Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive32

Montreal Canadiens task force.

Should Wikiproject Ice Hockey have a Montreal Canadiens task force? I think it should. Looking for some imput here. Acebulf (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It can, but most of our task forces are inactive as we are a closely knit wikiproject and pretty much everything is talked about on this main page instead of at the task force pages. I would probably recommend not starting one until you can find a number of active editors willing to join you. Most of our task forces were created in a spree where it seemed cool to create them, but pretty much all the team based ones as I mentioned are inactive. -Djsasso (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok then, if anyone wants to join the task force, please say you do here. Acebulf (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration idea

With the playoffs over the #1 thing on every hockey nerds mind is the draft, so I got the idea that maybe we should try to not only get 2009 NHL Entry Draft to FL status (which I think we talked about), but to push for a FT consisting of the draft article and the most likely top three picks; John Tavares, Victor Hedman, and Matt Duchene. I figure that getting the draft article featured will be fairly easy, so we need to get at least one article featured and the others up to GA's. I'd be happy to take the Hedman article under my wing, is anyone interested in working on the other articles? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 23:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't see any way that the draft and top three picks could make up a FT. Reviewers would shoot it down in a second for not including all picks. That said, Nurmsook and I already did our part in getting Tavares' article to GA. We had contemplated FA, but given how much things will change with the draft, first contract and first games, all happening within the next five months, it seemed unlikely. Resolute 00:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Laugh out loud. Get all first-rounders to GA? Could be possible... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, maybe in a few years... This isn't a good topic to be featured, but the articles themselves have value independent of the bronze star cluster. A bit late for this year, but good articles on next year's projected top picks would be ideal heading into the draft. Tavares' article, for example, had 20,000 hits last month, and is over 10,000 this month, with a huge spike expected when the draft hits. There will be a fair number of eyeballs on the articles related to the draft as the date draws nearer. As it is, once the Iginla article finally passes FA, I need to work on History of the Montreal Canadiens if I hope to get it as TFA for the Canadiens' 100th anniversary date. Thus, I'll pass on this collaboration, though improving our draft articles is definitely a good idea! Resolute 00:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

How about improving NHL Entry Draft to GA? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll be happy to help with this. I'm willing to work on anything with this draft if my guys get Tavares, like they should. :) – (iMatthew • talk) at 00:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

They had better... with the Isles holding training camp in Saskatoon, it is a virtual guarantee that New York would hit Calgary for a pre-season game, and I could hopefully grab a picture of Tavares in Isles threads. Resolute 00:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I doubt it since the Isles and Flames are playing here in Saskatoon on September 19th. However, I can't remember Credit Union Centre's camera policy, but since I have tickets for that game (and the Oilers/Isles game on the 18th), it may be possible for me to get said picture.Shootmaster 44 (talk) 07:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I Intend to work as much as possible on the Hedman article up until the draft anyway, but do you really think people would be demanding that all picks would have to be GA's, that is far beyond impossible. Top three seams sufficient to me... —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 01:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do. They are pretty picky at FTC about that. One of the key components of a featured topic is that there are no obvious exclusions. Other drafted players would be an obviously missing article from the set. Hell, the FTC on the NHL history died because someone felt an entirely different league needed to have an article in the set. Resolute 01:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I would have to concur with what Resolute is saying. Even disregarding their rather stringent requirements, it seems rather arbitrary to select the (possible) top 3 picks in the draft. Why not the top 5, or top 10, or even the whole first round? That would be my biggest concern in that regard. However, I'm all for improving the articles. Just looking at the Duchene article, it is in terrible shape compared to Tavares and Hedman. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention that the top 3 haven't even been selected yet. Tavares will almost certainly be #1, but the other two aren't certain. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 02:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Call me crazy, but we are always working on upping certain narrow topics to GA or FA etc. Why not actually fix ice hockey to GA or FA. Seems to me this is one article we should definately have as a FA. -Djsasso (talk) 03:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, the history series would break that mould.  ;) Ice Hockey would be another good candidate though. Resolute 03:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of our core articles, I was just driving home thinking that we should work on some of them. However, I like working on my obscure player biographies, it's more exciting to see how much one can find about a career depth defenceman, and get it to GA or FA status. Kaiser matias (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. As useless as it is, ultimately, I might know more about the Calgary Tigers than all but a handful of people at this point. Wikipedia thrives on obscurity. That said, it is worth noting that the NHL article is a GA, much of its history (including the Stanley Cup) is featured, five NHL teams are FA/GA, as are 12 current and three future (four if you count Crosby, lol) Hall of Famers. Ice hockey and History of ice hockey are two very good candidates for future improvement though. Resolute 03:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Btw, could someone on this project do a GA review of the Hedman article if I manage to get it up to quality, or would that be a neutrality problem? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 03:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Someone probably could. The guidlines for the GA review specify someone who isn't a major contributor. However, I would suggest letting someone else go over it for a couple reasons: There is the massive backlog for GA nominations, going back months for some articles; It allows someone who doesn't know anything about hockey to make sure the article isn't full of technical terms that confuse the general public; and it probably wouldn't look good for our project as a whole to just go in their and deal exclusivley with hockey-related articles. Kaiser matias (talk) 20:58, 18 June2009 (UTC)

Sounds fair, but could someone here look over it once I'm done with it anyway to see if it's ready for GA nomination? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 21:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

New season articles

I've already started on 2009–10 Ottawa Senators season. I assume it's not too early? Already I have Heatley's trade demand and a change in the team president. Alaney2k (talk) 23:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. I was about to create the Flames article myself. The draft is only days away, and many teams already have a lot of news for the new season - i.e.: those that will have new coaches and/or management. Resolute 23:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, the creation of these articles have been okie-dokied since post-June 12, 2009. GoodDay (talk) 23:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

"Editors, start your typing fingers"... Alaney2k (talk) 23:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I win, 2009–10 Frölunda HC season created on March 10! —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 01:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I was attempting to create 2009–10 Vancouver Canucks season and I misspelled it to 2009–10_Vancouver_Canucksseason. Can an admin please speedy delete it? Thanks. Thricecube (talk) 01:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I got rid of it for you. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I created the 2009-10 new york rangers season, but when searched for, it doesn't direct you to the page...maybe someone could help with this? Thanks! Piemann16 (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It seems to be working now. The spelling, exactly as you had it, redirects to 2009–10 New York Rangers season. Resolute 14:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 Stanley Cup Parade

If anyone is interested, I've uploaded a couple dozen pics. that I took during yesterdays Stanley Cup parade for the Pens. The pics are here. If anyone would like me to upload something to commons, and release under the Share Alike liscense to use for a Pittsburgh Penguin, or NHL article, drop me a note on my talk page. The originals are Nikon D80 3872x2592 hi-res so I can crop and prolly put something pretty descent up. (the ones I put up to Picasa are only 800x600 (approx.) to keep file space down. Just drop me a note, and I'll try to get them up this weekend to commons, and drop you a link. — Ched :  ?  01:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice images, Malkin and Crosby with the hardware are certainly highly valuable images for this project and it would be great if you could upload them in full resolution. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 01:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, excellent photos. I love the one of Iceburgh (the mascot). Don't know where that one would go though. Thricecube (talk) 01:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

List of National Hockey League mascots perhaps? -Djsasso (talk) 03:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There's already a good image of Iceburgh at that article. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, those would be great, if not on articles they would be nice to have on the Commons. Those pictures that surfaced with the Cup in Mario's pool (well, returning to his pool) were apparently taken by someone awesome, because they're on Flickr and I will upload those to the Commons as well. blackngold29 17:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

At least now we'll know if it floats --Lvivske (talk) 17:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

According to Traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup: The 1991 Pittsburgh Penguins and 1993 Montreal Canadiens decided to test its buoyancy by tossing it into Mario Lemieux's and Patrick Roy's respective pools ("The Stanley Cup"—noted then-Canadiens captain Guy Carbonneau—"does not float.") Kaiser matias (talk) 20:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

"NOTE: I did not take these photos and I don't know who did." —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 18:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Adirondack Phantoms requested merge

A user has requested that Adirondack Phantoms be merged back with Philadelphia Phantoms. Feel free to comment on the talk page at the Adirondack article. Resolute 13:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup

This page is quickly becoming a big mess of unsourced statements and loosely related anecdotes. One user claimed his uncle once saw the cup sitting on Steve Yzerman's deck and added that (I kid you not). He later added a picture and a claim that it was notable because it was unguarded. I again removed it for a lack of source and real notability. Either way, my point is that users keep adding these stories, and I think we need to work up some kind of criteria. I don't think simply having a reliable source is enough. If that is the minimum, the page will continue to be a jumbled mess of stories because there are quite a few stories out there about escapades with the Cup. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There already is a really well written section in the main article (Stanley Cup#Traditions and anecdotes) that adequately summarizes the more notable traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup. After reading through the article, I noticed a lot of the material (even some of the referenced material) is really trivial, especially from the "adventures" section and down. I think the best course to take on this is to merge it to the main article with a summary sentence or two of the more notable adventures. Some of the things, such as the engraving part at the bottom is already at the main article so it really shouldn't be that hard of a merge. Tavix |  Talk  22:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I forked two years ago coz it was getting too big. The sub-article's actually a GA now, but it needs work. I've locked the article because of the editwar and to give us time to determine what's notable there. Maxim_(talk) 22:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC) And its ballooned by 5kb since then. some trimming is in order. Maxim_(talk) 22:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC) This is a prime example of something needing removal. Maxim_(talk) 22:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Please remove the copyvio File:Cupinmariospool2.jpg from the article. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 23:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe the usual writing style would place anecdotes in the history section — it may be better to merge them into the appropriate chronological order in there. Isaac Lin (talk) 14:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Valery Kharlamov

