Talk:Wayne Gretzky/Archive 2

Archiving
I archived all of the talk and created Template:GretzkyArchive to facilitate future archival.  RasputinAXP  c   20:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Archived again.  RasputinAXP  c  13:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Rehashing An Old Debate, Perhaps
having that I feel the "greatest player" issue is still not sufficiently resolved. The text currently states: "He is regarded as the best player of his era." I don't think this is an accurate representation -- this is clearly not an all-inclusive statement, as I can point to many people that do NOT consider him to be the best player of his era. Therefore, it should be changed in one of two ways: 1 - Make the statement restrictive, by saying that "He is regarded by many as the best player of his era." 2 - Make the statement more general, by saying that "He is regarded as one of the best players of his era." Any other statement, including the current wording, is simply not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.201.222.149 (talk • contribs)
 * I really don't feel like hashing the debate out again. But who would you put forward as better than Gretzky of his era?  RasputinAXP  c  16:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * If we're going to have this debate again, can someone at least come up with a new argument? If the anon wants an answer to his particular question, he can find a labored discussion on it in the archives. --djrobgordon 17:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Interestingly enough, the arguments surrounding Gretzky's credentials revolved around the likes of Bobby Orr and Gordie Howe or older superstars such as Newsy Lalonde, Maurice Richard or Joe Malone. No one advanced any arguments regarding contemporaries of Gretzky.  That being said, I agree the argument wasn't resolved to the satisfaction of the anti-Gretzky minority, but then again Wikipedia operates on consensus. RGTraynor 17:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no "answer" to the question in the archives. There are a bunch of unanswered points made and ignored. The only reason that a consensus was "reached" is because most people became tired of bashing their heads against a wall, trying to make your "majority" understand that the statement you're making does not belong in the wikipedia. I have now seen that, no matter what, you will not be concerned with facts, and instead will revise this article to the way YOU personally want it. Oh well. I'll get over it... you people apparently won't. Isn't it tiring being so petty? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.201.222.149 (talk • contribs)
 * No, tiring is rehashing this argument for the seventh time. The consensus was reached a while ago. You still didn't answer the question...who in his era do you consider better? The only person I could possibly see you making a case for is Lemieux, and he was so injury-plagued he has to "settle" for second place.  RasputinAXP  c  23:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed; what is "petty" is rehashing this yet again. The side this sockpuppet (and for someone whose first edit was day before yesterday to be so conversant with old debates, I don't think that an unfair characterization) is pushing lost, and either they should get a consensus around their own POV or lose gracefully and give it a rest.  But as far as the player regarded the best of the era?  MVPs for Roy and Hasek and Messier and Lemieux combined?  Seven.  MVPs for Gretzky?  Nine.  Gretzky won nearly half of the MVPs awarded in his career.  That's a dominance unmatched not merely in hockey history, but in professional sports history.  RGTraynor 05:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd consider Roy, Hasek, Messier, Lemieux, and Gretzky to be the "best" players of the modern era. I can't give a ranking within those players, because they each have strengths and weaknesses, and "best" is far too subjective of a term. So, yes, I have Gretzky in that list. Duh ;-)  I just don't like the use of the term "the best".   By your logic, I could go to the pages of all the players listed above (and others) and add the "so-and-so is regarded as the best player in his era" as well, because there are lots of people that will believe it (and go on record as saying so).


 * laughing to myself*  okay, you guys win.  you're right, whatever.  enjoy your "victory"
 * Lemieux is better, and believed by many to be so. Although mentioning Roy and Hasek is stupid, because they're goalies and therefore on completely different standards than regular players. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.165.95 (talk) 02:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The New Road
I am sad to say that today, Edmonton City Council has voted in favour of changing the name of Wayne Gretzky Drive to Mark Messier Boulevard.--Killswitch Engage 02:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage
 * Don't suppose you noticed what day that proposal went through, eh? ;) Relax, Gretz's road is safe. Doogie2K 05:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh, it could be worse. They could have voted to change the name to "Dave Semenko Alley".  Think of the screeching that would have caused! RGTraynor 14:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

It has just been announced that the Gary Suter Expressway will be cutting across the spine of Gretzky Drive.

