Talk:National Hockey League

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2001:569:79a0:6300:1c41:10f6:12bc:cda7 (talk) at 08:14, 22 May 2017 (→‎French Translations). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good articleNational Hockey League was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
June 13, 2006Good article nomineeListed
June 29, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 4, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 9, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Template:Vital article

Clubs

There are 31 member clubs. Just because Vegas isn't playing yet doesn't mean they don't exist. Correctron (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Difference Between a Team and a Franchise

The Montreal Canadiens is both a Team and a Franchise. They have had the same logo, same team colours and same name for their entire history (with minor tweaks to their logo of course but still keeping the same overall CH Design). The Detroit Red Wings are both a Team and a Franchise, for the same reasons as the Montreal Canadiens. The Colorado Avalanche is a Hockey Team. Colorado would be the current Franchise, as the Colorado Avalanche have not always been known as the Colorado Avalanche, as they originated in Quebec as the Quebec Nordiques. The same is true for the Toronto Maple Leafs. The Toronto Maple Leafs are a Team, but NOT a Franchise. The Franchise would be the City of Toronto itself. The Toronto Arenas and the Toronto St. Patricks are part of the Toronto FRANCHISE, but they are NOT the same Team as the current Toronto Maple Leafs. So it would be incorrect to say things like, "The Toronto Maple Leafs are 100 years old." Or "The Toronto Maple Leafs have won 13 Stanley Cups." The Toronto Maple Leafs, the TEAM have won 11 Stanley Cups. The City of Toronto FRANCHISE has won 13 Stanley Cups with 3 different Teams. If you want to know the history of the Toronto Maple Leafs, you can look up their previous Teams, The Toronto Arenas and The Toronto St. Patricks, as both of them are different teams from the Toronto Maple Leafs, they both have their own pages on Wikipedia. But long story short, The Arenas had their own logo and their own team colours, when they became the St. Patricks, they changed their name to the St. Patricks, they changed their Team Colours and they changed their Team Logo. Same thing for the Toronto Maple Leafs as well. These were 3 different teams under 3 different owners. It's one thing if someone buys a hockey team and keeps the name and logo, essentially keeping the team the same, but if someone buys a hockey team, moves them or changes their name, logo, colours etc, then it becomes a new team. It's a very simple concept and the only reason people make this confusion with the Maple Leafs is because the Franchise didn't move to a new city but that doesn't change the fact that they became a new team, with a new name and a new identity each time. So when I edit the NHL page to reflect the fact that it is the name of the Franchise is simply "Toronto" and not the "Toronto Maple Leafs" I am making an edit to try and correct this confusion. Sparhawk85 (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85[reply]

Completely wrong, legally and intellectually. Plus, if you're going to make unfounded assertions, at least learn how to use capital letters and grammar correctly. Your stuff is unreadable. oknazevad (talk) 16:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What Oknazevad said. You've so far entirely failed to gain any consensus for your non-factual views. If you keep pushing these edits without doing so, you're at risk of a block. Ravenswing 16:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And I see I am talking to 2 completely retarded Leafs fans. That makes a lot of sense now. The Toronto Arenas is a hockey team. They won 1 Stanley Cup. The Toronto St. Patricks is a hockey team. They also won 1 Stanley Cup. The Toronto Maple Leafs is also a hockey team. They have won 11 Stanley Cups. The Toronto Maple Leafs is a TEAM NOT A FRANCHISE. You cannot factually say the Toronto Maple Leafs have 13 Stanley Cups. Would you please learn the difference between the two. Wikipedia even has a separate page for both The Toronto Arenas and the Toronto St. Patricks. Now please learn how to read and stop making idiotic changes. The table on this page also clearly states that they do not include cups won by defunct teams. The Arenas and The St. Patricks are defunct teams. A consensus on this was reached 2 years ago on the Toronto Maple Leafs talk page itself. And I'm sure it was changed 2 years ago as well and then Leafs fans who refuse to accept the truth, changed it back.

Sparhawk85 (talk) 17:03, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85[reply]

