Talk:Columbus Blue Jackets

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Columbus Blue Jackets was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject United States / Ohio (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Ice Hockey (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Columbus Blue Jackets task force.

2004-05 season[edit]

I think that since the season didn't happen at all it should not be on the chart of records for each year--it simply looks bad to have it there. I think the footnote should be kept, but without the actual number, perhaps an asterisk? What do you think? Thomas Carson 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It's included as part of the record list for every team. Ravenswing 13:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
And shouldn't be. Thomas Carson 00:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Which is entirely a matter of opinion, but if you want to try to get consensus around changing the Team Pages Format to your POV, feel free to post on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format. Ravenswing 01:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

List of Columbus Blue Jackets players[edit]

I have just completed the List of Columbus Blue Jackets players. As of the end of the 2003-04 NHL season, this list is complete for every player that has donned a Blue Jackets sweater. Please help and keep this list accurate by adding players when the start playing for Columbus. Thanks! Masterhatch 12 August 2005

Civil War Reference for name[edit]

I've noticed that the right shoulder patch on their jerseys now has a styleized cap worn by Union soldiers during the Civil War. I wonder if the team will begin to shift to that idea rather than the amorphous team identity the have currently...

Example: http://www.bluejackets.com/graphics/fans/wallpaper/pics/1024x768_denis.jpg

The Civil War logo was introduced in October, 2003, for use on the third jersey. See http://www.bluejackets.com/news/press/arts/1686.0.html. I doubt they'll ever "settle" on one particular theme, so they can maintain more options for marketing the team.

Flying CanOpener 01:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Blue Jackets Standings and Statistics[edit]

I edited the 2005-2006 standings to be up to date as of their game on Monday, February 6, 2006, when the Blue Jackets lost to the Vancouver Canucks. The only problem is that I was unable to find any sites with statistics covering current PIM (Penalty Minutes) numbers, so I had to leave that unchanged. Perhaps someone can link to a regularly updated sports site which does show a team's PIM for future reference to anyone who will edit the Blue Jackets' standings every now and then.--Resident Lune 06:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I went to http://www.tsn.ca/ and added up the individual PIM between all Blue Jackets' players who have played so far this season, so the PIM is now up to date. However it'd still be convenient to find an easier way to cover PIMs in the standings.--Resident Lune 06:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I left a message on your talk page about this. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 06:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Infobox[edit]

I like the looks of it. Ravenswing 21:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

How about adding, the current captain & alternate captains? The rest looks cool. GoodDay 00:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I'm actually a little hesitant to add the Captain and Alternate Captains sections, but I can understand why it would be wanted in the infobox. The reason I am, though, is because of the C and A already in the current roster section. That, and wanting to not make the box that much longer after adding important sections such as Conference, Division, and Titles.
I'll see what I can do, though. A concensus or a few other opinions would be great before I make a definite change.-Resident Lune 01:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I like it as well. Any way we can nominate it to be the new standard infobox for NHL teams, at least? NeoChaosX 22:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
And regarding captains, I think that should be left out of the box. Captains and alternate captains can change over the course of the season due to injuries, trades and the like. The infobox should be for more important and nonchanging information. NeoChaosX 22:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Possible move to Winnipeg?[edit]

could it be possible? i herd that it was the reason why they are having exibition games in winnipeg, to see if winnipeg cares about NHL hockey or not. IMURDAD 19 September 2006

Having had a NHL team for a quarter-century, I don't imagine there's any doubt on the issue. If an official announcement is made, it will be reflected in the various articles here. Ravenswing 05:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Wait, what? Why is this being asked on the Blue Jackets' discussion page of all places? The Jackets aren't having any exhibition matches in Winnipeg (though other teams are), and they've only been in the league five seasons (six if you include the lock-out). Resident Lune 11:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Disputed team name[edit]

Someone added the "Disputed-section" tag to the Origin of team name section. What's the problem? Jwolfe 19:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure either, but finding appropriate references might be a good idea. --207.69.138.144 23:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm stuck in a bit of a quandary here. I have read the Blue Jackets Media Guide for the season, and in it they specifically describe each and every logo, as well as the origin of the team name and the colors of the team. Perfect to deal with this little conflict concerning references and what the team's name refers to, right? Anyway, the name is a reference to the American Civil War, the amount of soldiers Ohio had involved, and the fact that many uniforms were made in Columbus. On top of that, there's other interesting tidbits such as how the 13 smaller stars on the CBJ logo are supposed to represent the original 13 colonies, and how the primary star is supposed to represent Columbus. It also makes no mention whatsoever of the Shawnee Chief Blue Jacket, which means regardless of one's opinions or the similarity in team name and Chief's name, nothing officially supports that claim.

