Talk:Montreal Canadiens centennial

Image copyright problem with Image:Canadiens100Anniversary.png

The image Image:Canadiens100Anniversary.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to redirect this page to 2008–09 Montreal Canadiens season

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The Montreal Canadiens article links to 2008–09 Montreal Canadiens season in its section on the centennial celebrations. I'm not sure I see a clear rationale for having this page separate (I think all of the information it includes can be placed on the 2008–09 Montreal Canadiens season page). I propose merging the content and making this page a redirect. Isaac Lin (talk) 22:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

In agreement; merge to 2008-09 Montreal Canadiens season article. GoodDay (talk) 23:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Could just as well be part of the season article IMO. Since it is a centennial year special extra information in a separate section of the season article is fully acceptable. --Krm500 (talk) 23:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the reason for two articles was that the Centennial year page will be talking about the off ice activities, where the season article deals mostly with the actual teams play and business moves etc. -Djsasso (talk) 23:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Do any off-ice activities need to be isolated in a separate page, though, particularly if most events end up scheduled in conjunction with a hockey game? The All-Star Game and the Entry Draft will have their own pages in any case, and next year's outdoors game will not be in Montreal. My current feeling is that coverage of the events can be comfortably included in the 2008–09 Montreal Canadiens season page (perhaps in a separate section, as Krm500 has mentioned above?). Isaac Lin (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with a redirect. The season articles are not so overly large that any events both specifically pertaining to the celebrations and notable enough for permanent record can be included in the season article, as Krm500 says.  Ravenswing  16:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with it going in the same page, I was just stating why I think it was the way it was. That being said Wikipedia is not paper and there is no reason why they have to be on the same page, things like the Winter Classic etc were given their own pages. -Djsasso (talk) 22:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the term "Montreal Canadiens Centennial Year" is essentially a moniker for the 2008-09 Montreal Canadiens season, and so the most expected behaviour would be for any references to the centennial year to be a link to the season page. Also, I don't believe that the off-ice celebrations of the hundredth year of the Canadiens are notable enough on their own to warrant a separate page; it feels like self-indulgence by fans of the team. Isaac Lin (talk) 13:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I just realised that although this article says that the Centennial Year "will be taking place during the 2008–09 NHL season", of course the team will at least have something on the actual anniversary date on December 4, 2009. The press release announcing the Canadiens 2008–09 schedule states that "The Montreal Canadiens Centennial, which will culminate in December 2009, will feature a comprehensive program of events, initiatives and products. ... The program of all Centennial activities will be released at a further date." So before making any decisions about this article, I suggest waiting until the program of events is released. Isaac Lin (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. It is apparent that events/dates will be going into the 2009-2010 Season as well.24.37.126.33 (talk) 20:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

And now that I think about it we as a project consider the 2009 NHL Entry Draft to be part of the 2009-10 NHL season. -Djsasso (talk) 20:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal to rename page to "Montreal Canadiens centennial"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

To reflect that the planned celebrations will span across a couple of seasons and two calendar years, I propose that this page be renamed "Montreal Canadiens centennial". Where celebratory events are related to the individual seasons where they take place, I propose that these events be included within the corresponding season page, and this page contain links to the appropriate sections in the season pages. Additionally, this page shall contain links to any other related events that have separate pages of their own (e.g. the 2009 All-Star game and the 2009 draft). Isaac Lin (talk) 02:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

article was renamed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Loonie

Canadian Loonie has commemorative edition:

http://www.mint.ca/store/content/productSeries.jsp?cat=Montreal%20Canadiens%20Coins&lang=en_CA&rcmeid=BWS-SEM-Search_SPL-MTL-100th-EN_Google-Canada_T_SEM%7CK_canadiens%20coin%7CA_3148973508&pdl=1

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=383325

Propose merge with Montreal Canadiens or History of the Montreal Canadiens

The content on this page is a bit slim and I think it could be accommodated within either the Montreal Canadiens article or the History of the Montreal Canadiens. At the moment it feels a bit like a vanity page for Canadiens fans. Isaac Lin (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I would keep it separate since it was a specific one time event. Wikipedia is paper so there is no harm in having it separate, and I don't feel the article is all that short. -DJSasso (talk) 20:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not that concerned with length, but content—at the moment, it's just a list of various events that would fit well into the narrative of the Montreal Canadiens or History of the Montreal Canadiens article. However, if details for each event would get fleshed out a bit (e.g. back story on the Canadiens coins and stamps, more info on the videogame, details on Builders night, etc.), then having a standalone article would seem more relevant. (Even so, it would still feel a lot like PR, though, which is the part that makes me feel uneasy.) Isaac Lin (talk) 20:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

PR isn't really an issue because it was a notable event, just think how many times it was mentioned on talk radio or tv or in the papers across North America and the world...its clearly a notable event on its own. But yes the different aspects should be fleshed out better, but that is what a stub is. Its a case of "Wikipedia is not finished" and "There is no deadline". -DJSasso (talk) 20:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Notability is a separate issue—articles about notable events must still be written in an encyclopedic style and not in the tone of a publicity release. Personally I would prefer to keep information more consolidated until readability/usability constraints dictate otherwise, but I guess it's not a big issue in this case. Isaac Lin (talk) 00:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

My point is that I don't remotely find this article to be written in a PR style. Its just a listing of things that happened that coincide with the centenial. -DJSasso (talk) 04:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, the list of events (which hasn't been updated for over a year) is pretty much a transcription from the Canadiens' September 2008 press release (and this is reflected in the introductory paragraph). I don't believe the intent of any of the content is to be publicity, but I could see how a disinterested party might think it is. Isaac Lin (talk) 05:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I haven't seen the press release so I obviously have no idea. As far as the listing goes, a list is a list. However if the introductory paragraph mimics it then that should be rewritten. -DJSasso (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I was a bit unclear—I meant the paragraph immediately before the list of events was written when the announcement was made, and so the wording reflects this, even though all of those events are in the past now. The events should be verified that they did in fact take place, and the list and paragraph updated. Isaac Lin (talk) 06:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Montreal Canadiens centennial. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090217223049/http://canadiens.nhl.com/team/app?articleid=359312&page=NewsPage&service=page to http://canadiens.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=359312
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.thestarphoenix.com/sports/story.html?id=2027895
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090216143140/http://www.cinoche.com/actualites/2932 to http://www.cinoche.com/actualites/2932

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 04:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)