Anyone sure of the correct spelling of his first name? Is it Valeri or Valery? I made a discussion here. RandySavageFTW (talk) 03:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Both are correct. They i and y change depending on the translation. -Djsasso (talk) 04:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

pics

OK .. I got some pics uploaded to commons:

• Malkin
• Iceburg
• Mario
• Talbot
• Sid and cup
• cup

You folks can put em where ya want em. In all fairness, I prolly wouldn't have uploaded except for IMatthews support. The credit goes to him. I hope they are useful. Best — Ched :  ?  07:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Those are some nice photos. Thanks! Resolute 15:07, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Stanley Cup clinching OT winners

Somebody has added these to the related players' navigation boxes (example Jason Arnott article). Shall I delete them? GoodDay (talk) 14:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Uh...I'd say get rid of them. What's next? Most hits in a final series game 7 in the second period. ;) - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

They've now been deleted. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The associated article is List of Stanley Cup Final overtime series winners. Should this be AfDed? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:42, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep. GoodDay (talk) 20:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the list could be a part of another article? MLB does it here: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Walk-off_home_run --Львівске (talk) 22:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

It could fit into List of Stanley Cup champions or Overtime (ice hockey). — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Phoenix Coyotes Infobox

There's some newbie editors, who are continuing to replace Moyes name (in the owners section), with Gary Bettman & Bill Daley. Moyes is still the owner, it's just his executive duties that are suspended. GoodDay (talk) 22:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Should Gretzky and other minority owners be included?--'Львівске (talk) 22:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd recommend only Moyes. GoodDay (talk) 22:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Moyes and Gretzky were listed before. If the team is operated via a named company, we could simply use that instead. Resolute 22:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Since it was Moyes-Gretzky, we should restore it. It's certainly not Bettman-Daly. GoodDay (talk) 22:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Something tells me their name if you don't go with Moyes-Gretz was Desert Dogs Hockey LLC or something like that....I am sure if someone does a good search one of the original articles mentioning the bankruptcy will have it...or if anyone has the links to the court papers still. -Djsasso (talk) 04:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Desert Dogs Hockey LLC, is also acceptable. GoodDay (talk) 13:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

That might be the best way to settle it if editors continue to try and change it. Resolute 19:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

New Draft tables

I think the draft tables could use a little upgrade. It currently looks like

#	Player	Nationality	NHL Team	College/Junior/Club Team
1	Steven Stamkos (Centre)	Canada	Tampa Bay Lightning	Sarnia Sting (OHL)
2	Drew Doughty (Defence)	Canada	Los Angeles Kings	Guelph Storm (OHL)
3	Zach Bogosian (Defence)	United States	Atlanta Thrashers	Peterborough Petes (OHL)
4	Alex Pietrangelo (Defence)	Canada	St. Louis Blues	Niagara IceDogs (OHL)
5	Luke Schenn (Defence)	Canada	Toronto Maple Leafs (from New York Islanders)	Kelowna Rockets (WHL)

Just a few changes I was thinking of:

#	Player	Position	NHL Team	Team from	League from
1	Steven Stamkos	C	Tampa Bay Lightning	Sarnia Sting	Ontario Hockey League
2	Drew Doughty	D	Los Angeles Kings	Guelph Storm	Ontario Hockey League
3	Zach Bogosian	D	Atlanta Thrashers	Peterborough Petes	Ontario Hockey League
4	Alex Pietrangelo	D	St. Louis Blues	Niagara IceDogs	Ontario Hockey League
5	Luke Schenn	D	Toronto Maple Leafs (from NYI)	Kelowna Rockets	Western Hockey League

Thoughts? – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

IMO, If you are going to make it sortable, then you should add a column for the round and integrate all 209 picks into one table. Otherwise, looks nice. Resolute 17:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that could work. I'll do a test of it in my sandbox (with 2008). – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you check over WP:MOSFLAG before making any changes. I think there is a rule against just using an image of a flag to indiciate nationality. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Tiny problem: How would we do that, and keep all of the notes? Should we just have a very large note section, or get rid of them? – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Scorpion, what about a Key with all of the flags and what country they represent? – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You could also write the whole word for the positions, not abbreviating the teams, since some readers may not know what NYI stands for, the Position column to be stretched more, just to make it look better, and removing the word "drafting", as it sounds kind of weird, and is also pretty obvious. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 17:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

There will be a key for the positions, I could make a key for the team abbreviations, I stretched the column out more, and removed the word drafting. I kinda don't want to write out the team abbreviations because it makes the table look neater, so I'm hoping a key works out. – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The positions don't have to be abbreviated, because even if you write Defenceman, it won't do anything. Also, for the team abbreviations, you're going to abbreviate 30 teams, and add them to the key? I'd rather write the whole thing, since it'll still look neat, but ehh... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 18:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

On a 3 computers I've used just now to look at it, it looks much better when it's abbreviated. And yes, I'll make a key with all 30 teams in it. Sandbox page coming soon. :) – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Though I still don't know what to do with the notes sections. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

What kind of notes are you referring to? Do you mean that there will be an actual "notes" column, or you will use a form of reference template for them? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

These note sections. Resolute suggested we combine all rounds into one table, but when we would have to combine all of the notes sections. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I like whats being done there. Also agree with the other comments, like adding a new column for nationality, and other things. Also think we should try and keep the notes section together, as our articles are one of the few places online that have a (near) complete list of draft transactions, which is very invaluable. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The notes section would be combined. The idea behind my suggesting a merged table is that the sorting function is of extremely limited value, in my view, if we keep every round as its own table. But if we combine the table, one could easily sort to see how many players of x nationality, from y league or z team were drafted in a given year. Also, from my long since abandoned project of upgrading the players lists, I created {{NHLteamabbr}} which includes all team name abbreviations. Resolute 18:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

As for the nationalities, WP:MOSFLAG states that flags should usually go together with the country names, mainly for "do not decorate" and accessibility (e.g. colorblind people) reasons. Thus it might probably be better to include an extra column just for the nationalities.

As for the position abbreviations - remember the recent quarrel about "centre vs center" and the likes at the 2009 article? There have been countless reverts and counter-reverts over this question. As the single letters, properly linked, are rather distinctive, we should use them instead of whole words in order to avoid further edit wars. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 19:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The abbr list looks useful. NHL.com uses more than one setup of three-letter abbreviations for the teams, in different parts of their site. For example TBL/T.B, NJD/N.J, LAK/L.A and so on. So there isnt really an official standard to follow. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Can we just pick a format and stick to it already??--Lvivske (talk) 19:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering that myself, didn't someone just redo all these tables only a few months ago. -Djsasso (talk) 19:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

So we shouldn't make improvements to it because the last format was recent? No, we should make improvements whenever they can be made. Also Lvivske, images aren't aloud in signatures, so please remove the flag from yours. Thanks, – (iMatthew • talk) at 19:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

If there is an actual improvement. I just find it funny that someone kept hounding us for input on fixing the draft pages and no one responded and he went through 40 years of pages doing these tables etc and only after he wasted all his time people finally decide to change them. -Djsasso (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the old draft thread can be found here. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 20:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Outside of making them sortable, is it an improvement?--Lvivske (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't just add positions as "D", "G", "C", etc. Not everyone is familiar with these terms. Or at least add a legend at the top, alongside a legend for what country the flags represent. I haven't read all the comments above, so I'm not sure this has been said already. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I'm going to stick with Djsasso on this one. Slysplace did a pretty good job with the format he discussed before and I really do not see any major improvement with this new format. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 23:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I definitely agree with Nurmsook here. The only thing I liked from your proposed version was the "Team from"/"League from" display. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 08:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Me too. Leave it as previous, but split team/league. Alaney2k (talk) 13:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

This is what it looks like

• User:IMatthew/Sandbox2
• This is what I've put together from the first round of the 2008 draft. What did I change here?
  • Key: I've added a Key to explain what the position letters stand for.
  • #: All I did here was change it to "Pick #" for better clarification. Can be changed back if desired.
  • Sortable: I've made this table sortable. It's much easier for those who are looking for a specific item, such as "Which Canadian players were drafted in Round 1," "How many people were drafted from the Ontario Hockey League in Round 1," or "How many Centers were drafted in Round 1," etc. Sortability is just all round helpful.
  • Split Player and Position just because it looks much neater and it's better to split things like that in a sortable table.
  • NHL Team I removed the "(from Team X)" and "(from Team X via Team Y via Team Z)." It makes the column much neater, and in it's place, I left {{Ref|number}} which links it to it's corresponding note in the "Notes" section. It doesn't need to be in the table and the notes section, so a link to the footnote should be better, since it gives you more information than "from Team X."
  • Split Team from and League from for mainly sortability, and it's neater.
  • Notes I update the notes to make it connect with the table using {{Note|number}} and {{Ref|number}}. I may clean up the notes section later.
• That's basically it, I'll address and make fixes to any concerns you have. Also for those of you who didn't want to change it "again," if we're improving it, it doesn't matter if we update it two times, or two hundred times. It's whatever the best result is that matters. – (iMatthew • talk) at 13:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me. The team/league format has always annoyed me. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to probably go ahead and do this if there aren't any objections. I can't see why anybody would have a problem with it? – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Anybody else? (Apologise if I'm coming off as impatient!) – (iMatthew • talk) at 00:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The wording of "Team from" and "League from" seems awkward. I can't think of any alternative at the moment. Any suggestions? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

How about "Former team" and "Former league?" – (iMatthew • talk) at 00:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It could work, but some of the players might end up in those leagues again next season. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe "Prior" would be better? – (iMatthew • talk) at 00:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but I prefer the old format. If I understand it correctly you also want to merge the notes section for the whole article instead of having a separate one after each round — Which would make it very hard to get a quick overview of all trades. And if you are not intending to do this, having separate notes sections for each round I don't see the point of making a table for just 30 players sortable. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 02:02, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not too sure about the notes section. If more people feel that it should be split, I'll do it. Can you explain why you don't see the point in making a table for just 30 players sortable. Tons and tons and tons of FL's have less than 30 items, but are sortable. It's just easier to find specific information in a table. – (iMatthew • talk) at 02:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Boston Bruins players