Unfortunately it's sort of hard to use a media guide as a citation, since it isn't exactly registered as a real book anywhere online.  :-/ So what should I do, folks? Any advice? I'd like to deal with this name conflict as fast as possible. -Resident Lune 13:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Use the media guide as the reference. I do with the Calgary Flames and Western Hockey League media guides all the time. Even if it is not an on-line source, such publications are still considered valid. And it is kinda hard to go against what the team itself says about the logo history. Resolute 16:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the media guide is "perfect" because it isn't NPOV. Media guides tend to be sanitized versions of what the team wants the history to be, not the actual history. The Native American reference isn't politically correct and the "insect with an attitude" wasn't popular, so now it's all about the Civil War. McConnell's influence isn't even mentioned, because that seems frivolous. Contemporaneous media reports would be much, much better in this regard, but tracking them down would be a lot of effort. Jwolfe 20:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Given the team itself chose the name, it is highly unlikely that they would misrepresent why they chose it. If they don't like the Native American reference because of the nature of PC, they would not have selected the name for that very reason. That alone leads me to believe that the reference is an urban legend at best. My recollection of the naming of the Blue Jackets is that there was a civil war tie in from the beginning, so in this case, I would tend to trust the media guide, especially if other reliable sources are lacking. Resolute 22:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
You're spot on when you presume that the Civil War reference was from the very beginning. I have a copy of NHL All-Access that was released on DVD in 2001, and it even has a "Building Columbus" section. The logo of Stinger has him wearing that Union hat and uniform, so it isn't like the tie-in was retconned in to the team's history just because the "insect with an attitude" didn't catch on as the main reference to the name. - Resident Lune 23:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The Name was chosen in a WNCI radio contest, and the reference of the name, as stated by the winner of the contest, was to Ohio's extensive contribution to the Union army. Of course WNCI radio shows are impossible to cite, and old issues of the Columbus Dispatch are tedious to sift through, so the media guide is the best choice as a reference. 65.24.116.97 09:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Mascot, and Picture of Jerseys[edit]

Team Mascot needs to be mentioned, and also a picture of their current jerseys would add to the article. Love each other, or perish. ~Auden 00:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fredrik Modin/Alternate captains[edit]

The Blue Jackets official website doesn't list Modin as an alternate captain. Why, is he listed on this article? GoodDay 18:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Before the season, Hitchcock announced that the alternate captains would rotate amongst Nash, Vyborny, Fedorov, and Modin. See [1]. All have worn the "A" this season. Modin wore the "A" in the most recent game (see [2]), even though Vyborny (who is listed on the CBJ web site with an "A") was in the game also. Jwolfe (talk) 11:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. GoodDay (talk) 22:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Cleveland Barons[edit]

Should it be mentioned that the Blue Jackets were the first NHL team in Ohio since the Cleveland Barons had left? 76.126.29.36 (talk) 05:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It was hard to work it in, and I'm not completely confident that it should be there, but if it belongs anywhere in this article, it belongs where I put it. Macduffman (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
After-thought I suppose it could also be included in the intro, as per Calgary Flames intro. Macduffman (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick Fail GA Nomination[edit]

I'm sorry, but this article has an obvious lack of references/citations. When you have added the (many) necessary citations, you can think about nominating again. But not now. Noble Story (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

In response to the GA failure, I added a few references and a (referenced) section about early franchise history. I also added the "refimprove" template so that others might notice and help out. If references are the only thing keeping this article from GA status, then references are what I'm working on. Macduffman (talk) 16:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
If you want an example of a well sourced team article. Calgary Flames is an NHL Featured Article. And Ottawa Senators is an NHL Good Article. -Djsasso (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I took a brief look at the Devils article for writing the early franchise history. I'll check those two out for sourcing. Macduffman (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Ahh yes I forgot the Devils were also a featured article. It would be a good one to look at as well. -Djsasso (talk) 17:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, the number of citations in this article has increased tenfold (yup!) since the failed GAN two months ago. I also have done a (brief) comparison to other GA hockey articles and to the hints for GA nomination, so I feel more confident now that we can either get this article listed GA or get some good feedback this time. Macduffman (talk) 15:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

