Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive17

message: Hi there.  I'm new to this whole editing thing, and I'm working on shoring up the Teemu Selänne page with references, ect.  I added a phonetic pronunciation of his name which is based on the way that I've heard it pronounced by just about every NHL announcer ever, since I can't read IPA.  Someone has come through the page and left a note that I need to cite the source for my pronunciation.  Is this just someone being a jerk?  If they believe I have transcribed it wrongly, shouldn't they just correct it?  How on earth do I cite a pronunciation?
Further, I noticed that a LOT of the foreign and/or difficult names (the Jokinen boys, Keith Tkachuk, etc.) do not have any kind of pronunciation guide.  Is that something that this group prefers to leave out?  If not, is there a 'source' where I should be getting these pronunciations, should I decide to put them in?
I apologize if this seems whiny or petty--I just want to do this right.
Astraldaeva (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitively agree! I'm not American/Canadian and for me pronunciation is something hard (Tkachuk is a perfect example). Usually I learn from NHL announcers. However, I think that you should include also original pronunciation (e.g. Selanne's Finnish pronunciation). IPA is necessary but is also complex and widely unknown. --necronudist (talk) 15:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not someone being a jerk, you would have to use IPA and/or have a source for what you are putting in. Unfortunately it is an encyclopedia so you need to source everything. --Djsasso (talk) 16:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though it doesn't use the IPA guide, the NHL Official Guide and Record Book has pronounciations for every player. That would be a good starting point. ESPN player profiles tend to also include pronounciations, but it is far from a total list. Kaiser matias (talk) 20:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not how you pronounce Selänne... IPA is a good idea, but then the correct native translation should be used, not the americanized version. After all, this is an encyclopedia. --Krm500 (talk) 00:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you pronounce Selanne, anyways? Is it Sul-lawny, Sul-lanny, Sul-laney etc. On the NHL broadcasts I've heard many variations. GoodDay (talk) 00:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps like this on Youtube. Native pronounciation of Selänne --Bamsefar75 (talk) 01:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Forget about the A, it's an Ä which in Selänne's case sounds more like an E then an A, Ä is sometimes translated as AE (Æ). Basically, the Ä in Selänne is pronounced like the E in encyclopedia. --Krm500 (talk) 03:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's wer variations on how the Stastny name was pronounced aswell. Then there was Foster Hewitt's own way of pronouncing Counrnoyer (sorry, getting too silly). Anyways, there were alot of mistaken pronounciations of European NHLers names by North American media (which can be forgiven). GoodDay (talk) 03:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciations of difficult names 

message: Have also put an issue on the talk page of the Sens' article about number 18 of the Sens'. Alaney2k (talk) 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sens Number 18 

message: I have been busy lately converting many templates into the :Template:Navbox format. I've also split the WikiProject Ice Hockey/Templates page in two, creating the  WikiProject Ice Hockey/Navboxes page.
I have noticed the many templates such as , ,  and  are grossly underimplemented on hockey bios. Would anyone be willing to help? Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 13:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can help out, but currently only the TSN one shows the correct usage, so I am not sure what needs to be done for each link.Leafschik1967 (talk) 14:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I have steadily over the last year been going through every player page changing the first two over. I haven't really used the other two yet cause I rarely are those pages linked in bios. --Djsasso (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what User:Leafschik1967 means by "currently only the TSN one shows the correct usage." Explain please. Flibirigit (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think she means instructions for how to fill it out. I believe they all pretty much use the same method. I know the hockeydb and legendsofhockey ones do for sure. The only difference between them and the TSN one is that it asks you for a team. You don't need the team for the previous two. The only time you need the third field in the first two is if someone is named John Doe (ice hockey), in that case you would type in John Doe so that the (ice hockey) would not show when the link shows up. --Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was what I meant.  Thanks.Leafschik1967 (talk) 20:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've completed the "usage" for all of those templates using Sidney Crosby as an example. Flibirigit (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template & Navigational boxes 

message: It seems that Maple Leaf has gone around adding said template onto all members of the mens and womens Canadian hockey teams. It just seems to be another one of those templates that we have in the past deemed useless. I would think that we are going to be removing them soon. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops.  I saw it and added it in a few places.  I was unaware of the previous discussion.  I kind of liked the looks of it.Leafschik1967 (talk) 00:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The discussion in the past was about Stanley Cup team templates, rather than Olympics, but I do feel the same way about this as the others.  The teammates a player shares on a team is not an important factor of their identity.  Templates like these simply lead to overtemplating.  I'd be inclined to TfD it as well.  However, I have asked Maple Leaf to add his input as well. Resolute 00:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I have seen so many templates in other sports that I thought that a Team Canada template was useful simply because of the fact that it was the first Canadian gold for women and the first mens gold in 50 years. I do agree about overtemplating but I think that Stanley Cups and Olympics are very reasonable. Considering that there are templates for First Round Draft Picks, I certainly believe templates for notable championships are acceptable. Maple Leaf (talk) 00:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, I was not aware of the previous discussions either. Maple Leaf (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It's up for TFD now. --Djsasso (talk) 01:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:2002 Olympic Gold Medal Hockey Team 

message: Did anyone see TSN Sportscentre this morning? They actually quoted the article for Carey Price because someone added the text "It is commonly held belief among Montreal fans that Price is the second coming of Jesus, only with a higher panic threshold." It was added yesterday  by some random IP. Either way, perhaps the article should be protected. -- Scorpion0422 16:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's rather funny, actually.  ;o)   At any rate, I don't think there is enough vandalism occurring to warrant protecting the page at this point.  I've added it to my watchlist though.  More eyes will reduce the amount of time such vandalism exists.  If it does persist though, we can protect the page. Resolute 16:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't be surprised if someone from TSN added that themselves. But, some hockey fans can be overzealous too. Flibirigit (talk) 16:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP is registered to Dalhousie University.  Seems some kids in Halifax got bored. Resolute 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Price? the second coming of Jesus? In that case he'll never be as popular as The Beatles (remember the reporter mis-quoting Lennon). Now, the second coming of St. Patrick (Roy)? Well, that would be blasphemy. GoodDay (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kind of embarrassing 

