Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive67

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Founded dates in the team infobox again

I noticed several edits this morning concerning the "Founded" parameter in NHL team infoboxes again (with a bit reversions back and forth). We previously discussed Here but we never made any stated changes to the wording. Maybe we should add a direct statement in the Team Page example about what to do when organizations were granted a franchise/team more than a year prior to icing a team? For the record I have no preference if the founded date is the date granted of a franchise or a franchise's first season, it would just be nice if there was a location to point editors to and end any conflict. Yosemiter (talk) 12:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

I was the one who reverted those additions. However, that user re-added them later. In my opinion, first season for the team should be listed as the "founding" date. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah we can change the wording if we need to I don't really care as long as it remains as the franchise founding and isn't changed to when the team itself started playing in the case of moves because as Ravenswing Tavix mentions in that discussion, that information is contained in the team history section farther down in the infobox. -DJSasso (talk) 14:14, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Less changing the wording, more giving a thorough definition of whether it should be exact founding date (as in the Florida Panthers/Anaheim Ducks granted an expansion in December 1992) or their founding season (1993 for their 1993-94 season). This could be clarified by changing the dates in Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format to represent the scenario for which ever is preferred. Yosemiter (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah sorry that is really what I meant. -DJSasso (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

So in this case Las Vegas team's founding date should be changed to 2017 in the infobox, Nashville Predators' to 1998 and so on... That would be the most logical step. On the other hand, Devils' founding date according to their own website is May 27, 1982. Despite them being relocated from Kansas City to Colorado and then to New Jersey. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

That is because they are talking about the team founding, whereas we are talking about the franchise founding. Team and Franchise are two different things. That is why I mentioned what Ravenswing Tavix said, we indicate the team starts in the history parameter. We indicate the franchise founding in the founded parameter. -DJSasso (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Ravenswing didn't say anything about franchise vs. team founding. But that's not the point. We SHOULD determine which date it should be – announcement of expansion/relocation or FIRST season played. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:07, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

The way that outside sources (such as sports almanacs) have always done it is to list the first year of play of the franchise as a whole. Announcing the awarding of a franchise, which can happen well in advance, shouldn't be used, because a) it can be hard to determine for older franchises, and b) it's a trivial fact compared to actually fulfilling their purpose of playing hockey. We should follow the practice of reliable sources and not make up our own stuff.

I'd also like to note that the editor in question has been making the same sort of changes at NBA, NFL and MLB articles, all without consensus. This is a bigger problem than just hockey. I've asked him to stop and self-revert while discussion is ongoing, and wonder if we should drop pointers to the NBA WikiProjecttheatrewikiproject and others about this discussion. oknazevad (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah it is up to those projects to decide how they want to handle it. I know for baseball they never seem to agree with what to use when it comes to minor league teams which follow a different standard than their Major league teams, but it definitely can't hurt to let them know as well. -DJSasso (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

We haven't exactly been very consistent either. Many of the teams that were changed today have used first season, however, others such as Nashville and Columbus have listed their June 1997 granted expansion dates. Furthermore, the 1997 dates are linked to the 1997-98 season, but there are no mentions of their granted expansion on that page. It could be added to the 1997-98 league business section to indicate the transactions and conditions of expansion, but as it stands now the link to that season does not help the team page or infobox. Yosemiter (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, the founding dates should not be linked to the franchise's inaugural WHA/NHL season. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@GoodDay: So you are saying you would prefer the "founded=" be the exact dates granted of conditional franchise? That might be fine, but I am pointing out the link to the 1997-98 season adds no value based on its content to the Predators, Wild, Blue Jackets, etc. that all have that season linked in their infoboxes. So why shouldn't it be linked to its first season, a season where information actually references those teams. Yosemiter (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Linking the founding date to a season, which the team hasn't played in (see Minnesota Wild) is misleading. Therefore the 'founding date' shouldn't be linked at all. GoodDay (talk) 19:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry it was Tavix who said it although Ravenswing also mentions if the intent was moved we would call it moved. Tavix's signature blended into the text for me so I mixed him up with Ravenswing. -DJSasso (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Oknazevad:I asked the same question at WikiProject National Basketball Association. For now noone answered it. I guess the same thing should be done at NFL and MLB projects. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

The first WHA/NHL season(s) are shown in the 'history' of the infoboxes. There shouldn't be any problem with the actual 'founding year' being presented. GoodDay (talk) 14:45, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Official teams' media guides list first season of play as team's founding date. I suppose we should follow what official sources tell us as always. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

