Talk:Anaheim Ducks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Apostle Tau (talk | contribs) at 05:13, 9 August 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconIce Hockey B‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconCalifornia Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The fact that the team is owned by Disney is mentioned in the article and in the categorization, therefore the see also section is not needed. Gentgeen 05:22, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

List of Anaheim Mighty Ducks players

I have just completed the List of Anaheim Mighty Ducks players. It is 100% accurate as of the end of the 2003-04 NHL season. When new players play for the Ducks, it would be a great help if they could be added to the list to keep it accurate. Thanks! Masterhatch

Somebody might want to rewrite the jersey section. It was very poorly written and hard to follow.

2005-06 Roster Scratch

move to article ccwaters 21:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Leave to the Walt Disney company (former owners of M.Ducks),to name the franchise Mighty Ducks of Anaheim & not Anaheim Mighty Ducks. Imagine if you will Penguins of Pittsburgh or Blues of St.Louis or Canadiens of Montreal (Oops!!) the Canadiens are called that (At least in French) Les Canadiens de Montreal.

It could be worse - They can get renamed to the Los Angeles Mighty Ducks of Anaheim LordBleen 00:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Now that would be funny. Masterhatch 04:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh No!! Lord Bleen & Masterhatch ,what are you trying to do? Give me nightmares? I'll start Quacking Up. 23 October 2005.

Ironic isn't it?, the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim are going to change their name. Beginning with the 2006-07 season, they'll be the Anaheim Ducks; do you suppose Bryan Murray read this page section (Talk: Mighty Ducks of Anaheim)? GoodDay 17:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should change their name to the Anaheim Pucks. Ducks is just ridiculous; I mean, they're not even mighty anymore. Then they can change that strange D on their jerseys to some sort of zooming puck. Britishenglish 04:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never change names, its stupid, but they should hav gotten rid of the mighty. Despite being a traditionalist, I think that the mighty needed to go because i dont like this sport so great to be thought of as affiliated to a kids movie.

Captains List

Since the Buffalo Sabres & Los Angeles Kings articles, have included Mogilny & Robitaille (respectively) in their Captains Lists (backed by Sabres & Kings web sites & media guides), I've looked up the Mighty Ducks web site. Teemu Selanne is listed as a Ducks Captain (during 1997-98 season, whil Kariya was injured/out of the Line-up). I'll make the proper edits to this article & the Karyia & Selanne articles. GoodDay 17:55, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rivalries

I'm not sure if this should even be on here because it's such a debatable topic. I remember this was discussed for the Leafs earlier, and it was decided that they won't have a rivalries list because of the arbitrariness of it all. An example of its arbitrariness: I entered the Flames as a rival of the Ducks because, as a Ducks fan, I remember that the games between these two teams are often marked by huge fights and scrums. But it was replaced by the Detroit Red Wings today, for which the rivalry is minimal at best (unless it's the year after the Ducks face them in the playoffs or something). Sure, they can be considered a rival, but really...? Just my two cents. --Buchanan-Hermit 19:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Red Wings are a rival. I have removed them-- AWBricker 22:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we can get a consistent rivalry such as UCLA/USC or Dodgers Giants, then lets not put down anybody. The Ducks rivals at thsi point cud be the leaves, flames, wild, red wings, sharks or kings at this point, but unless one or two teams are consistently in tough matchups with the ducks deep in the playoffs, then lets just delete this section for now.

Name change

They're changing their name. I've deleted a part that stated otherwise. Google if you're not sure. CKSCIII 00:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea they are... isnt it to Anaheim Ducks? We should make this page a redirect to Anaheim Ducks, or whatever the new name is, when its final paat 00:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha...they're not so mighty anymore. CKSCIII 00:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They might be mighty after they eliminate the Edmonton Oilers from the playoffs. I think they might. Ain't over 'til it's over! Drdr1989 21:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, definately not mighty. Let's go Oil, bring the Cup back to Canada where it belongs.--BoyoJonesJr 14:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Teemu Selanne == Watched Flames vs Ducks (April 17), and noticed that Selanne didn't have an 'A' on his jersey. Is he no longer an alternate captain? GoodDay 15:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Missing Kjellberg.

sorry guys, the list of players is inaccurate... Patrick Kjellberg needs to be added to that list.

Name change

Took care of the delete of the old redirect and moved Mighty Ducks of Anaheim there.  RasputinAXP  c 11:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously everything should redirect here, BUT: Please keep historical references to the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim intact. IE: Paul Kariya never played for the a team known the Anaheim Ducks. As much as I'd like to erase that name from history, its not our right.
On the same note: These should all be corrected [1]. Most of them should be changed to MDofA. ccwaters 11:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have noticed that someone is simply changing current players to the category of Anaheim Ducks. Please, if they played for the original franchise, such as Teemu Selänne, add the new category, but don't remove the old one for now, at least until the debate is settled. Briememory 17:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Team captains

I've re-listed the captains, listing them by season, instead of by players. See Talk: Buffalo Sabres#Team captains (consensus) & give your opinon. GoodDay 20:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The majority opinon was to list 'by player'. I've since listed them as such. GoodDay 20:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A compliment, really

I'd like to say well done to whoever wrote most of this article. My favourite sentence is this:

"The Ducks then beat the heavily favored Calgary Flames in seven games and Colorado in a sweep on a run through the playoffs, only being stopped in the West finals by the Edmonton Oilers, who'd swept the Ducks in the regular season."