message: Does any know what the official name is of those "things" that hockey teams enter through at the start of games? Some teams have inflatable objects, such as a tank (see here) or a wolf (see here), or solid objects such as the Edmonton Oiler's oil derrick. Any ideas? Flibirigit (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gimmick is the best fit, imo.  Resolute 20:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NHL teams adopting Professional wrestling crowd pleasing techniques, including the annoucers yelling in 'wrestling style' -On defence, Roby Raaaageaaaar. GoodDay (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So you've heard our PA announcer then, eh?  ;o)  Apropos to nothing, in my completely unbiassed opinion, the exploding fireballs in the Saddledome is the coolest gimmick in the league. Resolute 21:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wunder if Keenan is thinking about having the players skate out through a wall of fire? Or are they thinking of throwing Keenan into a fire? OK, I'm getting too silly (and blogging) which is a no no. GoodDay (talk) 21:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Haha I was totally thinking he must have visited Calgary or caught a tidbit on the TV or something cause that was pretty accurate for text lol. --Djsasso (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the official name of these things? 

message: Does anybody have any sources to back this. The NHL tends to claim the arena attendences are fine, yet there seems to be alot of empty seats watching NHL hockey these days. I'm just wundering if there's any sources for this & anywhere we could put such information. Or is it a superfluouis topic. GoodDay (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably superfluouis.  All teams count by tickets distributed rather than turnstile count, and that is the only reliable figures we have.  Unless someone actually does a physical count of the number of people at a game, using anything other than the official attendance is conjecture. Resolute 21:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Corporate tickets... --Krm500 (talk) 21:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It's trivial. As Resolute mentioned. Most people think attendence figures are actual people who show up at the game, but its not. It is counted by how many tickets are sold. The NHL has never denied this. --Djsasso (talk) 22:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low attendance & denials 

message: Have a look at this guy... the most traded player to haved never played a regular season game, and still going after 35 seasons in the playoffs! Thought you could use a laugh. Flibirigit (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is funny! What the heck 'is that? Alaney2k (talk) 04:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hockeydb.com anomaly 

message: Does this line actually have any notability?  It doesn't assert any, and I am inclined to PROD/AfD it, but given the article is nearly two years old, wanted to see if there is something I am missing here. Resolute 16:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prod it; it pales in comparison to the punch line, scooter line, kraut line etc. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Prod it, I believe at one point we were going to create an article of just line names like a list or something. Don't know if that was ever done. --Djsasso (talk) 18:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there's a section in the nickname article. --Krm500 (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, I'll bite. I have started work on the article. Judge the article after I work on it a bit. I think they are notable as one of the top lines in the league, if not the top. Heatley has scored 50 goals on the line for the last two seasons, and the threesome tied for the playoff points lead this past playoffs. I'm sure I can avoid fandom stuff. There is plenty of history around the players. Alaney2k (talk) 20:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly though, in the history of the NHL, they're not very notable. Where's the Art Ross trophies, Richard trophies or most important the Stanley Cup titles. GoodDay (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: While I think you have done a fine job of expanding the article, I would argue it still does not establish notability.  You have had to rely on a lot of POV - stating that that line is one of the best in the NHL is opinion, and being the top line in Ottawa establishes no notability.  The one reference you used does not support the statement it is citing, and more to the point, the article really doesn't talk about the "CASH line" itself, simply that one of the players is back on the top line.  There really is a derth of reliable sources that would establish this line as being notable, as I can't find any articles specifically about the CASH line as a whole.  Honestly, I think the only reason this article exists is that it has a  name.  There really is nothing special about it.  Certainly no more so than the Tanguay-Langkow-Iginla line, which was one of the top lines last year, or the old WCE line in Vancouver. Resolute 20:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: C'mon guys, I spent an hour on it so far. Anyway, if you were writing about top lines in the league today, you would certainly name them as one, no offence meant to others. Since they were put together, they might be the top scoring line during the period. The TSN article named them the 'most dangerous line in hockey'. Does the article have to come after the players' careers? Alaney2k (talk) 21:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  The line is probably comparable to the line of Mikita and Hull? Alaney2k (talk) 21:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not a good comparison - Hull and Mikita have a Stanley Cup title between them. Also they've a few Art Ross, Hart and Lady Byng trophies among their claims to fame and did I mention their HHOF memberships. GoodDay (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I don't think any of that matters either.  Individual accomplishments are listed on the individual articles.  My concern with this line is whether or not it will be remembered, and written about.  Everyone remembers the Production line, and the Triple Crown line.  Will the CASH line be held up by history?  Personally, I doubt it.  But I'm willing to leave it be for now. Resolute 21:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To put it bluntly I listen to hockey talk constantly read tonnes of articles on it and am very involved in the sport, and I didn't actually know who the CASH line was. Which is a pretty big indicator in my opinion on the lack of notability of this line. If you could find sources and not use POV and if they were still being written about 10 years or more down the road then yes I would be all for this article. But as it stands its got to go. It's not about the individuals, they are obviously notable, but the line itself is no more notable than any other line and an article on the line has to be notable for itself and not for the individuals who happen to be on it. And don't forget you can't go on what they could do either because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Djsasso (talk) 22:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure, but you knew who Alfredsson-Spezza-Heatley is, no? The name is the name of the line, but it is not used that much. I think the players are pretty notable. I don't think that that is POV. I think the line is notable, especially leading the playoffs last year in points. I don't think that is POV, either. I think we can safely predict that in 10 years time, this line will still be notable, it will be in the books. It will be in the Podnieks update on the Stanley Cup due around that time. That is not a stretch by any means. Two Calder trophies, 50 goals back to back, notoriety of the car crash, blockbuster trade for Hossa, blockbuster trade of Yashin. And maybe it takes on some notableness outside of hockey, especially with the video game covers. I am not writing from Ottawa, but from Toronto. I get the hockey talk here, mostly endlessly Leafs. I don't think the name is so widely publicized but every game the opponents talk about shutting them down. That was 90% of the Ducks' game plan in the Finals. Alaney2k (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But that is the point. This article is about the named line. Its not about the existance of the line. CASH line as an entity is not notable. Yes we know who the three of them are and they have their individual articles for that. But "Cash line" as a thing is not notable. --Djsasso (talk) 05:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  What about the Legion of Doom line? That was about 10 years ago. What do you think of its 'notableness'? Alaney2k (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Legion of Doom line is widely known as an entity by most hockey fans. This is what makes them notable as opposed to the Cash line. --Djsasso (talk) 05:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Seeing as the existance of this article is being disputed, let's have the community decide. Tag it with an AfD. GoodDay (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It already went through that, I think. Maybe the bigger issue is where should 'line' articles go? (or not, of course) What is the notability guideline? Alaney2k (talk) 23:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, no it did not.  The AFD was put in by User:Bsroiaadn who withdrew the nomination 9 minutes after he submitted it.  He inserted it here and deleted it here.  It should be tagged and allowed to run it's course.  As Djsasso said, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and this line is not yet notable. -Pparazorback (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The article has been nominated so that the community can decide it's notability -Pparazorback (talk) 03:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suggest that this is the 'wrong' way to develop notability guidelines. Alaney2k (talk) 04:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The notability is fine, but there is another name for it, "The Pizza Line". It deserves an article, unless the line was mentioned separately in each article (Heatley's, Spezza's, Alfredsson's). But that'd mean other line articles would be like that too like The French Connection (hockey). --Hasek is the best 21:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[CASH line]] 