If that is what the media guides say as established, then that would seem like the best bet. Also seems to be backed up by how teams recognize their age as I remember the Sharks recently had their 25 years patches and celebrations in 2015-16. If it had been 25 years as an organization they would have celebrated it a year earlier. Yosemiter (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Went through several teams' guides and 2015–16 New Islanders Media Guide is the most detailed. It lists first seasons of play as teams' foundation. As for the Sharks, their 25 years celebrations meant 25th season of play. Same goes for Maple Leafs as they celebrate 100th season of play this season, which means 1917–2016 is 100 seasons of play. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually 2016-17 is the Maple Leafs 99th season of play, but NHL teams have tended to include 2004-05 as a season. GoodDay (talk) 20:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes they have. I intentionally didn't exclude the 2004–05 season. And as you said – looks like the teams tend to do the same. – Sabbatino (talk) 20:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Interestingly, the Rangers celebrated their 85th anniversary during their 84th season of play but now are celebrating their 90th anniversary during their actual 90th season of play. That goddamn lockout!Jmj713 (talk) 00:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Jeepers, going by when they celebrated their 85th, they should've celebrated their 90th, last season. GoodDay (talk) 00:41, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what way the Hockey project wants to handle the founding date in the infobox, but one thing that cannot be done to our readers is confuse them with conflicted data. The Los Angeles Kings infobox states founding as 1967. Yet the second sentence in the lead states "founded on February 9, 1966." That conflict cannot stay. Wording has to change or something, but it cannot stay that way. Also, the Los Angeles Kings, all this season in advertising, are stating the founding of the team in 1966. Readers who come here for the Kings are going to be mighty confused, and that we don't want. The Los Angeles Times has run stories all year long on the 50th anniversary. Ones like this. 1967 would simply be a head-scratcher for Kings fans, but having the infobox state something different than the prose is a disservice imho. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The wording has to change. Season-specific media guides list first season as the founding date of the franchise. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Update. Checked all available 2016–17 NHL teams' media guides and they all use the same pattern as I stated before – first season is considered as the foundation of the franchise. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I'd personally would go with different dates & the founding date not being linked to any season. Whatever is decided, is fine with me though. I'm not as argumentive, as I used to be :) GoodDay (talk) 12:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean by "different dates"? Admission to the NHL or first season? And I also agree that it shouldn't be linked. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Example: Predators founded June 25, 1997 & their first season 1998-99. GoodDay (talk) 12:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

First of all, what are you referring to – the infobox or the lede? Secondly, yesterday you said that we should use the info that is written in teams' media guides, which is official, because all teams list the same thing. I'm pretty sure that admission isn't the establishment of the franchise as they just get a OK to go forward with the team. Here are two dates from the Predators' 2016–17 (currently not availabe along with several other teams) 2015–16 Media Guide:

1. June 25, 1997: Leipold Hockey Holdings, LLC was granted a conditional franchise by the NHL Board of Governors.
2. May 4, 1998: The National Hockey League officially announced the Nashville Predators as the 27th franchise in league history.

It's clear that the Predators were founded on May 4, 1998, when the NHL accepted them as the new franchise. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

As long as there's consistency across the 31 team article infoboxes, then no probs. It's not something I'm going to fuss over :) GoodDay (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Usually with other teams in other leagues, the first season in which a team competes is the year the team joined the league while the year is created is usually when the franchise is awarded. This is usually found in a lot of sports leagues i.e. NFL, baseball, soccer, and outside hockey & basketball leagues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AquilaXIII (talk • contribs) 23:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I already posted an example. Moreover, teams' media guides list first season as the founding date. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Update. However NHL's "Official Guide & Record Book" gives slightly different dates under the Franchise date: section. Full list (I bolded the current incarnation):

