Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey

Skip to bottom • Start new discussion

Archives
Archive index 2004-06:1 • 2 2006: 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 2007: 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 2007: 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 2008: 18 • 19 • 20 • 21 • 22 2008: 23 • 24 • 25 • 26 2009: 27 • 28 • 29 • 30 • 31 2009: 32 • 33 • 34 • 35 • 36 2010: 37 • 38 • 39 • 40 • 41 2010: 42 • 43 2011: 44 • 45 • 46 • 47

Remember the Titans

So an interesting team lineage issue just cropped up: The Trenton Titans were an ECHL team beginning in 1999. A few years ago the New Jersey Devils bought the team and renamed them the Trenton Devils. NJD gave on them and suspended operations this offseason, however the ECHL just announced that the "Trenton Titans" will be playing this upcoming season (complete with original branding). Is this a new team? Should articles be broken up? I personally think the should be 3 separate articles. Opinions? TerminalPreppie (talk) 17:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

• ECHL says "new membership", ie new team: [1] TerminalPreppie (talk) 19:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

(ec)Same team, they only suspended operations and then changed their name. We have a number of teams who have changed their name and then eventually went back to their original name. The only difference is that this team suspended operations for awhile. We don't separate for name changes and since they resumed operations in the same city they haven't moved which is what usually triggers us to make a split. -DJSasso (talk) 19:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Although if they are calling it a new membership perhaps it is a new team. How did the last version end? Was it literally called a suspension of operations? If it was then I would just call the fact they call it new membership a PR spin and its really the same team. Since the Trenton Devils only ceased operations this July and this new team was announced in the same month its hard to think they are different franchises but I guess we will have to wait and get more information on the situation. -DJSasso (talk) 19:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's the tricky part - the ECHL pulled the original press release, but it can still be found here, where they say the franchise operations were suspended. This article talks about franchise operations being suspended. However, the ECHL's press release announcing the Titans says that it was a new membership application and that the old membership was turned into the league. So is it a new franchise, or the same one rebranded again?  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 22:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I think in general, the majority of our hockey articles go like this:

• Same franchise, new ownership = one article
• Same franchise, new name = one article (Toronto St. Patricks being a notable exception, and one that probably should be merged back into Toronto Maple Leafs.)
• Same franchise, new city = new article
• Same city, new franchise = new article

If the new Trenton Titans is a separate franchise, I personally would create a new article, and rename the old Trenton Titans (1999–2011). However, if the suspended team was reactivated, use the existing. Resolute 19:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Another thing to consider is that splitting the article (unless someone has plans to heavily expand the original Titans and Devils portions) will basically leave us with two stubs. Cincinnati Cyclones (despite the infobox being for the most recent franchise) covers all three teams with that name—original ECHL, IHL, and new ECHL. I think it does a fairly decent job. Of course, the first Cyclones team is now the Stockton Thunder...why can't these guys just leave franchises where they are?  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 01:20, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Although I don't have any information regarding this point, isn't it significant whether or not the new team recognizes the old teams records?

On the ECHL website while viewing next season's Titans roster changing to last season the name automatically changes to Devils as if it is the same franchise. For me this indicates the ECHL views it as the same franchise (in the same city with only new owners and a new name) and therefore doesn't merit a new article. 99.246.179.122 (talk) 01:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The ECHL also never took Trenton off the website...just set it to an ECHL logo and blanked all the info until the Titans were announced. The only problem is that that's pretty much circumstantial—could just be that whoever up at the league offices updates the thing is lazy and didn't want to delete and then create a new team. I'm holding out to see if I can find a RS that indicates that the Titans are keeping the Devils/Titans history.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 03:21, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Please bear with me and pardon some of the speculation that crops up below.

• So it looks like the "new" Titans are in fact a new franchise. The Devils turned in the old franchise and the new owners were issued a new one. So that points to them being different and having different articles.
• However, this was most likely to allow the new owners to start without having to be responsible for the debt accrued by the Devils' management of the team (the league absorbs the debt instead). I'd say this was part of the deal the ECHL had to make to get a team up and running in Trenton for the 2011–12 season.
• Additionally, the "new" Titans are admittedly a resurrection of the "old" ones, down to the logo and all. They're taking over the Devils' city, their spot in the Atlantic Division, their schedule, and even some of their players. It remains to be seen if they will inherit the franchise history (i.e. will Scott Bertoli's number 19 still be hanging from the rafters). It would be in their best interests PR-wise to do so. So that would seem to be justification for keeping them in one article.