message: I've created a new biography template —  — to get a player's profile and stats from European Hockey.Net. The site has more complete stats for European based players. The template works the same way as the  and  ones by using the player number from the url. Hope that's okay -- JD554 (talk) 10:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! --Krm500 (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope that's always a good thing. --Djsasso (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've completed the "usage" that template using Jaromír Jágr as an example. Flibirigit (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Cool, I think the word I was actually looking for was 'syntax', but I just couldn't find it.  Leafschik1967 13:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New biography template 

message: FYI - See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NHL playoff lists for a few hockey-related articles that have been nominated for deletion.  Feel free to comment if you would like.   - Rjd0060 06:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD Nomination 

message: I've nominated our past Diacritics wars to be displayed at Wikipedia: Lamest edit wars, after checking them over (with myself involved). GoodDay 00:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: haha I can't believe you put that up... --Djsasso 00:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just felt we all should take a momment and laugh at ourselves and be proud of ourselves that we worked things out in the end. GoodDay 01:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm the nominaton might fail, I haven't done a good job of presenting 'the actualy edit wars' (they want more then just heated discussions). GoodDay 01:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well I'll be flabercasted - There really wasn't a whole lot of edit warring on this topic. We Hockey editors weren't as distructive as I recalled - we (correctly) kept the bulk of our disputes on the Discussion pages. Hmm, I think we deserve an applause. GoodDay 21:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, I was recently looking over the archived discussion at Wayne Gretzky, and while I'm not really into looking over the fine details of it, it seems as if the page was constantly edited over whether he was, to quote the archive titles, the "greatest or one of?" Just looking at the talk page shows 6 different archived pages, compared to one for general talk. Further more, it seems as if there was further issues about him including: whether he is Polish-Canadian, Belorussian-Canadian, Russian-Canadian, ethnic Polish (this is more centred around Walter though), is he Canadian, American, Canadian-American, Canadian-born American, etc. If someone actually took some time to go through it, I'm certain Gretzky could get on that page. Kaiser matias 07:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but you'll have to provide the 'edit warring' itself (the heated discussions aren't enough). GoodDay 20:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of Diacritics wars 

message: The NHL's official webpage for the Winter Classic refers to it simply as the AMP NHL Winter Classic.  However, nearly every other source I've found has referred to the game as the AMP Energy NHL Winter Classic -- today's Sabres press release, for example.  I've been hedging about this for awhile.  I created the page as AMP NHL Winter Classic because that was what I first saw when I opened up the NHL.com link on the day it was announced.  Should we stick with what NHL.com says, or should we move the page to AMP Energy NHL Winter Classic to reflect the apparent consensus?  Or have I missed something official from the NHL that does contain the word Energy? Skudrafan1 21:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave as is and create a redirect. We have to assume that the NHL is the one that is correct being that it is their event. --Djsasso 22:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[AMP NHL Winter Classic]] question 

message: Shall I continue or discontinue with unlinked C & A' for filling-in letter players? See discussion at Edmonton Oilers, for example. I don't recall ever getting the Project's views on this. GoodDay 17:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally do not see that big of a deal with linking the C & A for filling in players.  Using your commentary that "it help readers know which are the regulars & which aren't." I do not think is a valid argument for doing it or not.  I don't think the average reader would even notice that it is linked or not since technically you are not supposed to link a second instance of the same link in the same article.  With that observation, how is Average Joe Reader supposed to think there is any distinction between the linked and non-linked A or C?  Overall, edited warring over linking or unlinking that is not worth it, in my opinion. --Pparazorback 17:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I say pick your battles accordingly.  I don't think editing a link to an A or C is worth it.  While you have tried to nominate Diacritics to Wikipedia: Lamest edit wars, I say that if you got into an edit war with someone hell bent on linking the letters that you would have no problem getting that edit war onto that list.  There are other things that your efforts would be better spent on. --Pparazorback 18:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlinked lettering for 'filling-in' Captains & alternates 

message: For anyone interested I've started a discussion on the navbox talk page to see whether flags should be included on navboxes or not. -- JD554 (talk) 08:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flags on navboxes 

message: Looking up references for the 2006-07 season article, I came across an interesting tidbit. Different websites seem to have different ideas as to when the Oilers franchise's 1,000th win occurred. Most say January 2, 2007 against the Panthers, while others say January 7, 2007 against the Kings. The season article on Wikipedia says the 7th, while the team article says the 2nd. I am going with the 2nd with the reference for now, but this should probably be checked out. -- bmitchelf•T•F 04:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You meant Jan 2.  I pulled up hockeydb and put oiler's overall record in excel.  They had 981 wins at the end of the 2005-06 season, so 19 wins in 2006-07 is the mark which indeed was January 2. --Pparazorback (talk) 05:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I meant Jan 02.  Resolute 17:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edmonton Oilers' 1,000th win 

