Talk:List of Stanley Cup Finals appearances

Zero appearances
Do teams with zero appearances really need to be included here? Jmj713 (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Victoria Cougars
Technically the Victoria Cougars’ franchise was granted in 1918 as the Victoria Aristocrats. Pro hockey was not played in Victoria the previous two seasons. The original Victoria franchise of the PCHA, the Senators, were formed in 1911, and became the Aristocrats in 1913. They last played in Victoria during the 1915-16 season and then moved to Spokane, Washington to play as the Spokane Canaries for only one season before folding. Therefore I don’t think that Note 9: “The Victoria Cougars were known as the Victoria Senators, Victoria Aristocrats and Spokane Canaries prior to 1922.” is correct. It could just state: “The Victoria Cougars were previously known as the Victoria Aristocrats.”  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.110.175 (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Since the -league- was owned by the Patricks, the concept of 'franchise' doesn't really apply. That is a problem. The Patricks decided to operate a team in Victoria, then moved its operation to Spokane. Then they chose not to operate it. Then in 1918, they decided to operate in Victoria again. I would agree that the link between the 1915-16 and later is broken, but you've got to write it so that people understand. Did they reactivate a dormant 'franchise' or revive a dead one or start a new one? Since all the players until they merged with the WCHL were Patrick players, why wouldn't the later Victoria team not be a continuation? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 18:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good points alaney2k;. especially that the Patricks owned the league.
 * They main thing that catches my eye in Note 9, “The Victoria Cougars were known as the … Spokane Canaries prior to 1922.”, is the Spokane Canaries. We would never say that the Dallas Stars were known as the Minnesota North Stars; we may say the franchise originated in Minnesota or were previously the Minnesota North Stars.  If people who had watched the Victoria Cougars were asked if they identify with them as being previously known as the Spokane Canaries, I am sure they would disagree.  How many players on the 1915-16 team were on the 1918-19 team?  The only 1916-17 Spokane Canaries player I could find to be on the new 1918-19 Victoria team was Lester Patrick.
 * Maybe this would be more accurate: “The Victoria Cougars were previously known as the Victoria Senators and Victoria Aristocrats prior to 1922.”  The “franchise” may have been in Spokane for a year but I don’t think any Victoria team would be identified as a Spokane team.  Your thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.110.175 (talk) 22:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with the change. They closed up shop in Victoria, then restarted a few years later. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Statistics
I quite enjoy the irony of being called a vandal by a policy-ignorant editor. The statistics are unsourced original research and trivia. Wikipedia is not an indescriminate collection of information. Per WP:SYNTH, a real source is needed, rather than leaving users to draw their own conclusions. For example, anyone wanting to verify the "Most appearances without a win" statement would need to spend quite a bit of time going through the table. Hence, those statements are unsourced and should be removed. -- Scorpion 0422  01:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It is not -your- article and you should not treat it as your plaything. You are acting like a spoiled child. So you can put in wikilinks. Can you discuss things without being insulting? It does appear to be the case that you cannot. Put a citation needed on the statistics and leave it at that. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 05:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait a second here, when did I ever say it was my article? My edits are based in policy, what does that have to do with ownership? And please don't use ad hominem arguments; respond to my argument and avoid the attacks. -- Scorpion 0422  14:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not the person who directly named people who disagreed with me 'whiny editors'. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wasn't referring to you with that comment. My specific words were "whiny editor". And again, please focus on the arguments. -- Scorpion 0422  15:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)