Talk:Quebec Nordiques

message: This is also an issue in the Expos, and to a lesser extent the Canadiens, articles.  The proper English spelling is Quebec (not Québec) and that is the norm in the English-language wikipedia.  Using the accent in written English is an affectation, and we don't use Québec for the same reason we don't refer to places like Warszawa, Italia, Praha, etc. in English-language articles, except perhaps to mention the non-English version(s) or official version of the place name.  For the same reason, the French-language Wikipedia uses place names like Terre-Neuve and Angleterre, etc., not Newfoundland and England. 
And, frankly, it is just plain silly to spell the totally English term "Quebec City" as "Québec City".  
Although the City and Province might have English versions of their names, other places like Colisée de Québec probably do not, so I have not reverted those back to the English spelling.  Similarly, I am not aware if the official name of the franchise used an accent in both English and French, so I have left it as Québec Nordiques, and others more familiar with the team can deal with that particular issue.  Skeezix1000 19:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Accent on Quebec

message: *Support move because the team's English name is Quebec Nordiques and the city's name in English and here on wikipedia is Quebec City (without diacritics). Adding a diacritic to Quebec here, but not at Quebec City doesn't make sense. It's simple, in English, there is no diacritic on the Quebec Nordiques, and wikipedia should reflect that. Masterhatch 05:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Result: page moved. Eugène van der Pijll 19:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: It was asserted today that Lindros said explicitly he didn't want to play in a "francophone environment."  Now he certainly said he didn't want to play in Quebec, but I don't recall him ever saying the latter, and it isn't as if Lindros hadn't before pulled the "I don't want to play here" card ... unless someone is seriously suggesting that the Soo is a francophone environment.  In any event, I slapped a citation tag on it; if someone doesn't come up with a source in a week, I'll revert the edit.  Ravenswing 06:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did find this , which says that Quebecers beleived that Lindros didn't like French Canadians. Yankees76 04:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lindros edit 

message: Is the name really pronounced with /dz/? Is just /d/, or is /dʒ/ intended? — 84.12.170.44 09:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Came across this a decade later. Listening to (ostensibly) native French speakers online on various sites, and in tv clips from the era, I can see nothing to indicate a z sound in the word. I will make this change, but if someone with more information objects feel free to correct. GiovanniSidwell (talk) 15:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I think that saying that Forsberg is likely a Hall of Famer is quite over the top.  He's a great player, and he may get into it with some luck, but with 860-something points so far, it's far from being a done deal... --Childhood's End 22:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's pushing it (2 cups, 2 Olympic Gold, 2 World Championships, Calder, Art Ross and Hart Trophies, almost 850 points in just 674 games - not including another 162 playoff points),  however, I don't think it belongs in the article, as it is only POV. Yankees76 03:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

text: A great many players (even post-expansion) have been elected with fewer points than Forsberg.  Ravenswing 21:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forsberg 

