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.
Non-article page 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


National team in infobox

Does playing for the senior national team in an exhibition game or Deutschland Cup (and similar tournaments) count as playing for the senior national team? Because Braveattack (talk · contribs) is making such additions to players' infoboxes. - Sabbatino (talk) 06:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Yep, as long as it is the senior national team and not the junior team. So any exhibitions and tournament are good to go. In some cases countries in the past even had permanent senior national teams, such as Canada, which traveled around playing other international teams and sometimes local teams in exhibitions and both small and large tournaments. We have always added it for them. The only thing we never add to that parameter is junior teams. -DJSasso (talk) 19:08, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I know I'm in the minority, and it's been discussed before, but I still think junior team should count as well. Players who compete in IIHF tournaments as juniors have to fulfill the four-year requirement to change national teams (not the two-years for first-time players), so it's considered equal. Not that I want to start a major argument or anything about it, and am happy to go along with with consensus. Kaiser matias (talk) 19:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

The 10 most-viewed, worst-quality articles according to this Wikiproject

  1. 13 2021 IIHF World Championship rosters 108,644 3,504 Unknown Unknown
  2. 64 Ethan Bear 43,027 1,387 Stub Unknown
  3. 77 2021 Men's Ice Hockey World Championships 40,384 1,302 Stub Unknown

#87 Kirill Kaprizov 37,328 1,204 Stub Unknown

  1. 91 2021 IIHF World U18 Championships 36,281 1,170 Stub Unknown

#99 David Pastr?ák 35,330 1,139 Stub Unknown #143 Spencer Knight 28,819 929 Stub Unknown

  1. 161 2021 IIHF World Championship Group A 26,491 854 Stub Unknown
  2. 168 2021 IIHF World Championship Group B 25,639 827 Stub Unknown

#184 Chris Nilan 24,112 777 Stub Unknown Resource: WikiProject Ice Hockey/Popular pages--Coin945 (talk) 06:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Well ... let's start with that the article assessments are seriously lagging. Somewhat disbelieving, I checked the Pastrnak and Kaprizov articles. The first is a solid C, the second a solid Start, and I changed the assessments to suit. Likely some of the others are much the same: I'll take a look at the other player articles listed. Ravenswing 14:12, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  • I've also changed the Knight and Nilan assessments to Start. The Nilan article is damn near devoid of citations, however, and it does need a lot of serious work. The Bear article is pretty much a stub. Ravenswing 14:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Could someone point me to a project MOS or similar?

A WP:ENGVAR edit I recently made to an article was reverted with the broad statement that NHL-related articles must use Canadian spelling, but without any citation to some source to establish consensus for that. I'm sure it's been the subject of many edit wars over the years, so I looked to see if there is a manual of style or similar for this WikiProject that might support the statement. I can't find one, and I'm certainly not going to waste Sunday afternoon digging through the talk page archives. Can anyone point me to anything that would demonstrate consensus on that principle? Thanks in advance. 1995hoo (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Links to the various style advice pages are available in the sidebar on the main project page. For the article in question, I think Resource: Manual of Style § Retaining the existing variety is the apt guidance. isaacl (talk) 20:26, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Concur. I don't see how projects have the right to dictate which English variant is used in articles under its scope. Just because the. main NHL article is written in Canadian English does not mean that all articles on the NHL must be written in Canadian English also. The article in question first used American English, and that is what should be retained. BilCat (talk) 21:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both. Regarding BilCat's comment, one thing that struck me was that the article's talk page has two banners, one of them for WikiProject United States, as noted in my edit summary from a few days ago. I don't mean to suggest that one necessarily trumps hockey (I think I'd say if there were a consensus for hockey articles, that one would likely trump, given how broad a USA project would be overall), but it's certainly a factor in favor of US spelling. I will also acknowledge that I might be overly aware of these issues after an incident a few years back where someone told me to use British English in an article about Major League Soccer because "they invented the language." 1995hoo (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I disagree that WikiProject banners play a determinative role. Anyone can add any WikiProject banners, since it just indicates they feel the participants in that WikiProject are interested in that page. Personally, I don't think that the 2021 NHL expansion draft article has strong national ties to exclusively one country, and so there is no reason to change the spelling in the article. isaacl (talk) 22:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Have to agree with Isaacl here, there are no strong national ties in this article so RETAIN should apply. The first visible edit for this page was in Canadian English so that is what it should have stayed at. -DJSasso (talk) 18:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Wouldn't the national tie here be to the US, as Seattle is in the US? -- Earl Andrew - talk 16:39, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Since the 2021 NHL expansion draft affects all league teams, I don't feel that the national tie is exclusive to the United States. isaacl (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Regardless of the outcome as to that particular article, I gather from all of your comments that there is no policy basis for the statement, "All NHL league based articles such as this one are written in Canadian English," correct? 1995hoo (talk) 18:27, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Not for articles like this one. I would of course for any that are specifically about the NHL in Canada such as Battle of Quebec (ice hockey) or the various teams in Canada. -DJSasso (talk) 18:29, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Of course. No question there. 1995hoo (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
I feel that we did have a discussion about this long ago, and I'm remembering correctly if the article was about a Canadian person/team/etc Canadian English was used, but if it was American then US English (I think international went to whatever was first). That said, I don't think this was ever codified, but a lot of what we do never is (I'm sure that isn't the correct way to do it, but we have largely been fine as is). Kaiser matias (talk) 20:33, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Concur. Also, there's nothing stopping the editor in question, or any other user, from raising the issue on the article's talk page and getting a consensus there to use Canadian English. BilCat (talk) 20:46, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Clarence S. Campbell Bowl

