Talk:2020 Stanley Cup Finals

Removing games won by each team in lead
There is no reason to remove the games won by each team from the lead paragraph. Any reader coming to this article while the series is in progress would be expecting to see how the series stands and who leads. The same information about games won is important once the series ends, so why wouldn't it be just as important while it is in progress? Furthermore, it serves as a summary for the subsections that summarize the results of each game that have been added to the article after they were played, and a lead is supposed to be a summary of an entire article. I also dispute any argument that the table in the infobox already states how many games the teams have won. A table is not and should not be a substitute for prose. And to be honest, the line score is a very confusing format for a hockey series, as it looks like a box score for a baseball game. There is absolutely no reason to remove this info from the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 23:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * By your argument we may as well allow in game editing as well, because if the final score of the game matters, then surely it should matter at any random point of the game as well. Not to mention, we're not permitted to update series scores in list of team seasons articles but we should do it here just because you want us to, the well established community consensus is completely against your argument. Then there is also the fact that no other major sport does this either for the exact same reason. Deadman137 (talk) 01:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not advocating for editing the article during games while the outcome is still in flux. Periods of games can't be won, but games in a series can be. There's too much activity during an in-progress game for there to be a reasonable expectation for it to be kept up to date. But when there are days apart between games, there's no reason to withhold the information about the series' standing from the lead. It's in the article body and the infobox, and a lead is supposed to summarize an entire article, so why are you so insistent it can't be in the lead? Also, an oversight of information being absent from articles in the past is not a valid justification to continue to keep it absent moving forward. Your argument boils down to "we've made a mistake in the past, we should keep making it". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 18:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * So if there are days in between then we should make the update? Perfect, then we can now start making in season updates to player and team statistics articles per your argument because there are times when those articles are out of date for months at a time. There is no mistake in the WikiProject's stance on this, the only mistake is in your personal opinion on the matter. Deadman137 (talk) 10:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the point you are trying to make Y2kcrazyjoker4, but I believe this is unnecessary and does not need to be included in the article. I appreciate your desire to make it less confusing but it appears this approach can cause further unintended confusion. Jurisdicta (talk) 18:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Engraving notes
Is it just me or does that subsection include too many players who automatically qualified by having played in at least one game in this series as opposed to qualifying through other means? For instance, what would prevent Kucherov or Point from being included from those notes when Stamkos, Schenn, Bogosian, Rutta, and Volkov are included when they all appeared in at least one Finals game? Tampabay721 (talk) 20:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)