And now we've crossed in personal attacks. PS, I'm a Devils fan. oknazevad (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Co-signing what Oknazevad and Ravenswing said. This argument is incoherent and makes no sense, and has no grounding in facts or reality. Echoedmyron (talk) 17:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yep definitely sounds like I'm talking to a bunch of idiots. If you don't understand the difference between a Hockey Team and a Hockey Franchise, then you have no business making edits on a Hockey Page. The Toronto Maple Leafs have 11 Stanley Cups. the Toronto Arenas have 1 Stanley Cup. The Toronto St. Patricks have 1 Stanley Cup. Those are 3 different Hockey Teams. I explained this to XboxGamer22408 yesterday when he reverted my initial edit and after explaining it to him on his talk page, he fully understood what I was talking about and even said I could go back and re-apply the edit. Sparhawk85 (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85[reply]
Agreeing with Oknazevad and Ravenswing. Oh and I hate the Toronto Maple Leafs with the intensity of a thousand suns. You might want to read WP:NPA. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You can hate something all you want, that doesn't make you right. There is a very clear differentiation between a Team and a Franchise. All you gotta do to see this is look at Winnipeg Jets 1972-96 and Arizona Coyotes. Notice 2 things here: 1) All the Division Titles and Avco World Trophies that the Winnipeg Jets won, are NOT considered trophies won by the Arizona Coyotes. 2) Notice how the page for the Phoenix Coyotes doesn't exist anymore and redirects you to the Arizona Coyotes? That's because they are considered the same hockey team. Now notice how Toronto Maple Leafs, [[Toronto Arenas] and Toronto St. Patricks all have their own Wiki page, with their own Championship and Division Titles table etc? Notice how Wikipedia itself already treats these 3 DIFFERENT HOCKEY TEAMS as DIFFERENT HOCKEY TEAMS? If you sell your Broom to your buddy and your buddy doesn't like the bristles on your broom and replaces it with a sponge and then decides he doesn't like the grey handle and decides to repaint it red. Is it really still your broom? Or a broom at all? No, it is now a mop and your buddy has even renamed it to "mop". When you rebrand something, you are changing it. It is no longer the same as it was before. Sparhawk85 (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85[reply]
A city is not a franchise. Teams and franchise are the same. Some pages are split to make them easier to read as there is usually a large amount of information regarding teams that have been around a while. Your entire argument is literally just your opinion and not fact. Correctron (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, this native Bostonian and lifelong Bruins fan is happy to report Sparhawk's block due to disruptive editing. Perhaps he'll cut out his "Everyone else is WRONG because I'm right!!!!" riff, but of course that's not our experience with that ilk. But just in case he slinks back for more, the NHL's own Media Guide credits the Maple Leafs with 13 Cups. No doubt Sparhawk believes that he knows better than the NHL does, and I wish him luck taking up the issue with league management. Ravenswing 04:36, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
HHoF also concurs with the total of 13. Oh, and LET'S GO RANGERS! Keri (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As a Habs fan I find agreeing with a Bruin fan and a Ranger fan disconcerting..... Dbrodbeck (talk) 18:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Technically he isn't wrong, a team and a franchise are two different things. A team uses a franchise to gain entry to play. That being said I don't agree with him that changing a team name changes a team. They are still the same team even if the name changes. But a team and a franchise are two different things. -DJSasso (talk) 16:37, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The term "team" is very flexible. For example: one can say the 1986-87 Montreal Canadiens & the 2016-17 Montreal Canadiens, are different teams. GoodDay (talk) 02:24, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vegas

Should Vegas be considered a "current" member now, rather than a "future" member? As of today, they became an official member of the NHL (https://www.nhl.com/news/golden-knights-officially-join-nhl-can-make-deals/c-287272940?tid=281011650). If not, when would they be considered a current member? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CFC8:3680:1CFC:25C:1A44:50BD (talk) 02:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whennthe new season officially starts on July 1. They aren't a current playing memeber, so saying there are 31 playing teams is misleading. oknazevad (talk) 13:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't say "playing clubs". It says "member clubs".LordAtlas (talk) 13:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Typically across all league articles we don't add teams until the "season" they are playing in begins. For hockey consensus has been this is when the draft is held. We usually just note in the prose that they are an expansion team that will begin play in x season. -DJSasso (talk) 16:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend waiting until the 2017 NHL Expansion Draft, before adding the Golden Knights. GoodDay (talk) 02:29, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have to side with GoodDay on this one. Once they have enough players to make a roster, then we can add them. Plus waiting three and a half months isn't going to harm anything. Deadman137 (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. There is no reason why they can't be added under their own heading, rather than being placed in the Pacific division right now. Resolute 01:52, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Resolute as well. Frankly, I'm bewildered at how the Knights somehow don't really count as being a member club of the league just because they haven't hit the ice yet. Beyond that, the "harm" this is doing is that we're constantly having to revert the article against IPs who are just exercising their common sense. Ravenswing 04:23, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Vegas isn't even mentioned in the lead which is weird too. LordAtlas (talk) 05:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quite aside from any other consideration, take a gander at the NHL website, folks. Under "Teams?" It not only lists Vegas, but does so in the Pacific Division. Are we really going to continue to claim that the NHL's judgment of what teams are in the league is inferior to ours? Ravenswing 18:07, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vegas became "an operational member of the National Hockey League" on 1 March, allowing it to "enter into Trades and Waiver Transactions or sign Players to NHL SPCs in accordance with CBA Section 50.8(d) or a Player Transfer Agreement." The article should now reflect that. Keri (t · c) 01:31, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about this rewording I just made?[1] "... is currently contested (emphasis added) by 30 member clubs – 23 in the United States and 7 in Canada – with a 31st team in the U.S. that will begin play in Fall 2017" Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • From a language perspective, the NHL is not contested by member clubs, though; its season and championship are. I have no issue with stating that a new team will start play in October 2017 (for an international audience, stating the month is probably better). isaacl (talk) 12:09, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I propose the following: The National Hockey League ... is a professional ice hockey league currently composed of 30 teams – 23 in the United States and 7 in Canada – with a 31st team in Las Vegas scheduled to begin play in the 2017–18 season. isaacl (talk) 04:35, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are there any opinions on my proposed text? I would at least like to remove the word "contested". isaacl (talk) 15:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it's fine. oknazevad (talk) 15:58, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • If there are no other opinions, I will implement the change. Of course any further discussion is welcome. isaacl (talk) 17:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