message: This article resembles Ottawa Senators (original) too much, to be a seperate article. Perhaps it should be tagged with an AfD? What does everybody think. GoodDay (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was temporary. The club was officially always known as the Ottawa Hockey Club, during its Silver Seven days, and the Senators days. I switched the redirects around. But that can be switched back if Senators is proper policy. Alaney2k (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's similar to the listing for Montreal HC, also better known as Montreal AAA. Alaney2k (talk) 23:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Naming guidelines say to use the most common name, which may not necessarily be the official name. They may have been the Ottawa Hockey Club officially, but they were most commonly called the Ottawa Senators. Its the same reason we have the article Toronto Maple Leafs and Toronto Maple Leaf Hockey Club (the official name of the Leafs) redirects to it. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 23:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, my mistake, I'll switch that back. Hold on a sec. Alaney2k (talk) 23:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ottawa Hockey Club]] 

message: After about a year of pecking away at this article, I've spent the past three days seriously editing this article to add images, sources, prose, etc, and I believe it is close to being FA level.  I've listed the article at Wikipedia:Peer review/Calgary Flames.  Any comments anyone has on how to improve this article would be most appreciated, especially from anyone who worked to get New Jersey Devils to featured status.  Thanks! Resolute 23:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Calgary Flames]] peer review 

message: What do you guys think of this: List of Black Hockey Players?  Indiscriminate list, no? Skudrafan1 (talk) 21:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I find that article tasteless. A hockey players skills don't depend on his/her skin coloration. GoodDay (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, tastelessness is not really an issue, given Wikipedia is not censored, but I question whether this is a relevant intersection.  While there was a really good story on Willie O'Ree in the Sun yesterday, I think we have long since past the time when an NHL player being black is unique enough to be notable. Resolute 21:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: No but it probably is a defining characteristic of the person (as much as that shouldn't be the case) which is what the requirement is for categories, so I don't see a valid reason for getting rid of it as I would think lists would fall along the same lines.  --Djsasso (talk) 21:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's ample precedent in Wikipedia for such a list, alas.  My problem is that's it's poorly done.  Marc Tardif and Ray Neufeld, WTF?  Bill Riley listed twice?  Several players on the "Minor Leagues / Europe" list long retired?  All those redlinks?    RGTraynor  00:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Howabout an article List of White Hockey Players? GoodDay (talk) 00:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: To be honest, that actually does happen with most other professions on wikipedia. And yes GoodDay even that one. This one would not pass an Afd. --Djsasso (talk) 01:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting concept, but very poorly executed in my book.  If it is going to stick around, I'll clean it up a bit.  I am unclear if 'would not pass a Afd' means it 'would not pass through the process and be deleted' or 'would not pass through the process and be kept.'  Thanks for anyone who clarifies. Leafschik1967 (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It wouldn't be deleted. These sorts of articles/lists/categories go up for deletion all the time and get shot down because it is felt that your ethnicity is a defining charactaristic of who you are. -Djsasso (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Black Hockey Players 

message: I have created a template to quickly link to all the articles for each NHL team's records. Check it out at Template:NHL franchise records. There are still a lot of red links for these pages, and it is my hope that some of you will help me get them all going. Eventually I would also like to include records for defunct franchises (if the information is available). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 15:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New franchise records template 

message: These pages are in need of standardization, and I will work to to this. I would like something of a consensus to be reached first, to avoid edit wars. Here are my suggestions.
i. Records such as "Fewest wins" and "Fewest ties" are almost certainly from the shortened 1994-95 NHL season (or from before the 1967 NHL Expansion for the Original Six teams). For these "Fewest X" records we should include the record for short seasons and long seasons. I propose 74 games as the threshold for a "long season" (which is the number of games in the first post-expansion season). They might be listed like so:
Fewest Wins  	1216	1926-27 (44 game season)1937-38 (48 game season)1976-77
Fewest Losses	1113	1994-95 (48 game season)1995-96
ii. The Detroit Red Wings records includes the active leaders for the individual records. This could be implemented into all of the articles.
iii. Order of sections should be as follows:
# Franchise Records
## Single Season
## Single Game
## Streaks
# Individual Records
## Career
## Season
## Single Game
# References
What does everyone think? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You beat me to the topic. I was going to bring this up, only got sidetracked. Looks like a good list. Also, as I've started to do in some pages, adding a few photos to the pages of different record holders helps to make it look better. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franchise records standardization 

message: Is simply being selected to a World Junior Hockey Championship roster enough to make a player notable?  I ask because Mario Kempe, which I know we've had deleted at least once before, has been re-created.  The user left this edit summary when he made the page yesterday: yea yea, I know you guys love to delete this page, but like it or not, he's on a world junior team and is thereby now "noteable".  I don't see that anywhere in the notability standards.  Am I missing something, or is this guy still not notable? Skudrafan1 (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is he considered a top prospect after being drafted? Flibirigit (talk) 01:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous AfD for this article said no: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Kempe. Skudrafan1 (talk) 01:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Have you seen the edit summary? And the user's history? This is pure trolling, I've blocked him for 48 hours to prevent more crap like this. --Maxim(talk) 01:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good work, Max.  I thought this might draw your ire. :) Skudrafan1 (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, btw, I deleted the article and salted it (ie it can't be recreated by a non-admin, unless an admin removes the protection). Maxim(talk) 02:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are going to block it in that way I would make note to go back and remove it eventually because he will likely eventually pass our notability guidelines. But yes the WJHC isn't enough yet, as that still isn't the highest level of amateur competition. -Djsasso (talk) 02:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, the vanity press author... I remember him. ccwaters (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