It appears to me that the ECHL made the necessary deal to keep a team in Trenton, such that the "new" Titans are de jure a different franchise but de facto an extension of the old one. In that case, would it be appropriate to keep them in one article or should they be split?  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 04:06, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

If they honour the records then I would consider it the same franchise because the continuous history is the reason we don't split teams with name changes and this team would still technically have the continuous history, but it might not be until the season starts that we can see that. -DJSasso (talk) 11:28, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have references for inheriting player contracts? That to me, would say its the same franchise. TerminalPreppie (talk) 12:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It's in this article. It's not a great source per se because all it says is that Scott Bertoli "expects the team to maintain a handful of players that were a part of the Devils’ system." And this article, from The Times of Trenton, says the "Trenton Titans, the capital city’s minor league hockey team from 1999 to 2007, will return to the ice this fall after a four-year absence." It would seem that this intends to be a continuation of that franchise.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 15:18, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't necessary say they RETAINED any contracts. A lot of new franchises will go out an sign a couple free agent fan favorites, just to have some familar faces. I think the next paragraph is more telling: But with many ECHL players signing European contracts over the summer, putting together a competitive roster on such short notice — the Titans’ first game is October 14 — will not be easy. The first step will be to find a coach. Bertoli said he and Lisk have already reached out to some options hoping to speed along that process.. That's sounds like they currently have NO ROSTER. TerminalPreppie (talk) 16:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

True, but I think the most telling indication will be if they retain the team history, as per DJSasso above. I don't think it makes sense to split the page on a business technicality if they plan on retaining the team history and records. That's why I'd prefer to wait.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 16:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I've been half watching all of this in the local papers all summer long. Just be careful about creating original research here. It doesn't really matter what the management and the league does, in terms of legalistic and accounting tricks and maneuvers. It looks as though The Trentonian is buying the "new team" line, so I'd say that it doesn't really matter what the (quite obvious, such as retaining most of their players) facts are that belie that position. The sources say that it's a new team, so it is. the more subtle reality of the situation can be covered in depth within the article content, if it's actually important (which I'd say that it is).
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 22:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thinking about this some more, and after re-reading Trenton Titans minor league hockey team to be revived at Sun National Bank Center, I tend to think that the Devil's ownership of the team ought to be it's own article (mentioned and summarized in the Titans article), while the old team and the revived team should continue to use the Titans article. I mean, Blue Line Sports LLC seems to be taking the stance that they're going back to the old team, so... ?
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 23:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Right now it looks like the new Titans franchise intends to keep the old Titans history. The issue is whether or not they also intend to honor the Devils history by maintaining their records. It appears at the moment that they are treating this as a "rebirth" of the old franchise, which is a little wonky as the Devils honored the original Titans history as well. But if they're going to ignore the Devils history, then I say it should definitely be split out.

And I agree about skirting the borders of original research. The problem is that (in classic ECHL fashion) all the published information surrounding the change has been very vague ("Devils are gone! Titans are here! Who needs specifics!"). That's why I've been hesitant to move.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 23:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Not that it's a reliable source that we can base much other than stats on, but Eliteprospects is treating the team as a continuation of the old one.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 23:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

It's a good question, and I'm not personally going to argue with going in any direction (or none at all) at this point. If I were to make the decision all on my own here, I'd just leave everything as is for now and come back to it sometime in mid-October. I know that's kind of a crappy answer, but... well, you mentioned "the typical ECHL fashion" yourself, which seems to be something that everyone involved realizes.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 00:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes it does make the most sense to wait. Lacking better information, holding to the status quo is rarely a bad decision. Resolute 00:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I suggest that the article should be like the Oklahoma City Blazers article. The article starts about the most recent franchise, the second incarnation of the Blazers first in the first section, and then the second section is about the original franchise, the original Blazers. The Tulsa Oilers article has a similarly like the Blazers article. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 02:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I posed the question to the Titans PR folks, and their reply follows (and yes, I know that's OR and we can't use it in the article, but they indicate that it should be sourced by the ECHL—if no one else—shortly so it may become useful when that occurs):

As you will see in the upcoming ECHL Media Guide, the re-established Titans are retaining all records of the franchise that began in 1999-2000. Compare it to the re-established NFL Cleveland Browns retaining similar franchise marks.

Now, this of course isn't really a clear answer (and I've asked for clarification that hopefully will also be supplied in the promised media guide) as "all records of the franchise" could easily include the time as the Devils. However, given the Browns analogy I'm relatively certain that their intent is to retain the "old" Titans history and not the Devils. I'll keep tracking on this to see what comes out of it.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 03:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

If the new Titans will not take the Trenton Devils records, than both the old titans and the new titans will be considered the same franchise and the devils a separate franchise. I do hope the Browns way works but I don't think it will since on the Trenton Devils website which is still up and running says they were formally the titans. This is not the first time this happened to a hockey team. The Hamilton Bulldogs of the AHL. The Bulldogs were founded in 1996 but, the franchise was founded in Nova Scotia in 1984. The franchise was in jeopardy of moving in 2002. The oilers (the bulldogs were affiliated with the oilers at the time) wanted to move them to Toronto. New owners purchased the team and the canadiens ahl team from quebec and relocated them to Hamilton joining the two franchises together for the 2002-03 season. After that season the oilers ahl franchise relocated them to Toronto and the canadiens ahl franchise remained in Hamilton as the bulldogs and were considered automatically the same Bulldogs franchise that was founded in 1996 that moved from Nova Scotia after the 1995-96 season. I also read the history of the franchise on the team's website and said that the original team didn't relocate to Toronto. It only said that the team affiliated with the canadiens for that season and continued to be an oilers affiliate for that season too. After the season was over, it said that the oilers moved their affiliation to Toronto. The Bulldogs continued there affiliation with the canadiens from the 2003-04 season to present. This could happen again with the titans except there will be no relocations. The ECHL should transfer the Trenton Devils records to the new Titans which would automatically considered the new Titans the same Trenton Devils franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hersheybearsfan (talk • contribs) 05:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, the bulldogs story was from HersheyBearsFanHersheybearsfan (talk) 05:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Clarification from the team: "New Titans will maintain the history of both the original Titans and the four Devils years." So if we get a source (such as the promised media guide) that corroborates this, should we keep one article?  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 14:09, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes leave it as is since they are maintaining history. And when we have a source such as the media guide then you can put it in the article. -DJSasso (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