Are certain players unlinked in this list for a reason? If it were a few names unlinked then I would link them already but considering it is so many of them I thought I would "say on the safe side" and inquire about it. If no-one has any objections to it, I'll work away and link them all. If there are any objectives for any reason there let me know about it and feel free to undo my edits. Raphie (talk) 00:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Weird, many of the unlinked players have articles too. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 01:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It was pretty strange just looking at it. Even Donald S. Cherry wasn't linked! :) Anyways, I've linked them all now, thought there might have been some sort of criteria but when I saw names like Paul Coffey and Glen Wesley unlinked, I decided to do it myself. I will work on redirects, dead links sometime tomorrow, past 3am here in UK so I'm gonna catch some sleep first before I do anything else. At the same time its no biggie if someone else decides to do it for me. Raphie (talk) 02:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Bah, Don Cherry's article should be deleted because he has no sense of style, and because his team beat my grandfathers in the 53 Memorial Cup! On topic, I'd bet someone figured redlinks were bad and removed them some time in the past. Resolute 02:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

"Ya gotta luv dem Toronna Maple Leafs" GoodDay (talk) 12:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Way back in the day people used to unlink players in lists that didn't have articles, when these players got articles people probably didn't change them to links. I would just change all the players names to links. -Djsasso (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I just cleaned up the dab links and stuff using the dablinks tool. RandySavageFTW (talk) 13:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

(out) This list, like the Chicago one did, is using place of birth for the flags. I'm gonna need some asprin with all these scotland and wales flags on a hockey list...--Львівске (talk) 16:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

There should be no England, Wales, Scotland or Wales flags used. The UK flag should be applied. GoodDay (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

No playoff stats isn't helpful either. And there should be a goalie section too if there's going to be stats. RandySavageFTW (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

True, frankly speaking the page was/is a mess. Good job to Twas Now and RandySavageFTW for the links, probably not all done but I plan to look up every single player for every single team in looking for ways to improve their page so if I catch any page in need of a redirect I'll do that. Again, good job to them both, I wish I had the time to log on earlier but so much stuff happend behind the scenes (b'day tomorrow!) Raphie (talk) 22:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh and all the UK flags have fixed. Raphie (talk) 23:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Help on conditional picks at Entry Draft 2010 appreciated

The 2010 NHL Entry Draft currently includes four traded picks (three sixth-round picks, one seventh-round pick) with unknown attached conditions. I have tried to find sources for these, but my efforts (at least regarding internet sites) were without any success – the official statements (and with it, the usual suspects like TSN, Hockeynews and the likes) only said "conditional (xxth round) pick in 2010" and other reliable sources like newspaper articles were nowhere to be found.

Can someone assist in finding the missing information? I am especially addressing followers of the Anaheim Ducks and Pittsburgh Penguins here since both teams would receive two picks each, so there might be an increased chance that there has been some information in printed media of those areas. Any help will be gladly appreciated! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Dave Cameron

Here is an interesting hoax/hijack. An anon ip overwrote the Dave Cameron article, and inserted another Dave Cameron into the 1991 NHL Entry Draft, and into the 1991-92 LA King season articles. The dates were months ago. The story about this other Dave Cameron having played in the OHL, etc and other places, but not being able to turn pro due to injury, even being traded while in junior! Was there a real Dave Cameron with the Kingston Frontenacs in 1991 or was it all bogus? No Dave Cameron with a 1975 birthdate on hockeydb.com or sihrhockey.org. Alaney2k (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Hockeydb is quite reliable as it relates to major-junior histories, so if he's not listed there, I would feel extremely confident in believing the IP's edits to be vandalism. The fact that the IP tried to claim his invention went to a training camp at 17 completely invalidates his edits. It was all bogus. Resolute 23:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Calgary Flames

User:Resolute doesn't want the team captains section on there, but I do. Apparently one FA editor wanted it to be gone, which I don't see here. Considering they're usually picky and probably didn't have knowledge on the subject, it seems like a violation of WP:DONTLIKEIT. Every other team article has them (or like 90%) so why can't this one? RandySavageFTW (talk) 00:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, looking over the history, it seems this list wasn't removed from the Devils article, though others were. At any rate, I see no reason why the captains list is important in the main article, especially when captains are noted in the players article. I'd rather not load the articles up with lists, and the current roster and all time leaders are of far, far more value than historical captains, imo. Resolute 02:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought this was discussed that we were removing this from all team pages? Perhaps I am mistaken. Like resolute I don't think they should be on any team page. We have List of Calgary Flames captains etc for a reason. When articles get too large they spin off their lists and subsections to new articles. -Djsasso (talk) 03:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

That list redirects to the players page. http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Resolute&diff=298215904&oldid=298215012 RandySavageFTW (talk) 04:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah in the case of the flames I believe we ended up merging the page with the players page since we now list who are the captains on that page, which is the more appropriate page than the team page. -Djsasso (talk) 04:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I did it after discussion at WP:FLC determined that list forks were not a good idea. I.e.: a list of captains is simply part of a list of players, thus it should be contained in the former. Resolute 20:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I prefer the team captains on the main Team pages. So far, they're not on the Flames & Maple Leafs pages. Oh well, as Mick Jagger says "You can't always get what you want". GoodDay (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Calgary Flames redirect take you to a section of the List of Players page? That is, put a heading on the Captains paragraph. I think it should probably have alternates information too, no? Or is that asking too much? That page is probably the best location for the Captains info, rather than the main team page, but I don't expect it to be part of the lead, which is how it looks. Alaney2k (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a paragraph in the body of the players list, and the list itself highlights captains. Not much use for a separate section. As it is, that is a list in need of updating, and something I'd like to hit soon if I can ever find enough time to work anything more than vandal reverts and quick hits. There is no compilation of assistant captains available, and I'm not about to take the time to go through newspaper archives for something that trivial. Resolute 23:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Navbox criteria

I've noticed there's now navboxes for the Panthers first round draft picks. Has the Project approved of such things. Perhaps we need a criteria in place (as I recall having to delete Edmonton Oilers leading scorer & other such navboxes over the last few months). GoodDay (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

You mean one of the 30 boxes in Category:Ice hockey first-round draft pick templates ending up on the player bio pages? Or the boxes themselves existing? I've seen either a succession box or a navbox on this year's drafted Swedes. I dont care much about it (yet). --Bamsefar75 (talk) 16:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I mean the 'former'. GoodDay (talk) 16:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like there is a process halted here that might explain the templates still being around. Probably a decision somewhere in the talk archives about it. Perhaps we should help the process out. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it got halted when things irl got a little too hectic for me to spend the time continuing the removals. I will get back to cleaning up those templates at some point, provided nobody else beats me to it. The decision to replace navboxes with succession boxes came from this discussion. Resolute 02:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

IRL really can screw with ones personal Wiki-projects, I was planning on expanding Hedman's article before the draft but work interfered, hooked, tripped, slashed, speared, and cross checked me, I felt like small player in the old NHL! —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 02:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

List of New York Islanders draft picks

So, I've been working on this, but I noticed List of Calgary Flames draft picks, a FL. In CF's list, it has their stats in NHL. In the NYI one, I've been adding the team and league they are from, like the main draft articles. Which format is preferred? I don't see how their NHL stats has to do with them being drafted. I'd think that their prior team/league would be more notable. Before I finish, just looking for some opinions. – (iMatthew • talk) at 14:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I think I even removed some NHL stats from a draft article recently. The stats relevant to the draft are what (if any) should be included and those would be those in the league the draftee was from. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I went with the stats because rather than a bare list, the stats allow us to look at the record of a team's success in the draft. Space concerns required removing the team a player was drafted from, but frankly, a player's junior/college team is rarely commented on, especially as compared to the NBA and NFL, where your college follows you around for the rest of your life. Resolute 15:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

It seems all too hard to maintain, with the stats. And frankly, just not as notable as the club they came from. – (iMatthew • talk) at 15:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Not really. I haven't done last year's stats yet, but there are only about 30 or so active players at any one time. If consensus is to go another way, then cool. Resolute 16:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Cammalleri

Should this be moved to Mike Cammalleri per WP:COMMONNAME? It is usually what he is referred to now. RandySavageFTW (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That's acceptable. At the very least, add Mike Cammalleri into the introduction. GoodDay (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, he was always announced as "Michael Cammalleri" at the Saddledome this past season. Resolute 16:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I've tweaked the introduction. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

HockeyDB says Mike, Flames.NHL.com says Mike, but NHL.com says Michael as do some of the external links. And shouldn't the lead be Michael "Mike" Cammalleri? RandySavageFTW (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes it should. Since there doesn't seem to be a leading candidate there is not need to change the article title. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 22:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I tweaked it again, as Michael (Mike) Cammalleri. GoodDay (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Fine, to me it's obvious that someone named Michael will sometimes be called Mike for short, so I don't feel that it's necessary to include it, but I wont change it since we just don't seam to agree on name issues ;) —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 23:24, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Ya can change it back if ya want. GoodDay (talk) 23:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I guess it doesn't hurt anyone being there. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 00:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Diacritics - again

I'd like to bring up - for maybe the zillionth time - the subject of diacritics. It's one thing that the NHL and some other leagues in North America have chosen to adopt the policy of ignoring diacritics in both players' names and team names; I think it's an excellent compromise to reflect that policy in wikipedia articles related to those leagues, and I fully respect that compromise.

But it's another thing to spread that standard to all (articles on) hockey leagues across North America (as indicated in the project notice). As all of us know, hockey is played in Canada. Canada has quite a large French-speaking population, albeit a minority. That means that some leagues, several teams, and very many players, have French-sounding names, and many times these are spelled with accents. I think wikipedia should reflect that, regardless of the sparse use of accents and other diacritics in the English language.