text: World Juniors are an interesting problem.  In Canada, that tournament may well be the most highly anticipated hockey tournament of the year, in Europe, it's pretty much an also-ran.  So, I would argue that making the WJHC roster in Canada would make one notable, yet elsewhere, not as much?  I might suggest for the Wikiproject's guidelines that winning the gold medal be the threshold for notability. Resolute 04:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd argue against it as well.  The "well, this tournament is considered important in X" can apply in all manner of crazy directions.  Heck, should we allow articles about players in the annual Quebec Peewee Tournament, which is a huge enough deal that you can buy DVDs of the games and that a couple years have even seen trading cards of the participants released?    RGTraynor  08:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just curious - what is the highest level of so-called 'amateur' (not meant sarcastically, just that 'amateur' is pretty vague in hockey, basically only NCAA) competition, if not the World Juniors?  Arguing against regional events or notable minor hockey tournaments is quite easy, but the highest level of international hockey for  a significant age group (draft eligible and recently drafted) seems notable to me.  I'd argue the medalists from each year more than qualify.Leafschik1967 (talk) 14:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The highest level is the World Championships or the Olympics. The minute you add the qualifier of a significant age group then it ceases to be relatively notable for the players themselves. The tournament itself is notable because it is the best for that age group, but it does not make the players in it notable. And I would agree with Kaiser and RGTraynor. I don't really know why people can't be patient and wait the year or so till they have played a pro game. -Djsasso (talk) 15:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Beyond that, neither the notability criteria we have in place on WP:HOCKEY or, more importantly, WP:BIO, recognizes anything close to as subjective as "significant age groups" ... a value which, conveniently and arbitrarily, can be stretched to cover any age an individual editor can want.    RGTraynor  01:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability question 

message: A question at talk: Anaheim Ducks concerning Scott Niedermayer's status, please take a peek. GoodDay (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anaheim Ducks 

message: I slightly rearranged the section. I've entered a line where someone can place their signature ~~~~ when the have last checked each AFD, TFD or CFD for hockey related listings. Flibirigit (talk) 06:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candidates for deletion & discussion 

message: On two ocassions (September 1, 2007 and today) User: Blueboy96 added John Davidison as a General Manager. Is his edit(s) correct? see talk: St. Louis Blues (hockey). --GoodDay (talk) 21:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say no.  As I posted on the discussion page, the Blue's site explicitly states that Pleau is the General Manager. Regardless if his power has been reduced, he still has the official title. As such, he should be listed as the GM.  --Pparazorback (talk) 22:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  St. Louis Blues 

message: Here we go again.  The anon block has once again expired as of Dec 16, 2007 at 0:00, and at 2:05 the drive by Martin Brodeur edits have begun again.  Be on the lookout and WHEN a few more edits occur, I guess we request protection again, this time for a longer period.  Too bad we can't get the protection until April 2008 - YET...  --Pparazorback (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why can't we get a longer protection? And just a reminder, don't fotget the stats template ( ~~~~), leave this message at talk pages of users who update stats. --Krm500 (talk) 13:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In most cases, it's just 'drive-by' anon editors (most of them making their update edits innocently). If permanent protection or semi-protection isn't possible? Then we just request another protection each time the previous one expires. GoodDay (talk) 18:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of National Hockey League statistical leaders]] 

message: So, I noticed that The main categories for WHL, QMJHL, OHL and AJHL alumni were listed at CfD for renaming from alumni to players.  Seems the guy who failed to accomplish this last year tried again, and since nobody from this wikiproject was notified, or was watching CfD, it passed this time.  Same reasoning applied too - the nominator does not understand the difference between minor league hockey and junior hockey.  I'll be looking for a means to correct this, possibly re-listing at CfD, but in the meantime, we might want to watch the CfD pages closer, as chances are team categories will be hit next. Resolute 01:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_December_14#Category:Alberta_Junior_Hockey_League_players Resolute 01:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly support having those renamed, but any reason why you didn't list all four of them? Flibirigit (talk) 05:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I was wondering that too. DMighton (talk) 05:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is because we had the two categories already, what he has done is moved all the alumni over to the players cat, not realizing the differences between the two. --Djsasso (talk) 05:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could Resolute amend his proposal, or does it need to be another discussion? Flibirigit (talk) 05:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Might as well just put another one up if you want to. Just to be completely transparent. -Djsasso (talk) 05:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Fatigue, mostly.  Ultimately, I found the AJHL category to be the most important though, as there are several player articles in the root category.  For the CHL categories, there are very few articles that are not subcategorized by team, so it didn't seem as important a battle to fight.  I also felt the AJHL category had the strongest case, as there are virtually no Jr. A players who gain notability prior to turning pro.  At the CHL level, there are several active players who are notable. Resolute 05:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, better to re-nominate the CHL categories separately at this point.  Resolute 05:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Are you going to make those other nominations too, or want someone else to do it? Flibirigit (talk) 06:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the attempt to correct the AJHL category is headed to a no consensus vote, I'm not sure that would serve a point at this time.  Definitely going to be watching the logs to see that the team categories are not altered the same way, however. Resolute 02:26, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Junior hockey alumni categories 

message: I've made a few suggestions at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_December_14#Category:Alberta_Junior_Hockey_League_players. Hopefully this can satisfy both sides of the discussion. Please let me know what you guys think! Flibirigit (talk) 10:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New proposal