John H. McConnell[edit]

I think that a minor snippet about the team's original majority owner, John H. McConnell, should be included. He passed away not long ago, and was probably one of the most-loved pro. team owners in the country, as well as very likely the only reason that the NHL finally decided to give Columbus a franchise (you may recall that Columbus nearly lost their bid).
I think it is worth mentioning these things, if only briefly, since it's a big part of team history. I'll write it up and add it soon (I'll try into include some references to any facts I include), unless there are major objections here. I'll try to make the focus on McConnell's influence on the team, not the man himself. Thanks in advance for any input. Macduffman (talk) 19:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

January 2006 -- Best Record?[edit]

I have been going through this article and adding citations for anything I could think of. In the paragraph(s) about 2005-2006, regarding Jan 2006, the statement "They had the best record for January" was made. I was unsure if this meant their best month ever, or they won more games in Jan 2006 than any other team in the league, but I couldn't find references for either possibility. I had placed a [citation needed] (albeit not terribly long ago), but it was not filled. Since it would be great to get this article back on track toward GA status, I went ahead and removed it. If anybody cares deeply about that month in team history, please find some evidence to back it up, or at least leave a reply here in which you give me a lead. Thanks!! Macduffman (talk) 19:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Columbus Blue Jackets/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Started June 12/08

  • The article seems to pass all the 'quick fail' criteria. I'll be starting on the detailed review of the article for the other standards shortly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leafschik1967 (talkcontribs) 15:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm making notes as I go with this review, I'll post a note when completed so it is clear.

1. Well written?: I think a general once over would help clean up a few clarity issues with the prose. It might help to have a new set of eyes on the scene, just to pick out things that were understood by the writer but not expressed clearly. A few examples below:

    • After the Cleveland Barons left, Ohioans had to wait about twenty years to fulfill their hopes for an NHL team.
      • Maybe just say when the Barons left, and how long it was - 'about 20 years' is vague
    • The May referendum failed, but as Columbus' hopes for winning the bid were thinning, Nationwide announced on May 31, 1997, that it would be financing the $150 million arena
      • Run on sentence, and just generally not clear and concise. I'd try 'Columbus' hopes for winning the bid were slim after the May referendum failed, but Nationwide announced that they would finance the $150 million arena on May 31, 1997.
    • Just minor things like that. Not a major issue, but some cleanup is needed.

2. Factually accurate?: Well cited, from a variety of sources. Switching to a two column reference list would shorten that section of the page up a bit.

3. Broad in coverage?: Seems consistent here with other NHL team Good Articles.

4. Neutral point of view?: Seems fine.

5. Article stability? No recent issues evident from the article history

6. Images?: Lots of logos being used - not sure if this is necessary. Also, the jersey pictures seem redundant with all the logos, especially considering they are under 'fair use' They are on other team pages though, so for consistency's sake I understand their inclusion. Arena pictures, or other players might be a nice addition, but not a deal breaker.

  • As this is my first GA review, I have asked another reviewer to take a look at what I've done here. I don't want to make final judgments until that is done. Leafschik1967 (talk) 16:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The lead is relatively short (see WP:LEAD) and doesn't seem to cover the article in whole.
  • Is there really no more Team Information available?
  • Check that ALL references include publisher info outside of the URL title (if using cite web, you need a publisher=)
    • Per request on my talk page, clarifying... sorry if I wasn't clear. Basically, and to take a random example, ref 2 (url) doesn't have a publisher listed. If you're using {{cite web}} (click the link for lots of info about that template), you need to fill in the publisher field, eg. |publisher=NHL would be it in this case. Does this clarify a bit? giggy (:O) 09:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Are sites like hockey-fans.com reliable?
  • hockeygoalies.org - reliable?

