Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive11

message: Ice hockey players shall be considered notable if they fulfill one or more of the following and if they otherwise fulfill the requirements of WP:V:
* Played one or more games in the National Hockey League, the Elitserien, the SM-liiga, the Russian Super League or other such top national professional league.
* Played one or more games in a defunct league generally considered to have been a "major" professional league, such as the World Hockey Association, the National Hockey Association, the Czechoslovak Extraliga, the Pacific Coast Hockey Association and suchlike.
* Played one or more games in an amateur league considered, through lack of a professional league, the highest level of competition extant, such as the 19th century Amateur Hockey Association.
* Played three or more seasons in a fully professional minor league such as the American Hockey League, the International Hockey League, the ECHL, the Mestis, the HockeyAllsvenskan or other such league. 
* Achieved preeminent honors (all-time top ten career scorer, league or playoff MVP, first team all-star, All-American) in a lower minor league such as the Central Hockey League or the United Hockey League, in a major junior league such as the Ontario Hockey Association or the Western Hockey League or in a major collegiate hockey league.
* Played on a national Olympic team.
* Are Honoured Members of the Hockey Hall of Fame.
Whatcha think?    Ravenswing  20:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's good. Anything which links to the player that's hockey related should be easily accepted. --  Hasek is the best  19:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability standards for ice hockey players

message: WPT calls for NHL team pages sections 'Hall of Famers' & 'Retired Numbers' to be written in 'pros style' under the section heading 'Honored Members'. Could someone contact Darthflyer, tell him to stop going against that consensus, as he's done at Anaheim Ducks continuously. GoodDay 21:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Anaheim Ducks]] & Honored Members

message: Could somebody take a look at :Image talk:ECHL map.PNG?  The colors on the map no longer correspond to the current alignments of the conferences, according to the ECHL article.  Corvus cornix 23:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Image talk:ECHL map.PNG]]

message: I've removed the (injury) tags from players on inactive NHL team rosters (team's having missed and been eliminated from the 2007 playoffs). If this is unacceptable, feel free to re-add them (I won't dispute it). Also, how should the Toronto Maple Leafs history in its Infobox be listed? With or without mention of the Torontos and the Blueshirts? GoodDay 18:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Torontos and Blueshirts shouldnt be mentioned in the Maple Leafs infobox, as they are not part of the same franchise.  IIRC, the folding of the NHA and creation of the NHL was done specifically to exclude the Blueshirts.  The Arenas were a new franchise under different ownership. Resolute 19:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kinda figured they shouldn't be listed. I've left a message on Blueboy96's page (letting him know, they should not be re-added). GoodDay 20:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NHL player (injury) tags & Maple Leaf orgins

message: When it's not at the bottom of the page, I always think people may not see it.
| Take a look please.
Thanks, ColtsScore 23:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So, it's been decided to keep Oskars Bartulis?. The article meets the 'new' guidelines? GoodDay 22:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oskars Bartulis fits the guidelines in Wikipedia:Notability (people) as he has played in the highest level of amateur sports (representing his country at the World Juniors).ColtsScore 22:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So, this WikiProject's guideline is 'null & void', right? Just trying to understand, which has more authority over Hockey player articles (Wikipedia in general OR this WikiProject). Obviously, it's Wikipedia in general. Thanks for the clarification. GoodDay 22:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah when I prod'd it I forgot that he played at the World Championships and so played at the highest amateur level for his sport. --Djsasso 23:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hang on, time out here.  Did he play at the World Championships or at the World Junior championships.  If the former, he passes the criteria.  If the latter, he doesn't and this article's a candidate for AfD.    Ravenswing  23:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He actually played in both. I thought it was just the juniors which is why I prod'd it but upon going back to the page hidden in among the jr. championships was one appearance in the men's. --Djsasso 23:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We were on shaky ground for a moment, but things have settled (Bartulis, is approved). GoodDay 17:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Please see my comments in Notability discussion