Off the Ice
If you're ever looking to add something to the off the ice section, one possible thing would be that he lent his name, image, and likeness to a Cartoon Series, Pro Stars, featuring him, Michael Jordan, and Bo Jackson and Sports Superheroes. Alslammerz
 * Already mentioned in Off the Ice.  RasputinAXP  c  19:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Seems to me that the "Gretzky Rocks" song is as relevant (or not) as the renaming of streets and rinks as well as the "Greatest Canadian" TV show event. arghc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arghc (talk • contribs) 06:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

he appears on the video for rockstar by nickelback

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.82.227 (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Team photo tradition claim
Where does this claim that Gretzky started the team photo with the Stanley Cup tradition come from? It pops up in article related to him occasionally. Here's evidence otherwise: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/hockey/024002-119.01-e.php?uid=10085&uidc=DOTS_ID ccwaters 23:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It's just another silly rumor. Considering that most sports fans (and far too many sportswriters) have a tough time believing that their favorite sport really existed before they were, say, eight years old, trying to get them to believe the Montreal AAA actually existed is a stretch, never mind that some elements of hockey date back that far.  At least Original Six worship -- which oddly enough, almost always stemmed from Toronto, Montreal and Detroit -- is dying out.  RGTraynor 04:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I got someone further qualifying it as the first "impromptu on ice" team photo. See the edit comments at Edmonton Oilers. I think the burden of proof is on them. ccwaters 18:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Just speaking as someone who watched hockey for a few decades and also recently watched the CBC Sports classic replays of all five Oilers Cup wins, I can say that the on-ice team photo happened only after Game 5 of the 88 finals. The announcers kept announcing their surprise that fans were not rushing onto the ice as had become customary, and had no idea what Gretzky was doing when he was orchestrating the team photo. Gretzky didn't invent the practice, he just brought it back after their 4th Cup. MJR 02:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair Use vs. Free Use
Hi all; On account of a broad interpretation of Fair use criteria, it would appear the very nice photograph on this page - which unfortunately was copyrighted - has to be replaced by fair use. See the talk page at Talk: Stephen Harper for some other discussion of this.Michael Dorosh 04:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello everyone. The picture at the beginning of the article is pretty much the same picture at the "Reunion in New York" section. Wouldn't if be better is someone remove one or change it?Ptikobj 06:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed the duplicate.Michael Dorosh 14:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? The fair use was confirmed during the FA review. It is an iconic photograph of Gretzky, and it's at a smaller screen resolution than can be reproduced. See the image page for the Fair use criteria.  RasputinAXP  c  15:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've restored the image as listed in the Fair Use rationale I previously provided. There is no suitable free-use image, and it was used by Bruce Bennett Studios as a PR tool for their photography.  RasputinAXP  c  15:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi - my understanding is that fair use is to be removed from all articles if a free use image can be found. Can you direct me to the earlier conversation you are referring to?Michael Dorosh 15:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If a free-use image can be found, yes. The picture would also be defined as "iconic," which is to say that this is one of the most widely known photos of Gretzky. The discussion is in the archived FA proposal link at the top of this talk page, and the fair-use rationale given is on the image page itself.  RasputinAXP  c  15:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, many thanks for the quick reply. I definitely need to read up more on this. Some editors are having trouble interpreting Fair Use on the Stephen Harper page. Thanks for your help.Michael Dorosh 15:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Your understanding of policy is wrong. Fair use images can be removed from articles when a suitable replacement is available. The two free images in this article, frankly, suck - both are quite poor in quality (and very out of focus). Do not remove the '84 image unless you can provide a reasonable replacement. Raul654 16:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Raul - we had the same debate on the Stephen Harper page- I was told that just because a picture sucks, it doesn't matter - free use trumps fair use, with the rule being intrepreted by User: Jeff3000 as being that aesthetics are totally unimportant, and that as long as the image identifies the subject, that is all that matters. I disagree with that interpretation of the rules, but have not been able to make a solid case, so unless you can convince the other editors that aesthetics are important, they unfortunately are not a determining factor in the free use vs. fair use debate. I suppose if enough people objected, perhaps we can rally and have the policy changed, but that would be a huge undertaking.Michael Dorosh 16:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Your position is that replacing unfree content with no authorship information, no licensing information, taken from a no-longer-in-existence website with a freely-licensed image should be treated like vandalism because the freely-licensed one is blurry. I don't think that is okay.  Jkelly 16:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Bennett Studios apparently sold the photos to Getty Images. They're all credited to B Bennett: ccwaters 17:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict 4tw!) No, the position is that comparing the quality of both images, the smaller, free image is suitable for being the lead image in a Featured Article. The Fair Use rationale behind the Bruce Bennett photo (which has been purchased, along with all of Bruce's NHL work, by Getty) was entirely appropriate. That being said, I will be taking care of this shortly.  RasputinAXP  c  17:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think Raul654 has a completely valid point, which he explained perfectly well. I would put the picture back myself, but I have no interest in starting an edit war.  I'll let someone else do the dangerous work :-) - Runch 16:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Unindenting...I have replaced the image with a completely confirmed and sourced, fair use, freely available promotional shot released by a PR company for Pepsi featuring Wayne.  RasputinAXP  c  17:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Without the action shot of Gretzky on the ice, the opening of this article just loses a lot of its original visual appeal. That's just my opinion, though.  Would possibly placing this new image elsewhere on the article, while moving one of the other photos to the top (such as the one of him hoisting the Cup) be a good idea?  Or would it possibly undermine the layout of the article, since the Cup shot is meant to mesh with the section on his being a key part of the Oilers?--Resident Lune 17:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The subject matter of the photo is unimportant - the fair use images have to go; fair free use images only are permitted since they adequately illustrate the subject of the article. Since the free use image of Gretzky playing hockey adequately illustrates the subject, there is no need to use a fair use image of Gretzky selling Pepsi. Incidentally, the photo of him hoisting the cup is also a fair use photo and should probably be deleted.Michael Dorosh 17:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Gretzky is famous for exactly one thing: hockey. The photo should illustrate that fact. The free image does that job. Image:GretzkyPromo.jpg is totally unacceptable. It's a promotional shot for the "Pepsi-Gretzky partnership". This article does not mention that at all, so it illustrates nothing in the article. Conceivable if we had a section devoted to this "Pepsi-Gretzky partnership" we could use the image, in that section. Per WP:FUC #1, we should be using a free image, regardless of which is the "nicest" image. We simply don't have the option of picking whatever is the best image. --Rob 17:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * ISTM that the rules state that "Can this image be replaced by any other image, while still having the same effect?" - therefore, if the answer is no, it stands to reason that the fair use image could be retained. If it can be successfully argued, then, that the fair use image has a superior effect to the free use image, then the fair use image could be used instead. Wayne 18:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No, you are misapplying WP:FUC. A fair use image has to pass each and *every* single item in the list, not just one question.  There are many cases where we can't use the superior image.  --Rob 18:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * sigh* I'm looking at other images that can be sourced, verified and released as free, or other options. The biggest frustration to me is that I cannot find a free picture of Gretzky in his Oilers uniform from that era. As I said, I'm exploring other options, including possibly getting one from the Heritage Classic game he was in a few years ago. I'll take care of removing the rest of the fair use photos since apparently "no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information." The problem seems to be more that Bruce Bennett's photos have been removed from his site when he sold them to Getty Images, and as such we have no further sourcing for the images, though they existed at one time.  RasputinAXP  c  20:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * They are at the Getty link I provided. Just use those URLs as the source. ccwaters 20:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh nevermind. I couldn't find the exact Oilers era image. There's a bunch that are very similar from the same photographer, but they got watermarks. ccwaters 20:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I fixed up the free image we have using some photoshoppery.  RasputinAXP  c  03:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice work. Jkelly 04:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've also readded the other fair use images with attribution to Bennett via a sourced link to Getty Images, and picked up a The Hockey News cover for the WHA era.  RasputinAXP  c  04:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