giggy (:O) 23:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

With that input in mind, I have placed the article on hold. It requires some work, but I think it is manageable to get it to GA status. Leafschik1967 (talk) 02:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  • General comments. The headers are improperly capitalized. Only proper nouns should be capitalized. There are also numerous manual of style variations. Dashes don't conform to WP:DASH; the lead section uses line breaks to separate paragraphs for some reason; way too many sections in the "history" section, particularly for such a young team; "Franchise individual records" contains lots of needless capitalization; only full dates should be linked. "Team information" and "Franchise individual records" are completely unsourced. These is a very general statement about the article- there are many more specific problems. I wouldn't pass this article in its current state. I suggest withdrawing the nomination and getting some outside help on it.-Wafulz (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Did not pass requirements After taking into account the comments offered by other editors (thank you very much, BTW), this article does not pass the requirements for a GA. Many of the concerns raised have been addressed, but there is still the issue of the 'Team Name' section having only one reference that doesn't seem to adequately cover the content included. Also, while publisher information was added to the references, they are still haphazard - some have publisher wiki-linked, some do not, there is a red link in the references as well. I think the article is close, and reads very well but with these issues not fully addressed, I don't think it meets GA criteria. Good luck next time. leafschik1967 (talk) 23:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments on article[edit]

In conjunction with the GAN, I reviewed the article per a suggstion at the Hockey WP. I hope my comments help.

  • "Currently" shouldn't be used, it's better to say "Throught the 2007-08 season..."
  • Lead needs expanded
  • "Ohioans had to wait 22 years to fulfill their hopes for another NHL team" needs sourced. It needs verified that Ohioans actually hoped for a new team.
  • "On the ballot for Columbus..." What ballot?
  • "to score at least 30 goals"
  • "The 2002–03 season started started relatively well, with Columbus putting up a 7–5–1–1 record" Avoid Peacock words
  • "Central Division's basement for the third.." While I think this is fine, people unfamiliar with sports terms may not understand the use of "basement"
  • "The 2003–04 season was another disappointing one..." Disappointing to who? A citation would help
  • "Offensive defenseman Darryl Sydor..." The term "Offensive defenseman" might need clarified for people unfamiliar with hockey
  • Eliminate the one sentence paragraph about the 04-05 season. Merge it into a surrounding paragraph, or expand on it.
  • "Then, on December 10, 2006, the..."
  • 2006-present section is choppy. Try to merge some paragraphs.
  • Can you include something about the logos of the team, I can see at least three. It could probably go in the jersey's section.
  • I don't know if the "Honored members" section is necessary. I understand we want to keep all NHL team articles with the same format, but there's not really anything there.
  • Add a See also: List of Columbus Blue Jackets draft picks to the "First-round draft picks" section.
  • I think the "Other honors and accolades" section could be eliminated.

Overall, the article is a good base to build on. Blackngold29 19:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Blackngold29. I have made your recommended edits, except I did not remove the honored members section. Somehow that info still seems pertinent to me. I have saved the section that I removed here:
Head:Other honors and accolades
  • In 2003, the Blue Jackets had their first NHL Awards finalist in Rick Nash.[1]
  • In May 2008, Blue Jackets Captain Rick Nash was announced as the cover player for the NHL 2K9 video game (by Take-Two Interactive).[2]
Thanks very much for taking a look! Macduffman (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Response to GAN Comments[edit]

Hello, and thank you to everyone who has been working to improve this article. It is ten times better than it was even a month ago. I thought it might be appropriate to begin addressing the comments made in response to the GA nomination. Though I've tried to give a full report, please free to add or correct my summary of the subsequent improvements. Quoted comments are in italics.