message: Hey everyone, I need to take an extended leave of absence from Wikipedia.  I'm posting to ask whomever is willing to "adopt" the FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fighting in ice hockey.  I have been fixing people's objections as they have come along, but it still has not passed and someone has just posted another objection.  I will try to respond to it this morning.  I basically need some interested editors to watch the FAC and try to address objections until we can get it passed.  Thanks --Mus Musculus (talk) 16:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have refrained from voting, as I would rather not leave a perception that WP:Hockey people are attempting to rig the !vote.  As it is, the FAC is currently 7-2 in favour of passing it, so I can only suggest that you continue to address concerns as they are raised, and you should have no trouble passing it.  Good work! Resolute 23:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Someone please take a look at the FAC and fix the minor objects that are yet unfixed. I would do it my self if I knew more about the topic. --Krm500 02:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC request 

message: Just announcing to everyone that after some three weeks of waiting, Joe Sakic has finally cleared the GA nomination. My next goal is to slowly work it into FA status, but am going to focus on majorly improving another hockey article, probably something to do with the Vancouver Canucks. Kaiser matias 02:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll help you with this. I'm trying to get Dominik Hasek to FA right now but I can do this one as well. I really like seeing hockey articles reach FA-status (most people have seen that already, I guess) Sportskido8 07:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sakic is now a GA 

message: We currently have two Erik Johnsons listed here - the one everyone knows at Erik Johnson (B. 1988), and also a career ECHLer who played in Pensacola last year and had 15 points in 24 games as a forward Erik Johnson (B. 1981). The Erik Johnson page is a DAB page. Can we get a consensus to move the real Erik Johnson back to Erik Johnson and either delete the career ECHLer or list him as a DAB from the real Erik's page? BoojiBoy 18:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved the NHL Erik Johnson to 'Erik Johnson (ice hockey)', moved other Erik to 'Erik Johnson (ECHL)'. GoodDay 19:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm... The ECHLer passes WP:BIO. I would feel uneasy deleting it purely for the convenience of the other article. On the other hand, it is a one sentence stub that isn't linked from anywhere.  FYI: hockeydb lists a third who played for New Hampshire a couple years ago . ccwaters 19:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  Speaking as an AfD frequent flyer, I'd downright oppose filing an AfD solely because a particular article was inconvenient; that's not an acceptable policy ground.  DAB from the more famous to the less famous.    Ravenswing  20:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  My page movements were reversed, were they that bad? GoodDay 22:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope they weren't bad. I just moved them to the proper naming conventions for people with the same name being Erik Johnson (ice hockey b. 1981) and Erik Johnson (ice hockey b. 1988). That being said if we are moving him back to the straight Erik Johnson it won't really matter much. --Djsasso 22:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, thanks. GoodDay 22:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: One's a defenseman, one's a forward, could distinct them by that perhaps. IrisKawling 23:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the issue is how to distinguish them because there is a standard for that already. I think he is just stating that he feels Erik Johnson without a dab at the end should be him automatically and only have the other player have a dab next to his name. --Djsasso 00:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah I definitely think that the #1 overall draft pick should have a straight link as opposed to an ECHLer. It just saves some big disambig-repair at a later date, if no one raises any real objections I propose we move the more notable Johnson to Erik Johnson. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 06:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup lets just do it. --Djsasso 14:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's now done, what a mess. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 15:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Two Eriks Johnson 

message: I think a very useful template for players external links would be a hockeydb.com template similar to Template:YouTube. I've noticed many players articles which have their stats page linked, displays some sort of older html page that has out of date stats. (They now use Php3) Using this template we'd be able to keep all of the links current if the site happens to change their system of displaying the page, not to mention just the ease of adding this useful link to an article. IrisKawling 22:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is actually one at :Template:hockeydb. Slowly but surely I have been changing over all the players to it. --Djsasso 22:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly what I was thinking of.. funny that I (or anyone editing rangers players) haven't ever noticed it or I'd have been using it for a while. well thanks IrisKawling 22:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template suggestion 

message: The Colorado Avalanche article is on peer review here. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 12:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colorado Avalanche on Peer Review 