Does anyone know what the parameter for the Clarence S. Campbell Bowl is, so that it can be added to the infobox on the 2020-21 Montreal Canadiens season page? I saw that the Prince of Wales Trophy was added to the Lightning page, but I don't know how to add the Campbell Bowl. If anyone disagrees about adding it, I think it should be added because it is an accomplishment that the team has achieved this season. Yowashi (talk) 03:22, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I removed it, from the 2020-21 Lightning season article. Looks odd to have them, when there was no Conferences this season. GoodDay (talk) 03:32, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Ok. I guess it makes sense to not have it for that reason. Yowashi (talk) 03:36, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't buy that optics is a reason not to include it. Tampabay721 (talk) 04:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
The NHL could have chosen to award the Wales Trophy to the Canadiens & the Campbell Bowl to the Lightning. Up until earlier this month, the NHL wasn't going to hand out those two awards, at all. GoodDay (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
What's your point? I agree that this is not a conference championship, but you can't dispute that each trophy was awarded. Tampabay721 (talk) 20:20, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I think what Tampabay721 is alluding as "optics" to is seen here and the fact there is not an equivalent for the Campbell Bowl. The PoW parameter exists due its previous uses as the league playoff championship (pre-Stanley) and then as the regular season championship (pre-1967 expansion). The Campbell has never been used for that type of purpose as it was created to parallel the PoW new post-1967 purpose, hence, does not have an existing parameter. Yosemiter (talk) 20:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
What I meant by not buying optics being a reason to exclude them was that the reason given for not including them was because to one person said it looked "odd". I wasn't even aware when I made the edit you referenced that there wasn't a similar parameter for the Bowl because the Lightning articles are usually the only one I spend time on. I remember back in 2015 adding the PoW parameter to the Lightning article and someone changed it to ConferenceWin, which I didn't know at that time was possible so it made sense to me not revert because the two were synonymous to me. Having went back and seen some of the articles from the Original Six era or even in the years the Bowl was awarded for regular season records, what strikes me odd is that the neither the PoW nor the Bowl has ever been included in the expansion era and so the PoW trophy must only be found in articles during O-6 years since back then it was essentially the Presidents' Trophy as we know today. This time the Lightning win the PoW and not the conference, which is why I believe it should be reflected as such. Besides the fact that only admins can edit Template:Infobox ice hockey team season it would not be hard to add the Bowl. Tampabay721 (talk) 21:03, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Mostly because up until this season, both trophies were synonymous with the conference champion parameter post-'67 and it is against MOS:INFOBOX as bloat to list two of the same thing. I have no opinion on whether or not we list the PoW/Campbell on the infobox (yes, it could done by editing the template easily). I guess the question we should be asking is whether or not it is significant enough. We don't list the semifinal winners in the '74 to '81 playoffs in their season pages (see 1976-77 Boston Bruins season and 1978-79 New York Rangers season), regardless of if there were named trophies for the achievement. Yosemiter (talk) 22:05, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I see your point about it getting bloated and listing what is effectively the same thing twice. When it comes to this year, I'm of the opinion that adding something is better than leaving it blank. Which would mean adding to or adjusting the infobox template to allow for the Bowl to be added for Montreal even though (with respect to WP:CRYSTAL) this should be the only season that this is an issue. Tampabay721 (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Actually, this is a pretty straightforward thing. Can anyone point to a press release by the league confirming the award of these trophies? If so, of course they ought to be included in the season infoboxes ... whether or not they fit into the nice neat little slots we like them to be in. If not, of course they can't be. Ravenswing 20:35, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Oh, hey, look, they both were: [1]. Done deal then, and these awards should go in the infoboxes, whether or not they fulfill the previous criterion of conference championships ... which of course has not been the guiding principle for the entire history of the trophies. Ravenswing 20:39, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