When does the ECHL media guide come out? Hersheybearsfan (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Probably not until late September. -DJSasso (talk) 15:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Just in time before the season starts. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

According to the league, it goes to print in September and is available for purchase the first or second week of October. So yes, right at the beginning of the season. Figures.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 20:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the new ownership will not consider the current franchise a new franchise. The new ownership will probably automatically considered the franchise to be the same continuing franchise that was founded as titans in 1999, renamed devils in 2007, renamed back to titans in 2011. I found a source that said that the team will keep the records of the old titans and the devils. This source is on facebook. This facebook page is the official titans facebook page. For anyone to see it, you have to go to the titans website (www.trentontitanshockey.com) and click on the facebook page link. You don’t have to become a fan. Scroll down to see this post very slowly and read carefully. You will find a post that somebody wrote that regards about the old titans and devils records. The team answered this question. The answer was that they will retain the old titans and devils records. In conclusion, the titans article will continue to be one article and possibly the article should say that it is the same old continuing franchise that was formally known as the Trenton Devils, just like how the Cleveland Browns, San Jose Earthquakes and Hamilton Bulldogs articles are written. If there needs to be two separate articles then, well I can be cool with that. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 01:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I believe that team history defines what type of franchise it is and that business records and debt records don't define the fate of this franchise. We have to wait and see how the team writes it's own history when they launch their fully new website with a history page. For now it will be regarded that this franchise is the same old continuing franchise that was founded in 1999. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 02:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The Titans traded one of their players already who played with the Trenton Devils last season to Greenville. This is very odd. I think the Titans have a handful of players who played the Trenton Devils over the past four seasons. I think the Titans are already pursing to be considered the same Trenton Devils franchise. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 02:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

From the press release: "Hayes was one of the players protected to the Trenton franchise."

Based on that wording, it looks like the Titans inherited the Devils' list of players on their season-ending roster to whom they had extended qualifying offers.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 03:28, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Yep, thats what happened. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I noticed something that the ECHL does that other pro hockey leagues don't and will never do. They use the word membership alot when a team relocates to a different city, when a team is renamed, and when there is a new team entering the league. This membership thing really makes me mad. For example, sometimes the league calls the Stockton Thunder the Stockton Thunder membership. The word membership confuses people like me. We can't even tell if it's a new or old team, if the article is written like that Trenton Titans article on the league's website. The ECHL must stop using this word. If it's an old team, say it's an old team. If it's a new team, say it's a new team. If it's an expansion team, say it's an expansion team. The league also uses the term "expansion membership" for a new expansion team entering the league which makes me even more mad. A hockey team is more than just a so called membership. Any hockey team should be treated like a team that wants to win, that attracts good quality amount of fans, tries to sell season tickets at affordable prices, and tries to build a good loyal fanbase. That's what a hockey team should be treated like instead of being treated as just a so called membership. Also, both the Trenton Titans and Trenton Devils are refered to as the Trenton Membership together which is even more confusing. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 21:59, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

While I certainly agree that the ECHL could be a little more forthcoming in their press releases when it comes to franchise dealings, I don't think they're trying to be intentionally confusing or insulting. The term "membership" just refers to the relationship between the individual hockey team/club and the league. If a team wants to join a league, the ownership group literally has to fill out a membership application. It's a technical term, nothing more. The PHPA also commonly refers to ECHL and AHL teams as "member clubs."  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 03:52, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, a team obviously has to fill out an application in order for them to join a league, but the problem is that AHL and also the Central Hockey League don't say that they filled out a membership application, they just say simply that they joined the league. I like the term member club better than membership. Hersheybearsfan (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't see where there is a problem, except in so far as you're manufacturing one. First off, the ECHL can use whatever nomenclature it damn wants, and it's not going to ask our permission to do so just to make it easier for us to attach labels to things. (For one thing, if it did, we would have put that farcical "AA" nonsense to rest years ago.)

Secondly, life in the minors is like that - there are only three teams in the minor leagues with as much as 20 years without a city, nickname and/or franchise change. Colors change. Affiliations change. Nicknames change. Teams leave leagues and then come back again. Teams leave cities and other franchises immediately come into the new market, sometimes adopting the name of the old team. This is why we attach dates to articles.

