, and I can not find a reference that the London Lions were actually affiliated with the NHL, but just one NHL team owner, Bruce Norris.  So, I am removing the paragraph saying they were affiliated with the NHL.  -- JamesTeterenko 03:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Since my edit has been reverted, I have noted that a citation is needed.  -- JamesTeterenko 00:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the edit to re-insert the statement.   I found what is likely the same page you did, [1], which argues that the NHL itself never proposed such an expansion plan, simply one owner.  Given that the paragraph in question is factually inaccurate, it does not belong in this article unless the IP who inserted it can verify it using primary sources. Resolute 05:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I thought that smelled kind of funny, which is why I never added London to the list of defunct NHL teams in the {{NHL}} template.  Doogie2K (talk) 17:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay thanks.  I have also removed this information from List of defunct NHL teams and London Lions.  -- JamesTeterenko 17:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm gonna cry foul on the affluent fan remark that: "NHL season ticket prices have traditionally been higher (given the number of games per season) than the other sports."  At the very least this opinion needs a citation, but is probably wrong since the NFL is more expensive per game, and MLB is more expensive per season according to the Fan Cost Index [2]. -- Jeff180 19:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Made appropriate edits, showing the 1917-34 & 1992-present teams are 'seperate franchises'. GoodDay 20:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

well, look at it this way. If someone who knows nothing about hockey, started reading about it, what would they say if they could read that there was an Ottawa Senators in 34 and an Ottawa Senators in '92? Your edit is not 'historical' in viewpoint. Sure, the NHL added the Sens in 91, but that adds nothing to the paragraph. You've stripped out information. It should be something like 'revived' the Sens or brought back hockey to Ottawa with a namesake Senators. What you do is minimalize that point, over and over. What is your agenda? Please see what I rewrite before you nuke it. Alaney2k 13:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
The agenda is simple, basic and oft-repeated:  that these are two separate teams, and that phrasing  that suggests otherwise is inaccurate.    Ravenswing  13:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
It is important that it is a revival, or a return to Ottawa. That is also a point that must be made. Saying 'reviving the Ottawa Senators' is much more revealing than 'added the Ottawa Senators'. The first gives the info that there was a previous franchise. The second only states it was added. Do you see what I mean? Why must the 'new' point be made over and over? That's what you two are imposing. Alaney2k 14:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Definition of reviving... The old team is dead. There's no reviving it. ccwaters 15:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
The point is that the people of Wikipedia are trying to 'swim against the stream' here, by inserting new and expansion at every possible point in the articles, instead of actually adding content. Most of the NHL articles need attributions, people! Alaney2k 15:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Your definition link actually shows you can restart a franchise: to make operative or valid again Alaney2k 16:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
The point is, you are trying to swim against the stream of consensus. GoodDay 20:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not about me. I know about the consensus around here! You guys are trying to correct the media in your own way. It seems counter-productive when there are so many articles in need of work. Alaney2k 22:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
As long as you continue to make edits that suggest the 2 NHL Senators teams are the 'same'; there's going to be continued complaints. GoodDay 22:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Broken record. Alaney2k 23:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Which the rest of us keep trying to fix, but you keep breaking. GoodDay 23:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

As the four articles on the history of the NHL have been created, I've reduced this one to a disambig page for the time being.  Resolute 20:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you have plans to make this a summary article at any point?-Wafulz (talk) 12:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
I had considered it, but really, the history section of the mian National Hockey League article will serve as a summary.  To do the same here would be completely redundant, imo. Resolute 14:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm adding this note to three talk pages: the talk pages for the
NHL,
the history of the NHL,
and the history of the NHL 1967-92.
Please post any responses at the third of these locations,
as this is the most specific of the three pages.
---
I've just added a short section to the two history pages about John
Ziegler's move of the NHL head office from Montreal to New York.
It strikes me as an action of considerable symbolic importance, but
I've been able to find very little in writing about it, so I can't
provide details or a usable cite.
A friend in New York phoned the NHL head office and was told it moved
there in 1977 after Ziegler took office.  My friend searched the New
York Times online at his library using ProQuest and I searched the
Globe and Mail the same way.  I found that the exact date Ziegler's
presidency began was August 26, 1977, and we both found articles from
earlier that year speculating that if Ziegler got the job then he was
likely to move the HQ out of Montreal, but it wasn't clear where to.
Whether because ProQuest searches are not entirely reliable or because
nothing further was reported or because we both missed something,
neither of us found any further details or confirmation of the move.
Besides the symbolism of the move, there is also a legal issue:
corporations can't normally just move from one country to another.
(The NHL must be a corporation, because it gets sued on occasion.)
Did the move involve reincorporating the NHL, or did it already
consist of separate companies in each country and their relationship
changed, or what?  I haven't found anything at all in writing
anywhere that covers the NHL's corporate structure, and that seems
like a topic that belongs on the main NHL page.
--208.76.104.133 (talk) 05:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm noticing some major problems wit the timeline, the years are very off.
--GOPTeen1995 (talk) 00:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

It seems to be accurate to me.  Could you be more specific? Resolute 04:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
The timeline seems to look fine. But looking at the image, it's one gigantic image. In semi-response to the next comment, what if the images were split into the "Original Six" era and the "Expansion" era, both with seperate hide-away boxes? Or even just the defunct teams removed from the second half of the image? Single image "Original Six", "Expansion (note: Latter two images are first image, split) Tyman 101 (talk) 06:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
What happened to the old timeline picture? The new one is much too large and does a terrible job of showing which teams belong to the same franchise. Additionally, having the "Original Six" Era on top of the "Expansion" Era completely messes up any sense of continuity. Someone needs to fix this mess. 74.140.167.212 (talk) 20:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you update the timeline? The Capitals won the Stanley Cup and this season is over. Could you please update the timeline? Please.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.212.229.228 (talk) 11:07, 8 June 2018 (UTC) 

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Nhl relocation map 1495x1155.png
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

The way the timeline is formatted now, teams' individual bars are split up and colored based off their primary logos. I feel that we should change this to the way all of the other sports timelines are (see Timeline of Major League Baseball), where they're split up by their location identifier and team name. I feel that this will vastly improve the timeline's readability, especially with identifying where teams begin and end. For example, the Minnesota North Stars moved to Dallas for the 1993-94 season. This is not indicated at all on the timeline.
This is just my opinion, but y'all might feel differently. Let me know whether it should be changed. NocoRoads 18:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I went ahead and changed it. I feel that this removes some ambiguity, but let me know if it should be by uniform colors instead. NocoRoads 06:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
On a related topic, I understand that the 2004–05 season was cancelled due to the lockout, but why is there a gap in the timeline for each team?  After all, they didn't cease to exist during that time, but the gap makes it seem as if they did. Assadzadeh (talk) 04:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)