If they're going to be added? A footnote explaining how they were awarded would be helpful. After all, this is the first time the Canadiens were ever awarded the Campbell Bowl. GoodDay (talk) 20:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Every new team that wins it is the first time it's won it, if you think about it ... and a number of those involved changes in the criteria for awarding it, and/or changes of division or conference. Most of the teams that have won it weren't originally eligible to do so. Ravenswing 00:26, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

With all this repurposing of trophies that has gone on, maybe the team infoboxes should list achievements rather than trophies: regular-season point leader, Stanley Cup finalist (perhaps in an NHL context that should be NHL playoff finalist, but some traditions die hard), and Conference champion. The article text can get into all the specific trophy details and their significance. isaacl (talk) 22:05, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Standings templates at TFD

FYI, at TfD, several NHL templates have popped up. See Resource: Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 26

-- (talk) 04:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

New editor creating pages that mostly fail WP:NHOCKEY

Just want to notify that KRANKENWAGEN (talk · contribs) has created multiple BLPs that fail WP:NHOCKEY (already PRODed them) and has also created pages for multiple teams from lower leagues like the Junior Hockey League (Russia) (MHL). He is a new editor on resource so we should help him out to get a better understanding of how things work here. - Sabbatino (talk) 11:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Cannabis and sports

New stub: Cannabis and sports. Any project members care to help expand? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

NHL Entry Draft trades

Why do NHL trade details on resource have "nth-round pick in [year]" instead of "[year] nth-round pick", unlike those details in the NBA, NFL, MLS? Santiago Claudio (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Possibly because nobody wanted to take the time, changing them. That's a lot of articles. GoodDay (talk) 15:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
We are not required to copy what other WikiProjects do. Plus we've been using that formatting for well over a decade. Deadman137 (talk) 16:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
There's no reason why you can't change it if you want to, Santiago Claudio, but (as GoodDay notes) you'd be creating an awful lot of work for yourself because it doesn't make sense to change some articles but not others. 1995hoo (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Never mind this simple question: "what benefit is gained by making such a change?" Ravenswing 23:13, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Been reading this, and I feel that both have been used in media, so either choice should be fine as long as it's consistent. But if someone wants to go around re-wording, I have not issue with it. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, we always were a funny bunch here at hockey-doing things our own way. It'd be a lot of work changing it all. Masterhatch (talk) 03:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

A heads up

User:Ched has been removing game recap urls under the guise of "General formatting" from several team season articles. Example. -- (talk) 13:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

under the guise of? Nice AGF there, and you could have come and asked me, but whatever. General formatting does this because they are not needed under WP:MOS guidelines. -- Ched (talk) 14:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
see: User:Ohconfucius/script/formatgeneral -- Ched (talk) 14:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
see also: WP:EL -- Ched (talk) 15:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
@Ched: WP:EL does not say anything that would justify your actions. A link to a game recap is helpful so you could at least fill them as references. This format (which you are removing) has been used for a long time so you should have asked here before starting to remove them. - Sabbatino (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I have no objection to you restoring them if you're going to format them as refs. And external links should be in a section at the end - and I do notice that where they are setup in a recap column in the table and formatted as such - then they don't get removed. But hey - I'm also fine with not editing any more NHL seasons too. As far as "asking" before editing .. no comment. -- Ched (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
@Ched: The links in the "Recap" column in game logs are being changed to references by Alaney2k (talk · contribs) (the editor thinks that WP:EL says to fo that when it is the opposite). I do not have time to go through all teams season pages so I made a simple observation that there is a format to be followed (links are either in "Recap" or "Score" sections). - Sabbatino (talk) 12:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
@Sabbatino: Why do you think WP:EL means use a bag of bare external links instead of references properly formatted as citations? Alaney2k (talk) 13:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
BTW I do think that the recap (as references) are useful and should not be removed. Alaney2k (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the replies and pings. Wasn't my intent to trouble anyone, and I was most certainly not editing in any surreptitious manner ("under the guise of"). I've been, for some time, adding WP:Short descriptions to articles, and while I was going through each team, each year - I thought I'd clean up a bit with "auto ed" and "General formatting" tools I have installed. I've been editing for a while, and perhaps common practice has changed with some things, and some of the guidelines haven't been updated. I also understand that various groups/projects have their own way of doing things - so when first confronted, I did stop editing the NHL articles immediately. As far as the "recaps" - I'll let you folks work that out. (my view is that we should avoid "link farms", but for refs that validate scores, then that's where they should be used. But that's just my view, and I have no intention of pushing that on anyone) If you have any further concerns, feel free to ping me or ask on my talk. Cheers. -- Ched (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