Confusing? Yes, it sometimes is. But with these "membership" redirects you're inventing, what's your goal? I can't see any point or purpose to it.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  05:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

This business with ECHL "memberships"

I just tagged redirect pages for 9 current and former ECHL team pages for speedy deletion under R3 (names consisting of "Victoria Salmon Kings membership," "Trenton Devils Membership," "Chicago membership," et c.. For the list, see here). Yesterday I had to go through those same articles to remove manually entered header text like this: "Victoria Salmon Kings membership" redirects here. Today I turn around and now there are edits (like this one) being made to these articles regarding the ECHL's use of the term "membership" as an alternate name or nickname for the teams in question.

Can we just put this to rest and agree that it doesn't matter if the ECHL calls them memberships, member clubs or happy fun time hockey brigades? I don't think it adds anything to the articles in question.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 19:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

• They add nothing whatsoever to them, and are a stretch beyond mindless pedantry. I've just reverted a bunch.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  19:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
• I agree that I don't see the usefulness of these pages. Every sporting club in a league is a member of the league; there's no need to create redirect pages for all of them, and I doubt there is any notable use of the terminology. isaacl (talk) 19:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

  I agree...however, running around deleting the redirects is equally pointless. Redirects are cheap after all. -DJSasso (talk) 23:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

  Redirects are indeed cheap, but we delete them when they are pointless.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  02:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

  Some of them, like Chicago membership, were too generic to redirect to an ECHL franchise page. isaacl (talk) 02:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Titans website launched with history page, but with Flyers press release; there being treated as the same continuing hockey team

The Trenton Titans website [2] has been launched with a history page. The history page says:

The original Trenton Titans debuted Oct. 15, 1999, blanking the Johnstown Chiefs, 3-0, in front of 8,041 fans at the Sovereign Bank Arena under head coach Bruce Cassidy.

In its second season – 2000-01 – the franchise reached the ECHL Kelly Cup finals, falling to the South Carolina Stingrays.

The franchise recorded four consecutive postseason berths in its first four seasons. The club missed the playoffs for the first time in 2003-2004, but the best was to come in 2004-05.

Under head coach Mike Haviland, an original Titans assistant coach and now an assistant with the National Hockey League’s Chicago Blackhawks, the Titans won playoff series with Atlantic City, Reading and Alaska. Led by captain Rick Kowalsky and leading scorer Scott Bertoli, who will serve as Senior Advisor of Hockey Operations for the 2011-2012 Titans, Trenton brought the 2005 Kelly Cup to home by defeating the Florida Everblades in six games.

The Titans also qualified for the playoffs in 2005-06 and 2006-07. Kowalsky and Vince Williams served as head coach and assistant coach, respectively, in 2006-07.

The original franchise, after a purchase by the NHL’s New Jersey Devils in 2007, operated as the Trenton Devils the past four seasons until the club was folded by the parent team July 6, 2011. The Titans were re-established July 28, 2011, after a vote by the ECHL Board of Directors under a new ownership – Blue Line Sports LLC.

This new chapter in Trenton ECHL hockey, with the re-establishment of the Trenton Titans, is certain to continue the traditions of those who are fans of the sport in the Greater Trenton area.

However on the Flyers press release article on the Titans website which is the same press release on their website says this:

Hockey will remain at the Sun National Bank Center in Trenton, NJ, as the Trenton Titans are returning to play the 2011-12 East Coast Hockey League season in Trenton, NJ. The team will now be affiliated with the Philadelphia Flyers whom they were originally affiliated from 1999-2006.

The announcement was made on Thursday afternoon at a press conference at the Sun National Bank Center.

“We are thrilled to be re-affiliated with the Flyers,” said Titans President/CEO Rich Lisk, who was the General Manager of the original Titans. ‘’It is important for us to be connected to the Philadelphia Flyers and their enthusiastic die-hard fan base. This is going to be a terrific affiliation and we cannot wait to drop the puck.’’

‘’There is a high interest in the Greater Trenton area for Flyers hockey and we know how much this means to our fans,’’ added Lisk. ‘’We are excited to be contributing to the development of future Flyers stars.’’

‘’The Philadelphia Flyers and the Comcast-Spectacor Family of Companies are excited to be affiliated with the Trenton Titans,’’ said Comcast-Spectacor President Peter Luukko. ‘’As our ECHL affiliate, we’re confident that our prospects will be playing in an environment here in Trenton that will help them develop their ultimate potential.’’

By realigning their affiliation with the Flyers, the Titans, which played the past four seasons as the Trenton Devils, will continue playing at the Sun National Bank Center. When Trenton first entered the ECHL, the team was originally affiliated with the Flyers.

‘’In addition, with our management company, Global Spectrum, operating the arena, and with our advertising and sales division, Front Row Marketing Services, selling sponsorship opportunities for the Titans, we will create cross-promotional opportunities to help grow their fan base and fill the arena,’’ added Luukko.

‘’This is a tremendous opportunity for hockey fans in Trenton and the surrounding region to identify new up-and-coming future prospects and watch them grow into possible NHL stars,’’ said Luukko.