message: I just have a quick comment about the Hockeydb template. It's a great template, but for players who have the (ice hockey) tag in the article title, I really don't think the template works. On Ryan Craig's article, instead of using the template, I simple copied it and put this in manually:
*Ryan Craig's career stats at The Internet Hockey Database
The template, however, would have looked like this:
*Ryan Craig (ice hockey)'s career stats at The Internet Hockey Database
I had a user revert my manual link because they thought it wasn't good to remove a template. Well, in my opinion, it really doesn't look good at all to have the (ice hockey) part in the link. Where is there any harm in manually replacing the template? Am I alone on this, because I personally think it looks a lot better to just have the person's name in the link. - Nurmsook 02:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two reasons. The first and biggest being if the target website changes how it labels its pages we only have to go to one place to make the change and not to every single player page. Secondly the name of the article is Ryan Craig (ice hockey) which is a valid disambig as to who's stats they are. --Djsasso 04:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hockeydb template

message: I've hit a point where I know it sounds silly, but I can't think of anything to do for this WikiProject. I have no problem doing menial, repetitive tasks. Any suggestions/recommendations? Thanks. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 15:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Something I was slowly getting myself around to doing was improving the lists of memebers of the Hall of Fame. I think it wouldn't take much to get the HHOF and the USHHOF member lists to Feature List status. Aside from that, you could always get a regular article to FA status. Pick a team or player and work on it. Kaiser matias 15:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah I've pondered the whole getting an article to FA status thing, however I'm kinda separated from most of my hockey library at the moment, so that'll probably have to wait til I move back home.... but keep the suggestions coming. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 16:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  Now your talking, that's not a bad idea.... Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 16:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That won't take me long, I've already done 10 seasons worth, it should keep me busy though for a short while though. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 18:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish a list of 'alternate captains' could be added to the 30 NHL team pages, but such a list is near impossible. The NHL team websites don't bother listing them. GoodDay 18:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Howabout 'images' of the current captain of each NHL team (see Anaheim Ducks for example). GoodDay 18:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry GoodDay, I try and stay away from images as much as possible, I don't pretend to understand all the legalistic rules around it. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 18:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The current captain image, might be a hassle at Minnesota Wild as it would be change almost monthly. PS- I'm not clear on the legalistics either. Oh well. GoodDay 18:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry guys... I'm an Italian ice-hockey fan so I don't have the experience and the knowledge to speak and to contribute, but I've noticed that are missing winning rosters on Stanley Cup pages. Why don't you add the roster of the winning team at the bottom of the Stanley Cup articles? I think it's a bad missing. --necronudist 19:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good to see so much going on, and it sounds like its giving more people ideas other than just me. It served its purpose, it kept me busy the last couple hours and will continue to keep me busy. I'm done for the day and I gotta go, but by all means keep bringing up ideas so that others can keep busy as well. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 19:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Not a fan of the Chicago one, but I really, really like the Avs list.  I will probably work on completing a similar upgrade to the list for the Flames once I complete the last 11 Flames season articles. Resolute 22:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uniform numbers info, good idea Ered7. Think of it, who wore the Red Wings #19 before Steve Yzerman? Very interesting. GoodDay 22:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been working on a sortable players list, that way you can see top scorers, most games played and etc. I thought about addind jersey numbers but decided not to, but maybe I'll try it and see how it works out. The problem though will be that some players have worn more then one number for the team, for example Gordie Howe. --Krm500 23:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also I have made a NHL team seasons list simular to the Frölunda HC seasons one, which currently is a fetured list canditade.  --Krm500 23:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I need something to do 