It is irresponsible to lead the Wayne Gretzky article with a picture of him as a New York Ranger. Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups with, and is the face of the NHL's last dynasty - the Edmonton Oilers. As is, the article appears distorted, and I hope someone will find an appropriate image of Gretzky as an Oiler or at the very least a Los Angeles King. Jaskaramdeep 00:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "Irresponsible?" "Distorted?"  In what fashion?  He did play for the Rangers, after all.  Now I agree it would better reflect his career to be portrayed in an Edmonton or Los Angeles jersey, but it's scarcely inappropriate as is.  RGTraynor 00:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're saying that as if I didn't try to find a free or more appropriate fair-use image.  RasputinAXP  c  00:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And Hank Aaron did play for the Brewers, yet he is introduced in a Braves jersey. Michael Jordon did play for the Wizards, yet he is introduced as a Bull.  The picture is irresponsible in that Gretzky made no major contribution to this team, yet he is showcased in a large picture on the top of the page in their jersey, implying the contrary.  He built his career as an Oiler, and made major strides in bringing popularity to hockey in the US as a King.  To introduce him visually as neither is irresponsible.
 * The picture distorts the article by introducing him in a minor role. You can only make one first impression, and uninformed readers looking up Gretzky will surely get the wrong one through this picture.  A dwindling career, last-gasp effort to reunite with his former Oiler teammate for a cup, 3-year stint with the Rangers is not what comes across with a large pic of him in a Rags jersey right up top.
 * And I never said the pic was inappropriate. I said we should try to find an appropriate pic of him as an Oiler/King (ie: one that is worthy of a title image on a featured page.  Not snapped with a polaroid from the stands)
 * And Rasputin, if that's what it came across as, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to imply that it was due to lack of effort.  If copyright restrictions are keeping the Rangers pic up, then that's fine.  Personally though, I would rather have no pic at all than leave the current one up.
 * Also, it just figures that it's a Calgarian (Michael Deuche), who is the cause of removing the original picture. Freaking rednecks.  Jaskaramdeep 04:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Realizing I had a valid fair-use image of him holding the cup, I've swapped that image to the top. The original picture didn't distort the article at all...I'd just relax a little, especially with the redneck bit.  RasputinAXP  c  13:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Superstars?
If I remember correctly, he was considered to be such a paradigm of the hockey player in the early 90's that he was featured along with Michael Jordan and Bo Jackson in a cartoon called, I believe, Superstars. Perhaps worth a mention somwhere in here?
 * I vaguely remember this, I think Joe Montana was involved, not Bo. ccwaters 12:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It was ProStars and its already mentioned in the article. Yeah, it was Bo, not Montana. ccwaters 13:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * So it is. Didn't see it cause I was searching for "superstars"!

