Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey
Get Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey essential facts below. View Videos or join the Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey discussion. Add Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey to your topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey
WikiProject Ice Hockey (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
 NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Stock post message.svg To-do list for Resource: WikiProject Ice Hockey: ·history·watch·refresh· Updated 2017-05-20



Archive index


NHL Division articles

So now that we know the divisional alignment for the season is it worth it to make a new article for the North Division, while reviving the East and West Divisions and redoing the Central? Deadman137 (talk) 21:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Even though they'll be temporary. Sure, create articles for them, IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 21:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

The same Division

We've had this discussion before, concerning the Atlantic Division (NHL) article, which is about two separate Atlantic Divisions. But now, we've the same situation with West Division (NHL) & East Division (NHL). Considering that there's 46 years difference in the latter two cases. We should re-think this. GoodDay (talk) 05:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, though if these remain in one article we'd format them somewhat similarly to the Atlantic article as we have some precedence there. If the group decides to split these articles I'm not really going to get bent out of shape about it. Deadman137 (talk) 05:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
IMO, I would probably argue that none of the 2020-21 divisions are the "same" divisions as any previous divisions. The league seems to have made it pretty clear this is supposed to be a one-season temporary alignment, meaning there would be no historical carry-over. I propose simply having a 2020-21 NHL divisions page for all four, if we want one at all. I haven't seen them mentioned since there are no conferences, but it will be interesting to see if/how the Prince of Wales and Campbell gets awarded this season. Yosemiter (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
North & East divisions in the Eastern Conference. West & Central divisions in the Western Conference. GoodDay (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
@GoodDay: Incorrect, "The four teams that advance from the second round to the Semifinal Round will be seeded by their points total in the regular season (No. 1 vs. No. 4; No. 2 vs. No. 3)" per the NHL; playoffs are not conference based. The league website has yet to add a 2020-21 standing page or update the Teams tab. But that is also one the reasons we should not be assuming any connections. It all sounds like original research on our part. Yosemiter (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Cool, but the divisions need to be divided up into new articles, including the Atlantic. GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Why? Because of precedent? I think we can all agree this season is unprecedented. I don't see how a one-off alignment needs its own division pages when the entire subject is better covered on its own page or simply a section of the season page. Much of it would be a duplicate of the single season in which the alignment was used anyways (alignment configuration and division winners). Yosemiter (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
It wouldn't hurt to have separate articles like Atlantic Division (NHL), 1993-2013 or East Division (NHL), 1967-74. GoodDay (talk) 16:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I would say no to that because we've had this discussion off and on for a few years, most recently last year. [1] Deadman137 (talk) 16:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't have revisited the topic, if the NHL hadn't decided to use 'East' & 'West' again. GoodDay (talk) 16:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
No argument from me about the older divisions and their article names (per WP:PRECISION and WP:DAB), my statement was about this season's divisions. I'd like to see a source that states they are the same as a previously existing division, otherwise it is WP:OR. Yosemiter (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. They're purely geographical descriptive names (it's not like they revived the Patrick, Smythe, Norris, and Adams division names) are only going to be around for one year. I don't think we need separate articles for them. oknazevad (talk) 17:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Except that they've announced the Cup semis are going be reseeded based on regular season records and that there is not a fixed pairing. The Cup semis (not conference finals) could be East vs West and North vs Central if the seeding breaks that way. So you assumption is incorrect. oknazevad (talk) 16:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC) (Yosemiter beat me to it by seconds!)
PS, I agree wile need to split the Atlantic Division article regardless of these temporary divisions. Why they reused the name for a division of eight teams where only two or three (depending on how you look at Tampa) are actually on the Atlantic Ocean is beyond me, especially when it meant that the division that actually has most teams on said ocean, and which already was using the name, got stuck with a junk name like Metropolitan (it's but all one metro area!) oknazevad (talk) 16:16, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I've made a few changes to the articles of multiple divisions under the same names, so as to help clarify the status of said divisions. GoodDay (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I still disagree that they were "reformed" in 2020. Unless there is a source that states otherwise, it is WP:OR. We can say the names are re-used during the 2020-21 alignment, but we cannot say they were reformed and should not be included in that division's timeline of teams. Pre-1974 NHL divisions are not equal to post-1974 divisions when conferences were added. Yosemiter (talk) 17:35, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I just changed them in the infoboxes to basically re-founded. Though it causes more problems. For example: Did the East Division in 1974, become the Wales/Eastern Conference, then revert in 2020 (temporarily) to the East Division again? Or is it an entirely 'new' East Division. Doe the Conferences still exist, or have they disappeared only re-appear in 2021-22. What about the Central Division (NHL)? for that matter. GoodDay (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Unless a source says otherwise, all divisions this season are entirely new. Hence, why I keep saying their is no historical preceding divisions or continuity. When (if) the 2021-22 season reverts to the 2019-20 alignment, then all divisions would simply point to the single-season alignment article, omit the season in its list of changes/winners, and then continue on (including the Central). No re-formed, re-founded, or disappeared/reappeared in any historical division articles, period. You seem to be simply making up or creating some connection that simply cannot be verified to any primary or secondary sources. Yosemiter (talk) 18:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
It seems obvious to me that these are, effectively, four new divisions. There is no verifiable connection between these temporary divisions and any other divisions. O.N.R. (talk) 11:50, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Likewise. That being said, and rereading the above, look, folks. We do a LOT of process worship here. People feel that they have to do things a certain way because it's always been done that way, or to bring something in conformity with every other remotely similar thing (gods, I want to throttle the people who claim that folks will be "confused" if every sport and every league within a sport doesn't use the same template/style/color scheme), or out of various notions of continuity. For my part, I not only don't give a rink rat's patootie about the makeup of "division articles," but I question whether we need them at all. Ravenswing 15:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I would be of a similar opinion here. While I do see the purpose of having a division article, I don't think it is something to be that overly worried about. People are more than welcome to make a new process for it, as this is a unique situation (like everything the past few months), so there is certainly no requirement to stay the course, not that it ever was a major concern to begin with. I also am not opposed to creating articles, so if that's where this ends up, then go for it. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)