message: I saw several NHL articles whip past my watchlist for removed images.  I left a note on User talk:Betacommand about fixing the tags instead of removing the images.  See :Image:Calsealslogo.gif and :Image:Calgary Flames.gif.  Please chime in if those are good examples, as it would be less work to tag them properly now, instead of being removed from articles, have the image deleted, reupload the image, tag the image and then readd it to the articles. — MrDolomite • Talk 16:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am currently worked on the same task for all the logos on the junior ice hockey teams I'm watching. Flibirigit 16:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I just had a round with him as well, and he has no interest in working with the community.  Technically, he is right in tagging unsourced images, but his actions in damaging the articles themselves is just ridiculous.  I have been working to properly source the NHL team logos, but have also been reverting his edits as vandalism, which frankly, I consider it to be.  I will be checking the WHL team logos tonight or tomorrow as well, and would suggest someone do the same for the Q, the OHL, and various minor leagues. Resolute 00:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Booji, I agree with you... and I know that I am happy that you are back... even in a shortened capacity.  DMighton 15:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure if this matters (concerning the images) but, wasn't Betacommand recently reprimanded as an Administrator? GoodDay 17:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure why this makes me feel better, but he was. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. And after all of that, the fact that a guy like this is still allowed to do all sorts of mass image deletions and edits with a bot pretty much sums up why I left Wikipedia in the first place. BoojiBoy 17:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image tagging 

message: User:Mayumashu has moved the Steves Smith articles to Steve Smith (Edmonton Oilers, Chicago Blackhawks) and Steve Smith (Philadelphia Flyers). Since I'm not an admin I can't do anything, but I remember we debated this last year and we had a consensus to have them at Steve Smith (ice hockey) and James Stephen Smith. Thoughts? BoojiBoy 20:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gah, those new article titles are horrible.  I don't particularly care for James Stephen Smith either, but it's far better than Steve Smith (Edmonton Oilers, Chicago Blackhawks).  Has someone discussed naming conventions with Mr. Mayumashu? Skudrafan1 20:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Howabout, the former as Steve S.Smith and the latter as Steve (his middle initial) Smith? I was gonna seperate them by birth year, but 'Yep' they were born the same year (26-days apart, no less). GoodDay 20:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved Oiler/Blackhawk/Flame 'Steve Smith' to Steve S. Smith, previous title was too cumbersome. GoodDay 20:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah no! That makes it James Stephen Stephen Smith. Will the real 'Steve Smith' stand up. My page moved, makes it worst. GoodDay 20:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved it back to Steve Smith (Edmonton Oilers, Chicago Blackhawks) until an admin can move it back to James Stephen Smith. --Djsasso 21:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  This is a rather special case, and James Steven Smith is by far the best alternative we have for a dab. Resolute 23:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I just moved it back to James Steven Smith, I have no idea what Mayumashu was thinking on this one. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 06:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean, James Stephen Smith, of course. GoodDay 19:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Smith (again) 

message: Is there anyone who watched the show Hockeyville, that could make significant addition to the article? I never had a chance to watch. Flibirigit 03:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hockeyville 

message: I've just found that the articles on women's hockey (National Women's Hockey League, Western Women's Hockey League, Clarkson Cup, et al) are grossly outdated and inaccurate, according to my sources (for one thing the WWHL is not defunct, and as a matter of fact, the NWHL is suspending next season while the WWHL continues to operate).  I'd like some help in improving these articles. kelvSYC 03:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its hard to update the articles when the leagues themselves have no clue what they are doing.  The WWHL and NWHL did announce a merger prior to this season, but it appears to have been in name only.  The WWHL continues to behave as if it is an independent entity, while the NWHL regards it as a division. Resolute 05:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women's hockey articles needs some attention 

