Talk:Beanpot (ice hockey)
|Wayne Turner (ice hockey) was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 13 January 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Beanpot (ice hockey). The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|WikiProject Ice Hockey||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject United States / Massachusetts / Boston||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Removal of University Logos
I've read the Wikipedia:Fair Use guidelines, and I don't really see how having the logo of the university right next to the name of the university does anything except reinforce the imformation being presented, and make an otherwise dauntingly long table much more readable.
The user that removed them claimed that they were misused as "decoration." It would be one thing if we were just blindly putting university logos on the page, but in this case it really served a legitimate purpose, in my opinion. I would try to resolve this with the user, but his talk page seems to indicate that he continually makes changes such as these, despite a strong consensus against his actions.
I will revert the changes in one day if no one objects. -Pjorg 22:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Revert completed. -Pjorg 02:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I've once again reverted the removal of the images from the tables in this article. The use of the images is NOT purely decorative, they increase the tables' readability dramatically. Furthermore, there has been consensus among the other editors that this use is appropriate (Ed g2s is the only user who seems to have a problem with it), so even if it was purely decorative, the WP:FU and WP:Logo guidelines are just that - guidelines. The existing consensus among the editors is sufficient to allow for an exception.
Please don't just revert without discussing, it's perceived as rude. -Pjorg 00:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Look again; Wikipedia:Fair use criteria is policy. I've left a note on your talk page with more information. As a rule of thumb, just don't revert unfree image cleanup. Jkelly 02:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
The article states that BU has now won exactly half of the championships, and points out that this is exactly as many as the other 3 teams combined -- in the same line! I'm removing the latter part, because it is completely redundant. --Srwm4 08:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Good catch, that seems a bit simpler! --Bill.matthews 12:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
A BU template was added, which doesn't seem to further the neutrality cause since it's the only school represented with a template. BC has one, but it doesn't fit well with the BU one so I didn't commit the change. Perhaps someone could improve the BC template, and make comparable ones for Harvard and Northeastern to keep some semblance of neutrality in the article. Until then, I think we should remove or comment out the BU template.
- I agree, it doesn't fit here. I removed it. --Bill.matthews 17:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
NU in the first round vs. Harvard
The note about NU in the first round vs. Harvard (which I edited to fix grammar and correct for this year's first-round loss) was subsequently excised by an edit. I don't think it should be, but I also don't like the idea of reflexively reverting. Thoughts? --Mr Wednesday (talk) 15:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Who chooses the MVP? Saying that the MVP award goes to the most valuable player is pretty meaningless. Is any player eligible, or just those on the championship-winning team? Eleusinian (talk) 22:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- I couldn't find anything on the official site. I'd assume it's a media vote. Every MVP winner has been on the championship team, but without any information on the selection of the award, I don't know if it's officially restricted or if that's just how it's worked out. By way of comparison, I don't think most professional championship MVP awards are restricted to the winning team, but nonetheless, the winner almost exclusively is on the winning team. --Mr Wednesday (talk) 06:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I propose renaming this article to "beanpot(ice hockey)" instead of just "beanpot"
I will be creating an article on the cooking vessel shortly. Given that the hockey game is named FOR the vessel, it does seem absurd to only have an entry for the game. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Moved the page and a redirect. Will fix other links once this has a chance to settle. (But should Ice Hockey have been capitalized or not?) FiveRings (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced that a pot for cooking beans is interesting enough to merit an article of its own. It's not clear that the article about the pot rises above the level of a dictionary article, which, as I understand the general guidelines, should not be included. This move also causes problems with the Beanpot (ice hockey) article, which includes a section on all of the other Beanpot competitions that now seems out of place. I'm more sympathetic to the idea of splitting the Beanpot article to deal with the various different Beanpot competitions. --Rkstafford (talk) 18:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
This concerns POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.
That's my standard paste. In this case I see no POV dispute on this page, and I went back several pages in history and can't even find who/when it was placed to begin with. So, I'm removing the tag. If any of you have cause to replace it and comment here then of course you can. If so, don't undo my edit, add a new tag and comment so it will have a current date.Jjdon (talk) 20:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I have hidden the following text "and often draws the largest crowds of the college hockey season outside of the Frozen Four". TD Garden is significantly smaller than Joe Louis Arena and thus, it is unlikely that the attendance is not less than the attendance at the Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry featured game.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)