BeanieFan11 (talk | contribs) →Mass draftification proposal on Olympians: new section Tag: New topic |
BeanieFan11 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 239: | Line 239: | ||
== Mass draftification proposal on Olympians == |
== Mass draftification proposal on Olympians == |
||
You may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC on draftifying a subset of mass-created Olympian microstubs|this village pump discussion]] on draftifiying |
You may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC on draftifying a subset of mass-created Olympian microstubs|this village pump discussion]] on draftifiying nearly a thousand Olympians. [[User:BeanieFan11|BeanieFan11]] ([[User talk:BeanieFan11|talk]]) 14:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:07, 2 March 2023
Ice Hockey NA‑class | |||||||
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
NHL rosters & flags
Earlier today, an IP made a change at the Seattle Kraken's roster. Giving an Austrian born player, a Swedish flag. This was due to the player living & (I assume) having played for Sweden in international tournaments. If it were up to me? I'd have all flags removed from the NHL rosters, as it's the NHL & not the IIHF. But since the flags are there, which should we use? Birth country flag? or (if not the same country) residency flag. Note - This isn't about players whose birth countries ceased to exist during their lifetimes. GoodDay (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
- All flags should be deleted in rosters of professional sports teams. It violates MOS:FLAG when the person is representing a professional team, instead of their nation. Flibirigit (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
I'd like to split an article into two, but i don't know if I can do that
Hello! I think that the "History" section of Porin Ässät (men's ice hockey) should be in a seperate article, since that section is pretty long. The problem is that i don't know if i can do that. --Cheers! Kilaseell - Message me! - 21:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- You absolutely can; a number of the NHL team articles do exactly that. See History of the Detroit Red Wings, for example. You just want to leave a hatnote on the history section of the original article, but hiving history off is fairly straightforward. Ravenswing 11:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Still haven't done it (laziness), but i will do it during my usual "staying up late so I can read/write Wikipedia at 3AM" session. Now, I'd love to have your overall opinion on the article. I'm 100% sure there are like a million grammar mistakes but my Finnish brain just cannot find them XD --Cheers! Kilaseell - Message me! - 19:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- I've gone over the History article and done some tweaking, but I've a few extra comments:
* First off, it's citation-light; I could have "citation needed" templated it to death, but I'll leave it up to you to work it out.
* You mention the Rosenlew company in passing, but if this was the firm that founded the team, that needs to be stated up front, and preferably in more detail.
* "The problem for the Karhut was the economic downturn ..." What economic downturn?
Alright ... I've done a little work, but I also have the new History of the Boston Bruins article to revise (heavily), but at least it's a start. Ravenswing 20:47, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks! It is really hard to find sources for this, since really the only sources are books that my local library doesn't have, but I'll try my best. --Cheers! Kilaseell - Message me! - 23:03, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- I've gone over the History article and done some tweaking, but I've a few extra comments:
- Still haven't done it (laziness), but i will do it during my usual "staying up late so I can read/write Wikipedia at 3AM" session. Now, I'd love to have your overall opinion on the article. I'm 100% sure there are like a million grammar mistakes but my Finnish brain just cannot find them XD --Cheers! Kilaseell - Message me! - 19:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
LA Kings third jersey
I’m not familiar with the jersey template of NHL teams, but there is a jersey on the Kings page that is now out of date (from 2021) and needs to be replaced. Any way to change this? Marino13 (talk) 19:25, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- This is the image. User:Silent Wind of Doom no longer updates the NHL jersey images, so you can either be bold and update it yourself, or just remove the image from the article if you feel it's inaccurate. 162 etc. (talk) 16:47, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Connor McDavid
An editor has added Connor McDavid to Category: Canadian expatriate ice hockey players in the United States, with which I disagree. Please let us know what you think. Thank you, PKT(alk) 02:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- What I think is that the category is badly overstuffed. I'm very far with agreeing with Crowsus' nonsensical "these categories refer to any time in their career" -- not when there's any actual formal definition of the cat -- and believe the category should only be used for the Espositos, Orrs, Parks and Berensons of the sport: the ones with a documented history of permanently settling in the United States in their post-playing careers. It should absolutely not be used for players who as a teenager happened to play a handful of seasons for a US-based junior league team. Ravenswing 05:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Agree with PKT and Ravenswing, there needs to be some element of qualification applied here. For now, the only one I reverted was this edit at Marian Stastny, as the article content does not support adding him to any categories as a Canadian. (But if it did, that's even more dubious - 27 games at the end of his career in Switzerland.) Echoedmyron (talk) 11:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I too agree with Ravenswing and PKT. Masterhatch (talk) 11:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm honestly of the opinion that categories like this are not really defining, and don't really see the use of having them at all. Though by the wording of them it would seem that McDavid would technically fall under the purpose of them, but I'm not strongly for or against it here. Kaiser matias (talk) 14:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
List of NHL records (individual)