Some editors I've come across here (not many), have an attitude of "the English language/alphabet is good enough here". This isn't about that at all. The English language is absolutely "good enough" (whatever that means), and certainly almost as good as Swedish (just kidding!). By the way, the alphabet is Latin, not English.

What I'm saying is that deliberately misspelling people's names is ... mildly disrespectful, at least. We all know how we react when people mix up names and call you John, when your name is James. We're not happy. It doesn't mean that there's something wrong with bearing the name James, it just isn't your name. It's kind of the same thing with losing the diacritics in names; it means that it's not entirely correctly spelled (in addition to being mildly disrespectful, if intentional).

So here's my suggestion: why don't we - once and for all - try to find out which leagues have adopted the same policy as NHL, and document that here? (I guess not many domestic Canadian leagues have that policy.) Then we adapt the involved articles accordingly. We have all the letters with diacritics in the Latin alphabet available to us (even if some of us don't have them on the keyboard), so why don't we use them?

So - what say you?

LarRan (talk) 18:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't like the guideline to begin with, but if it's going to persist it definitely should not apply to Quebec leagues. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 19:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe it does apply to Quebec teams. The idea was only for English North American teams. -Djsasso (talk) 19:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

One of my edits (to Drummondville Voltigeurs of the QMJHL) was recently reverted by RandySavageFTW on the grounds that the project notice said that all North American teams should not apply diacritics. It does really say that, so maybe the notice needs an update. LarRan (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really for either, I just reverted due to the guideline. I'd rather no diacritics what so ever or diacritics on all pages but I just follow the current rule. RandySavageFTW (talk) 20:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

As the agreed upon guideline says, diacritics are to be hidden on all North American related articles. GoodDay (talk) 21:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is silly. You should be interpreting this based on the spirit, not the letter of the guideline. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The guideline has been holding up for quite awhile. No diacritics on the North American based hockey articles. Ya'll should be content that diacritics are on English Wikipedia atall. GoodDay (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'll be happy to support an amendment to the North America guideline, allowing diacritics on Quebec-based hockey leagues, on one condition. We hide the diacritics from the player birthplaces on the NHL rosters. GoodDay (talk) 21:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Let's discuss this reasonably instead of treating it like a negotiation. But why are diacritics shown on NHL rosters to begin with? The reason we display diacritics on European hockey articles is because diacritics are common in the languages of the region. The same applies to Québec. (Besides, I think the five-or-so diacritics that are used in French are much more recognizable to a typical reader than some of the ones used in other languages, such as Czech/Český.) — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I won't agree to a Quebec amendment, unless & until diacritics are completely removed from the NHL team articles. GoodDay (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, this is not a negotiation, and whether or not you agree is irrelevant. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) It would damage this WikiProject's credibility, if those agreed upon guidelines are suddenly dismissed. GoodDay (talk) 22:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

That's rather melodramatic. Guidelines should be scrutinized and revised as necessary. This is just a slight modification, using the same rationale for the previous exemption. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

What I request in return, is a slighter modification. LarRan's proposal effect many articles, where's mine only effect 30 Templates. GoodDay (talk) 22:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I didn't say we shouldn't do it, I am just surprised by your contrarian approach, because removing them seems reasonable regardless of what happens with Québec hockey articles. Why are you bringing it up here, can't you just pipe out those diacritics? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

What I find amusing is you still think this WikiProject can make that call. As has been pointed out to you over and over again, the diacritics on place names is a wikiwide...hell its an English wide rule that they stay on place names. This isn't something the wikiproject decided on. Even strong supporters of removing them from all pages have told you this in the past. -Djsasso (talk) 02:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't agree to a Quebec amendment. It's still the same story: English sources in North America overwhelmingly do not use diacritics. Hell, I doubt English sources in European sources use them much either, but we had to draw a line somewhere in the hopes of establishing consensus in this debate. While I do realize we do bastardize Quebec based teams a lot (i.e.: Victoriaville Tigres as opposed to Tigers), I do not see any great reason why our current compromise needs to be reopened. Despite the confusion of some, this is still the English Wikipedia. Resolute 23:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Right on. GoodDay (talk) 23:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't really think its an amendment, as we did say Quebec was an exception when it was being discussed because QMJHL teams do use the diacritics. The only reason the removing them on any article stands up is because the NHL doesn't use them...well that argument doesn't hold true of the QMJHL. -Djsasso (talk) 02:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

To user GoodDay I'd like to say that guidelines are not carved in stone. They can be changed. If one would reason like you on laws, we would still sit with the laws from the stone age: "Hey, it's the law, we can't change it." Of course we can, if we reach a consensus. However, you might have a point with the birthplace names - if you can prove that NHL has the policy to ignore diacritics on players' birthplaces too. My guess is that they have not had the need for a policy on that matter.

To user Resolute I'd like to say that the reason for English sources not using the diacritics is that they're not on the keyboard in the English-speaking world. It's not the same as having a policy to ignore them.

Finally: if we go ahead with this, it's important to document the findings: which leagues have the policy of ignoring diacritics, in players' names and/or birthplaces. So we can reach a consensus that both makes sense, is stable over time, and can be viewed somewhere. Who will make the effort of finding out which leagues have a policy on diacritics, and document it here?

LarRan (talk) 08:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I will repeat what I said above about birthplaces. This is not a wikiproject decision, its what the entire wiki uses, and is in fact an english language rule that places that do not have translations still keep their diacritics. This was never something the wikiproject decided on because its something the wiki as a whole does. -Djsasso (talk) 13:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay by me. LarRan (talk) 13:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Quebec is apart of North America (at least it was when I last checked); therefore, no diacritics on those articles. For goodness sake, the vast majority of Ice hockey articles are under the Non-North American category. Things have been so peaceful these last few years & suddenly this. Jumpin' Junipers, don't you pro-dios crowds 'never' stop? GoodDay (talk) 14:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Please discuss the proposed amendment based on its own merits rather than appealing to tradition. Yes, the current wording fails to mention Québec, but that doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be changed. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 14:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

NOPE, Quebec is a part of North America. The vast majority of hockey articles are Non-North American based, please remain content with that. GoodDay (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

If you have nothing new to add to the discussion, please refrain from posting repetitions of your stated position. We have noticed your position. LarRan (talk) 14:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Only a handful of editors have responded so far. Should we invite more? Like ... participants in the hockey project? LarRan (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Why bother? The pro-dios crowd have already made their new ruling, on how to invoke the North American guideline. You're quite correct LarRan, my repetitions are falling on deaf ears. GoodDay (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

We have not made a new "ruling", I guess that is proved by my suggestion of asking more editors. LarRan (talk) 15:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a "new ruling" go read the archives. That being said, consensus can change. If you want to make this confrontational instead of discussing it like adults we can easily hold another poll on whether or not we should use them in articles. That being said our editorship has grown since the last time we did it and I wouldn't doubt we have more editers now that are for using them than there was last time... -Djsasso (talk) 15:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi all! long time no see! Anyways, I just want to put my two bits in (again). This is a lot more simpler than ya'll folks are making it. Here is the litmus test: Find the most common spelling in English and use that! Wow, that is simple. If the majority of reliable English sources (besides just the 'Net) don't use diacritics for a subject or person, then wikipedia shouldn't either. If the majority of reliable English sources for a subject or person use diacritics, then wikipedia should too! Oh, and it is NOT about "spelt wrong", it is about "English spelling". It may look wrong to a non-native speaker of English, but truth be told, to the majority of native English speakers, it sure looks wrong to include diacritics. Masterhatch (talk) 15:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

And that is the opinion of the people who want to remove them yes, however in the millions of wars over this on the wiki its been brought up over and over that you can't use how papers spell it as proof that you shouldn't have diacritics as removing them doesn't equate a translation to english. -Djsasso (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure you can. That is the entire point of the common name guideline. "Jaromír Jágr" is not the common English spelling. "Jaromir Jagr" is. Just because a different language uses the latin alphabet does not mean it literally translates. Frankly, this argument is as silly as demanding "Alexander Ovechkin" be spelled out as "Александр Овечкин" every time his name comes up. Resolute 16:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No because in your example, that is a translation. Removing the diacritics is simply a spelling mistake. -Djsasso (talk) 16:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Both examples are translations. People are just bogging down on the semantics that Czech and English both use the Latin alphabet in the Jagr example. Resolute 16:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Except diacritics are used in English so the translation of Jágr is Jágr. While I can agree that alot of media do use Jagr, that would be slang and not a direct translation. -Djsasso (talk) 17:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Diacritics are only used in English when there is no English translation of a word or name. In this case, the translation is "Jagr". Resolute 17:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and there is no translation of his name. Removing diacritics is not a translation, its slopiness or lack of equipment. -Djsasso (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I think idea in engvar about british/american/canadian spellings should apply to dios. If they are there, leave them there, if they aren't there don't add them...except when it comes to article names where the persons name should be spelled the most appropriate way with them. That is if people absolutely refuse the ideal of having them on all pages. -Djsasso (talk) 15:20, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of media spells Jágr Jagr. That is mostly due 1) "á" not being on the keyboard, 2) sloppiness or laziness. That does not make it a rule or a policy. LarRan (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

At the end of the day, the only place you will see it spelled "Jágr" is either in the Czech language, or on wikipedia. It was never spelled with diacritics in his entire career in the NHL. It's ridiculous that every central european name gets cluttered up with diacritics that would never otherwise apply. --Lvivske (talk) 03:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Your cynicism about the media is disappointing. :-) On whose authority are you to judge? Alaney2k (talk) 19:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok. What reasons do you suggest? LarRan (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Convention. Courtesy. (e.g. use english) Computer screen resolution. Looks. For a very long time now, when people immigrate to North America, they simplify their names. I think we have just continued this in the media today. It is not that long ago that Unicode did not exist. I doubt that most spell-checkers in North American are of any use with diacritics. Don't just be prejudicial. Alaney2k (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Except that WP:COMMONNAME is a rule (guideline), and it says to go with how a word is most commonly spelled in the English language. Whatever the reason why we spell it as Jagr, that is the common spelling in English. Resolute 02:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