The Titans, who are owned and operated by Blue Line Sports LLC, will open their 2011-12 season on Friday, October 14 when they travel to Elmira, N.Y.. The Titans’ return to home ice will be on Saturday, October 22 vs. the Florida Everblades.

I think it’s best to say it’s the same franchise. The article should be written like a baseball type article like the Durham Bulls article. The Durham Bulls are regarding themselves as one continuing franchise. On the Titans history page it has the records of the old Titans/Trenton Devils years. Phantoms007 (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• I saw the new website and while I concur that the new franchise is maintaining the team history (and therefore we should keep the same page), I would caution you against the notion that it's "best to say" it's the same franchise because it's not. The old franchise folded and a new one was established that retained the old franchise's team history (as their team history says). If you look at the definition of "franchise" as it pertains to a professional sporting league (see here) you'll see that it actually refers to the corporate organization, not the team itself. The franchise fields the team; the franchise is not the team. Unfortunately there is a tendency to incorrectly use the terms interchangeably that has caused some confusion here. The Flyers press release refers to the "team" (which is defined by things such as logo, colors, history, records, et c.) and is correct to call the current Titans a continuation of the old "team." So, all semantics aside, it's the same "team," just being operated by a new "franchise."  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 02:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Possible?

First off I feel pathetic that I have started the last three sections on this page, sorry.. Now on to my real question do you think there can or ever will be a category with the title of something along the lines of "Ice hockey articles missing career statistics"? Could it be added? It could be something we add to the template on the talk page of hockey articles if they are missing stats and then others or yourself could go back and add them later. Detredwings1139 (talk) 01:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Asking questions is always better than not asking questions... Personally I think it would be better for people to go through and add the statistics themselves rather than just template an article and walk away. I often work on old-time Hall of Famers, and add the tables when I encounter an article in need. Resolute 03:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I mean you've been around longer than me so I assume you would know better. I was just looking for more of the sake of needing something to do and then being able to go to the list. Thanks for cropping that photo by the way. Detredwings1139 (talk) 03:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Never assume I know better.  ;) I'm only speaking from personal opinion, and not any position of authority. I would think someone with scripting ability could provide a rough list, but I am not sure how difficult that would be, or who would consider doing it. Also, there are (unfortunately) a lot of cleanup projects to do at present. Resolute 03:43, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Haha, this is true. Too bad I don't even really know how to go about doing those. I've pretty much just been learning as I go along. Like with that list I wouldn't even know where to start or what to do. Detredwings1139 (talk) 03:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

• I agree with Detredwings1139 that a category to show which articles are missing stats would be helpful. It can be very time consuming to click through articles looking for those that are missing stats (I know because I have done it), and by the time the editor is ready to work he is already out of time and patience. When looking for things to do, such a category list would provide a useful focus for helpful-minded editors. Dolovis (talk) 04:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Almost exactly my thought process. Sometimes I just want to simply add to an article and that is something helpful but not too time consuming to add but it often takes me a while to navigate through to find an article that is actually missing stats. Detredwings1139 (talk) 15:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Anybody else? Detredwings1139 (talk) 17:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I could add it into the template like we have needs-infobox and needs-photo which will place it into a category. Once I am done changing over the taskforce parameters I can look into adding that in. The only issue is that most pages are always in need of stats since we don't update mid-season so it could get a bit overused, but we can watch for that. -DJSasso (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Done. Just add needs-stats=yes to the project template. -DJSasso (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks so much. Hopefully it doesn't get too overused. Detredwings1139 (talk) 17:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Clubs with short names

Finnish clubs such as "HIFK" and "TPS" have very short names. Therefore, I am wondering: should titles such as "HIFK Helsinki" and "TPS Turku" be used (especially in articles about international competitions)? I'm not sure because 1) the fact where the clubs come from are clarified in the 2011 European Trophy article; 2) the "Helsinki" and "Turku" parts are not included in the respective clubs' official names; and 3) they more seem to be used as a way of clarifying where the clubs come from. HeyMid (contribs) 23:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Note that the initial H and T letters represent the Finnish names for Helsinki (Helsingin) and Turku (Turun). 174.119.19.211 (talk) 02:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

HIFK doesn't usually have the Helsinki added to it in North America. But I have noticed that the NHL many times talks about TPS Turku. I would say Wikilinking the HIFK and TPS in the articles should be sufficient. If absolutely necessary one could write HIFK (Helsinki), but I would assume that most people if they are curious where HIFK was located would click on the link and go to their page. The only time I would say that showing the city might be of use is in the case of a team playing that has no page. However, I'd imagine that most tournaments that would have pages here, would also only include teams that have pages here also. A second option is to include a table on the page akin to the table on National Hockey League#List of teams and list both the city/country and the league they are from. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 02:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

As I said, a list of the teams (including where they come from) has already been created. HeyMid (contribs) 07:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The IIHF always lists the cities as well as the club name, including the Finnish and Swedish teams. We should follow this for at least the world championships. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 17:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Roster footer template