message: Many of the participants in the discussion about notability stated that these weren't standards for deciding what to delete from wikipedia, but just what the hockey project would focus on.  No one disagreed with those statements.  The list of guidelines was put onto Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format with the title "Notability standards for ice hockey players".  The first paragraph started out ...  "Ice hockey players shall be considered notable for purposes of WP:BIO and deletion policy if they fulfill one or more of the following".  
To eliminate confusion about what these guidelines were for, I have changed the title, and introductory paragraph (here) to indicate that these notability standards are for the focus of article creation, and not WP:BIO.  If we are going to discuss WP:BIO or notability-standards for deletion, then we should do it on the Wikipedia talk:Notability (athletes) talk page. ColtsScore 23:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But again, its not that its the scope of the project. It is the notability standards of the players. We have no intention of going through all the articles deleting people that don't measure up fully, that I agree with but we are stating that these things make a player notable. --Djsasso 00:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've altered the introductory paragraph of [the section we're talking about] to it does not state these are standards for deletion. In previous discussions, it's been stated '"we are not using these as notability guidelines to decide whether to delete articles, we are using these as notability guidelines to CREATE articles."' by users other than me.ColtsScore 16:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah the wording on your most recent edit is much better. --Djsasso 18:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Be aware that many of these guidelines are just written down versions of what have long been used as valid deletion reasons. When we said we weren't going to use them to delete articles what we mean is that we aren't going to en masse go and delete 150 articles about them. --Djsasso 13:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Quite.  I am comfy with them as being used as ammunition in AfD discussions as reflecting the views of the project on notability, but there's little enough call to go hunting for articles that don't qualify.    Ravenswing  14:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Back to notability

message: A couple of IPs have been repeatedly attempting to add an external link to a website called est1967.com to the EL.  I've removed it as spam three times today.  I've also removed the link for letsgoblues.com for the same reasons, and it has been readded a few times as well.  IMO, neither site meets the guidelines on external links, as blogs, discussion forums and fan sites are specificed as not being suitable.  Hopefully a couple others can keep an eye on this, as I don't really want to violate WP:3RR or engage in an edit war over this. Resolute 06:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it is part of a spamming campaign brought on by a form of penis-envy:   Someone want to remove the spam link?  I can't without violating the 3RR policy. Resolute 06:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it's been removed. Should we request protection on the page? Scratch that, it's been protected already. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 06:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I decided to request protection after realizing that several editors in an edit war with a bunch of anons wasnt going to be productive. Resolute 15:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully, those spaming anons will be blocked (better yet banned). GoodDay 17:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Straight up blogs and forums are definitely frowned upon. Generally my litmus test is whether the site has a respectable almanac/historical section. I think the Detroit and Pittsburgh sites removed are well qualified in that regard. Check out http://www.pittsburghhockey.net/: its doesn't compare at all to what's going on at the blues article. I'm not going to bring that in front of our friends though. ccwaters 19:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah.  We can always restore them once these blokes leave to carry on their war somewhere else.    Ravenswing  19:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For future reference, you will not be violating the three-revert rule for reverting spam. There are exceptions and spam is considered simple and obvious vandalism, so you can revert spam as many times as you like without violating 3RR. BsroiaadnTalk 14:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Ofcourse, it could always end up in an edit war like it apparently did that time...at that point it'd probably be better (and easier) to just protect it. BsroiaadnTalk 14:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spam attempt at [[St. Louis Blues (hockey)]]

message: Keep an eye out for User:209.136.3.78.  I've reverted some edits they've made at Dallas Stars and 2002-03 NHL season.  Thanks.  Patken4 22:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: User:209.136.3.78

message: Someone created an article called Preakness Game regarding the OTT-BUF game two days ago in which NBC cut away from showing overtime and instead went to show the Preakness Race. I tagged is as , stating that a game that ended about 48 hours ago has obviously not been extensively written about over a long period of time in the media and the history books to be considered historically significant and notable. And so far, I have not found a source using the term "Preakness Game". The article also lacks references.
Currently it is tagged as , so please feel free to leave comments on Talk:Preakness Game before I decide to remove the prod tag or put it on AFD. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Prod has been removed. Want to send it to AFD? BoojiBoy 14:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take care of it. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 14:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Done: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game 5 of 2007 Eastern Conference Finals. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 14:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Preakness Game]] 