• Does WP:CANSTYLE apply here too, I suppose? These are Canadian athletes and topics. They suggest using "what an English speaker would most likely recognize as the usual name of the subject in actual usage." For Quebec-only leagues, that seems to indicate allowing mostly French spellings. For articles outside of Quebec, that would indicate no use of accents. This is in agreement with no diacritics on NHL and league articles. Alaney2k (talk) 16:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is basically what my position was. And what I thought was already what we were doing here. -Djsasso (talk) 16:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Except that it is not a "inside Quebec/outside Quebec" argument. It is an English vs. French argument. In French, it's "François". In English, it's "Francois" WP:CANSTYLE basically argues against using diacritics. Resolute 17:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe WP:CANSTYLE#French_names argues against using diacritics; it says to use "what an English speaker would most likely recognize as the usual name of the subject in actual usage" and gives an example of a phrase where the most common Canadian English usage is an untranslated phrase, including accents. (In the current context, this of course just brings the discussion back to what should be considered to be a reliable source for common Canadian English usage.) Isaac Lin (talk) 03:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly the word recognize is the key and an English reader wouldn't suddenly not realize Éric Fichaud is the same person as Eric Fichaud. -Djsasso (talk) 03:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

"recognize as the usual name", not just "recognize this name as representing the specific person in question." Isaac Lin (talk) 06:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Is "Francois" to be pronounced as "Frankoys"? The hard vowel "o" makes the "c" be pronounced as "k", according to the hard vowel rule. So by just removing the diacritic, the spelling counterdicts the pronounciation, according to normal English pronounciation rules (unless you pronounce it "Frankoys"). Which proves why just dropping the diacritics is not a good idea. Remember Chevy Chase as Clark Griswold in the National Lampoon's Vacation calling for the waiter in Paris: "Garkon, garkon"? LarRan (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No, the pronounciation does not change, as you are no doubt aware. Nor does the pronounciation of any other word where diacritics are dropped as part of the translation change. English, as a rule, does not follow its own rules, and building strawmen does not prove your argument. Resolute 17:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, the pronounciation doesn't change - provided you know how it's pronounced to start with. If you don't - like very many of the English-speaking community, who have not had any contact with the French language, do - you have to assume something. And it's more logical to assume the rule than the exception, right? That's why Clark Griswold assumed "garkon", and that's why he'd assume "Frankoys". QED. LarRan (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Then I suggest you add a phonetic key (WP:IPA) or the French language translation in brackets in the opening line.--Lvivske (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

We often do. I've been adding that sort of thing. What is school for? IPA still needs you to have gone to school. Adding a ç is only helpful if you know what it means. We don't put a link on it, and we don't have an English article on that letter. Griswold is just a joke on American stereotypes. Alaney2k (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I have very little to add that has not been said, other than I agree with Resolute and Masterhatch above. Dbrodbeck (talk) 00:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I have to say I'm disappointed that the diacritics argument has come up again. I thought we had slain this beast back in the day. I don't even remember what my stance is on this anymore, but either way, I couldn't care if they are there or not. As I don't have a keyboard that supports them, I personally won't add them myself unless I'm really feeling into it, but if someone adds them, go ahead. Kaiser matias (talk) 05:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Back to the specific question (straw poll?)

In Europe, English speakers and readers are used to seeing spellings with diacritics. In North America, the convention is not to use them. Based on looking at the Montreal Gazette, I'd say that, in Quebec English media and writings, accents are tolerated. Not required and not removed. Also, not the full set of diacritics. You do not see Dominik Hašek, for example. That's as far as I would go. Wikipedia should reflect reality, not lead it. Is it appropriate to do a straw poll and how do you do it? Alaney2k (talk) 14:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

A reminder to all. This is the English language Wikipedia & not the Canadian Wikipedia. If it were the latter? I'd have no problem with the Quebec amendment. GoodDay (talk) 14:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You really are grasping at straws you know. You might want to try being a little less xenophobic. To Alaney2k, this is pretty much what I was thinking. I say this because french accents sometimes also show up in NHL player profiles as well as in English language newspapers in Quebec. -Djsasso (talk) 14:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

We should continue to keep the diacritics banned, from all North American based hockey articles (with the exception of the NHL player's birthplaces, of course). The Non-North American based hockey articles, would (of course) continue to allow the diacritics. GoodDay (talk) 14:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It's the Canadian Wikipedia too. (My Canada includes Quebec) And this is only a few articles. I would think that for Quebec articles that WP:CANSTYLE applies. I think that the local spelling convention applies. You know, when an article is marked as Canadian spelling, you're not supposed to change it to an American spelling. So, if the content is written with accents, don't remove them. If created without, don't add them? Anyway, a poll? Alaney2k (talk) 15:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The french accents can be applied to Quebec hockey articles, at the French Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 15:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

If you are going to just keep saying no without actually providing any arguements, please refrain from commenting in the discussion. It is not helpfull. -Djsasso (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The French Wikipedia is the place for those 'french diacritics'. Quebec is within Canada & Canada is within North America. GoodDay (talk) 15:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

GoodDay, you know as well as any of us that that argument is hooey. That's like saying "England is part of Europe, and most of Europe uses diacritics, therefore anything related to England should use diacritics". I do not want to continue asking you to stick to cogent arguments. What do you think about leagues in Québec that operate almost entirely within the French-speaking community, with almost all media coverage in French? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 15:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) There's a French Wikipedia with it's arms wide open, to welcome them aboard. GoodDay (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop repeating your same comment over and over if you have nothing new to add. You have made your point clear and everyone is able to see it. Continue to do it and you will definately be considered editing disruptively. -Djsasso (talk) 15:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You're threatening to pull Administrative rank on me? GoodDay (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not threatening to pull any kind of rank on you. I am telling you that you are being a disruptive editor at the moment, and as such you are very much able to be blocked. I wouldn't do the block myself since I am involved in the discussion but I am sure any other administrator that has seen your behavior would consider you being disruptive. You've been asked now by 3 editors to stop repeating the same comment over and over. -Djsasso (talk) 15:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Very well, I shall remain silent. But, please note, I haven't edit-warred over this topic. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The reason for this ghost coming back and haunting us, is maybe that we haven't found a good balance in our consensuses so far. When we've got articles on leagues and teams in the French-speaking parts of Canada, in whose names we accept diacritics, then it puzzles me that we should have a consensus that proclaims that the names of the players mentioned in those articles should have their diacritics hidden there. Seems illogical to me. LarRan (talk) 12:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the issue is that the current compromise isn't a concensus. Neither side likes our compromise, however it was the closest we could come to compromise to stop edit warring. This is an issue that rages across the entire wiki and will likely never be solved. So this is basically a stopgap meassure. -Djsasso (talk) 13:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It could never be a consensus. There are definitely editors who want diacritics everywhere, even where convention would be otherwise, where it's impractical,e tc.. There are others who don't want it at all, even where the readers would be surprised not to see them. I like the current compromise. It reflects reality, we don't live on Vulcan. It's a fair compromise, and revisiting it regularly is healthy. Alaney2k (talk) 21:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Healthy for most of us. I think GoodDay just had several minor strokes. :P — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Would I be accurate, in saying the Quebec amendment is rejected? GoodDay (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Few of the questions about it have been addressed, such as "What about leagues which are almost entirely exclusive to the Francophone community (such as the LNAH)?" — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree its a fair compromise to keep things from flaring up, and I agree revisiting it now and then is a good thing. And I have to agree with Twas Now that I think GoodDay probably just had an major stroke. And no GoodDay I don't think anything was rejected, It was actually shown that major english media in quebec do use accents in their articles from time to time. I think what Alaney2k propossed its reasonable. (now Alaney2k probably just fainted from shock). -Djsasso (talk) 03:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Now if we could only agree that the 1992- Ottawa Senators use the same franchise (aka Ottawa NHL franchise) as the old Senators team, I'll be happy. New operator, same old franchise, short inactive period, 11 Cup wins - priceless. :-) Alaney2k (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't agree that a Quebec amendment is rejected. I was going to summarize the other night, but couldn't find the time. My original hope was that we could arrive at trying to document which leagues ignore diacritics as a policy, and then follow that. But I have found that this subject, for some reason that goes way over my head, is highly sensitive, to say the least. So I'll try this instead: since we have leagues and teams with French names, probably Quebec-based, for which we accept diacritics in their article names, I think it would be logical to accept visible diacritics on players' names there. It doesn't make any sense to me hiding them on those pages. Wouldn't that be acceptable? LarRan (talk) 07:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) Here's my take on this. The spelling of the player's name especially in the case of the NHL/AHL/ECHL etc. is reflected on the name on his back. If someone decides that a diacritic is the proper spelling of his name, then it would appear on the back of his jersey correct? The best examples of this are found in baseball where a few players wear diacritics, Eric Gagné and Magglio Ordoñez for example. I'd say the rule should be how the player wears his jersey in North America dictates how his name appears on North American teams' pages. I don't think this should extend to the European pages as the KHL rosters would be unreadable to most English speakers if the names were in Cyrillic. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 08:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The NHL has a policy to ignore diacritics, I don't think the players can go against that, even if they would prefer. So it might not be that easy. LarRan (talk) 08:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't accept this Quebec amendment unconditionally, sorry gentlemen. GoodDay (talk) 14:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

No single editor has veto rights. LarRan (talk) 14:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I've never claimed to have such rights. I've already indirectly conveyed this to Djsasso. GoodDay (talk) 14:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You do however, keep implying it by your repeated comments. -Djsasso (talk) 17:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

No sir. Implying that I had such right, would be shown by deleting the dios from the NHL Roster Templates. I haven't done that for over a year (nor do I intend to, again). GoodDay (talk) 17:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe the NHL has a rule against it. I seem to remember a few French players wearing é's on the back of their jerseys. So I honestly think it is up to the players how they wish to represent their names. On the other hand, perhaps we follow the league's convention, if the official league website shows diacritics it is shown here. If not then we leave it alone, no sense in using letters that will never be seen in reference to said player in said league. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 08:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, the NHLPA official website 'does not' show diacritics on the NHL players birthplaces. GoodDay (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

(out) I'm just mulling this over....do ANY English sources use diacritics for European language names? The Jagr example just sticks out like a sore thumb to me. I had an entry for Forsberg corrected to use diacritics the other day...and I've never seen diacritics, ever, from an english language source. This isn't the Czech wiki or Swedish wiki, etc. Do we start writing names in cyrillic next, since that's the proper way to pronounce the name?--Львівске (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Just for your information: Peter Forsberg's name isn't spelled with diacritics, if that is what you were referring to. LarRan (talk) 20:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably referring to using diacritics in his article, e.g. "Malmö", etc. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Assistance in cleaning up 2009 NHL Entry Draft, quickly?