I have created roster footer templates for the other major North American sports leagues: {{MLB roster footer}}, {{NBA roster list footer}} and {{NFL Roster template list}}, which unify all the team templates that they link too. I know WP:HOCKEY always views template work differently than other projects. Thus, I am going to ask if you would mind if I did the same thing for templates such as Template:Buffalo Sabres roster.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Not going to lie. I see absolutely no use or purpose to this other than to create unnecessary clutter. Each team article - for all four of the major leagues - already has a template that links to all other team articles, each of which has a roster. This is simply a duplication of that. Resolute 14:37, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I think this would be an unnecessary duplication of the league templates we already use. Thanks for the offer, though.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 15:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:NHOCKEY

I have re-opened the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports) regarding precisely what we mean when we say "major award" (and don't worry, I referenced the old discussion). Please feel free to drop by and offer your thoughts. Not looking for anything revolutionary here, just seeking clarification, or better wording, or something.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 04:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Jerry D'Amigo

More eyes are needed on the Jerry D'Amigo article. User:Everyone Dies In the End is edit waring to include the National Team infobox tag which indicates that D'Amigo has played on the United States men's national ice hockey team. The fact is that D'Amigo has only played with the junior national team, and my understanding is that the National Team tag is used only for players who have played with the Senior Men's National Team in an international tournament. Dolovis (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I have reverted him because you are right the last discussion never came to a conclusion to add junior teams to the mix. However he only made one edit, please try to have a little good faith and not declare he is edit warring when he only made one edit. -DJSasso (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Marcel Hudima

There is an AFD discussion on Marcel Hudima that was started a couple of days ago. Two things to note here. First off, it appears the majority of the edits on the article is being done by User talk:Marcel Hudima which seems to indicate a WP:COI. Furthermore, the same user removed the AFD template from the page, which I just restored and posted on his talk page to allow the discussion to go its course. Just wanted to make the project aware of this. -Pparazorback (talk) 17:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Probably just a fan, happens fairly regularly that fans name themselves after players or teams. Will keep an eye on it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Russell Bowie

Hi everyone,

Working on fr:Russell Bowie, I used a lot of pages about Russell Bowie, ECAHA and others. I have some question.

• on Russell Bowie, in 1907-1908, it's written that he scored 31 goals
• on 1907–08 ECAHA season, he scored 28 goals (written in the text and in the table of leading scorers).

I've got also a problem with the total of goals. On wp, in the statistics, it's written that he scored 238 goals but in Total Hockey: The Official Encyclopedia of the National Hockey League, it's written (p.1742) that he scored 234 of them (same thing in the text of the article). The same problem is on Legendsofhockey: if we do the total of the goals that he scored, we reach 239 goals (1 more goal in 1905) but in the article, it's written 234.

Does some one know where is the truth ? Thanks for your help.

--TaraO (talk) 18:41, 28 August 2011 (UTC) (sorry for my english ...)

I expect that 31 goals is correct. I used the 28 goals from 'trail of the stanley cup' but both the hall of fame and the society for ice hockey research state 31 goals for bowie for the season and I trust them more. I'll update the ecaha article. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 22:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Championship navboxes

A heads up – Lnhhm has made many NHL championship navboxes. I'll leave it up to you to decide if they should stay or not, and what to tell this editor. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleted as recreations of templates that have been deleted multiple times via tfd. -DJSasso (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit Notice

It is about that time of year. The new season is about to start shortly, as such the Edit Notice for the List of NHL Statistics needs to be updated to support the new year. An Admin needs to update the Template:Editnotices/Page/List of NHL statistical leaders page to correctly be updated for the 2011-12 season. -Pparazorback (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Done! Resolute 22:34, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! -Pparazorback (talk) 23:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Alexei Ivanov

Alexei Ivanov (ice hockey b. 1985) has been moved to Alexei Vladimirovich Ivanov. Will somebody please put this right as I am not permitted to do so myself. Dolovis (talk) 14:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC) Likewise, Alexei Ivanov (ice hockey) has been moved to Alexei Sergeyevich Ivanov, it should properly be moved to Alexei Ivanov (ice hockey b. 1988). Dolovis (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

We use middle names prior to resorting to bracketed disambiguators with birth dates. Whoever moved them moved them to the right location. -DJSasso (talk) 18:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That said, I am not sure this entirely resolves the dab issue, since there apparently is also a soccer player named Aleksei Vladimirovich Ivanov. Rlendog (talk) 18:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that is true, though it is spelled different so the hat note probably suffices there. -DJSasso (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Alexei Ivanov (disambiguation)? Resolute 23:23, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

BOLD and done. -Pparazorback (talk) 05:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The problem with moving these articles to titles including the alleged middle names it does not follow the policy of Verifiability or Common names. The common standard for disambiguating ice hockey players is to use birth years, so I do not understand why we would want to change that very workable practice now. Dolovis (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

We aren't changing it. The order we go in is Common Name -> Common Name (ice hockey) -> Common Middle Name -> Common Name (ice hockey b. date) -> Common Name (ice hockey position). It has been this way for years. Nothing is being changed. Once you have to have disambiguation nothing is common anymore anyways, that is the whole point of disambiguation, to stop it from being the common name that is conflicting with another person. -DJSasso (talk) 15:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, while we might have a preferred disambiguation format, it does not exist exclusive of other formats. In this case, there is also a specific guideline for Russians. For my part, I think one is as good as another in this situation, and I think the current format is just fine. If you have a concern about verifiability, please talk to the editor who made the moves. Resolute 00:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Harvey Pulford

Bonjour !

