# Talk:The French Connection (ice hockey)

The first thing that bothers me is that this article is not really about the trio as a unit but only really groups together their individual stats. Since this is team sport with synchornised coherent ensembles of players who are supposed to move in organised manner, this is a problem. In short, comprehensiveness is a problem, only 4.7k main text.

Background. Need to know the circumstances under which these players were hired and brought together. What was the coach looking for in these players, what were the team weaknesses which prompted the coach to select these players. How did they fit into the game plan; how did the strategy and team style change once they were in the team? What were their strengths and attributes and how did these complement one another? How did their skills faciliate improved performance of the team? How did their opponents attempt to nullify their strategy? How was performance before they came and how did it improve afterwards? Why was the combination broken up by selling one of the players? (change of coach? backroom infighting etc?) How the tandem play enhanced each other...eg, are there stats showing that when one of them was injured, the others were not as effective by themselves? Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  20:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Could it be fattened up a bit more? There are really only two sentences about the style of the partnership and about the circumstances of their transfer. I guess I am a different kind of reviewer in that I put a premium on the actual content. But it's good in cricket when you have statistical computers like this to help you. That way you can search for stats under a wide range of crtieria. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 07:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Need more chronological structure of the evolution of the partnerhisp I think
I think everything should be clear enough now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  18:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Notable matches - Need more examples of the highs and lows of the combination Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  20:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Do these Ice hockey databases have really detailed info like the cricket ones. If not, we'll just have to live with it I guess but I would like to see another 2-3k of info if at all possible. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 07:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Images: I believe they fail fair use and are unnecessary. The painting isn't actually discussed, it only mentions that the players were famous so people made images of them. The other one at the top appears to be a FU violation. The picture is not discussed at all and appears to only be a depiction of what few living people look like. It is not a historical event that is difficult to understand without its presence.
The main image had been under FU review and passed ([1]).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  16:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
But the person only seemed to only untag it because it was not orphaned. You do not seem to be discussing the picture in the article and it needs to "significantly enhance" our understanding of the topic. Per FUC it appears you are only depicting the portrait of a BLP. Don't worry, I don't consider pictures to be important at all since I am strongly of the opinion that WP is not a children's book. So don't worry about it, the non pictures don't downgrade the quality of the article.
I have added further explanation to the second image.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  21:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
that's true, but the picture only is an example of the fact that they are the subject of artwork. The same thing can be conveyed simply by noting that people have made paintings of them.Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 07:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
To say that someone posed for a picture and that a premier athlete were the subject of Leroy Neiman are two different things.  Artistic sportsfans get the point I am sure.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  01:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Lead: Is supposed to recap stuff stated below, of the important details. The etymology should have its own section and not just be stated in the front without repeat below. There should be info in the lead about how their partnership operated and their style of play and characteristics such as the pointers in the first dot point. Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  20:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Style:Some use of full names of players in multiple occasions
examples of clunky language: "Among their post season highlights was the 1975 Stanley Cup Finals game three overtime Martin to Perreault to Robert overtime goal in the game whose overtime was delayed seven times due to fog on the ice surface at the Buffalo Memorial Auditorium" too many overtimes and difficult to understand language.  Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  18:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
"Perreault holds numerous club career records (including regular season games played, goals, assists, points, game-winning goals, 30 goal seasons, 20 goal seasons, and shots on goal), but Martin holds the franchise career records for hat tricks, four goal games, 40 goal seasons, consecutive 40 goal seasons, 50 goal seasons (tied with Danny Gare), consecutive 50 goal seasons" - sentence needs splitting.  Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  18:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Regards, Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 05:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Well ... quite aside from that this is of a greatly disproportionate length (even a famous line like this one has virtually no notability detached from its component players, and few of the other line articles were more than a paragraph), it's not well balanced.  In its day, the French Connection had a reputation for poor defensive play, something unreflected in the article.    Ravenswing  18:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
WRT, defense, aside from Robert that is true.  Robert was more than adequate defensively and usually played the point on the power play since Danny Gare was a better right wing scoring threat.  WRT length, I am not sure that is true.  I think this trio is a mid or high importance to hockey.  They are surely worth 20 or 30 KB.  We have a HOFer, the best left wing of the mid 70s and an All-Star.  Sometimes the whole is worth more than the sum of the parts.  The story does not contain enough info that could not be included in the respective bios to argue with you, but nothing in the article as it is should really be removed.  Their main problem with their place in history and on WP is that they never won it all.  I guess I should mention the curse of Taro here as well as on Perreault's page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  02:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I have not found anything in the Buffalo Public library that says the line was poor defensively.  The closest is a statement that Robert was chosen because the line needed someone who might attempt to stay in position and check.  I have added that.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  21:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I guess the main thing I'm holding out for is more info, in particularly about the style and team politics of buying and selling the players. (if at all possible). Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 07:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how much there is to say since two of the three were drafted as first round picks.  Basically, you draft someone with a first round pick because he is a good prospect.  Nothing encyclopedic to say.  Perreault was never traded.  Martin was traded away after he was injured.  I am sure no one want to see a guy who went to 7 straight all-star games as a struggling gimp.  The reason we acquired Robert is in the article.  The reason he was traded is the only possibly interesting transactional detail.  As far as style goes, I should probably find something about their wide open play.  These guys were skaters and Perreault could stickhandle with the best.  I will look something up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  01:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for that, I think the article is now sufficient for GA. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 03:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:The French Connection (hockey)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. There are a few relatively problems with this article and if the editors require I can provide some pointers to help, drop a line on my talk page. Regards,--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
Prose is good, a 8/10.
Consider breaking up the History section with sub-headings to make it easier to access.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
It is stable.

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned):  b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
Obviously, an image would be nice.
Overall:
a Pass/Fail: 

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The French Connection (ice hockey). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070311065813/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/spot_oneononep199003.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/spot_oneononep199003.htm
Added archive https://archive.is/20130111123034/http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/110711/37/French-Connection-Reunited-at-Pegulas-First-Game to http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/110711/37/French-Connection-Reunited-at-Pegulas-First-Game
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) 12:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)