What's the Oscar Wilde opening line for?
What is the meaning of this opening line?: "Oscar Wilde says: Uncyclopedia is not Wikipedia is not Uncyclopedia is not Wikipedia is not Uncyclopedia is not Wikipedia" ~ User:Drummondjacob 13 Jul 06 15:29 GMT

It's gone ~ User:Drummondjacob 13 Jul 06 15:31 GMT


 * The meaning is it's another of the never ending lame Oscar Wilde jokes they plaster all over Uncyclopedia and it's vandalism. Quadzilla99 12:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Resolution issues
Think of the 800x600 people&mdash;having the TOC and a huge image in the lead leaves little room for the actual text. --Spangineeres (háblame)  14:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

49 records?
"By the time he finished playing in Edmonton, he held or shared 49 NHL records, which in itself was a record."

So then that would make 50 records, right? Then you could add that he was the first person to reach 50 NHL records, which would itself be another record. So he'd be the first to reach 51, which is another record... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.52.253.213 (talk • contribs)

I assume you're being coy, but just in case... He held 49 official records. 'Most Records' is not an official record, and neither is fastest to X records. Gretzky could have an unreal number of records if one were to count things like fastest to fifty goals, fastest to 800 goals, 801 goals, 802 goals, 803 goals, 1000 points, 1001 points...2856 points, 2857 points. MJR 23:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

378 goals in how many games?
The MacLean's article says "In 1971, Gretzky led his Brantford peewee team to 68 straight victories on the back of his whopping 378 goals (the league's next-best scorer had 40)."

The Wayne Gretzky Official Homepage says "Four years later, a 10-year-old Gretzky finished the 1971-72 season with 378 goals and 120 assists in 85 games in the Brantford atom league."

The CBC says "At age 11, Gretzky was already breaking records, scoring 378 goals and 116 assists in a 78-game season playing for the Brantford's Nadrofsky Steelers."

In one, he's 10 and playing peewee. In the other, he's with his own age group. Also, the number of games is different in each stat, and the next-best-scorer info is also interesting. --TheMightyQuill 13:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Record Breaking Goal?
Shouldn't there be a mention of Gretzky's record breaking goal on March 23, 1994? I know it's found on his Records article, but I feel it should be found on his biographical article as well to do him justice. The event is an extremely important one in Gretzky's life. Probably more so than his 894th goal. Anyhow, it is just a thought. — Dorvaq (talk) 14:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Lou Kaplan Trophy
I think that Wayne Gretzky's winning of the Lou Kaplan Trophy for the WHA rookie of the year should be mentioned under the awards section of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.24.78 (talk • contribs)


 * Please feel free to add anything you think is worthy. Flibirigit 04:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * S/he couldn't - the article was protected for the last 4 weeks (but not tagged as such). —Wknight94 (talk) 14:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Wrong Statistics
This is my first time doing this but some of Wayne's statistics have been vandalized, please check them over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.81.177.181 (talk • contribs)
 * Things look fine. Could you be more specific? Flibirigit 05:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