Some IP editor created Draft:Template:NHL, which is exactly the same as Template:NHL and it is not very clear what the editor wants to do with it per Template talk:NHL#Edit request. - Sabbatino (talk) 14:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm guessing he's going to change the divisions to the North, West, East, Central setup. GoodDay (talk) 14:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Speaking of which can there be a consensus reached for changing the divisions in Template:NHL? I changed the setup to reflect the new realignment's for this season but have got reverted each time by one user, here's the discussion on the talk page Template_talk:NHL#Update_Divisions_to_current_season

Triggerbit (talk) 21:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Naming convention for sports stadia

A request for comment is open regarding the use of parenthetical disambiguation in relation to articles on sports stadia here: Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RfC Naming convention for sports stadia. Input is welcome. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Stats leader article, needs message update.

Requesting an administrator to update the Edit message at List of NHL statistical leaders article, from 2019-20 to 2020-21. GoodDay (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Will do once the season starts. As was mentioned last time you requested this. -DJSasso (talk) 06:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Turns out, somebody has just updated it. GoodDay (talk) 15:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 NHL Outdoor Games

There is an FfD for 2021 NHL Outdoor Games at Resource: Articles for deletion/2021 NHL Outdoor Games. Please give your opinion there. - Sabbatino (talk) 01:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Ice hockey at the 1952 Winter Olympics

There are have been a lot of contributions recently to Ice hockey at the 1952 Winter Olympics. Is anyone willing to review for overall encyclopedic tone and relevance? Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 21:43, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

A similar edit was made at Edmonton Mercurys, in addition to the above. The edits of IP address 1, IP address 2, and IP address 3, seem to pass the WP:DUCKTEST in comparison to User:Max Arosev. Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:100 Greatest NHL Players § Toews and Kane