  • It is correct to treat those result links as citations. "Convenience links" are well and good, but are not compliant. Spam links are all too common so I configured the formatting script to remove links that are considered WP:LINKSPAM, and I see that AutoEd does the same. I see that it correctly identified the string in question as a spam link, so the removal was above board. -- Ohc revolution of our times 21:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

New Jersey Devils Uniform Set

I created a custom illustration of the team unifoms in high resolution vector format and based on the long standing model that has been in the article since 2017. The newer updated illustration is superior in quality and level of detail and it retains the design forms of the original. Can we include it as part of the article's infobox Kj1595 (talk) 16:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

There is a consistent format used across ice hockey team pages. Therefore, you apply the same format to all other teams or do not change anything at all. In addition, oknazevad (talk · contribs) has already voiced similar concerns like mine with the addition of "Reverse retro" not being a regular jersey. - Sabbatino (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
I have no problem with removing the retro uniform and reuploading the 2 set home and away uniforms. There are several issues with the existing PNG set. Aside from it being poorly rastered and lacking details, it lacks important elements like the gloves, the hockey stick and the helmet visor. Again, my illustration retains the forms and language of the PNG set. Why can it not be used as the future model for other and all teams to be represented by? Kj1595 (talk) 21:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Gloves, sticks, and visors are not "uniform" or part of a team's uniform identity; they are equipment. Players can often choose the brand/sponsorship as long as it is one of the team's approved colors. They do not need to be, and probably should not be, included. Yosemiter (talk) 21:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

NHL returning to previous alignment, in 2021-22?

Has it been confirmed, that the NHL is returning to the Eastern & Western Conferences, the Pacific, Atlantic, Central & Metropolitan Divisions setup, in the 2021-22 NHL season? Because edits are being made in some of those articles, as though it were so. GoodDay (talk) 06:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, they announced it last week, and reiterated it yesterday when they stated that the full schedule will be announced tonight. See here. oknazevad (talk) 11:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
...and if the Canadian government does not lift or loosen the border restrictions, by then? GoodDay (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
To paraphrase author Robert Jordan, "Watch and find out." In other words, why speculate about it when there is to be an announcement tonight? 1995hoo (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
Beyond that, there's the very simple principle that's always been followed on Wikipedia. To wit, if conditions and circumstances change, some editor goes in and changes the article. What else? Ravenswing 16:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
True :) GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps then, the North, West, East divisions should also be updated? GoodDay (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I was always in favor of only having one page on the 2020-21 alignment as they had zero historical connections to the divisions that once used those names in the first place. Yosemiter (talk) 19:08, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
I've updated the demise of those three divisions. GoodDay (talk) 19:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorting Trades on the Transactions Page

The new Transactions page just went live, and we've had our first trades. For now, I have begun listing trades as we have in the past: team receiving the most notable piece on the left; players before picks; players listed by notability; picks listed by year/round.
With that said, there is definitely subjectivity involved in that - how much do we weigh draft pedigree, career peak, career decline, etc., what about when players are super close in value and it's not clear who's more notable? - and I am wondering if it is worth restructuring how we sort our trades.
I am partial to the idea of: teams in alphabetical order, left-to-right; sort players alphabetically regardless of who the "centrepiece" is; picks after players, sorted by year/round. -uncleben85 (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The only thing that I would say is if a trade is a player(s) for just draft pick(s) in return that it should be left as is. Other than that I don't have any other points of issue. Deadman137 (talk) 22:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

2021 Draft and Loans

Curious how much thought we should put into players who played on loans this year, on the draft table. For now, for example, we have Mason McTavish being drafted from Olten of the SL, and Chase Stillman, being drafted from Esbjerg of Denmark U20, which is where they played, but they were on loan, and the official NHL draft board is listing them as drafted from, Peterborough and Sudbury respectively, where they were loaned from. I think there's genuine merit to listing the Club team as, for example Olten, but at the same time, sticking with McTavish as the example, he was registered as a North American player, and his draft rights are being treated accordingly (two year expiry of a major junior player). Just figured I'd throw this out there for discussion.-uncleben85 (talk) 21:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

  • Hm. I'd just go with the team where they were playing, as has generally been the case. Players on loan, while common in some sports, is an exceptionally rare thing in hockey, other than just this past season when the OHL was on hiatus. The situation probably won't recur, and is best handled in the players' individual articles, and/or a note on the 2021 Entry Draft article. Ravenswing 00:24, 25 July 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