I've another question about Harvey Pulford and 1903–04 Ottawa Hockey Club season.

• Pulford had scored 1 goal in Stanley Cup match in 1904
• in 1903–04 Ottawa Hockey Club season, it's written that he scored 2 goals vs. Toronto (February 23, 1904) and 2 others the February 25, 1904. There is one reference for each game but can't find a word about the game in the second reference ?

thank's for the help !! --TaraO (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• I'm looking at the game summaries for the two matches from Trail of the Stanley Cup. The goal scorers for Ottawa in the February 23rd game were Pulford, Frank McGee (3), Alf Smith and Suddy Gilmour. Pulford was injured at some point in the game on the 25th (and didn't appear in the following March 2nd match against the Wanderers) and didn't factor into the scoring; the goal scorers for the Silver Seven were Art Moore, Harry Westwick, McGee (5), Smith (2) and Gilmour (2).  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  13:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Lokomotiv Yaroslavl

Keep an eye on Lokomotiv Yaroslavl and its various players since a plane just crashed killing about 33 people. Likely to get lots of action on various pages. -DJSasso (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

And a lot of assumptions on who was on the plane, therefore who actually died. Resolute 13:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Scratch that. Lokomotiv confirmed all players from the main squad were onboard. Resolute 14:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

There is now a dedicated article: 2011 Lokomotiv Yaroslavl plane crash. This is so horrible, beyond belief. Jmj713 (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we please edit restrict these? IPs are already writing about the team in the past tense. Jmj713 (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I hate to edit restrict...but I might get to it soon. -DJSasso (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Since media was reporting that the entire main roster and four youth were killed, I had started to add death notes to the infoboxes of players known to be on the main roster. But stopped since IPs were reverting them, so I figured it is futile at this point. For what it is worth, I saw on Hfboards that Russia Today is tweeting that Alexander Galimov's agent is confirming that he is the lone surviving player. Reports are the other surviving person on the flight was a crew member. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 14:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Until we have an official report with a confirmed list of casualties, I don't think we should touch anything right now. This is a fast-changing situation. Anything can happen. Jmj713 (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It might be a good idea. I watch a couple of the ex-NHLers pages and IP editors are already assuming their deaths. Is semi-protecting the entire roster too far sweeping? TerminalPreppie (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that would probably be too wide. I just protected Pavol Demitra. For what its worth Russian Officials have announced the entire roster died. But there are rumours that various players didn't. -DJSasso (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) At this point, I'd say protecting the Lokomotiv Yaroslavl and Template:Lokomotiv Yaroslavl roster would be a good idea. A few minutes ago, Galimov was the only player on their page. Unrelated to this, Riley Armstrong has been reported dead by the CBC. However, he has tweeted that he is in St. John's, Newfoundland at camp (St. John's IceCaps?), so we should watch his page until that settles. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 14:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Reportedly, Ruslan Salei was not on the flight. Jmj713 (talk) 14:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that is one of the rumours I was referring too. -DJSasso (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A horrible tragedy. And there have been so many this summer, Derek Boogaard, Rick Rypien, Wade Belak, now an entire team is killed. --Hockeyben ^✉ 14:37, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

