Talk:Adam Oates

message: The stats given in this section are very different from the ones in the table below.  Anyone know which are correct?  (unfortunately I do not know where to procure hockey stats)  68.161.220.16 09:38, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  2002-2003 Season 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating 

message: This article's nomination for GA, shouldn't be passed. Adam Oates hasn't been inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame, yet. The Hall of Fame, 2012 addition to the bottom of the infobox, gives the impression that he has been. GoodDay (talk) 20:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Only a moron would think that, given the article says both in the lead and his playing section that he has been elected and will be inducted in November. I realize you are upset that consensus is against you, but that does not justify your WP:POINT actions and, frankly, trolling. Resolute 20:41, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's best to wait until November (after the induction ceremony), before nominationg this article for GA, IMHO. But since it has been nominated now, the reviewers will decide on its status. GoodDay (talk) 20:52, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

text:  Mm, I'm with Resolute.  The notion that a GA nomination shouldn't pass because you don't like the consensus on a particular element of the article is nothing short of sour grapes.  You've been around quite long enough to understand how GA works (or you ought to, in any event) and the provisions of WP:POINT.  The only grounds for objection in this particular case would be on WP:CRYSTAL, but since only one electee in the Hockey Hall of Fame's 67 year history has failed to be inducted, the notion that Oates' election is solely speculative is farcical.   Ravenswing   07:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Inaccurate information in the infobox, makes not a GA, IMHO. Anyways, it's up to the reviewers, now. GoodDay (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, see now, let's examine that.  Upon what basis do you assert that Oates is not a member of the Hall of Fame?  That the public ceremony has not yet been held?  That there isn't a hunk of metal on the wall yet?  The point that the webmaster updates the website?  Do you in fact know when this is official, and can you quote the HHOF rule governing this?  (In fact, according to By-Law 21, paragragh 32, it is when the Chairman of the Board of Directors certifies the member, and not upon the induction ceremony.)    Ravenswing   18:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oates hasn't been inducted, yet. Therefore, I haven't changed my stance. GoodDay (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  So stipulated.  I'm quite happy to let reviewers decide whether or not your personal preference about what ought to constitute an Honoured Member overrules the Hockey Hall of Fame's bylaw on the subject, and the degree to which WP:IDHT comes into play.   Ravenswing   01:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Should the reviewers decide to give this article a GA status, then the article will get its GA status. GoodDay (talk) 02:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What a ridiculous case of a WP:POINT argument. Just because consensus hasn't gone your way doesn't mean you need to continue spouting off about it all over the place and in this case trying to block a GA. The infobox does not say inducted, it does not indicate in any way that he has been inducted. It just says he is a member of the 2012 class, which is what he is. That is already a fact. It has already happened. -DJSasso (talk) 12:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA nomination 

message: this is not true. He does not have the most points for undrafted player. Gretzky was also undrafted.. 71.176.216.104 (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  He has the highest amount of games played and points scored among undrafted NHL players, with 1,337 and 1,420, respectively.