Hey guys. Would anybody be willing to help me start cleaning up (expanding the lead, making the rest a little cleaner) 2009 NHL Entry Draft tonight? It will likely get millions of hits tomorrow, so lets make it look nicer beforehand. Anybody available? – (iMatthew • talk) at 20:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you decided on a format for the table? If so, I suggest you implement it before everything is filled out as it will be much easier. (You might be able to do it quickly if you use word). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I already did that. – (iMatthew • talk) at 20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

And while we still have time to discuss; Am I the only one not supporting the new sortable draft tables? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 02:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Nope, I don't think they're necessary either. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

How do you figure. Sortability is a very helpful feature. I find it weird to have to explain why having a sortable table is helpful. – (iMatthew • talk) at 02:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

As a feature, it can be useful. Implemented the way it is with seven different tables, it's value is extremely limited. In a practical sense, there is very little benefit to having a sorting ability to this article format, but there is also no loss, either, so no biggie. Resolute 02:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Nope you are definitely not the only one. I find in our current article format its value is limited. -Djsasso (talk) 03:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Regardless of table format, are we enough to keep it updated and in good shape through the entire draft? I'll be up until the 30th pick is made. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 23:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Only the first 30 picks are being done today. The rest of the draft will be held over the course of tomorrow. I'll be here keeping an eye on everything, its going to be crazy. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

It has been rather calm so far. *knocks on wood* Anyway, I will be around as long as I can as well, but rather cover potential trades. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Calm!? Please please please semi-protect the article immediately. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 23:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

If someone is up for it Nazem Kadri and Scott Glennie needs articles. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 00:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

At #14, is it Dmitry Kulikov as on TV or Dmitri Kulikov as on eurohockey (not to be confused with Dmitri Kulikov)? --Bamsefar75 (talk) 01:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Day 1 completed. Remember me to bite my tongue before I mention the word "calm" next time. Anyway, I was punished by that late Red Wings trade... xD Please make sure that WP:OVERLINK is not violated when cleaning up. *hurls off to bed* Gn8, Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 03:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I on vacation during last years frenzy of trades so I could be wrong, but tonight seemed rather calm. Aside from the people trying to announce Tavares and Hedman as being drafted prior to their selection, and the frenzy of people trying to be the first to update their pages, it didn't go off as bad as I thought it was going to be. It will be interesting to see how many views both the Tavares and Hedman articles got though. Good job on all who had them as well written as they are. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

How many times have two brothers been selected at exactly the same draft position? Also there is very little updating going on about the Chris Pronger to Philadelphia trade. 121.214.56.158 (talk) 06:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

John Tavares was viewed about 3900 times, 2000 more than the day previous, and about 3000 times more than a typical day. Victor Hedman was viewed about 1400 times, just over 1000 more than a typical day. 2009 NHL Entry Draft had over 9000 views, way up from usual this month. Resolute 15:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Worth noting that the Tavares article got more views back in January when the World Juniors were going on. Hedman also had comparable views to his peak in January. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Anybody got the energy to fix up the Flames & Panthers rosters? Bouwmeester has been swapped for Leopold. GoodDay (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Working on it.  ;) Been busy updating the 2009–10 Calgary Flames season article with all of the moves the past day. Resolute 15:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Short update: All team changes and notes have been added, now the only task left is to insert the remaining picks for the last three rounds (and perhaps some clean-up). I will now add today's trades to 2009–10 NHL transactions in order to get an overview. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 18:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Project's notability allows any of you stub-loving recentists out there to create articles for some (non-Swedish) European picks:

• 31. Mikko Koskinen (G)
• 52. Richard Panik (RW)
• 65. Joonas Nättinen (C)
• 127. Roman Horak (C)
• 163. Jere Sallinen (RW/LW)
• 207. Dominik Bielke (D) — SJS task force

These have played in the top leagues of their respective countries. Also, there is a similar list of Swedes on the Sweden task force talk page. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 16:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I've added some pictures of some of the selections, but it kind of squishes the draft listing. Someone might want to take a look at the list and see if they know how to clean it up. Teemu08 (talk) 15:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 Draft article page views

Using the article traffic tool, it appears that Saturday was our big day for draft picks: 14,400 hits for Tavares' article (22.3k for the weekend). 6900 hits over the weekend for Hedman, and 5000 for Matt Duchene. Almost 54,000 hits for the 2009 NHL Entry Draft article, and 78,000 for the weekend - even our top team articles don't do much more in a month. Pretty damn good numbers. Probably worth keeping big names for next year's draft in the back of our minds (i.e.: Taylor Hall) and develop the articles on next year's top picks as time goes on. Resolute 01:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Very nice numbers, and we managed to keep it decently in shape and up to date during the entire draft. FL push next? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 01:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm impressed with how high a standard you guys got the Tavares, Hedman and Kane articles already (Apologies to any others that are good; I haven't really seen any of the other top prospect articles yet). They were probably one of the best sources of information on the two players across the internet and sets a pretty high standard for our future top draft picks. Now we just need to get the rest of the players up to beyond stub quality. Also impressed with how we managed to keep related articles somewhat organised considering the massive amounts of viewership. Good work everyone. Kaiser matias (talk) 05:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm still somewhat disappointed Nurmsook and I couldn't get Tavares to featured status for the day of the draft, but c'est la vie. Got Tim Erixon past stub, and some of the others are already looking pretty good. Notably: Magnus Pääjärvi-Svensson, though it needs some citations, Brayden Schenn and Ryan Ellis. Resolute 04:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Duplicate team categories

I was fixing up categories for Swiss teams where I've noticed there are a couple of duplicate categories on the Ice hockey players by club in Switzerland category. There are two player categories for Fribourg-Gottéron, one as it is and the other with HC is its name. Another duplicate is for Genève-Servette HC again one that reads as it is and the other reads with the HC letters in the front (HC Genève-Servette). All four cats are populated. If anyone could look at it for themselves and see what they can do then I would greatly apriciate it. Also should the Nationalliga A players category be renamed to its current name National League A? Raphie (talk) 11:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The official Genève-Servette team webpage has the HC at the end, so I moved the players to Category:Genève-Servette HC players. The Category:HC Genève-Servette players is empty now. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 12:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The "Contact" page (both the French and the German) on the official Fribourg-Gottéron team webpage says "HC Fribourg-Gottéron SA". Both the Slovene and the French Wikipedias use "HC Fribourg-Gottéron" as category names (but they iw-link to different English cats and not to eachother). I will go ahead and move the players to Category:HC Fribourg-Gottéron players and update the iw link to/from the Slovene Wikipedia. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 12:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. The Category:Fribourg-Gottéron players is also empty now. Thx :) --Bamsefar75 (talk) 12:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that. Raphie (talk) 11:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh one other thing, one of the Swiss team categories read ECH Chur players, where the team is actually EHC Chur (or Eishockey Club Chur). Was it called ECH Chur for a reason was is it a classic case of typo? Raphie (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably typo. CH is short for Switzerland, perhaps messing the mind up. There is also more than 250 players in Category:Nationalliga A players, I suspect many of them should be sorted down to their respective NLA teams. Some might have played for teams no longer in the league, team now maybe in the NLB league or defunct. I think it gets messed up because subcategories for teams have being added to the league in good faith, but teams are independent entities and players really only fit in categories below the Category:Ice hockey players by club in Switzerland and in the Nationalliga A players category itself (not its children). Similar problem with Category:Elitserien players. That category has now only subcats and no players, but its description still should be something else, because they might have played for the team but not necessarily in the league. However I am now a bit off topic. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 15:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Dany Heatley

Any admin online want to lock this article for the nonce? There are all kinds of competing rumours as to whether he's officially been dealt to the Oilers (RSN, Score) or if the deal is dead (RDS, Bruce Garrioch). Too many back and forth edits going on right now, the page probably needs to be halted for a bit to sort it out. I'd lock it myself, but I've been making reversions all night, and I'd rather not be seen as enforcing my preferred version. Resolute 04:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, may not be necessary anymore. Multiple sources from everywhere now saying deal is dead. Hate the Oilers with a passion, but god does that ever have to hurt the fans up north... especially after what we did today. :D Resolute 04:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

As is the case, nobody wants to play in the barren wastes of Edmonton --Львівске (talk) 04:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Forgot about the vandalism that would stem from the breakdown of this deal. semi'd for 3 days. Resolute 04:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Russian Superleague