1985-1986 The stats don't fall under the proper columns. It appears to be missing the Goal Scored value.65.113.212.40 (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicity
Does anyone have a verifiable source regarding Gretzky's family heritage and ethnicity? In the last week he has been Polish, Belarussian, and Ukranian. Thanks. Flibirigit 06:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the borders in that region changed so often over the years that you can have competing claims within a family. My great-grandfather's family members were Lithuanian, Russian or Polish, depending on where the borders rested, in their own case.  RGTraynor 19:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If there is no consensus as to the ethnicity, it should be removed and simply state, immigrated from the town of Mogilev. Flibirigit 23:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Mm, makes sense to me. RGTraynor 10:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Or you can say, he's Eastern European. Lukas19 23:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be rather vague and not contribute much to the article. Flibirigit 04:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * As Mahilyow (former Mogilev) lays in Belarus, the most reasonable would be to refer to him as Belarusian-Canadian--Czalex 07:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The only problem with that, is all people from Mogilev are not necessarily Belarusian. There's more discussion at Walter Gretzky. Flibirigit 13:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of people living in the cities of polish-lithuanian commonwealth were ordinarily polish or jews or german; belarusian and ukranian lived (in the east of the commonwealth) in the country.
 * For historian the good clue is frequently a religion - it isn't the best way to solve the problem of ethnicity but belarusian and ukranian used to be orthodox - and language (but many of non-poles and non-catholics spoke polish). In my opinion the best way to solve the problem is to ask Wayne himself what do he think about his ethicity:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.76.37.148 (talk • contribs)
 * The only source we have states that Walter Gretzky is the son of ethnic Polish immigrants. Flibirigit 20:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