message: I recently started to create the San Jose Sharks draft picks page and started to copy the existing Calgary Flames draft picks page, seeing how it's the most complete. This led to some issues I think we should clear up before I get heavily involved into the article and other associated pages. As it stands on the Flames article, it only includes players who have played at least one game in the NHL as of last season, as well as listing their career games and points, or if a goaltender, wins.
While I applaud Resolute for taking the time to create the article in such depth, I have some ideas on how to change it for the better, providing the projects blessing of course. What I personally think we should do is list every player drafted. This seems to me a no-brainer; the NHL Record Book does it for every team, albeit only the past 20 years or so, as well as the most recent draft's full listing, and as it is now, the first 2 rounds of every previous draft, plus notable players. Individual team media guides also list every player drafted by that particular team, as does hockeydb.com. Seeing how Wikipedia isn't paper, and paper sources list complete drafts, this should be no problem. Also, I think there could be something that could be added to change the stats of drafted players, perhaps adding more than just games and points/wins. Not quite sure what we could do there, so up to ideas. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wanted to list all the players ever drafted by the Buffalo Sabres at Buffalo Sabres draft history (which, by the way, is the way the consensus had me word the title), and it was shot down per discussion at this very project's talk page.  I think giving a complete history is vital in the name of accuracy and thoroughness, but apparently that's just me and you. Skudrafan1 (talk) 02:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, here is where those discussions went down: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Buffalo Sabres draft picks. Skudrafan1 (talk) 02:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't recall a discussion saying we shouldn't list every player on that page. We definitely should as it is the appropriate place. --Djsasso (talk) 02:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: The idea behind why I did the article the way I did was that each season page would have the full draft for that year, while this article would cover the players which are "notable" - ie. played in the NHL.  I am mindful of the failed FLC for the Sabres article, and knew that including the full history would be required to get the Flames one to FL status.  I simply haven't done it yet.  Been working on a couple team articles first.  I'd say complete it, including the supplimental draft, which I also wish to add. Resolute 04:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: This is what the Sabres page looks like as a complete list: User:Skudrafan1/Complete Buffalo Sabres draft history.  Not too lengthy, IMO. Skudrafan1 (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 19:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I would really like the lists being complete.  It is still very easy to tell visually how many of the players have played in the NHL the way your complete Sabres page is formatted.  I feel that the articles are not too long to be unmanageable.  -- JamesTeterenko (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.  Work has been nearly dead today, so I've been working on expanding the Flames list to include all players.  About halfway done now.  One suggestion for you, Skudrafan, for the Sabres list - since the FLC argued that there were too many sections in the table of contents, I cut the Flames article down to sections by decade, then using the  template to divide years without having them show up in the TOC.  Also, for the Supplimental drafts, I was thinking of putting them all into one table at the end, rather than a separate section for each.  Which do you think would work better? Resolute 22:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  template, huh?  I'll work on it.  And having the few Supplemental Draft picks grouped together in a separate section would probably be better, yes. Skudrafan1 (talk) 02:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: In my revision at Calgary Flames draft history, I shaded all players who made the NHL, rather than players who are active this season.  IMO, it helps on easily tell at a glance which players made the NHL and which have not. Resolute 01:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team Draft Pages 

message: I've seen this done in other cases. How do you merge the category Category:Ottawa Senators (original) players and List of Ottawa Senators (original) players? The list article looks better with chronological info. Alaney2k (talk) 20:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We wouldn't do this. The only time this is done is when one or the other is not appropriate. In this case both are appropriate. --Djsasso (talk) 20:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. I thought I'd seen that somewhere. I'll work to get the names in sync then. Alaney2k (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of Original Sens list and Original Sens category 

message: :Image:Fighting in ice hockey featured on main page screenshot.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Fighting in ice hockey featured on main page screenshot.PNG 

message: ...there have been three different edits recently questioning the way Mountain Dew's sponsorship of the AMP NHL Winter Classic should be shown in the article.  I have it simply shown in a referenced sentence at the end of the introductory paragraph: The game is being sponsored by Mountain Dew AMP.  This sentence was removed twice, the second time with an edit summary saying "Q. Is sponsorship an important part of the story? Shouldn't M Dew donate $1MM to Wiki if they want the advertizing?.  I readded it both times, but now it has been removed again and, in its place, the article's heading has been changed to call the game the Mountain Dew AMP NHL Winter Classic, with the edit summary "Shouldn't you guys treat like the BCS Bowl Games wiki pages, giving wiki link to sponsor's name in the games title as shown here now?".  I am stepping back for now, because it is making me upset.  The game's official name is not the "Mountain Dew AMP NHL Winter Classic"; it is simply the AMP NHL Winter Classic.  And is there something wrong with a sentence saying that the game is sponsored by Mountain Dew AMP?  Advice?  *sigh* Skudrafan1 (talk) 00:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see nothing wrong with it; it's a significant aspect of this match.  How the BCS bowl games are handled is WP:FOOTBALL's bailiwick, and I'm sure they can tend to their own knitting just fine.    RGTraynor  05:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The title of the game, from the link on the page, is the 'Amp Energy NHL Winter Classic'. But later, on the linked page, it's entitled Amp NHL Winter Classic. This seems a little bizarre. That said, they did not mention Mountain Dew, who must own Amp I suppose. As we get closer to the game, I am sure this will be made more clear, but maybe the article might be more appropriately termed? Possibly it should be the Amp Energy NHL Winter Classic 2008. I've seen it referred to that way, likely indicating that the NHL wants to do it again in the future. We can do redirects for whatever is the exact title. About the placement of the sponsorship text, I think that belongs in a later paragraph. Alaney2k (talk) 23:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And in another page, the 'AMP ENERGY / NHL Winter Classic'. Argh. Alaney2k (talk) 00:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have posed this question here before.  For the longest time, the official NHL website for the game referred to it as simply the AMP NHL Winter Classic, which is why the page was titled as it was.  But now I see that the official NHL page has changed, and most of the mentions to the naming there seem to call it the "AMP Energy NHL Winter Classic" ().  I will be moving the page to reflect this lengthier name, which has seemed to be the consensus among other news outlets anyway. Skudrafan1 (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. (I noticed the question, after I responded in this section.) If in the future, they do another, another move can be done. About the sponsorship, should that discussion go to the talk page for the page? I think some sections are needed for this article. It is one long section, which is not very good. It should be a lead and some sections, but I am not sure of the naming of those sections... Maybe the Heritage Classic article is appropriate. I'll take a look. Alaney2k (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point the article is tiny so sections would not be a good idea. -Djsasso (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, I was going to break the article into sections after it has been played. Skudrafan1 (talk) 02:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Yup. Make sure it is well tagged though, or the bots will come to harvest your soul... Resolute 03:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Before I get into an edit war... 