Is Superleague two words or one? Russian Hockey Insider uses two, as does Russian Prospects. Same with Hockey's Future. Should it just be moved back then? RandySavageFTW (talk) 02:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah...I was thinking about it and in hockey it seems to be referred moreso as Super League than Superleague in English, despite the official wording. I wish there was a verifiable or official source on this, not amateur authors on RP or HF, or message board chatter--Львівске (talk) 02:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it sucks that out of the top 10 Google results, like 3 of them are message boards. RandySavageFTW (talk) 02:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's Dave King's book, link--Львівске (talk) 03:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Personally I would leave it as is until better sources could be found, Hockey's Future for example is pretty much considered a joke page for how many errors they have. I personally until now have always seen it spelled one word. But I am not stuck one way or the other. -Djsasso (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It was originally called Russian Super League. It was moved earlier this year - http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Russian_Superleague&diff=278559410&oldid=84117636. Doesn't seem like a good reason to move it. RandySavageFTW (talk) 17:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I moved it based on the official name being "Суперлига" (one word), and there being no official sources stating otherwise. I think NHL09 calls it "Superliga" as well.--Львівске (talk) 17:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Marián Gáborík

Any admin out there that can semi-protect Marián Gáborík. IPs are bouncing him around to so many teams that I can't revert without getting an edit conflict. ccwaters (talk) 19:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Marián Gáborík aka Batman (born February 14, 1982 in Trenčín, Czechoslovakia) is a Slovak professional spokesman for the Paraplegic's Association of America (PAA). He has since donated a hospital wing to Saint Jude's in NY. He has the distinction of being one of fewer than 50 NHL players to have scored five or more goals in a single game and the only one of the 21st century. He is best known for his role in the Iran Contra Affair and has been nominated for seven Oscars.

Um... Semi-protection seconded... o.O --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 19:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Last good revision is last rev from yesterday ccwaters (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What going on at that article, isn't improving my opinon of anons. GoodDay (talk) 19:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

A lot of people from the Rangers blog that I read (rangers.lohudblogs.com) are having fun by changing it and apparently moving on to Sather next. They both probably need protection, and look out for Brashear after that crazy signing. -- bmitchelf•T•F 19:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree, their next target will likely be Sather & Brashear. GoodDay (talk) 19:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha, the Gaborik article has been semi-protected. Ohh, to only see the vandalizers growling in their chairs now. GoodDay (talk) 20:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

National Hockey League GAR notice

National Hockey League has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Chicago Blackhawks task force.

Pretty much every thing above me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KingRaven (talk • contribs) 08:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Montreal Canadiens

I've just removed 'lots' of french accents from the names at that article. Has an agreement been made to include those? PS: I'm not looking for an argument, just information. GoodDay (talk) 21:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I would mention that that page always had lots of accents...the conversation was on whether or not we would stop having them on those pages. And if you weren't looking for an argument why did you bring it up? -Djsasso (talk) 18:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

If that's the decision of the WikiProject members, so be it. I won't re-add the accents, but I won't remove them (again). GoodDay (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe any new consensus has been reached on this point in the lengthy discussion from about a month ago, so status quo should remain in effect. Isaac Lin (talk) 14:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

As I recall, many accents have been added over the last few months, so I wouldn't say it always has lots of accents. Isaac Lin (talk) 04:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

They also get removed fairly often and re added again etc etc...my point was more about why he was bothering to tell people he removed them...he is constantly telling people "Hey look guys I removed some diacritics" (paraphrased of course)...If he really wants them gone just removing them silently would probably help his cause more and irritate people less. He is slightly obsessed with accents...squiggly lines...dots etc etc...one can't help but wonder if his stress levels would go down and if he might happier if he just stopped worrying so much about them and/or stopped talking about them as he has claimed he was going to do many times. -Djsasso (talk) 05:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Dj, you complain 'too much'. GoodDay (talk) 22:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

WHA General Player Draft

I have slowly been working on this page, but mostly doing background research at the moment. It has occurred to me that by the time this is "finished" it will be absolutely enormous! Suggestions? Comments? I was thinking of breaking it up by team... 93JC (talk) 01:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm actually just finishing up reading "The Rebel League" by Ed Willes, a book about the WHA. My advice, since the draft was indeed massive, would be to use the above article as a summary of the draft, and then have seperate articles for each team's draft picks (ex. New England Whalers at the WHA General Player Draft or something less awkward sounding. That keeps all the articles linked together, while staying at a reasonable length. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

That's what I'm leaning toward: a central article which summarizes the draft and separate articles for the picks.93JC (talk) 18:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Damn. That will be some undertaking! As a quick thought - is there any reason why the Broncos' draft picks are split into three tables? You would reduce overhead by combining it into one table. Doubly so since the current table format cripples the search function. Resolute 18:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It would actually be split into four or five tables per team! You see my source, a newspaper article from 1972, is split like this. Unlike the NHL Entry Draft where everything is neatly broken down round-by-round, pick-by-pick, the WHA General Player Draft results are broken down alphabetically in preliminary rounds, rounds 1-10, 11-20, 21-50, 51-70 and 71+. They are the most accurate, precise results I could find. I suppose it doesn't really matter if they are combined, I just thought for the sake of accuracy I should break them down as best I could given the sources. If I could I would put all of the team's picks into one table and add a "Round" column, but this is the best I can do given the info I have. Ideally I'd like to find a source that has round-by-round selections (but I doubt I ever will). Oh well, off to the library! 93JC (talk) 18:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure there is something. Willes' book mentioned that there were several reporters there covering the entire event, and the next day papers in Dayton announced that they drafted Esposito and Orr, so someone must have written something up on it. Just a problem of finding out if it is available, and how detailed it was. Kaiser matias (talk) 20:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeesh, at that size, probably best to break it into an article for each team, and one more to tie them all together, perhaps just listing the preliminary round top ten picks? If I get a chance this weekend, I'll head to the library and see what the Calgary and Edmonton papers said on Feb 14, 1972. Perhaps being of direct local interest, they might have a greater breakdown. Resolute 22:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't bother checking the Herald, I already did. I doubt the Journal has any more info.93JC (talk) 21:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Eyes on Nashville Predators and Sommet Center

It looks like someone pushing an agenda, and probably socking to try and enforce it, is attempting to build a mountain out of a mole hill. It wouldn't hurt to have a few more people watching these articles at the moment. Resolute 05:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Minor Hockey League (name)

Hey. Now have official sourcing that the Russians are calling their major-junior league the "Minor Hockey League" (MHL). Should the article be named as such, or should it be "Russian Minor Hockey League" seeing as "minor hockey league" is such an ambiguous term.

Previously we decided on RJHL instead of JHL, but that was before they had a sourced English name --Львівске (talk) 23:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless there is a need for disambiguation, I'd just go with Minor Hockey League. The context of where the article will be linked will help readers understand. Perhaps add a hat note pointing to Minor_league_hockey#Minor_professional for people looking for minor professional hockey leagues. Resolute 23:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Espen Knutsen

Any reason why the stats are in the external links section and not in the Career statistics section? I tried fixing it but didn't know what to do. RandySavageFTW (talk) 14:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I fixed it. That was a weird one. I just wikified it. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 15:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

FLRCs

Hi guys. This is just a note to let you all know that I've nominated List of San Jose Sharks players (FLRC), List of New Jersey Devils players (FLRC), and List of Columbus Blue Jackets players (FLRC) for featured list removal. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

You're a hockey editor — {{sofixit}}. Maxim_(talk) 18:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but these articles can't remain as Featured lists with all of the problems they have. I don't have the time to finish my own projects, let alone other projects. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I just love how people nominate them before even trying to fix them or mention here that they are thinking about doing it so people can fix them before they get to the stage where they are nominated. -Djsasso (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Nominating them isn't automatically delisting them. The issues should be cleaned up there, and hopefully they are so they can keep their FL status. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

When you nominate 3 at once, when the hockey season is over and thus most hockey editors not paying attention to wikipedia, it means that atleast one will lose its status because fixing all of them at once in the alotted time will not be able to happen. That is why its usually common courtesy to notify the relevant projects prior to listing. Especially when you say one is just easy fixes, if you were an editor who didn't edit hockey thats one thing, but you are so easy fixes you probably could have done yourself could you not have? -Djsasso (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

They are not just easy fixes. The leads all need to be expanded, and many more references need to be found. Those two alone are big enough jobs that I just don't have the time for myself. These can stay open longer if more time is needed. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually the references are fine, number of references isn't important but rather quality. If one reference covers everything on a page it would be acceptable. Since these are only lists of players and their statistics, its not necessary to have a massive set of references. The only other references needed would be those for the lead. -Djsasso (talk) 18:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Not for nothing, but this violates WP:DICK. If you thought there was a problem, bring it to our attention so we can rectify it. In the offseason, the lists are watched as carefully as we can, since players change and move around. But it's difficult, and to just launch into FLRC without consulting anyone is a bad play. I just updated the Devils goaltender section not that long ago with stats; the main website had problems, though, so I couldn't update the players stats as well. Djsasso and I, along with members of the Devils task force, watch all the Devils pages, that one included, and update them when necessary. I recognize the stats hadn't been updated in a while; that's no reason to just eliminate it as an FL. As for the references, DJ is right: if you have one ref that covers everything, why bother wasting space with more? I will work on the page (though not today, too busy), and oppose the move for the Devils page. Anthony Hit me up... 18:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Not for nothing, but you guys must not follow WP:AGF. I was not trying to sabotage this project by nominating a few lists for removal. In the future, I will let you know (and everyone) in advance. But calling me a dick and throwing {{sofixit}} in my face is just plain rude. I will not remove the lists from FLRC, but I will help with fixing the lists. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Well its hard to assume good faith when someone does a mass nomination of articles for removal of their FL. Especially when if you would have mentioned it here, we could have told you that there are a group of people currently already working on upgrading the FL player lists to the current standards. User:Resolute is one I believe. None of us probably would have said anything had you done one at a time, atleast I know I wouldn't have. Or atleast let us know, relisting prior to letting anyone know just goes against the idea of collaboration that wikipedia is all about. -Djsasso (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Well once again, I wasn't trying to tick anybody off. So the automatic bad faith assumption is rude. – (iMatthew • talk) at 18:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