  • I think a general once over would help clean up a few clarity issues with the prose. It might help to have a new set of eyes on the scene, just to pick out things that were understood by the writer but not expressed clearly. Bmitchelf, Blackngold29, Skudrafan1, and some others made edits and edit suggestions to improve clarity and flow in the prose. For whatever my opinion is worth, their efforts have made great improvements to this article. (Thanks again.)
  • It now has a 2-column ref list.
  • Arena pictures, or other players might be a nice addition, but not a deal breaker. Wikimedia does not have any public domain images of significant players, as far as I could find. However, a public domain image of the arena was available, and it has been added. {end of response to Leafschik1967's comments}
  • The lead is relatively short (see WP:LEAD) and doesn't seem to cover the article in whole. The lead has been edited and expanded several times since, and while it is not the general WP recommended 4 paragraphs, I point to Calgary Flames to show a similar article (at FA status) with a lead of similar length. A team such as Montreal Canadiens has a longer lead in part because there is much more to say about it! (If there is a section of the article that anyone thinks needs more representation in the lead, please specify which section.)
  • Is there really no more Team Information available? Team Information has since been expanded as well, probably doubled or tripled in size. For my part, I honestly don't know what else to add to this section, although someone else might have good ideas.
  • Check that ALL references include publisher info outside of the URL title (if using cite web, you need a publisher=) References have been cleaned up immensely. Please give details if further improvements need made.
  • Are sites like hockey-fans.com / hockeygoalies.org - reliable? See point F. Almost every single non-news or non-NHL source was removed in favor of a news or official NHL source. To my knowledge, the only 3rd-party information source used is the Internet Hockey Database, and for whatever it's worth it's approved by WikiProject Ice hockey.{end of respone to Giggy's comments}
  • Capitalization errors have been resolved. I have tried to reconcile this article with the MOS (I don't know if others have), but must confess my lack of confidence with my grasp of the MOS. I put in a request with the League of Copyeditors before I realized they are practically defunct (are there any other such groups?). Dashes have been changed. The lead has been made less choppy. The history section has had about half of its section headings merged into larger ones, so big changes there. Only full dates are linked now. The team information section and franchise records (now called "single season records") are much more strongly sourced.{end of response to Wafulz's comments}

Conclusion: All comments and time spent reviewing this article are very much appreciated. I look forward to reading your responses. Thanks again to everyone for the time and hard work. Macduffman (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Luke Richardson link[edit]

The external link to Luke Richardson in the Captains List? is inaccurate. Richardson was named captain in 2003 (not 2002). GoodDay (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Coach Hitchcock[edit]

We are currently building a Hitchcock team. I think we are gonna make it this year. cbj171 (talk) 23:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Official Colors[edit]

On the Wikipedia page, the colors are navy blue, red, and white, but on the Blue Jackets' official site, they are union blue, goal red, and capital silver. Main color however is blue.

Source: http://bluejackets.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=380504 (2nd paragraph) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.183.73 (talk) 20:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe a number of teams have this issue, and I believe it was decided that since there is no difference between goal red and red etc. that those words are really just marketing creations. -Djsasso (talk) 20:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

ECHL affiliate[edit]

I cannot find a source that lists Gwinnett as a current affiliate. The Blue Jackets' website's affiliate page does not list Gwinnett, and the 2010–11 ECHL affiliate page does not list Columbus as Gwinnett's NHL affiliate. As such, I am removing the Gwinnett affiliation from the infobox. If anyone has a current reliable source indicating otherwise, please feel free to revert and we can get the discussion rolling. Cheers.  Cjmclark (Contact) 01:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

2013-present: Division Realignment[edit]

I don't want to make this big of a change before discussing it. I have tried to verify that the Blue Jackets and Red Wings have been moved back to the West but there is no article on it, and the two team internet sites still state that the teams are moving to the Eastern Division. Unless I can find verification for this, my strong inclination is to strike it out or revise it to the correct information. Lizmichael (talk) 23:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I think for now, it's preferable to leave the infoboxes as is. The Jackets are in the Central Division of the Western Conference until the league officially realigns, and we should avoid being premature in changing infoboxes and the like. (this isn't necessarily directed at you, just a general comment). As to the supposed change, if the Red Wings were moved back West, I can pretty much guarantee that it would turn into a shitstorm real fast. Absent any other information, I would guess that you might have read a forum post or "rumour" that tries to fit a Phoenix-to-Quebec City relocation scenario into the new divisions. Resolute 23:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, the problem with that is, there is nowhere where I can find that the move to the East of the Wings and the Jackets has been nullified. The team websites both have them moving to the East. I've simply revised the section of the grounds that the return to the West cannot be factually verified. If this changes it can be changed back. Although I agree that a complete revision should wait until the NHL officially realigns. All I can determine is that the return to the West is only rumor, and rumor shouldn't overrule what the league and the teams have announced. Lizmichael (talk) 02:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)