message: I'm currently trying to get Members of the Hockey Hall of Fame (chronological) to FL status by modelling it after List of members of the Baseball Hall of Fame (chronological). They managed to get away without having to do individual cites for every inductee, and I'm hoping that this page will be afforded the same luxury, but the BHOF page was promoted a long time ago.
Either way, I would like to include as many free use images on the page as possible. However, for obvious reasons, I have been having trouble finding some, especially of players in uniform (which are the only images I am really after). So, I was wondering if anyone knew where I could find some images that are public domain, (the ones I'm really hoping for are Howie Morenz, Frank Nighbor, Maurice Richard, Frank Calder, Art Ross and Eddie Shore). I think any image published in Canada before 1950 is free, but I'm not exactly well versed on image policy. There are some really old images at the official HHOF website, but I'm not sure if they were copyrighted by the hall or not. Also, if anyone knows of any free use images already uploaded that I haven't used, then by all means, please add them here.
If anyone would like to just help me get the page to FL status, it would be much appreciated. Thanks, Scorpion0422 03:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are there two list? Chronological and alphabetical? --Krm500 10:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I was wondering that myself. I'm more likely to think it should be put up for afd than to be pushed to feature level. Its total duplication. --Djsasso 12:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am working on merging the pages, but it will take time. Again, help would be appreciated. -- Scorpion0422 13:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I only mentioned it because I thought it was decided awhile back to not have a chronological version and to only have the dates next to the names on the alphabetical one. --Djsasso 14:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a case where the sort list feature would be put to excellent use.  I can certantly see a use for both an alphabetical and a chronological list, and I believe these two articles were created before the sort list function was created.  Good luck with merging and improving this list.  It is a good candidate for such work.  Resolute 15:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The pages were split about a year ago because various users felt that there were uses for both lists. This was some time before sortable tables were introduced. -- Scorpion0422 19:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I just re-created List of members of the Hockey Hall of Fame as a sortable table.  Feel free to delete the other two lists and redirect to this one if you like.  Andrwsc 21:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Need some images

message: Please watchout for User:Mrcbc and his anonymous IPs. He insists on adding copyrighted material to articles. Most recently the Ontario Hockey League and all 20 team logos. Thanks. Flibirigit 15:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair Use violations 