• Mighty Ducks on Anaheim/Anaheim Ducks – June 15, 1993 (known as Might Ducks of Anaheim from 1993 to 2006)
• Winnipeg Jets/Arizona Coyotes – June 22, 1979 (Winnipeg → Phoenix on July 1, 1996, Phoenix → Arizona on June 27, 2014; 1972–1979 in WHA)
• Boston Bruins – November 1, 1924
• Buffalo Sabres – May 22, 1970
• Atlanta/Calgary Flames – June 6, 1972 (Atlanta → Calgary on June 24, 1980)
• Hartford Whalers/Carolina Hurricanes – June 22, 1979 (Hartford → Carolina on June 25, 1997; known as New England Whalers from 1972 to 1979 in WHA)
• Chicago Blackhawks – September 25, 1926 (known as Chicago Black Hawks from 1926 to 1986)
• Quebec Nordiques/Colorado Avalanche – June 22, 1979 (Quebec → Colorado on June 21, 1995; 1972–1979 in WHA)
• Columbus Blue Jackets – June 25, 1997
• Minnesota North Stars/Dallas Stars – June 5, 1967 (Minnesota → Dallas on June 9, 1993)
• Detroit Red Wings – September 25, 1926 (known as Detroit Cougars from 1926 to 1930, as Detroit Falcons from 1930 to 1932)
• Edmonton Oilers – June 22, 1979 (known as Alberta Oilers from 1972 to 1973 in WHA)
• Florida Panthers – June 14, 1993
• Los Angeles Kings – June 5, 1967
• Minnesota Wild – June 25, 1997
• Montreal Canadiens – November 26, 1917 (December 4, 1909 in NHA)
• Nashville Predators – June 25, 1997
• Kansas City Scouts/Colorado Rockies/New Jersey Devils – June 11, 1974 (Kansas City → Colorado on August 25, 1976; Colorado → New Jersey on June 30, 1982)
• New York Islanders – June 6, 1972
• New York Rangers – May 15, 1926
• Ottawa Senators – December 16, 1991
• Philadelphia Flyers – June 5, 1967
• Pittsburgh Penguins – June 5, 1967
• St. Louis Blues – June 5, 1967
• San Jose Sharks – May 9, 1990
• Tampa Bay Lightning – December 16, 1991
• Toronto Maple Leafs – November 26, 1917 (known as Toronto Arenas from 1917 to 1920, as Toronto St. Patricks from 1920 to 1927)
• Vancouver Canucks – May 22, 1970 (from 1945 to 1952 in PCHL, from 1952 to 1970 in WHL)
• Washington Capitals – June 11, 1974
• Atlanta Thrashers/Winnipeg Jets – June 25, 1997 (Atlanta → Winnipeg on June 21, 2011)

I suppose NHL's "Official Guide & Record Book" is the most detailed and best source for teams' founding dates. In addition, they don't list teams' time in NHA (Canadiens), WHA (Coyotes, Hurricanes, Avalanche, Oilers), PCHL and WHL (both Canucks). All these founding dates should be reflected in the text and in the infobox (we should list two founding dates for the Canadiens). – Sabbatino (talk) 12:54, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I'd use the NHA & WHA dates 'only' where required, as these team articles cover 'more' then the NHL history. GoodDay (talk) 12:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

NHL acknowledge NHA as it's forerunner, and that should be reflected in the Canadiens' article. Same goes for teams that came from other leagues (WHA quartet and the Canucks). Arenas' seating capacities also differ from the ones we currently have listed in teams' or arenas' articles. I don't know how many more differences there are between what is written in Wiki and that book, but I do know that there's a lot of work to do on current NHL teams' articles. Now going back to founding dates – should we list the full date as in the book or just the year? – Sabbatino (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

If we use the those founding dates instead of founding season, then the exact dates should be used when available since it seems to be sourceable. (And possibly just remove the founded column from the main NHL table altogether because: #1- it is team info not necessarily relevant to the league and #2- it is just more clutter since most now will have a separate year for founded and joined and the intent of the column was more for indicating if a team joined from another league, not how long it took to form a team from league approval.) Yosemiter (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Do you have this in mind? How about infoboxes – remove founding dates from them or list these dates that I posted? – Sabbatino (talk) 20:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the list of teams is what my parenthetical comment was in reference to. And changing the the founded date in the Team Infobox to the exact date would cause the way they are used on the League table and Team pages to not match. Any founded date is relevant and likely important information to a Team but necessarily to the NHL itself. So I am saying, if we use the exact date of founding, then just delete the Founded column from the NHL table since it is not useful info. (I still don't mind if we use founding season in the Team Infobox because that is when the organization was first able to compete, but founding date works just as well since, as it was the reason I started this section in the first place, it is not defined anywhere in our templates or examples which it should be.) Yosemiter (talk) 20:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't disagree more with removing the first years from the teams table at the league article. It does speak to the league as a whole, as the dates show the growth of the league, and provides context to rivalries and such. I think removing it is a huge mistake. oknazevad (talk) 20:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