Hello everyone! The template at the top of List of NHL records (individual) when trying to edit says "PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE STATISTICS FROM THE 2017–18 NHL SEASON. THEY WILL BE REVERTED." I would like that to be updated to reflect the current season but, alas, I do not have the required permissions. Can an admin or a template editor take care of that for me? Masterhatch (talk) 10:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- I found out how to change it - I assume 2017-18 should be changed to 2022-23, correct? It seems like a stupid question but I'm good at asking them :) PKT(alk) 16:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- I believe it can only be done by an administrator. GoodDay (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ahh - dang, so close! I put in a request to have it updated. PKT(alk) 16:39, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- This has now been taken care of, thanks to
Masterhatchsorry, that should be Paine Ellsworth........... PKT(alk) 20:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- This has now been taken care of, thanks to
- Ahh - dang, so close! I put in a request to have it updated. PKT(alk) 16:39, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- I believe it can only be done by an administrator. GoodDay (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's great! Maybe I should apply for template editor so I can take care of stuff like without needing help. Masterhatch (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
RM at NHL Conference Finals page
An RM has been opened, concerning capitalisation. GoodDay (talk) 23:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Module:Sports roster
Just want to let everyone know that Module:Sports roster/NBA has been created back in December 2022 and its creator thought (without any consensus) that it could be implemented for ice hockey rosters (for example, Template:Boston Bruins roster/sandbox). The attempt was made at TKH Toruń, which I reverted. – sbaio 09:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Discussion re: tables versus lists for first and last games
@Ravenswing has recently begun changing the first/last game tables on season articles, shifting from tables listing the player, their final team, and their notability, to simple bullet-point lists of the players and their last team. I've been reverting the edits for now as they go against the implicit consensus of season pages - i.e., no other editors have attempted to remove the tables in recent memory and they've been around as long as I've been editing them (approx. the 2017-18 season). However, I understand an implicit consensus is inherently unclear, and can change over time, so I'd like to open up a debate in order to establish a more explicit guideline/practice on what we should be doing with regard to this topic. In short:
- Option 1: Retain the tables, listing the player, their final team, and notability.
- Option 2: Switch over to the bullet-point lists, listing the player and their final team.
- Option 3: Switch over to a bullet-point list of the players and their accomplishments, omitting final teams. This is how retirements are typically handled for notable players on NFL and NBA season pages, per BattleshipMan.
The Kip (talk) 03:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Added option 3. The Kip (talk) 23:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Inviting @Sbaio, @Ho-ju-96, @Zzyzx11, @BattleshipMan, @Ralphierce @GoodDay, @Xolkan to comment as semi-frequent to frequent season-page editors. The Kip (talk) 03:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 1 for me, personally, due to both aesthetics and context within the article. Aesthetically, as silly as it may sound, the tables look more refined/formatted when reading through the article, as opposed to a stacked bullet-pointed list. More importantly, though, they provide context; with a list, we're giving readers simply a list of "notable" players, without clarifying to the reader why anyone listed is notable. The tables accomplish this via a short blurb listing off said players' accomplishments. The Kip (talk) 03:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2 - I've never been a fan of the table form for lists of names, fwiw. PS - This includes lists of general managers, coaches & captains in NHL team pages, where a few of the teams use it. GoodDay (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 1: It is useful, due to the fact that the players who played first and last games have notability like high number of games played, All-Stars, Stanley Cup champions, winners of certain trophies and such. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2, because first/last games sections were always bulleted lists until someone came and changed it without any consensus. – sbaio 07:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 1: I prefer the option to explain and give context as to why those players are notable. Ho-ju-96 (talk) 08:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Exactly, that's kind of how I see it. The bulleted list may have been around, but's old and it's no longer useful. It's time to explain readers why these players are notable. BattleshipMan (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2, I don't really mind either of the ways we do this but I would vote for a bulleted list. Xolkan (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2: obviously. The bulleted lists have been around since the sections started, they still comprise the great majority of the season sections in question, and there is a very easy way for readers to find out why these players are notable: click on the links and read the articles. Those lists converted to tables were changed without seeking any consensus to do so, and there was a discussion at the time demonstrating a consensus against the action. I understand how a relative project newcomer like The Kip might not be aware of this, but that's scarcely an excuse. Ravenswing 15:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, it's not an excuse. Clicking the links doesn't make it easier as you think. The bulleted list is outdated and it's not convenient as you think. It never reveals why players listed are notables on the NHL season articles, which is why the tables are there for. There's no reason to remove that in NHL season articles for the players' notability. BattleshipMan (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- The issue with having the users simply click and read the articles if they desire to find notability is twofold, however.
