Talk:Lacrosse/Archive 1

message: The almost complete lack of information on the games origins is sad. I play with Onondadas for years, and to them Lacrosse is still more than a sport. 
The game was developed by the Six Nations, Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, Senecas, Akwesanse, colectivly call the Iroquois. It was often used for land disputes, witch is why it was called the "little brother of war," it was used insted. It was also played all year round, frozen rivers were often utilized. 
Every on of the Nations had there own style stick, the one closed to the ones we use now was the Akwesanse, it was actualy used Until Brine came out with the L-88(I believe), the firts plastic stick. In Box lacrosse there are still players that perffer the all wood style very simmilar to the Akwesanse.
Another Intesting fack traditionally you will never see a women playing lacrosse. On the Onondaga reservation it is consider bad luck for a girl to even toach a lacrosse stick. I would never see a mother carring her sons stick, it just didnt happen.
They still play traditional style games today. They are reffered to as medicine games. They are played for the well being of the communtity and also play in honnor of specific clan mothers.
I have researched none of this information, it is all first hand experiance. What I have seen and have been told by the people who created the game. Hopefull someone who has more time will be able to to add more information of the true origin of the game. As in not a Canadian Cricket Club  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.242.123.72 (talk • contribs) 00:03, April 14, 2005  (UTC)
*The article says "Lacrosse was named Canada's National Game in 1859" and later it says that in 1867, George Beers, codified the game.  I am removing the 1859 thing since Canada confederation was in 1867.  Add correct info if you can cite a source. Cafe Nervosa | talk 02:25, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is actually a History of Lacrosse page that is sadly lacking information. Perhaps the historical information on this page should be merged into that page, and the History page should be expanded. I will do what I can to expand on the History section. Comments?  --DO11.10 19:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: Very little mention is made in this article regarding other countries that play lacrosse. The sport in particular has been played in Australia since 1870's. Women's lacrosse was created in the United Kingdom. The rules of lacrosse and much of the article represent the USA version of the game and does not reflect the international rules and perspective.
Ozdaren 03:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lacrosse Around the World

message: It seems there is some non-neutral POV additions surrounding the "domination" of Division I lacrosse. It is silly to believe that some of these listed teams that are rarely ranked #1-3 and have not won a title can be considered "dominating" Division I. Maryland is frequently in the final 4, but haven't won the title since 1975, and aren't close to dominating D1. Navy has been strong, but have never won the title and apart from a recent year or two, aren't a perennial final 4 staple or top 5 team either.
On the contrary, I would be tempted to delete this "dominating" wording altogether, as the parity of lacrosse increases and no teams truly dominate the division anymore. Virginia and Hopkins have consistently been #1/2/3, although both have had a disappointing year or two in the past five. Syracuse, Princeton, and Maryland (consistent #1-6 in past decade) have been bi-polar at times as well. Duke is coming on strong, but a few years ago they were a consistent 4th place ACC team. No team is really dominating the division anymore. I would replace the entire sentence listing the six dominating teams. I would replace it with a table or chart showing the final 4s, runner-up, and national titles of each team in the past decade -- this would give a much more accurate indications of the strength of current teams and the top current D1 schools.
There is quite a bit of non-neutral POV in this article, you can simply go through it and easily pick out a certain college or two that have been hyped up through additions. This really doesn't need to be an advertisement for your favorite school. I have not deleted anything yet as I am going to see if anyone has any further suggestions and I need to gather some information if I am going to create a more reflective item in its place. 
Scott930 01:06, 09 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with your comments and aims.Sfahey 03:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been 7 programs recognized as NCAA champions in Division I Lacrosse: Cornell, Virginia, Maryland, Johns Hopkins, North Carolina, Syracuse and Princeton.  Also, Syracuse has technically won 8 national titles.  Their 1990 title was ruled as "vacated" as a result of Paul Gait playing while ineligible [] .  In the future please put your name and date stamp on the page and please do more research before posting. Phimu222 16:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Domination" of Division I

