Talk:List of Stanley Cup challenge games

Win/loss record
Could we come up with a win/loss table similar to that in the main Stanley Cup champions article that would list the number of titles won, challenges lost, etc.? Jmj713 (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that would be a good addition. If we can keep Scorpion away, :-) I'll add it. Alaney2k (talk) 16:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Berlin Dutchmen
I believe that Berlin Union Jacks in the 1909/10 (or a year after) should be renamed into Berlin Dutchmen. References: http://hockeyleaguehistory.com/Ontario_Professional_Hockey_League%20_1907.htm, Ernie Dubeau, Frank J. Selke. Also in this article nobody mentions Berlin Union Jacks but Berlin Dutchmen. Jambornik (talk) 16:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I wonder where Union Jacks came from. Possibly a future team for that town, or a future name for that team. Names for teams were not regularly reported in newspapers of that time. I can do some digging too. Alaney2k (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Season-by-Season Summary table
I propose we change the Season-by-Season Summary to the table below.


 * Two different things, really. The above is a summary of the article, while the existing table is a list of champions of the era. I've changed the heading to match. Maybe it belongs better elsewhere. I think maybe I'd moved it from List of Stanley Cup champions, but my memory is hazy. Possibly a merge of the existing table and the above would be the best idea. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:15, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I proposed a plan at your talk page yesterday. Please give your thoughts! Jmj713 (talk) 15:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Tables 1.1, 1.2, "Challenge Era" champions and year/seasons
Instead of a 20-year "Challenge Era" following an unnamed one-year/season era at the beginning of Stanley Cup history, ignored in this article, Wikipedia should use the term "Challenge Era" to cover the entire 21-year early history with explanation in the lead section of this article that the first challenge took place when the Cup first changed hands at the end of the second year/season of its history.

Winter 1893 should be covered, with reference to calendar year 1892 also as necessary, in section 1, with explanation that the first Cup champion did not hold it by challenge, and the winner's of the first challenge were the second Cup champions, yada yada yada.

We say, "The leagues typically started close to the beginning of the calendar year and ended in early March." Our articles on 1893 to 1895 AHAC seasons give January to March timespans. Concerning our socalled 1893-94 season we say that AHAC clubs alone were considered for the challenge in Winter 1894. If that league played no December games, why "1893-94" rather than "1894"? Table 1.1 first names a non-AHAC club in 1895-96 but our article on that league does not say whether its early games were played during December.

I suggest that all seasons from 1893 (not 1894) to 1914 have four-digit designations such as "1894". The text should explain that some leagues relevant to Stanley Cup history played some games during the month of December (if that is true) as early as December 1895 (if that is the first relevant December).

The second table states that Stanley Cup championship games were played, and the Stanley Cup potentially changed hands, twice in Decembers, namely on the two days 1906-12-29 and 1908-12-30. Of course readers of articles such as this should learn such things when they read carefully, but it's adequate to alert them through judicious use lead text (of which most tables should have more than section 1 provides for its two long tables) and footnotes.

It isn't necessary, and I don't think it is sensible, to provide parallel coverage by season and by calendar year because of the occasional December thing.

The lead section might observe that the only Stanley Cup-relevant league now begins play during the month of October, and did so as early as year YYYY, and opened play as during November as early as season YYYY-YY, but competition began in (late) December or (early) January during this era, so we refer to seasons/years/winters at once with four-digit numbers, and footnotes only as necessary. (Concerning the last Challenge Era season of the NHA, perhaps not the only relevant league, we report opening day 1913-12-27. 1913–14 NHA season. So I guess "very late December" is right.) --P64 (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I improved the lead paragraph and provided one for section 1, to begin to address problems that I indicated. The story during winter/seasons 1893 to 1895 was more complicated than I understood last hour, so "Challenge Era" makes even less sense than I knew, even as beginning 1893-94. From the section 1 tables and the subsections on single season/winters, I can go no further than I have done now [in the two lead paragraphs]. Quit with something happening in March 1895. March 6, March 9, March 8, god only knows or maybe doesn't. --P64 (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. Perhaps what really defines 1892 to 1914 (not 1893 or 1894 to 1913) is the role of Trustees--active, altho not initiating. In the main article we say concerning March 1914 resolution of that year's controversy/ambiguity/whatever:
 * Stanley Cup, trustee Foran wrote to NHA president Quinn that the trustees are "perfectly satisfied to allow the representatives of the three pro leagues (NHA, PCHA, and Maritime) to make all arrangements each season as to the series of matches to be played for the Cup."
 * That's it. Wasted all of this weekend's spare time. --P64 (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)