- First off, these articles aren't exactly concise on notability either; one will either have to read quite a lot of prose, or scroll all the way to the Honors and Awards table, which some articles do not have.
- Second, going by WP:USE:
Users (new and old) will not sit quietly and slowly read a webpage from start to finish. - They will quickly scan for words/phrases or colorful icons/buttons that catch the eye. Wikipedia is a little different in that the user may be expecting a lot of information and may read longer, but they will still get bored easily. Users don't want to have to figure things out for themselves.
- and also by the spirit of WP:RF.
- Notability qualifications within the table quite simply increase ease of reading for article viewers, not all of whom may be familiar with these players; although we may inherently know why said player is notable, many won't off the top of their head. Simply put, it's on us to make the article readable, not on readers to do their own research, as you suggest. The Kip (talk) 23:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2 I can see the argument for a table, but it looks a bit heavy when compared to the preceding subsection where a bulleted list is appropriate. Deadman137 (talk) 15:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Problem is though it's doesn't make a convenient for users to click on links to those players played their first and last seasons to learn of their notability, which is why having a table about their notability makes it easier. BattleshipMan (talk) 15:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Option 2 The problem I find with the table is that the team listed undermines the team they spent most of their career with. Such as Duncan Keith with Edmonton, Mikko Koivu with Columbus, etc. I personally like how the NFL and NBA wikis handle their retirements section. Also, this section should be listed as "Retirements," not "Last games." Just as a side, players who died during the regular season maybe should not be on the "Last games" section. Conyo14 (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- As for your first point, it's unfortunately just how it is. It's even worse sometimes with the transactions page; as least Henrik Lundqvist and Corey Crawford's last games are listed as Rangers/Blackhawks, instead of Capitals/Devils due to their contracts.
- Retirements and last games are separated by notability in effect, transactions pages are where we list all retirements while last games is only of players meeting notability qualifications.
- Death is perhaps morbid, but it's listed as a notability qualification. The Kip (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I was pinged to this conversation. I looked at the diffs for the last few seasons and I see no need for the tables but at the same time, they don't hurt either. I did notice that the milestones section below the first and last games (Major milestones reached) was not put into a table. I think aesthetics plays a big part in all this and so as long as there's some degree of consistency with all the NHL season pages, either tables or no tables should be ok. That's my two bits, for what its worth. Masterhatch (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Alternative for a compromise
I have an alternative for a compromise if the discussion of options continue on. The NFL season articles has a bulleted list of players who retired that lists notable achievements to their careers, like Pro Bowls, how many Super Bowls they won and notable trophies they won. We may use that for the first and last games. BattleshipMan (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate your proposal, but I'd argue that'd be the worst option of the three - it's clustered and not well-formatted.The Kip (talk) 22:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)- It's actually a little better than you think. The bulleted list without any list of notability is outdated and doesn't provide necessary things that the tables do have. Also, Conyo14 somewhat agrees with the idea I thought of with some tweaks to it and agrees on how the NFL and NBA handles those things. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm striking my prior comment, going by my own above usage of WP:USE and WP:RF, as well as the way retirements are formatted on both NFL and NBA season pages. I still prefer the tables, but it's a better solution than "let the readers figure it out." The Kip (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- I still prefer the tables too. But with the way the vote is going, we may have to use that option. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm striking my prior comment, going by my own above usage of WP:USE and WP:RF, as well as the way retirements are formatted on both NFL and NBA season pages. I still prefer the tables, but it's a better solution than "let the readers figure it out." The Kip (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's actually a little better than you think. The bulleted list without any list of notability is outdated and doesn't provide necessary things that the tables do have. Also, Conyo14 somewhat agrees with the idea I thought of with some tweaks to it and agrees on how the NFL and NBA handles those things. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Mass draftification proposal on Olympians
You may be interested in this village pump discussion on draftifiying nearly a thousand Olympians. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)