message: Is this article really needed? It should be re-directed to the 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs. I know there's Senators fans out there, who are tickled with the fact their team is in the Finals. However, there's no other Stanley Cup Finals articles on Wikipedia (that I know of). This article might be a candidate for deletion. What does everyone think. GoodDay 18:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it should be. --Djsasso 18:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just found others (Cup Finals article), 1918 Finals through to the 1922 Finals. Should they be deleted aswell?? GoodDay 18:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say if you are up for it to merge what you can of those ones into the main page and then redirect. The 2007 one didn't really have anything in it so I just redirected it. --Djsasso 18:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also found the 1925 & 1926 Cup Finals articles. I'll let you and/or others attempt a merge (then redirect). I'm not very good at that. GoodDay 18:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, I don't think the 1918-26 articles should be merged.  It's an apples-oranges comparison.  In those days, the Stanley Cup finals were between multiple leagues, not just within the NHL.  Therefore, it is illogical to merge 1925 Stanley Cup Finals into 1924-25 NHL season, for example.  You'd have to do a similar merge into 1924-25 WCHL season, and that would make a merger somewhat pointless.  It's better to keep 1925 Stanley Cup Finals distinct, and linked from both league articles.  I agree with you that we do not need more than one article for the whole playoffs (as you've proposed to merge 2007), but that means that in early years, the single article would sometimes be named "19xx Stanley Cup Finals" because of the situation at the time.  You'll see that from 1922-24, the articles are named "19xx Stanley Cup Playoffs" (not "Finals") because those years featured three leagues, so more than one series was necessary.  For all other early years, "Finals" is the best article name because it was a single series with two league champions.  I hope this makes sense.  Andrwsc 19:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I hadn't thought of that (Multiple League Finals, which they were). Excellant point. GoodDay 19:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: You know I was totally thinking that and meant to say it. Thats what I get for trying to comment on wiki and work at the same time. --Djsasso 19:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has restored the 2007 Stanley Cup Finals article. The 1994 Stanley Cup Finals needs re-direct, aswell. GoodDay 20:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah its redirect again with comments on the talk page as to why its redirected. Hopefully it will make sense to him. There is no actually 1994 Stanley Cup Playoffs article that I can find at the moment to redirect/merge it to.--Djsasso 20:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ha, alot of the Stanley Cup Finals are merged into their respective NHL season articles Example: 1993-94 NHL season. GoodDay 20:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps ALL the post-1926 Cup Finals & Playoffs should be merged/redirected into their respective NHL season articles. GoodDay 21:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  There is too much detail in later years to merge into one article.  I like to see the main season article include the playoff bracket only (as a clean summary of the whole set of playoffs), and the playoff article can include series game-by-game scores and series commentary if available.  Andrwsc 21:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On further review, I'm in agreement. We'll keep the Stanley Cup Playoffs articles. GoodDay 21:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But we also need to clean up and add content to many past years....   Andrwsc 21:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've redirected the 1994 Stanley Cup Finals to 1993-94 NHL season (there's no 1994 Stanley Cup Playoffs). GoodDay 22:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: If it'll cut down the length of articles (which it will), I'm sold on the idea. GoodDay 00:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd rather see the length cut down by removing alot of the useless trivia from 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs --Djsasso 00:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that much of that trivia section can be removed, the bulk of the article's size is the game logs.  If anything, I would like to remove the trivia, keep the scores, and add some commentary for each series.  While that would, IMO, improve the quality of the article, it would make it even longer, further necessitating a split. Resolute 01:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am all for more than one article if we have someone that is actually going to do the prose for both. I think it would be ridiculous to have this massively detailed finals page and not the same kind of info for the rest of the playoffs. --Djsasso 01:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  Ho-hum, this discussion has really snowballed... I would say that without question the season & playoff articles should be kept separate (just stating the obvious). As for a separate article for the Stanley Cup Finals, I see no problem with it... Just try and not make it too hard to actually reach these articles when one is searching for them. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 04:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, I would really like to re-create the article. I think we can work on previous articles as well. I really like how the other leagues do it, and I don't see why the NHL shouldn't. Someone said that that wasn't an excuse to have it. Why not? Tell me how the NHL is any different. The Stanley Cup Finals are a lot more important than the World Series and the NBA Finals to a lot of people, so why should we not have an article? -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It seems other sports separate the play-offs from the final (whether it be a series or a single game).  NFL - Super Bowl XLI and National Football League playoffs, 2006-07.  MLB - 2006 World Series and 2006 American League Championship Series (baseball separates each round and league of the playoffs).  The aforementioned NBA - 2007 NBA Finals and 2007 NBA Playoffs.  Champions League - 2007 UEFA Champions League Final and UEFA Champions League 2006-07.  UEFA Cup - 2007 UEFA Cup Final and UEFA Cup 2006-07.  FA Cup - FA Cup Final 2007 and FA Cup 2006-07.  To me, it would make more sense to separate the finals from the entire play-offs.  Patken4 13:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it looks like no one is making any more opposition to having an article on the finals. I will re-create the article. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also in agreement Earl. We also need to cut down the stats of the article and bring things back to simple game reports.  Eric B ( T • C • W ) 18:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can live with Stanley Cup Finals articles, just hope nobody gets the idea to start creating other NHL playoff round series articles. Then again, maybe that too, wouldn't be such a bad idea. GoodDay 19:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[2007 Stanley Cup Finals]] article 

message: We seem to be having a lot of discussions here on the hockey project page, which makes it pretty long.  Another option is to use the 
 
and
 .
For an example, see Blocker (hockey).  It creates a space for the discussion, people interested in the article who aren't part of the hockey project will see it,
and it's a GREAT way to find a volunteer to come along and do the merge work for you <smile!> ColtsScore 04:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge tags

message: Looks like this guy is going around and spamming the rosters of Stanley Cup teams on articles. Wasn't there a decision not to add these to articles? --Wafulz 12:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah we even had the templates afd'd. --Djsasso 19:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Its because it makes the pages cluttered. Can you imagine a player like Henri Richard who has won 11 Stanley cups. The page would become a mess. We have or intend to (don't know if its been done yet) have a table on the applicable season page that would indicate who was on the team that won the cup that year. --Djsasso 21:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 216.60.196.222