message: I restored the French-language name of the team in the infobox, which had been removed with the explanation: "Removed 'french version' of Quebec Nordiques (there's no English version at French Wikipedia)".  Quebec City is an overwhelmingly francophone urban area, so it is appropriate for the article to make mention of the version of the team name by which they were best known in their home city.  As for the fact that the French-language Wikipedia does not reference the English version of the name, my response is "why should it?".  The Nordiques played in a francophone city, so why should a francophone encyclopedia include the English-version of their name?  The French Wikipedia does, however, include the English version of the team name in its article on, say for example, the "Rockies du Colorado" because Colorado is an English-speaking town.  Like the English-language encyclopedia, the French encyclopedia appears to include the name of the team in a different language where it is relevant to do so.  In any event, what the French-language Wikipedia includes or does not include is immaterial here, and should be worked out by the editors over at that encyclopedia.  What is relevant for this article is that the Nordiques played in a francophone town, and the name of the team in French is a very relevant piece of information for this article.  Skeezix1000 21:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I must disagree, this is the English Wikipedia. The fact that Quebec City is francophone, should have no effect on this article's title. ALL 30 NHL team articles & the defunct NHL team articles, should be the same (all English titles). GoodDay 18:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I am the biggest supporter of the French language, especially since my two daughters are French, and French is their first language.  However, this is an English language encyclopedia, and the English names of any article is used, whether the article is about a French-Canadian ice hockey team or a city in Poland.  Warsaw is the capital of Poland in English, but in Polish it is Warszawa.  The English Wikipedia references Warsaw in the title.  I assume the Polish Wikipedia uses Warszawa.  It is a tradition in Encyclopedias that goes back 100's of years.  I understand your sensitivity on this issue, but if I'm search for the article on the Nordiques, I'm typing Quebec Nordiques.  The French name of the team should be within the first sentence of the lead.  Orangemarlin 18:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with 'Orangemarlin'. If this were the Canadian Wikipedia, then I'd allow for English & French in the article title. Same for all the Canadian based NHL teams and former teams. But it's not. GoodDay 18:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I said 'article title' (excuse me), I meant Infobox title. GoodDay 18:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: With all due respect, Orangemarlin and GoodDay, you both seem to be confusing two distinct issues.  First issue is what the article should be called.  And, yes, I would agree, this is the English-language Wikipedia, and the article title should be the name of the team in English.  Nobody has ever disputed that.  If you refer to the old discussions above, I was one of the editors who initially suggested moving the article title from Québec Nordiques to Quebec Nordiques, in order to use the proper English-language name for the title.  The second issue is whether the name of the team in an another language is relevant information to contain in the main body of the article (such as in the lead paragraph or the infobox).  The Nordiques played in a francophone city to a mostly francophone fan base -- of course the name in French is relevant, regardless of the language of the encyclopedia, because that was the name they went by in their home city and were known by most of their fans.  This is not an issue of whether or not this is the English, French or Swahili Wikipedia.Orangemarlin, you mention that the article on the capital city of Poland uses the English version of the city name for its title.  But the Warsaw article also mentions in its first sentence and at the top of its infobox that the City is known in Polish as Warszawa.  So if it's acceptable for the Warsaw article, as you suggest, why do you object to the same thing for the Quebec Nordiques article?  Perhaps you are bothered by the inclusion of the French version of the name in the infobox?  Information contained in the infobox has nothing to do with the title of the article.  If, as you say, you come to this article when you type "Quebec Nordiques", that's because it's the title of the article, and it has nothing to do with any information in the infobox.  However, I don't care whether the information is located in the infobox or in the lead paragraph -- there is no real distinction between the two, and it doesn't matter to me either way.  I simply reverted the initial deletion of the French name, but didn't really take a position on where the French name should go.  Some editor ages ago put it in the infobox.  I'm fine if you want to move it to the first sentence of the lead, as you suggest.GoodDay, you seem to be objecting to the inclusion of the French name in the article, regardless of where it is placed, because you keep editing the article to remove it completely.  As I mentioned in my first post above, I disagree with your initial tit-for-tat rationale for deleting it.  Then, in your comments above, you seem to suggest it would be okay to include it in a Canadian (bilingual?) encyclopedia, but not an English-language one.  I'm curious why you believe that the French name is not relevant information for the article, and why you seem intent on deleting it entirely from the article.  Skeezix1000 19:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I misunderstood the full intent, assuming that you wanted to change the title.    I'm open to the infobox containing BOTH English and French names. Orangemarlin 21:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I meant to say (earlier) the Infobox title should be 'only' English (like the Montreal Canadiens). The Nordiques were always written as 'Quebec Nordiques' (only) in English publications. I've nothing against the French language. However, I shouldn't have made this into a English Wikipedia VS French Wikipedia thing, because it may develop into a English VS French linguistic rights debate (something I don't want). GoodDay 23:54, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone is construing your comments as anti-French, so no worries there.  No one is suggesting the article be renamed, simply that it contain a reference to the name that was used in the team's home city.  This has nothing to do with the language of this encyclopedia -- Wikipedia references terms used in other languages in 1000s of articles.  Articles on both Montreal and Quebec city, for example, have detailed descriptions of the English and French names for those cities.  You have not explained why the French-language name is not relevant information for this article.  The Montreal Candiens article is not a good precedent, because (a) it does refer to the French-language name of the club in the lead paragraph, and (b) you're the editor who has removed the French-language name from the infobox on at least a couple of occasions.  Skeezix1000 11:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Since I'm currently in the minority (2-to-1 in favour of English & French inclusion), I'll concede to the majority will. English and French it is. GoodDay 00:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  But we should settle the issue by consensus, not with you feeling outvoted.  I guess I still don't understand why you object to including the French name in the article. Skeezix1000 11:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I was more of an abstention than anything else.  I just didn't want to change the title of the article.  However, I think it's a good compromise, given that only three people are caring about this article.  Orangemarlin 02:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Others might chime in eventually. Skeezix1000 11:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Me for one.  There's ample precedent throughout Wikipedia (I'm thinking country names, myself) for including the local language name of an institution either in an applicable infobox or somewhere in the lead paragraph.    Ravenswing  13:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: French-language name of team

message: :Image:QuebecNordiques7279.gif 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:QuebecNordiques7279.gif

message: :Image:QUE-N 288.gif 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:QUE-N 288.gif

message: I would like to add to the infobox when the Nordiques took part in the Stanley Cup playoffs ...How to do this please ?
Matt-san 18:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing the infobox 