message: But I could use a little help with Denver Pioneers Hockey. I've suggested the article be merged into University of Denver or be made part of a new article called Denver Pioneers, since no school has an article for their own hockey team (to the best of my knowledge). The author, User:Ctrottnow was welcome templated just this very day and is obviously new to the process. He or she is seemingly taking offense to my proposal it be merged and has twice deleted the mergeto template. I've left messages on the article's talk page and Ctrottnow's. Any help greatly appreciated. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 17:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be moved to Denver Pioneers which would cover all of the sports. Just like Michigan Wolverines does. -Djsasso (talk) 17:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I am aware of at least two college ice hockey programs with their own pages: North Dakota Fighting Sioux hockey and Minnesota Golden Gophers men's ice hockey. Skudrafan1 (talk) 17:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know I was trying to find some, not sure why I didn't think of those two. That being said I think it should be part of a bigger article until it is big enough to be split off onto its own. --Djsasso (talk) 17:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: editconflict I don't think that's necessarily a 1:1 comparison though. Both of those schools have individual articles for each of their varsity sports. This is the first and only article on any Denver Pioneers sport. But yes, I do stand corrected to a point. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I understand what you mean now.  We both stand corrected to a point. :) Skudrafan1 (talk) 20:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's kind of tangential to this WikiProject's purview 

message: Some of you might know that over in the Bobby Orr article, there's been a user, User:TrulyTory, who for a couple of years has been pushing variously the POV that Orr is the greatest player of all time and more particularly (weirdly enough) the POV that Doug Harvey is one of the greatest offensive defensemen of all time.  Virtually all his Wikipedia activity this calendar year has revolved around inserting the latter into the article, and there's been a good deal of discussion in the Orr talk page on the issue, much of it peppered with WP:CIVIL violations on Tory's part.  After an absence of a few months, he's popped back to make the edit again.  Could some folks pop over, give their own opinions on this and head off another dreary edit war?    RGTraynor  12:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, we agreed to use the line one of the greatest... to end these silly disputes about a year ago. I'll be glad to help out. GoodDay (talk) 15:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I went ahead and removed the players listed as the "exceptions to the rule".  It is extraneous information, as if we intend to argue that offensive-defencemen were not common, then pointing out examples of offensive-defencemen kinda defeats the point.  This also defeats the attempt at POV pushing on that front.  Otherwise, agreed with GoodDay.  Orr is consistently considered one of the greatest of all time, and there are literally hundreds of sources that would back up that phrasing.  To call him the best of all time, with certainty, is not correct. Resolute 15:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to be a bother, but I noticed at the article Wayne Gretzky, we neglected using the line one of the greatest.... Why has that article been given special treatment (yes I know about the citations, but those are arguablely PoV citations). Anyways, I'm not gonna raise a stink there, just pointing out application of 'double standard'. GoodDay (talk) 15:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text:  Hate to see surrender to that idjit, but I suppose you're right, Resolute.  As far as Gretzky goes, the thing is that there's a hugely sourced consensus among hockey experts that Gretzky is the greatest.  It's not a matter of special treatment, it's a matter that regardless of our personal opinions, the hockey world has a POV, that POV is generally in Gretzky's favor, and failing to recognize that position would be POV-pushing on our part.  Heck, the very first line of Gretzky's Encyclopedia Britannica entry is "Canadian ice-hockey player who was considered by many to be the greatest player in the history of the National Hockey League (NHL)."  Plainly they don't consider the statement out of line.    RGTraynor  16:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Like I said, I'm not gonna bring up the (IMHO) 'double standard' thing at that article. Yes, we all know the people(s) in the hockey media worship Gretzky & those in the non-hockey media go by what little they know. OK, I said my piece. GoodDay (talk) 16:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This guy apparently went Orr crazy.  Was looking at his edits and came across this diff which I just undid. --Pparazorback (talk) 18:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: You could say the guy was Orriginal in his edits. GoodDay (talk) 18:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  (blinks)  He edited the Number Four article to include Orr?  For heaven's sake, I'm a bloody Bostonian, Orr's just the next thing to Jesus still around these parts, but sheesh!    RGTraynor  19:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's lotsa uniform numbers at 4 (number), but it appears every single "x (number)" article has an "in sports" section. Flibirigit (talk) 19:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As does this one, which he is already mentioned in. -Djsasso (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking of edit wars ... 

message: I wrote an Excel web query that does the following:  1) Imports ESPN's NHL Standings onto an Excel Sheet.  2) Re-sorts the standings to break ties using fewer games played then # wins.  3) Creates wiki code for all 6 divisions so that all one has to do is copy / paste the code into the edit box and the standings are updated quickly.  Anyone who has Excel and is interested in the sheet, e-Mail me and I will be more than happy to send it to you.  --Pparazorback (talk) 05:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NHL Standings Update Robot (Sort of) 

message: Is is it possible to get a robot to be programmed to convert player profile links in URL form into the  , , , , and  templates? If so, who can do it.. or where do we ask? Flibirigit (talk) 10:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also looking for the same kinda thing to add :Category:Sports clubs by year of establishment and :Category:Sports clubs by year of disestablishment, with the respective years substituted. Flibirigit (talk) 10:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This maybe possible with a simple AWB bot... Gimme a couple days to figure this out. --Maxim(talk) 23:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been meaning to do this for a few months. I got a couple hundred done but it gets so tedious without a regular expression to speed things up. I'll be starting with :Category:American ice hockey players until I can get a regexp made. IrisKawling (talk) 02:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some nice folks at the AWB page made a nice little RegExp code/module to make this task easier, see: Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#RegExp request IrisKawling (talk) 23:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well looks great.. but I have no idea what to do with it :-s What to do now? Flibirigit (talk) 00:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robot request 

message: I notice that the automatic archiving at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey uses a "space" between the "archive" and the number e.g "16". Hence, we now have two separate entities in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive16 and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive 16. How can we fix this? Flibirigit (talk) 07:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MiszaBot was configured to have a SPACE between archive and the Archive #.  I have 1) merged the content in "archive 16" into the "archive16" file, 2) db-empty'd the "archive 16" page as it is no longer needed.  3) reconfigured the path save filename in the miszabot configuration to delete the incorrectly placed space between the word "archive" and the archive number.  This should fix the problem. --Pparazorback (talk) 08:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Flibirigit (talk) 08:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

text: For the record, you should do it the other way round - the standard is to have a space between "Archive" and the number. Миша13 17:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps so, but I removed the spacing to be consistent with the other 15 archive pages (as well as the original archive16 page) which was created prior to using the bot to archive. --Pparazorback (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question re: automatic archiving and [[User:MiszaBot II]] 

message: Interested editors, please take a look at the discussion at Talk:2007-08 Buffalo Sabres season about the merit of including summaries of particularly interesting games within the body of season articles.  I guess my question is "where does it end?"  How do we determine what games are worthy of being written about and what games aren't? Skudrafan1 (talk) 01:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Commented there. We should have a page discussing general content and layout of season pages. --Michael Greiner 02:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual game summaries on season articles 