message: Has anyone notice that someone using this IP has been changing statistics on player pages such as height, weight, etc.? S/he generally changes it back to what it should be, but this has been happening quite often. Gmatsuda 12:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: S/he is still at it, even though I left a message for him/her on his/her talk page. Latest is on Dany Heatley Gmatsuda 21:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Report him/her to the Administrators, I'm certain Heatly isn't 6'5' tall. Lower the boom. GoodDay 21:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That user makes changes and then corrects them right away. It's weird. Gmatsuda 21:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He/she just doesn't know about the sandbox. That's the place for these Wiki experiments. GoodDay 21:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I've reported him to the Administrator's noticeboard's incidents section. Patients is a virtue, 88.112.222.56 is trying my virtue. GoodDay 17:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He/she's been blocked for the next 24hrs. The Administrators will be keeping watch now. GoodDay 22:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 88.112.222.56

message: In the spirit of the Stanley Cup Finals, anyone want to take a shot at re-writing the Scott Niedermayer and Dustin Penner articles? The Niedermayer article is not on-par with the other articles of players of his calibre, and the Dustin Penner article is just poorly-written and tons of fancruft and POV. Anyone? I'm just a lil too busy on other stuff to do it myself. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 16:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article improvement

message: although i don't fully understand the technology, sortable wikitables has been implimented, and was discussed here; this seems extremely useful for displaying hockey stats. just thought i'd let you know, 131.111.24.187 10:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't really help with stats all that much except maybe standings I don't think, but I know they were using it in the project for some other sorting. --Djsasso 15:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I used them for a re-write of List of members of the Hockey Hall of Fame, and they are also used for the two small statistical leader tables on 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs.  Andrwsc 16:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  sortable tables 

message: Not if we count 'interim captains' (which we do at Wikipedia, as the NHL also recognizes them). Today, Sidney Crosby at age 19-yrs 9-monts was appointed an NHL captain (Penguins), media declare him the youngest captain ever. What about Brian Bellows? who served as the 'interim captain' of the Minnesota North Stars (for the later-half of the 1983-84 season) while Craig Hartsburg was injured/out of the lineup. Bellows was appointed at age 19-yrs 4-months. What's everyone's opinons. GoodDay 22:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should probably call him the youngest full-time captain and say who was the real youngest in the Crosby article. As you picked up on this, various media outlets will probably pick up on it as well, especially in Minnesota, and we will probably be able to find a source that states the same. bmitchelf•T•F 22:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As expected, my edit at Sidney Crosby is attracting opposition (though I understand why). It's frustrating, we've NHL team sites (external sites) that list 'interim captains' with regular captains & yet there's external sites listing Crosby as the youngest captain (ignoring Bellows). Conflicting sites, indeed. GoodDay 19:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Youngest NHL captain?

message: I mentioned it here a few days ago but I'm not sure if anyone noticed it. I made an major reconstruction of the New Jersey Devils seasons list. In my opinion this table looks better then the old one and I think it would be nice if we used it on all seasons lists. If someone could write a better lead and add more refrences, I think this list could pass Featured List Candidacy. --Krm500 00:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not half bad. I'm not sure I see the point in the note 3 for when the Wales became the Eastern Conference though.  Resolute 00:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. Nice job. Sportskido8 07:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's definitely a good solid effort.  The one thing it is missing to make it FLC is a column of team seasons, which will obviously have to be created as articles.  If you look at all the FLs that are team seasons, the first column is for the league season that year, and the second is of the individual team 's season.  Then all the other stuff.  Resolute, the note about the conference changing over is standard practice.  In fact, the list could use a reference to the year they switched jersey colors, and an update to this coming season where it indicates that they're moving to the Rock.  It shouldn't take too long to hammer out individual season articles at least as stubs to start (I'd offer to help but I'm up to my neck in projects as it is).  Once that's done then we can submit to FLC. Anthony Hit me up... 12:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[New Jersey Devils seasons]] 

message: Stanley Cup is now assessed as Good article. Congraduations. OhanaUnited 12:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stanley Cup