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:100 Greatest NHL Players § Toews and Kane. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

International Ice Hockey Federation

A large section of controversy was recently added to International Ice Hockey Federation. My removal of it was contested and second opinions are appreciated. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 15:36, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

A similar was made to René Fasel including excessive amount of information about the situation in Belarus. I am concerned that both of these article are being used for advocacy of a political cause. Please add both both pages to your watch lists. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 22:49, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
The above type of edits are continuing at René Fasel. Has anyone else had time to review the edits? Any thoughts? Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 04:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

What is wrong with adding well-sourced informations to these articles if they thematize a relevant political controversy around this incident?--KastusK (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The edits made violated both Resource: Neutral and Resource: Advocacy. Multiple comments in the respective edit history of the article mention Resource: Undue concerns. Flibirigit (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC) Resource: Undue might be an argument in this case. But I do not see anything wrong with adding well-sourced information about this incident when dozens of neutral media outlets reported about this controversy. I would agree to shorten my edits but there is no reason to complete delete well-sourced objective facts.--KastusK (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Where they might be well sourced information, whether or not certain pages are appropriate pages for it to be listed on has to be accounted for as well. For example something like this case is a blip on the radar of the IIHF so would not at all belong on the page for the IIHF itself which has existed for a century so including it would be very much undue weight to be there in any amount. It would however be very appropriate to put in on the page of the specific tournament it belongs on. -DJSasso (talk) 16:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Agreed with those above me. You wrote this entire section, which actually weighted for the IIHF itself could simply be summarized as The International Ice Hockey Federation received international criticism for its plans to hold the 2021 Men's Ice Hockey World Championships in Belarus during the 2020-2021 Belarusian protests and meeting with Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko. The rest is just a deep dive into the various reasons the protests are happening in the first place and problems about Lukashenko, therefore irrelevant to the subject of the IIHF main page. Yosemiter (talk) 16:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Alright, thank you very much for your response. I have added this sentence to the history section of the IIHF article.--KastusK (talk) 16:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
(outdent) As I noted on the IIHF talk page, it would be best served on the 2021 IIHF World Championship, where the full details can be noted. The main IIHF page does not need that level of detail, though it would be certainly welcome on the 2021 page, as it is becoming a major story, and likely to only get more coverage as we come up to it. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Is Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lithuania#2021 IIHF World Championship appropriate? Lithuania plays in Division I and I suspect this could fall under WP:CANVASS. Am I correct to imply that? - Sabbatino (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
It is logical to conclude that it is canvassing. Flibirigit (talk) 18:39, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
It IS canvassing, and pretty blatant as well. Anyone up for an ANI filing, if Jabbi and KastusK don't leave it at that, drop the stick and walk away? Ravenswing 20:15, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
ANI might be required. Seeking third opinions is another option. Flibirigit (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Controversies in Belarus

I notice a continuing trend by editors who seem sympathetic to the Belarus protests to insert excessive information and accusations at International Ice Hockey Federation, René Fasel and now Belarus Ice Hockey Federation. I feel I can only revert so much without violating the three revert rule or owning an article. Any other thoughts?Flibirigit (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I also feel the recent edits as a whole are Resource: Advocacy concerns. Flibirigit (talk) 15:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 IIHF World Championship

The IIHF issued a press release to not host the event in Minsk. Anyone feel like taking on the corresponding updates and ensuring neutrality? Flibirigit (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

This is going to be exciting to deal with. Obviously should be noted on the IIHF page, but keep the political discussion to the 2021 page. I have both on my watch page as well. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Made an update at 2021 Men's Ice Hockey World Championships article. GoodDay (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
At least this will put paid to Jabbi's and KantusK's soapboxing, in these articles anyway. Ravenswing 22:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

  This article uses material from the Wikipedia page available here. It is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0.



Music Scenes