message: I am currently watching the Colorado vs. Vancouver game and the Canuck goal was (somewhat) caused because the linesman couldn't "jump" out of the way along the boards. The announcer said that they aren't allowed to "jump" up on the boards anymore. Does anyone have any info on this rule change? This is the first i've heard of it. Masterhatch (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, MH, long time no hear; how goes it?  (That being said, this is news to me.  WTF, you can't jump out of the way of the play?)    RGTraynor  03:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yah, I was watching the game and the announcer said that the linesmen aren't allowed to jump out of the way by climbing up the boards like they used to. Because the puck hit the linseman (who couldn't jump up on the boards) and the puck didn't clear the Colorado zone, the canucks were able to convert that into a goal. anyways, i just wanted to see if anyone heard anything. So, RGT, i see that you are still quite active here on wikipedia. ARe things going well? I only contribute rarely, and that is usually just reverting vandalism on pages on my watchlist. Have a merry christmas! Masterhatch (talk) 03:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  a simple question 

message: Most of the NFL football teams have lists like this (even the newer ones) and they seem to be becoming FLs at an impressive rate. I was wondering if we should start making lists like this for NHL teams? There are sources, NHL.com has a full list of all first round picks going back to the 60s, the Hockey Database has a list of draft picks by team and some of the team websites probably have some kind of history page. -- Scorpion0422 03:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a working model of all draft picks for the Devils at User:FutureNJGov/sandbox/Devilsdraft. I don't see why all teams can't have this. --Michael Greiner 03:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Frankly, it baffles me how those can even become FL's.  Yeah, the scope is specifically limited to the first round, but there is more than one round.  There are some draft articles already, ie Calgary Flames draft history and San Jose Sharks draft picks, but yeah, more should be done.  Resolute 04:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, we need a set guideline for naming conventions... Resolute 04:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of [insert team] first-round draft picks‎? 

message: Does anyone know what the status is of the Myrtle Beach Thunderboltz?  They are due to begin play in the ECHL in 2008-09, however it appears their proposed arena YRT2 Arena has been postponed due to funding issues.  Patken4 (talk) 13:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Myrtle Beach Thunderboltz]] 

message: :Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays !  Flibirigit (talk) 10:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holiday wishes 

message: I've been working on the page, and I was wondering if some people could take a look at it and let me know how it's going. Just remember that I've yet to start work on the lead, the exhibits and "Operations and organization" sections, but the rest of it has been reformatted. The criticism section could also use a bit of expanding, so if anyone knows of any reliable sources that could provide some good info, please feel free to add it. -- Scorpion0422 07:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work! What are you gunning for; GA or FA? --Krm500 (talk) 14:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, GA. It'll probably be a month before it's reviewed, but after that I might try for FA status. -- Scorpion0422 05:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hockey Hall of Fame]] 

message: The question was brought up at Talk:IIHF World U-20 Hockey Championship, I checked and no such articles exist. I noticed there were many articles on national U20 soccer teams, anyone think we should take the time and create these articles? --Krm500 (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why not.  For Canada, at least, I'd argue the Junior national team has a higher profile than the senior team, Olympics aside. Resolute 04:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What would such an article be called - Nation national junior's ice hockey team? --Krm500 (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think its overkill as I stated in the link above... That's five total articles per nation: men's, men's u-20, men's u-18, women's, women's u-18. I think it would be easiest to consolidate to one mens and women's team article per nation or just link to the sanctioning body (USA Hockey, Hockey Canada, Swedish Ice Hockey Association). However, if someone wants to do all the work, then go for it. I would name them "XXX national men's U-20 ice hockey team", etc... ccwaters (talk) 14:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For comparison, the football articles are named "Nation national under-20 football team" (or "under-21", etc.).  I think that "under-20" is better looking than "U-20".  However, my preference would be to group the men's under-20 and under-18 teams under a single "junior" article, and include the women's under-18 team in the existing women's articles.  That would give us three articles for most major hockey nations.  — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Junior national team 

message: On the 2007 Summit Series article... it seems we missed this, but the logo: :Image:2007 super series logo3.gif got deleted because of lack of valid FUR... Can someone roll this back so we can fix it?  DMighton (talk) 05:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speaking of Which

message: Please take a look at Sebastian Stefaniszin, a prod that was challenge by an anon editor.  Looking at his career statistics, the player's career had him in the Deutsche Eishockey-Liga and in the 2nd Bundesliga (ice hockey).  Are either of these professional leagues or high enough for this player to be notable at this time?  Thanks.  --Pparazorback (talk) 00:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: DEL is a professional league, and on the rise. Generally ranked in after Russian Super League & Swedish Elite League (in a group of their own), and Finland's SM-liiga & Swiss Nationalliga A. --Krm500 (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

text: The article says the league is professional, so as long as the player has played at least 5 seasons and 100 games in that league (or one of equal or higher standing) then they would be notable as per WP:HOCKEY. However, WP:BIO has much freer guidelines in that they player simply has to have "competed in a fully professional league" — in other words one game is enough. I think the guidelines for WP:BIO would scupper your plan. -- JD554 (talk) 12:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional League? 

message: Just wanted to let you all know another editor brought up the concern of player rosters on less than professional teams. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Player rosters. Since it would fairly heavily affect this project I figured you all should be aware of it.  -Djsasso (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added my 2 cents.  DMighton (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh god not this again. I cringe everytime I see a roster in the Canadian Hockey League with blue links full of non-notable articles. Flibirigit (talk) 22:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do as well, but I do feel we need a list of who is on the team, linked or not. -Djsasso (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Player rosters on amateur teams 

message: Could someone please check the AFD, TFD and CFD listings? It hasn't been done in a while. I'm going away for a few days. See you next year guys. Flibirigit (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Next year? That is entirely too long. --Pparazorback (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD, TFD, CFD 

message: Just noticed that Djsasso, a very active member of this WikiProject is up for adminship Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Djsasso. Feel free to comment on his adminship capabilities. --Pparazorback (talk) 21:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Djsasso up for adminship