That's cool. Just wanted to make sure you understood that not notifying the relevant parties before hand was also rude. -Djsasso (talk) 19:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I would note also that assuming bad faith would mean I thought you were doing it to hurt the wikipedia or the editors, which I didn't do. So your assuming I didn't AGF is actually an assumption of bad faith...I was just making a comment about how rediculous it is that people don't have the courtesy to discuss first before taking it up the next step in the ladder. (as you would do with anything else in life such as a problem with a co-worker...) -Djsasso (talk) 03:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

You guys are being very rude to iMatthew. There is plenty of time to work on the issues brought up. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I can see both sides. These lists, and others, are on my fixit list already, but I just haven't made the time to fix them yet. I agree that people are being rude to iMatthew, but at the same time, I've never hid my opinions on how annoying it is that people rush to delist stuff rather than discuss first. A simple message on this talk page stating that these lists need fixing probably would have spurred action to fix these lists up to the new standard. In my not so humble opinion, the very first step should always be to informally contact the contributors/projects involved. I can see where iMatthew is coming from, however, given I've notified other projects about a list in need of work with no response or action. Resolute 21:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Seeing how I originally nominated both the Sharks and Blue Jackets articles way back when, and have neglected to keep them up to date, I feel somewhat guilty. Especially because over the last few months, I kept thinking that I should go and bring them up to current FL status. I won't really be able to do anything for them until Friday, as I took time off for the Entry Draft, I'll put in my share of work for them in the coming days, and have them up to the standards that are expected. Kaiser matias (talk) 22:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a reminder that the 2 week period is almost up and atleast 2 of them are likely to be delisted. Anyone want to take a look at them? -Djsasso (talk) 18:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

New list!

After a lot of tedious work, I have created the List of Men's World Ice Hockey Championship players for Canada (1977–present) (why 1977? two reasons: 1977 was the first year active NHLers were allowed, and Hockey Canada only tracks stats since then) and I was wondering if I could get some thoughts on it. There are some changes from the format used in List of Olympic men's ice hockey players for Canada, such as the way the medals are presented (that way, one can sort by number of medals, and while the small years in the columns add width, I wanted to indicate what years medals were won, and it worked the best of anything I tried), and every year is written out (so 2002, 2003, 2004 rather than 2002-2004, that way, if a user wanted to use ctrl-f to find a certain year, it would be possible). If everyone likes it, it might not be a bad idea to create similar lists (for both the Olympics and Worlds) for other major hockey nations (although sourcing may be a problem). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

That is quite some list you made there, I can probably do one for Sweden when I have some spare time. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 00:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Could probably assist on that... The official source for them is here but the stats are not. Any other source to easily merge/complement with? --Bamsefar75 (talk) 00:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to see a list done for the Soviet Union (both Olympics and Worlds), where are those nationalists when you need them? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd use Årets Ishockey (SIHA annual stats book), I think they list other nations roster and complete stats too but the books have only been released since 1938 so before that it could be difficult to find complete stats. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 04:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Very nice work. Now you can imagine how I felt while working on List of Detroit Red Wings players. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Québec Remparts

Not trying to start a big diacritic/accent debate, but shouldn't this be moved to Quebec Remparts like Quebec Nordiques and Montreal Canadiens (in French it's Montréal). RandySavageFTW (talk) 02:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

No, why? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 07:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Because the English spelling of Quebec has no accent. This is English Wikipedia...--Львівске (talk) 07:54, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Though this isn't about the province/city, it's about the Québec Remparts which has no english version of it's name, unlike the NHL their league recognise the accents.

Huh? Compare the webpage titles of http://www.remparts.qc.ca/eng/index.asp and http://www.remparts.qc.ca/index.asp. The team itself recognizes "Quebec Remparts", sans accents, as their name in English. 93JC (talk) 14:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Move it to Quebec Remparts. GoodDay (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, move it. Masterhatch (talk) 15:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I just moved it per WP:BOLD. RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I admire your courage. GoodDay (talk) 15:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I would have moved it also. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Great move...you have my full support. Masterhatch (talk) 15:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

F*in BS, they use Québec all over the English version of the website. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 03:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

They don't. The logo is French. Les Remparts de Québec should have it, it's French. Quote from site - May 27th, 2009 - Patrick stays in Quebec City. F*in BS. RandySavageFTW (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Well the team history page is in english and has the accent, but they also use the accent on "Québec City" so it's a two way street --Львівске (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Since it seems the page uses both I have evoked WP:BRD. -Djsasso (talk) 20:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it nearly lasted 24hrs (amazingly). GoodDay (talk) 20:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

(out) Looking at the QMJHL website, accents are used on all teams and cities as possible. One thing that stood out to me was that the syntax of the names is clearly done NAME>CITY (outside of the drop down box at the top of the screen). When I went on that history website they set up, names are done this same way, example: "Moncton, Wildcats" (wherein the name should read full-out Wildcats Moncton). This is like how a lot of Euro teams are. I don't want to cause a debate...much...but just something that's causing me to do a doubletake, seeing as this is the English language source--Львівске (talk) 03:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The history section does use the accent but it also has it on Quebec in Quebec Major Junior Hockey League. The Nordiques were based on Quebec, and we don't use the accent for them, so it would be consistent to not use it for the Remparts. RandySavageFTW (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed--Львівске (talk) 22:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The article should be moved back to Quebec Remparts. GoodDay (talk) 22:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

We don't use it on the Nordiques because the NHL doesn't recognize diacritics. We use it on QMJHL teams because the QMJHL does recognize diacritics. That is what we are being consistent with. -Djsasso (talk) 13:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The city name in this case has a English version. What the team or the league uses is a matter of branding. I believe common usage from independent sources should be used, not branding (Wikipedia is not a place for advertising). Isaac Lin (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

This is of course debatable but its been said for other sports team in this situation that the Quebec in Quebec Remparts isn't technically the city/province name but rather the two words together are the name of the team (as opposed to the two words being separate entities ie city/province name and then team name) in which case the branding should be followed. -Djsasso (talk) 14:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems odd for a team nickname to include the city name in it (so would the city name be doubled in a listing of the standings, for example?) — this sounds like a rationalization to sneak some advertising through a media outlet's style guide. Isaac Lin (talk) 14:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The QMJHL "recognizes" diacritics because they obviously use a fairly mediocre translation tool rather than properly writing articles in both English and French. In the end, much like Quebec City and Quebec Nordiques, the common English spelling does not use diacritics. Likewise, we don't translate Rempart to English, because even in English, the french word is used. This article should be moved back to it's proper English title. Resolute 15:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Though Québec is also an English word. And if every single article on Wikipedia was named after the common name we'd have to move United States, Federal Bureau of Investigation, etc, and Sweden to Sweeden, a common misspelling, does that make it correct and we should move the article there just because some people can't spell it correctly? Hell no. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 15:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

To follow that up, one can argue the "common usage" is incorrect translation due to laziness and former technical limitations. ie printing presses not having both version, however, new digital printing options do have this option. So I would hardly argue its the case of mediocre translation software. -Djsasso (talk) 15:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Places with international profiles can have multilingual versions of their names, and this is the case for Quebec, Montreal, Moscow, and many other places. Isaac Lin (talk) 16:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

That assumes that Quebec is talking about a place and is not part of the trademarked name. -Djsasso (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Again, that's branding. Isaac Lin (talk) 16:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, and we should be using what they actually name their brand. Just like we would any other company. -Djsasso (talk) 16:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:MOSTM. We actually should not be titling articles based on the trademark. Resolute 20:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

You mean the article name should be "Quebec Québec Remparts"? MLB often refers to the World Series champions as the world champions, but this is branding and doesn't mean Wikipedia should rename its list of World Series champions to World champions. Branding should not be used uncritically, or else the opportunities to sneak advertising into Wikipedia become plentiful. Isaac Lin (talk) 17:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

No I don't actually. You are just being ridiculous when you double up the word Quebec. What I am saying is that when you see all team names (in all sports in all cities) you are seeing the two words together as the organizations name. When you see stats lists for example you are reading the full team names you aren't reading <city> <teamname>. To spell it with or without the diacritic isn't advertising anymore than the other. The name of a company is different from the branding of a product such as the World Series (and I would note the term World Series is the brand in that case). An example of wikipedia already doing this is Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The team is not in Los Angeles and only uses that in their name as a marketing ploy (which backfired) and only has Anaheim in their name to fulfill a lease requirement. -Djsasso (talk) 17:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

There was a lengthy discussion on the World Series article about MLB using the term world champions as well as reliable sources such as Sports Illustrated, and so the World Series champion should be considered to be the world champion. However, this ignores the fact that the term is being used as a traditional marketing phrase, not as an assertion that the World Series champion is the official world champion. Marketing terms do not have to be used blindly; each circumstance can be evaluated to see what is appropriate. In this case, as I have not seen any assertion yet that the team name is in fact "Québec Remparts"/"Remparts de Québec", this whole discussion is somewhat moot. (On their web site, the name "Remparts" is commonly used in articles to refer to the team, so it does not seem they are trying to use the "Québec Remparts" name exclusively.) Isaac Lin (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Should QMJHL be Québec Major Junior Hockey League too since the Q recognizes diacritics? RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be my opinion, yes. -Djsasso (talk) 15:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it's still a matter of debate, as the official site, here, states "The Quebec Major Junior Hockey League was founded in 1969..." and uses no diacritics at all, even at the bottom "©2005-2009, QUEBEC MAJOR JUNIOR HOCKEY LEAGUE."--Львівске (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I see 'no reason' to continue arguing for Quebec Remparts. Why? don't ask. GoodDay (talk) 20:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)