message: A glossary might help. For instance the word stick-checks, I have a good idea of what it means, but a definition might be useful.
meatclerk 23:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These changes have now been made.  "Squaws" is replaced by "women," "braves" by "young men." --Craigkbryant 14:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I oppose this edit. Why overly P.C.-ify what was otherwise an accurate statement? Just who do you expect to be offended by the term that you deleted? "Squaw" and "brave" are not negative terms. I respectfully suggest reversion. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 15:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for engaging me on the talk page.  I don't see it as overly PC, for the reason that I am not requesting some kind of new, special term to refer to Indian men and women.  In fact, I am doing just the opposite: calling women "women" and men "men."  Why wouldn't we want to do that?  Why, in fact, would we feel we need a special word--borrowed from an Algonquian language--to refer to all Indian women in North America?  The answer is simple: to create and emphasize a distinction between Indian women and "normal" women, which is to say, white Europeans.  Calling people "squaws," particuarly in 17th, 18th or 19th century North America, means you don't have to think about whether you would think about or deal with "women" in the same way.  "Squaw" is not a special role particular to Indian societies (like "medicine man" or "chief"), and so there is no call for a distinct vocabulary item to refer to these people.  Consider whether we would be comfortable using a word like "negress" to refer to, say, Coretta Scott King or Condoleezza Rice.
Of course, it's possible--perhaps even easy--to carry this sort of thing too far.  I might mention the gracious German "Herren and Frauen" I met on vacation last summer, and (probably) no one would take exception.  But the moral qualities of words are not some kind of absolute, independent of usage and history.  We can try to argue that "squaw" is not a negative term, but it is part of a five-century legacy of dehumanization and, not to put to fine a point on it, genocide.  You may mean no disrespect in the world when you use it, but you can't escape that legacy.
Fine, you might say, then we will reclaim the word by using it in a positive way--by using it to talk about the history of this wonderful sport, lacrosse.  So I'll close my argument by asking: why would we need to?  Why do we need a special word that means "Indian woman," but not a special word that means "colonial European woman?"
The case with "brave" is similar, but less extreme.  "Brave" is a word with a strong military context (Europeans get to have "soldiers" to defend them, Indians get "braves").  We would find it odd to refer to European settlers as "militiamen" outside the specific contexts of drill and combat, even if they were, say, at a marksmanship contest or wrestling match, or out hunting.  Warfare was a part of life for young Indian males.  It wasn't for Europeans?  Then why a different word?
I stand by the edit and consider that it is only appropriate for the world-class, neutral encyclopedia that Wikipedia aspires to be.
Best,
--Craigkbryant 17:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Agree.Sfahey 22:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, according to our very own article on the subject, that's erroneous.  Powers 02:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: Can we please only have external links that are non-commercial and neutral, rather than adding in personal favourite teams or personal business (eg photos site)? Lukeoz 11:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Site Plugs

message: An IP user changed the History of Lacrosse link, as can be seen here (don't want to give the URL potentially undue google rank, know what I mean?). Can someone review this link? It seems to have some info, but I really don't know anything about Lacrosse, as I just came to this article checking on another IP that has been engaging in vandalism.--Drat (Talk) 15:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at the link. I'm not sure what you wanted but it seems accurate and fine. It has good info and I think its good. --Yarnalgo 22:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot all about this. The point I was making was that they changed it from one link to another link, meaning that the first link is no longer in the article. What was that one like?--Drat (Talk) 09:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing of external link. 

message: The Good article nomination for  has failed
:There aren't enough references (only 2), violating 2a and 2b on WP:WIAGA. That also leads to questionable statistics, details, numbers, years, etc., violating 1a, 2d, and 4a. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good Article]] [[Wikipedia:Good articles/Nominations|nomination]] has failed 

message: It says "One midfield and defesemen" can carry longer sticks.  Does that mean that two or four players can carry them?  As in, one midfielder and all defensemen or one midfielder and one defensemen? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bizznot (talk • contribs) .
* A team can have four players on the field at all times with long-sticks. All three defensemen have long-sticks at all times. Not a rule, just widely practiced srategy. When the ball is in the deffensive end, usually a short-stick mifielder, or middie, subs out and a long-stick middie subs in. This is done without the use of a time out, or "on the fly". When the ball is cleared out of the defensive end, the long-stick middie subs out, and the short-stick middie subs back in. Length of long-sticks are a max of 72 inches. Hope this helps clear things up. J-Dog 04:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should also be noted that in Major League Lacrosse you can only have three long-sticks on the field at one time—midfield or defense. --Yarnalgo 01:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long-stickers 