*Awful news, looks like Galimov has been reported dead now. Russian TV is reporting he has died according to Russians on HFboards.Shootmaster 44 (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• I am not looking forward to seeing the updates to Deaths in 2011. And as far as Salei goes, there are reports both that he was, and was not on the plane. Oy. Resolute 15:00, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
• Life News has posted the list of dead at [3]. Translateable by Google. It appears that Salei was not on the plane, and Galimov has died in hospital. (not confirmed) ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  • sovsport.ru has a list of the dead and it includes Salei. url ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm trying to wrap my mind around how the KHL season will now progress, especially since today was the first day of the season. This has to be an unprecedented event for a professional sports league. Jmj713 (talk) 16:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Unfortunately not. The Torino soccer team was wiped out in the late 40s, a crash in Germany in the late 50s decimated Manchester United, and there was the terrible crash in the early 60s that killed the whole United States figure skating team.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  17:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I know, but I was thinking more about pro leagues. I guess Manchester United would qualify, I didn't know about that. I knew there were several national teams and such, but no real pro sports teams, like Lokomotiv. Jmj713 (talk) 17:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Mm, a lot of people would indeed consider soccer teams to be in professional leagues ...  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  17:25, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Ironically I am currently discussing the removal of a section talking about these similar events from the crash article. -DJSasso (talk) 17:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Sovsport says that KHL will continue with existing schedule, minus Lokomotiv obviously, but upcoming games will have ceremonies to honour the team, and no regular in-arena entertainment will take place. url (russian) I would expect that there will have to be some sort of rebalancing the schedule. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't be surprised if Lokomotiv keeps going with players lent to them. Sort of like "The show must go on" mentality. -DJSasso (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
      • I do wonder if we'll see any current UFAs that are left get talked into playing there? Not to turn this into a forum though. I do think we'll need to keep an eye on news coming out of Russia in the next few weeks. That way we can ensure that IPs don't run wild after the "security" leaves. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
        • A few reliable reporter types on Twitter are noting that the other KHL teams are in agreement that Lokomotiv should continue. Expect to see some kind of draft or something. Resolute 19:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
          • Too bad it looks like we have no KHL team season articles. Perhaps a 2011–12 Lokomotiv Yaroslavl season should be created to document the events surrounding the tragedy and the rebuilding of the team. Jmj713 (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
            • Yeah the project generally only did team seasons for the NHL. Some people recently have decided to do some for the minor leagues and no one has deleted them mostly because if someone put the effort in to keep them up to date no one had the heart to delete them. But in the past it was often believed that individual team seasons just aren't notable below the top league in the world. -DJSasso (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
              • But would you say this event qualifies for a season article? Plus, this is not a minor league team. I just think, tragic though it is, it will be interesting, from an encyclopedic point of view, to document the team's recovery and rebuild, since, as I understand, the KHL has stated the team will participate in this season's games, though it's unclear how just yet. Jmj713 (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

*Yeah there are certainly always exceptions. -DJSasso (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

On a semi-related note, I notice that 4 players are redlinks on the crash page. Since I do not read Russian, does anyone know if they pass notability for hockey? I'm thinking that it might be worthwhile to even create stubs for these players. I'm not sure whether the crash itself makes them inherently notable under GNG since they are now in 1000s of articles? Shootmaster 44 (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:ONEEVENT, WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Being mentioned in a list of people that died does not create notability. That said, they were on the roster of a major league club, so I expect it would be fairly easy to find sources for each. Even if one has to rely on Google translate. Resolute 19:02, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks like three of them are of the four youth mentioned earlier this morning. Does winning a gold medal at the World Juniors count as notability? I don't want these pages to end up being speedied or anything else if I create them. I realize that this isn't a memorial nor a one event thing. The one player should be easy enough, he's been playing in the KHL and the various incarnations since 2000. Its the other two that might have problems. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

We have generally said no for gold medals at the world jrs. I think that is especially true for countries outside north america where they pretty much ignore the world jrs so are not very likely to have any coverage just for having been on a gold medal team. If they won an individual award you might be able to scratch some sources up. -DJSasso (talk) 19:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I have created a stub for the easiest of the four Mikhail Balandin. Looks like the other three may be hard if not impossible to satisfy even GNG for them. I will keep working on it and see what I can find. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 19:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks like Dolovis not surprisingly created articles for the other 3. I have redirected two of them because they don't meet NHOCKEY and I can find no articles for them beyond WP:BLP1E issues. -DJSasso (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

The only one that I can find that pass NHOCKEY is Yuri Urychev. I would have created it myself, except I thought NHOCKEY was 100 games of KHL experience, not 1 game. Not that MHL experience counts but at least Pavel Snurnitsyn and Maxim Shuvalov exist. I'm sure if people read Russian, they can find sources for those two, but then again to pass GNG you need significant English coverage I believe. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Err, guys? It's ONE game in the KHL, not 100. The KHL is not a minor league; it's a top level national league, and specifically cited in Criterion #1.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  04:58, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

With the exception of the lone surviving player, the others will need to be deleted from the team's roster template. GoodDay (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Once it is known what is happening they can be. But right now people going to the page are going to want to see who was on the roster when it happened so they should be left. -DJSasso (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A list, yes, but I suggest we do a subst on the roster to preserve it for this day, (possibly on the crash article page?) but we should probably note that the team is 'suspended', instead of just listing the survivor as a roster. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The team hasn't yet been suspended. I'd say to just change the header to "Roster at time of crash". Once the future plans for the team is known, we can update. Resolute 20:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether this can be placed anywhere and if so where, but 24 of the 30 NHL teams were somehow involved with this crash. It does fall into OR though since it was from me counting the teams. But I believe only the Buffalo Sabers, Edmonton Oilers, Montreal Canadiens, Pittsburgh Penguins, Tampa Bay Lightning and Washington Capitals did not have a former draft pick/player/coach on board that plane. If I can find a reference of this somewhere, does this tidbit belong on any page? Shootmaster 44 (talk) 03:35, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's always the approach of going paper by paper in the NHL cities. The Chicago Tribune has a story up, "2 former Blackhawks among victims in Russian plane crash". —C.Fred (talk) 06:09, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

2011 in ice hockey

Shouldn't there be a 2011 in ice hockey? Canadian news sources have been calling the worst year in hockey after the crash, what with the suicides and deaths this summer, the crash.

This might be useful in referencing disaster management for the NHL after the KHL crash.[4]

65.94.77.134 (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)