French Translations

There is no reason to have French translations in every and all pages related to the NHL in English Wikipedia entries. The language of these encyclopedia entries is English - it is arbitrary to translate into one chosen foreign language and not another. Perhaps with the League name NHL/ LNH, there is an argument since they are both official names. However, when this is extended to associated pages - having to translate Stanley Cup into "Coupe Stanley", the NHL Entry Draft into whatever the French equivalent is, etc, it starts to become unwieldy. For the vast majority of English language users of Wikipedia, there is no use in having translations into one foreign language. And there are French versions of the pages that can be easily accessed anyway.

I tried to clean up the pages but the revisions were quickly undone and then I was threatened by Wiki user Oknazevad, who seems to be some sort of French Canadian language activist.

I think there should be some sensible discussion on this issue rather than have some self-appointed arbiter of Wikipedia content stymie what are sensible improvements to the English language entries of this online resource 2001:569:79A0:6300:B87F:EBC0:491B:FFFA (talk) 21:39, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm from New Jersey (Let's go Devils!) and don't speak French at all (took German in high school and college). But it doesn't change the fact that the NHL is a bilingual league, and French is not a "foreign" language for memeber teams. Or that the name "Coupe Stanley" is just as much the actual name as "Stanley Cup". Your cleanup wasn't cleaning anything up, just removing valid native language names for the topics of the articles, which we are supposed to include. oknazevad (talk) 01:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's a league with a team in a French speaking city, but this is the English Wikipedia. The United Nations uses many languages, but this being the English Wikipedia, we use English. JOJ Hutton 02:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why the article is at the English title. Including the French name does not in any way fall afoul of WP:USEENGLISH, and is well within the guidelines. oknazevad (talk) 13:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the way that French is added to these articles falls perfectly under the guidelines recommended by the WP:MOS. The personal opinions of a few editors on a talk page are not enough to change this. Deadman137 (talk) 03:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ligue nationale de hockey is a formal name for the NHL, so it is appropriate to note this. And given that is literally the only time French appears in this article, this is much ado about nothing. Resolute 13:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that for organizations where there is a formal name in an alternate language, it is reasonable to note it in the article text. (Although I personally disagree with it, general consensus is also to list the alternate title as part of the infobox caption.) isaacl (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hrm. I think this is an argument in search of a problem. Certain elements are quite reasonable to list their French names (the NHL itself, the Canadiens, the Senators), and the articles do. The vast majority of NHL-related articles, including teams in cities without significant Francophone populations, don't. Ravenswing 19:28, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The IP that started this conversation has continued with their slow moving edit war at NHL Entry Draft. Given that their IP address changes slightly each time, but all addresses are from the Vancouver area and the rationale never changes, it's clear that all of the edits are from the same person. Deadman137 (talk) 13:33, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just now see this discussion here. I'm the person accused of the "edit war". Note that in the NHL Entry Draft page I made an entry in the talk section detailing the rationale for the edit - the counter editor above did not engage in the talk there - it was he that aggressively and heavy-handedly took to revising content without participating in any discussion on the matter in that forum. Now that I see there has been some wider engagement on this page, I'll continue here.

Now, I have searched as much as possible and can find no evidence that the NHL as an organization is officially bilingual. Given that NHL Enterprises Inc. is incorporated in New York, that the CBA is fully in English and that all league business is conducted in English, I think is fair to say that the league is not bilingual.