message: I know, you'd think it would be hockey, but lacrosse is the official national sport; I'm just not sure whether it's box or field lacrosse that's the "official form".  Came here looking for appropriate category tags for the New Westminster Salmonbellies, also noting while researching them that the Coquitlam Adanacs (formerly the New Westminster Adanacs AFAIK) doesn't have an article; I'll check the cat tags at the Victoria Shamrocks and the Vancouver Burrards articles; whops the Burrards don't have an article either but leaving redlinks in place as reminders.  But I think this article should mention that it's Canada's official national sport, and provide listings of Canadian teams/links; I note the US-bias tag and find it kind of ironic; mind you, many pro players in Canada get their experience in the NCAA, so.....Skookum1 22:15, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the 1994 National Sports of Canada Act , both hockey and lacrosse are the national sports of Canada (ice hockey in the winter and lacrosse in the summer).  The bill does not specify a form of lacrosse, although box lacrosse isn't played much in the summer.  =)  Powers 14:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Box lacrosse is only played in the summer, as far as I know. Its offshoot indoor lacrosse is played in the winter. John FitzGerald 16:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Not being a hockey fan (very un-Canadian, and proudly so), it had slipped my mind that hockey had been added by legislation as a national sport in '94; it was an irony of Canadian identity until then that the national sport was something most people didn't watch or care about (even though ice hockey began as "lacrosse-on-ice").  Out here in BC, until the boom in rec centre construction with increased suburbanization in the '70s and '80s, hockey never used to be a big sport (despite the local obsession since the Canucks came along), and lacrosse and rugby and soccer were the main outdoor sports (and baseball, when it wasn't raining...); volleyball and basketball the main indoor sports (hence Steve Nash).  One of our neighbours and his brothers had been Salmonbellies, and his nephews were star players in my time (family name was Delmonico; Herb was also one of BC's first bodybuilders), hence what little knowledge/awareness I have of the sport until the last few years when I wound up coffeeing with some of the New West guys and was friends with the team's trainer/physio....anyway, just felt that a mention of Lacrosse as (one of) Canada's (two) national sport(s) should be made in the article, although will have to think of the wording given lacrosse's long standing as the only national sport/ and not sure what year it was first legislated as the national sport in; also should be mention of the role of First Nations/Native American athletes and teams like the Iroquois Nationals in the sport.Skookum1 19:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I started the Iroquois Nationals article and added some info to this article. The '94 official sports act stated hockey and lacrosse, not sure if lacrosse was official before that. I'll add a cite to the article if it's still missing, will check now. heqs 19:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which of box or field lacrosse is the Canadian Nat'l Sport? 

message: I have created a proposal for a new WikiProject about lacrosse. Please check out the temporary project page at User:MrBoo/WikiProject Lacrosse and sign your name if you are interested.
Thanks --MrBoo (talk, contribs) 14:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Lacrosse 

message: This evening I added team sports to the Position disambiguation and started to write the position (team sports) article. My start is mainly links to Wikipedia articles and sections. Perhaps it should eventually include a general discussion of something like player specialization.
From this article on lacrosse, I think goalkeeper may be the only official position (it is "designated") among conventional positions, and may be the only position that is highly specialized. Right?
Maybe position (team sports) can use a general characterization that fits several "Goalkeeper sports" (my term of the moment) and one that fits several "Server sports" (my term), where the particular sports can simply be listed. I'm not sure. Look at what I wrote for volleyball as a "server sport".
Cricket and the three biggest North American team sports all have one specialized articles devoted to field(ing) positions. Association/soccer football has that too (although it is a goalkeeper sport). So I simply linked to those specialized articles. --P64 01:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One clue to thinking about this might be how left-handed and right-handed players mix on the field. Do some positions need right-handed and some need left-handed players? Or different positions might be defined in the rules but not covered in this article. Concerning the length of the sticks, it seems from the article that there are limited differences as a matter of strategy --and tradition, if middle and low levels follow what the high level teams do. --P64 02:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Position (team sports)