message: :The Montreal Canadiens page, had it's 'french version' removed. What about this page? GoodDay 23:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS- I'm neither for or against the 'french version'. I'm just seeking consistancy for the Nords and Habs pages. GoodDay 23:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: French version, at Top Infobox

message: How could Peter Stastny's #26 have been retired. Once the Nordiques were eliminated by the NY Rangers in the 1995 Playoffs, they were sold and it was announced on May 25, 1995 that the team was being moved to Denver. The Blues were eliminated on May 19th, but Stastny hadn't yet retired. Furthermore, various sites list his number as being retired on February 26, 1996. There was no Nordiques organization to retire his number in 1996. It seems to me that it's something bogus like what happened in Hartford with the so called "retirement" of #5, #10, & #11. Another instance of numbers being "retired", yet the team no longer existed. MrNWA4Life 03:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Using a word like "douchebag" is a great way to get yourself blocked, IMO. Echoedmyron (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We 'douchebags' are following policy.  Sign in with the account, and update the comment, do not edit the comment.  Really, even if it is yours, just add a correction, don't change the comment itself.  Dbrodbeck (talk) 16:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The original comment was left by a different IP, the user MrNWA4Life has not commented on this page, and has not edited since 2007.  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&tagFilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=+MrNWA4Life&namespace=&tagfilter=&year=&month=-1 Dbrodbeck (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Retired Numbers?

message: We may have to consider 'protection'. Alot of newbies are trying to add info about a possible NHL franchise in Quebec City. Info which doesn't belong at this article. GoodDay (talk) 15:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: May? —Krm500 (Communicate!) 16:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: One has to break these facts to others, gently. GoodDay (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They are good faith edits, not vandalism.  Not a likely candidate for page protection.  Resolute 21:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'd agree.  That aside, while we might prefer not to have this info in the Nordiques' article, that's a judgment call, and plainly other editors disagree with us.  Page protection isn't appropriate for a mere content dispute in which there's no sign of edit warring.    Ravenswing  09:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is no need for page protection as these edits are not vandalism. However this problem would never have existed if a very very short section on the possible NHL franchise with a link to the relevant page was included on the page. Outback the koala (talk) 05:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mm, well, I agree that there wouldn't be a dispute if we just gave in and allowed those posting irrelevant info here to do so.    Ravenswing  17:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, protection would be over-reacting. Besides, another NHL franchise in Canada? let's not kid ourselves. GoodDay (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Think not?  There are Canadian cities that want teams.  There never was any clamor for teams in places like Nashville; at best, the Phoenixes of the world supported minor league teams.  The only clamor was from magnates and wannabe magnates who saw dollar signs in their eyes, and the number of them (a) willing to lose hundreds of millions in Sunbelt cities and (b) able to get the financing these days is damned limited.  Just watch ... Winnipeg and Quebec City will get teams back.  It might take five years and a regime change, but they will.    Ravenswing  20:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it'll happen after Bettman has resigned, but not before. GoodDay (talk) 22:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: The sentence: "The league's Canadian teams (with the exception of Montreal, Toronto, and to a lesser extent, Vancouver)" is an odd construction. It's like saying "The league's Canadian teams, except almost all of them..." -24.130.65.122 (talk) 22:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Then rewrite it to your satisfaction.  That's what we do here.Asher196 (talk) 13:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd 

message: People are wondering if and when the Nordiques might return to Quebec City. The obvious place to look on Wikipedia is this page. I realize this page is technically about the historical team, but there's nowhere else obvious to look on Wikipedia and this page is as close of an obvious fit as there is going to be right now. The See Also section guidelines (WP:SEEALSO) say it "might be only indirectly related to the topic of the article because one purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics." It's not like I added a paragraph to the article body. How does what I've added here fall outside of this? Air.light (talk) 15:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it would be helpful if I added a small note after the link to clarify what it is about and how it relates to the possible gaining back of a team. Air.light (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This very link is already included as a hatnote as the very top of the article. Like, it's the first thing you see. I think the hatnote would be sufficient, although am not opposed to the See Also. Echoedmyron (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

text: Per the last line in WP:SEEALSO – The "See also" section should not link to pages that do not exist (red links) nor to disambiguation pages (unless used for further disambiguation in a disambiguation page). As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes. As stated it is the very first line on the page so it is unneeded. (Also if the Nordiques do return, it wont be this team/franchise, as in the Winnipeg Jets and Winnipeg Jets (1972–96).) Yosemiter (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true about the last line in the "See also" guideline. I overlooked that part. Air.light (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "See also" section 

message: Would be open to having the team history being spun-off into its own article if it is too big. JoshDonaldson20 (talk) 15:41, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team history