Similarly, I think it is a stretch to say that the league actually has two official names. LNH is of course trademarked so it would be fair to say that it is an official trade name it uses in certain markets. But then again the NHL trademarks everything under the sun, so that doesn't mean much. For example, "Hockey Fights Cancer", "Because It's The Cup", "Hockey Is For Everyone", and "NHL Thanksgiving Showdown" are all registered trademarks of the National Hockey League. What is notable is that the league's own website https://www.nhl.com/ has versions in multiple languages: Swedish, Finnish, etc. In each of those except French, "NHL" is "NHL" (never translated) with the exception of Russian where everything is in Cyrillic script - but even that preserves the "NHL" logo. I think what we have with the LNH thing is the NHL wisely catering to the French portion of its fanbase with its use of names wherever possible. That doesn't mean the two titles have equal status though.

Now similar to user Issac above, while I disagree with English Wikipedia having excessive translations into foreign languages (ie non-English languages), I think I am willing to concede that the use of LNH is widespread enough and established enough to warrant a French translation at the beginning of the main NHL page. And I guess as the umbrella entry for all NHL related articles it is a convenient place to have the redirection to the French version. However, I do disagree with the pervasive use of French translations in each and every Wikipedia entry for anything NHL related. As user Ravenswing seems to note above, it intuitively seems appropriate to not to have a French translation in many cases. I point to some specifc instances where it seems unnecessary:

The NHL Entry Draft entry gets a translation: "Repêchage d'entrée dans la LNH". It just seems like a literal translation - not enough of an established alternative name to warrant the inclusion of a translation. It's verging on insisting that an entry for Hockey Puck should have to have a French translation of the word puck. Sure the NHL capitalizes and probably trademarks the use of "NHL Entry Draft", but really we are dealing with something that is common parlance - to most it is just the draft. And what is notable is that unless the draft is held in Quebec, the NHL doesn't bother with bilingual signage or anything. Everything just says "Draft 20xx". And as a sidebar, note that the French version of the NHL Entry Draft page doesn't have a parallel translation into English, and nor should it have to in my opinion.

Another example would be the Wikipedia entry for the Stanley Cup Playoffs. It gets a translation: "Les séries éliminatoires de la Coupe Stanley" Again, it just seems like a literal translation - I don't think it merits inclusion. Certainly you see that written on the ice in Ottawa, but that is just the league smartly marketing to/ appeasing its French fanbase (or maybe complying with Canadian signage law?). Similarly though, the NHL's Russian page has NHL Playoffs as "РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ". Why doesn't that get a translation for the NHL Playoffs Wikipedia entry? There's a ton of Russian players in the league. That is why I say it is arbitrary to include a translation of some of these article names into one select foreign language (again foreign in the context of non-English in an English Wikipedia entry) and not another.

So I propose a compromise: leave the LNH translation in this page, but eliminate the two aforementioned ones. Coupe Stanley I think is 50/50 so I won't propose altering that.

Also note that the New Joisey Devils suck. Nolan Patrick will bust. ;) [1] - images of NHL Draft usage in practice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:79A0:6300:F406:F93E:BD62:8A7D (talk) 05:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What happens at other language wikipedias is irrelevant here. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Those other pages are also official NHL names, the logos for which often feature the french translations, especially in Canada they are almost always in both. I think you are on the wrong side of this unfortunately. -DJSasso (talk) 14:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not true that they are often translated - I would say it is very rare for them to be in both languages (look at the link I provided). And I address why it is questionable if they should be considered official names - I think they are just lip service being paid in one limited geographic region. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:79A0:6300:A595:FA8E:89CB:7346 (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me on this doll where the French translations hurt you. LordAtlas (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The entire country of Canada is not one limited geographic region....Yes Quebec has the majority of french speakers, but there are french speakers throughout the entire country since we are a bilingual country. -DJSasso (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1) There may be French speakers (and Mandarin, and Punjabi, etc.) in all parts of Canada but French is not widely spoken in many (most?) parts of the country; likewise the NHL event names etc. are definitely not almost always translated into both languages throughout Canada - perhaps they are in one region but they are not throughout; 2) Canada's official bilingualism is not really relevant in any case as Wikipedia is not Canada and whichever languages Canada's government have deemed to be official does not dictate content here. Honest question for someone who does speak French - do people even typically refer to the draft as "Repêchage d'entrée dans la LNH" or the playoff as "Les séries éliminatoires de la Coupe Stanley"? I suspect these are more cereal box type translations that aren't even commonly used by the French themselves.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on National Hockey League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:53, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ https://www.google.ca/search?q=2016+nhl+entry+draft&safe=active&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwil5OSfzPjTAhXojVQKHRgYAugQ_AUIDCgD&biw=1228&bih=700#imgrc=azykrgGdJJvrlM:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Hockey_League&oldid=781615881"