That's not what I meant, I said remove the Founded column. I didn't say anything about the Joined column, that should definitely stay as it does exactly what you say. But having a box for Columbus that says Founded 1997 and Joined 2000 isn't helpful info in regards to the league as from June 1997 to July 2000, there was no team (as in players and such). Yosemiter (talk) 21:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

My appologies, misunderstood you. I can totally see that. For those teams that joined from other leagues, we can use footnotes to mention that fact, with their first season in those leagues listed. But I absolutely agree with you regarding the unneeded nature of the years before the start of play. oknazevad (talk) 22:13, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Given that the infobox should contain information that is essential for a concise summary of the subject, I believe including the franchise's first season of play in the infobox (with an appropriately named heading) should have higher priority over the founding of the franchise. isaacl (talk) 02:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. Exact founding dates should be shown in the infobox and in the text as it can be backed up by sources. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand; the first season of play can also be backed up by sources. I don't necessarily oppose showing the founding date, but as I said, I think showing the first season of play is essential for a concise summary of the subject. Accordingly, I would not favour showing the founding date but not the first season of play. isaacl (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

The first season of play is always shown (and linked) under the franchise history section in the infobox directly below the Founded line. Yosemiter (talk) 20:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@Isaacl: I meant that we should list full founding dates since we now have sources that can back it up. Moreover, Canadiens and Maple Leafs (however, it contains wrong date) had full founding dates for a long time in their infoboxes and continue to list them. And as Yosemiter wrote – first season is listed in the History parameter. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, the contents of the History parameter must have fallen into my blind spot... isaacl (talk) 22:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Interesting, it wasn't until now that I noticed NHL teams that have not moved/changed names etc are using the history section. Usually that is only filled out for teams that haven't always been at the same place or name or league. -DJSasso (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Mmm ... I could wish that the founding dates had any consistent principle to them. The ones in the expansion era tend to be around the date of the Amateur Draft in the summer before opening night; the Bruins and Maroons, by contrast, date from the league meeting at which the franchises were formally admitted. Ravenswing 16:38, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

As far as I remember the History parameter was used for every single team since the creation of the infobox and I think it should stay that way to keep uniformity through all teams' articles. But going back to the dates – YES or NO? Maybe we should do a vote? Because I see that people are divided about this. Or we should just get rid of Founded parameter and be done with it? – Sabbatino (talk) 16:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I think we should leave it how we have had it and use the first season of the team in whatever league they were in at the time they were founded. I think getting down to the exact day is a bit too specific. I think most people when talking about the start of a sports team are going to be talking about the first game they play and that is what they are expecting to see there. It follows the principle of least astonishment. As for the history section, yeah the NHL teams may very well have, I was more meaning teams in other leagues. -DJSasso (talk) 17:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

If keep it as before then full dates from Canadiens' and Maple Leafs' infoboxes should also be removed (every other team included). However, Template:Infobox NHL team has the following line – Use {{Birth date}} for "founded", but ONLY if a full YYYY-MM-DD date is available. Looks like it should be included if this line is written in the template. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Documentation in most templates is almost never accurate. Likely that line has been there since the infobox was created and never touched again. It is clearly not accurate in this case. -DJSasso (talk) 11:10, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Ahh yes, Pigsonthewing added it in 2008 without any discussion when he moved the documentation out of the template to its own subpage and since almost no one every looks at or updates the templates it has sat there since then. I am guessing he added it due to something he wanted to do with hcards when he was trying to brute force them onto all templates on the wiki. -DJSasso (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Since nobody said anything, I removed full dates from the infoboxes and left only the year. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

We have had a couple of weeks now to consider the options and it seems the consensus is to have the founding season/year in the infobox and any exact founding announcement dates left in the prose of the article. So if this is the case, should we change the wording in the infobox to clarify? Or should we have directive in one the templates that states we imply first season for that parameter? Yosemiter (talk) 13:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Just put an instruction in the infobox doc that we use first season in the parameter. -DJSasso (talk) 13:55, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Y Done. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I think it's important to have accuracy. They are founded when the team was awarded an expansion berth as it is day one.

• I think it's important for you to recognize that (a) the NHL hasn't been consistent as to what dates they recognize, but that (b) the NHL sets forth franchise founding dates in its media guides, and that (c) a majority of people disagree with you on this issue, followed by that (d) Wikipedia works on consensus. Ravenswing 07:13, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Las Vegas or Paradise?