It's an Oil fan's dream. Pointing out that Edmonton beat the team that beat Calgary. Sigh. Britishenglish 04:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Players Birth Places

See WPTT, for discussion of this topic. GoodDay 19:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honored Members

This section has been revamped, in accordance with the consensus reached at Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format. Though not all Team pages have been revamped 'yet', in time they will be. Reverting back to the old style, only stalls the 'revamping' process. Please be patient. GoodDay 20:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting Article?

This article (lately) is being continously vandalised by either numerous anon-editors Or the same anon editor using different identities (the disruptive edits are generally the same). Perhaps 'semi-protection' is required (either that, or blocks).GoodDay 17:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems there's an anon fetish with adding 'Charlie Conway' to the team captains section & 'Gordon Bombay' to the coaches section. GoodDay 17:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Colors

Someone claimed without any evidence that the new colors are supposed to be a tribute to the Marine Corps. I found this highly doubtful and have taken it out. If someone has any evidence to the contrary, it would be appreciated.

(Note: comment above was unsigned.) I thought I read somewhere that it was actually supposed to be a tribute to the U.S. Army, I'll see if I can find that article. Jadefalcon 23:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, nevermind. I didn't read it, it was a comment made by (I think) Mike Emrick during a Vs. broadcast of a Ducks/Red Wings game. Jadefalcon 23:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sens Ducks

is gonna be a great series.

just what hockey needs imho...

He is only the fifth goaltender in NHL history to have won the trophy while playing for the team that lost. Giggy was the fifth player second goaltender to with Conn Smyth on a losing team (Ron Hextall was other)


SniperSarge 15:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GO DUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!! --Howard the Duck 15:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is all very interesting guys, but do either of you have anything to add or subtract from the article? Remember, this isn't a blog. GoodDay 18:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Crozier and Glenn Hall feel dissed. --Doogie2K (talk) 22:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Pre-mature' Cup edits

The game is as good as over, 5-2 with 4 minutes left against a team that looks defeated.

Oh, 6-2 as I speak.

And I'm a Sens fan. So why not just let the edits stand?

Because its not fact until the buzzer ends, stranger things have happened. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 02:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No they haven't. 5-2, a few minutes, and a fallen apart team means it's over. Period.

Its over. If they some how manage to come back we can change it.

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, you keep it until the game ends which it just did. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 02:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One cup

Again, saying "one Stanley Cup" would constitute confusion over whether or not they are the current champion. "Reigning Stanley Cup Champions" should be used TheWikiVigilante 12:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I think the language of the top should be changed. They should be known as the "reigning Stanley Cup Champions", seeing as though confusion would reign if they said that they "won" it instead of making light of the fact that they are the current champion. yours, your friendly neighborhood Wikilante TheWikiVigilante 16:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is clearly stated that their one cup came in 2007. There is no confusion. Resolute 13:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There is no point writing that they are the "reigning" champions...all that means is you will have to remove it next year. Ccrashh 14:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not until April 2008, and you may have some people who will be confused... and people are already going to edit this thing anyway. I say just go with the "reigning" part and let nature take its course. TheWikiVigilante 15:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2nd paragraph

The info in that paragraph belongs in the 'history' section. Just because the Ducks 'recently' won the Stanley Cup, there's no reason to overload the opening paragraphs to the article. GoodDay 16:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since I was the one who first started that, and since the Ducks 'recently' won the Stanley Cup and are currently listed on "In the News" on the main page, my response is basically my summary for that particular edit, this page, this page, and Item 2a of this page. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The lead section of an article, per Wikipedia Manual of Style, should as much as possible be a concise version of the rest of the article. A good lead gives the bare basics of the subject, enough so that the reader does not have to read the rest to get the gist. This paragraph fits this purpose perfectly, so it should stay. Arcimpulse 03:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minorly cleaned up "History"

I'm no Ducks fan, so I couldn't make it fully cohesive, and it still suffers from a bit of recentism (as do most sports team articles, really), but I hope I was able to fix up the History section a little bit by adding subsections and tightening up some of the paragraphs. Some more details of this season will eventually have to be pared, but I left 'em for now. --Doogie2K (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert war on player names

Please, do not put diacritics for the players' names on this article. It makes it difficult for those using English keyboards (this is the English section of Wikipedia, after all) to use the search function. If I wanted to search for Teeme Selanne, I would not be able to find it if the article had his name with diacritics. Don't get me wrong, I know it is the technically correct spelling, but that belongs on the player's own article, not here.Arcimpulse 04:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. Diacritics are not typically used in English, and the English spelling is Teemu Selanne. They do not belong in this article on this Wikipedia. Resolute 04:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As per common agreement of WP:Hockey diacritics are not to be used to team pages and only are used on player pages. --Djsasso 05:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Removed a diacritic (it was missed). I missed this recent edit battle (it occurred, just after I removed this page from my watchlist). Anyways, congradulation on keeping the 'agreement' intacked. GoodDay 17:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Cup Section

I don't really think this section is detailed enough, at least not for winning the championship of a professional sports league. Look at the Carolina Hurricanes cup-winning post-season, and how their biggest games are well explained and passion is put into the article. Another thing I do not like is that the paragraph after this section is a derogatory one that is biased imo. Yes, the Ducks played aggressive hockey this past post-season, but I do not think that it merits a section that demeans their accomplishments. It was not really all that controversial either. I think this section should be removed. The Pronger suspensions are fairly important, so they can be added into the Cup-winning section, like what series they happened in etc. Love each other, or perish. ~Auden 05:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]