With the new Vegas team, I was wondering what the consensus on the location should be. T-Mobile arena is in the unincorporated town of Paradise, Nevada, and is adjacent to Las Vegas proper. However, it does seem that the standard mailing address in the town is still Las Vegas. So is this more of Florida Panthers/Sunrise and Arizona Coyotes/Glendale situation or a Ottawa Senators/Kanata and New York Islanders/Brooklyn situation? (There is a section on the Talk:Vegas Golden Knights for this, but that seems to not get much traffic.) Yosemiter (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Based on the above discussion, consensus seems to be arena location. (Personally I think readers would like to know the encompassing metropolitan region, but I appreciate this isn't as cut-and-dried as where the arena is situated.) isaacl (talk) 21:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

The problem here is that Paradise, Nevada, which is unincorporated, is within the area of the Las Vegas mailing address, which encompasses more than just the modern city proper (it's the entirety of the old Las Vegas Township). Plus the fact that the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police, which is a county agency, covers Paradise as well. So saying it is in Las Vegas, Nevada, is not incorrect, as that is its mailing address as far as the postal service is concerned, but it is not in Las Vegas proper as far as the state's articles of incorporation are concerned. oknazevad (talk) 23:54, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

It sounds like the reverse situation of Kanata, which is still the mailing address of the Senators home arena, though the city is now Ottawa. Previous discussion has agreed that the actual city, regardless of what is used in the mailing address, should be used as the location for a given venue. isaacl (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Help really needed?

Can anyone help with Ice hockey in Canada and help decide wether History of ice hockey in the United States should be merged withIce hockey in the United StatesDwanyewest (talk) 01:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Many draft articles about individual games

FYI, an editor from the 24.xxx.xxx.xxx IP range (dynamic IP addresses assigned to zoominternet.net in Youngstown Ohio) has been creating many individual game articles, with questionable importance ratings (I don't see how a single game that is otherwise "normal" would be mid-importance to a city project)

Amongst the articles so far drafted are:

• DRAFT: 1962 Stanley Cup Finals (Game 1)
• DRAFT: New Jersey Devils at Hartford Whalers, January 22, 1995
• DRAFT: Tampa Bay Lightning at New York Rangers, October 7, 1993

I don't doubt there are others, since this person's IP address rotates every few hours, so tracking creations would be hard as the IP shifts very very quickly (in less than a day)

-- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 07:12, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

That user is a blocked sockpuppeteer SNYler. Any articles created by him technically can be deleted immediately per WP:DENY via G5 which I have now done. But yes his IP shifts all the time, we play wack a mole with him on the various sports projects. -DJSasso (talk) 17:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

This guy under 24.101.134.12 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has a load of drafts -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 07:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

FWIW for anyone trying to follow this; the user is SNIyer12 (talk · contribs) -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 07:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes there are a few of us that watch for him constantly. -DJSasso (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

merge help

The Robin Söderqvist and Robin Söderquist articles are the same person Joeykai (talk) 07:54, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive67 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

• Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 18:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

NHL Trophy Boxes

Seems an unsuspecting, good-intentioned user, in this case User:Argsoccer has gone and created one of those boxes full of award winners (see any Hart Trophy winner for an example). I've left him a message giving the projects general views, and offered him a chance to come here and at least argue his position. However it will likely get deleted, though I'd at least give them a chance to state their case here first before we delete them. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Those boxes should be removed from affected articles & then deleted. GoodDay (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Gretzky's citizenship, again

I have started a conversation about a recent edit regarding Gretzky's citizenship. Any feedback is welcome. isaacl (talk) 23:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

2015 World Junior Ice Hockey Championship

The article needs to be moved to 2015 World Junior Ice Hockey Championships, to match it with the Year World Junior Ice Hockey Championships articles. GoodDay (talk) 00:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Notice of relisted move discussion

An editor has requested that {{subst:linked|Talk:Icehouse (arena)#Requested move 22 December 2016}} be moved to {{subst:#if:|{{subst:linked|{{{2}}}}}|another page}}{{subst:#switch: project |user | USER = . Since you had some involvement with 'Talk:Icehouse (arena)#Requested move 22 December 2016', you |#default = , which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You}} are invited to participate in [[{{subst:#if:|{{subst:#if:|#{{{section}}}|}}|{{subst:#if:|Talk:Icehouse (arena)#{{{section}}}|{{subst:TALKPAGENAME:Talk:Icehouse (arena)#Requested move 22 December 2016}}}}}}|the move discussion]]. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:36, 29 December 2016 (UTC)