"Walter Gretzky, O.Ont, (born October 8, 1938 in Canning, Ontario, Canada) is the father of former NHL legend Wayne Gretzky, as well as Brent Gretzky and Keith Gretzky. The son of ethnic Polish immigrants from Mogilev, Belarus and Pidhaitsy, Ukraine he played ice hockey for much of his youth, but never made it beyond juniors."
 * Quoting from Walter Gretzky's article:
 * I think the correct answer would be to restore "Ethnic Polish" to the Gretzky article. Any objections? Flibirigit 13:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Still, language can neither be considered as a determining factor (for instance, most population of Belarus nowadays speaks Russian without considering themselves as Russian). And per region of origin (that is known for sure) the Gretzkies are still Belarusian-Canadans. I think it would be reasonable to put both "Polish Canadians" and "Belarusian Canadians" (probably as well as "Ukrainian Canadians") --Czalex 16:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree. The Walter Gretzky article mentions nothing about "language." It simply states "son of ethnic Polish" and the cities his parents come from. It does not say "ethnic Belarusian" nor "ethnic Ukrainian" nor what languange was spoken. Flibirigit 17:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Part 1
Gretzky has dual citizenship, so I amended his nationality to Canadian-American. Bobgat 09:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I moved the American citizenship note to his "off the ice" section, since it is not a main part of his identity, and not critical to the introduction. Flibirigit 14:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wayne Gretzky did not go through the extensive immigration process to become an American without it being a main part of his identity. I am putting it back. Other immigrants have their birth country and country of citizenship hyphenated. Gretzky's will follow suit. Bobgat 17:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Your assertions of what constitutes a "main part" of Gretzky's identity aside, such things are determined here by consensus. "Citizenship" does not necessarily equal "nationality," any more than I would cease to be a New Englander should I move to Oregon and register to vote there.  Feel free to take it to the Wikiproject talk page if you'd like to reopen the issue on how we define nationality.  RGTraynor 18:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Tell that to the Steve Nash people, who assert he is Canadian because that is the country of his citizenship. Reverted. Bobgat 19:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't believe there is any consensus to insert "American" as Gretzky's "nationality." Flibirigit 18:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Consensus doesn't make something true or untrue. The plural of opinion is not fact. Gretzky obviously felt that becoming an American was important enough to him that he went through the rigorous process of becoming an American. You, as a Canadian, may not like it, but it was his choice. He has dual citizenship, and thus he is a Canadian-American. Bobgat 19:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think that any rational citizen considers Gretzky Canadian-American. Anyone you will ever talk to will view him as Canadian which, considering where he was born and spent the majority of his existence, and the countless times he played for the National Team (including being GM of the Olympic team in 2002 and 2006), is obvious to everyone.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JaysCyYoung (talk • contribs) 22:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC).
 * In the perspective of writing a biographical article about Wayne Gretzky, he is clearly identified as a Canadian. The introduction of his biography is not the proper place for inserting "Canadian-American." Flibirigit 00:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Gretzky is Canadian with American citizenship.  The assertation that his gaining US citizenship is an obvious sign of this being a "main part of his identity" is a POV statement, and violates one of Wikipedia's core policies, thus it is invalid in this debate.  I, for one, have never heard Gretzky describe himself as being American. Resolute 01:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Beyond which ... Bobgat, I note that save for a handful of edits in the spring you're a new user, and may be unaware as to how Wikipedia operates. One of the most fundamental pillars of Wikipedia is that we seek consensus approaches, especially where there is a dispute of opinion, and that articles are governed by those consensus approaches.  Right now you are holding your POV in the teeth of the unanimous opposition of every other editor to weigh in on the subject, and I urge you to accept the community's decision and move on.  RGTraynor 15:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting that you say he's holding to his POV, when that's exactly what you and your minions are doing. Just because there are more of you than there are of us doesn't make you correct. As Bobgat said, Gretzky obviously felt strongly enough about becoming an American to go through the process. That alone is more than enough reason to give him the title he has earned. He's Canadian-American, and there's no POV to it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.81.95.114 (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Thank you, I think we can do without insults and sockpuppetry from anon IPs first arriving on Wikipedia an hour ago. If you dislike Wikipedia policy on disputed issues, I'm sure there are alternative sites available to you.  To quote from WP:CONSENSUS, "Insisting on insertion of an insignificant factoid into an article in opposition to many other editors, has been adjudged a violation of consensus due to its putting undue weight on a topic ... Stubborn insistence on an eccentric position, with refusal to consider other viewpoints in good faith, is not justified under Wikipedia's consensus practice." RGTraynor 19:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You clearly didn't read any of what the previous users stated. Wikipedia strives to gain consensuses on such matters from its users. Many Canadians get US citizenship for tax purposes and because they work in the United States. I myself have British citizenship, but I would never refer to myself as British. I am a Canadian. Gretzky's situation is exactly the same. What rational person would consider him American? """" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.15.194.231 (talk) 17:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Citizenship just makes so many things simpler with the government. Gretzky would have had to jump through all sorts of hoops to own the Coyotes, and raise a family in the US without US citizenship.  My mother only recently acquired Canadian citizenship because she was tired of the regular background noise whenever she had to deal with the government.  Jaskaramdeep 20:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I just turned to my roommate (a native of Michigan who moved in with me half a year ago when her marriage broke up) and asked her, "Do you consider yourself a New Englander?"  She blinked at me and said, "Err, no."  RGTraynor 01:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem i (& i think others) have with this is that you assume that being American or being Canadian only means one thing, that you are a citizen of that country. This is obviously not true. If you were to say that "he is American" or "I am American", you are making more then a simple statement of citizenship. The word 'American' or 'Canadian', etc. have symbolic meaning. There is a certain ideology associated with these words. In Gretzky's case for example, if you were to put 'American' within the first few lines it would speak volumes about WHO Gretzky is. To the average reader with no prior knowledge of Gretzky there would likely be an assumption that this is a man who associates himself with being American. Gretzky to me is a person who is American out of simple necessity (tax, etc). I think if you look at Arnold Schwarzenegger the wiki bio puts American even though he is born in Austria because obviously if you are a Governor of a state you associate yourself with being American. The symbolic meaning of the word is accepted here because it holds true. Same holds true for Steve Nash. You might say that this is just an opinion and my interpretation but clearly me saying "i am American" means more than its literal meaning of citizenship. Aka khan 14:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This is not really our call to make. How is Gretzky's nationality referred to in mainstream, reliable publications?  We should not be making up designations because they are "obvious" to us given what we know of the subject, we should be creating an encyclopedic summary of what our sources say.  Jkelly 19:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have never in my life seen any reliable source that refers to Wayne Gretzky with American or Canadian-American Nationality. Flibirigit 20:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of Wayne Gretzky being referred to as anything but Canadian. He's played on and coached the Canadian Olympic team. He's been awarded the Order of Canada medal as discussed here. Also, his profile on the Phoenix Coyotes website states the following .. "Gretzky was named the first recipient of the International Horatio Alger Award, marking the first time in the history of the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans that a member of the international community was formally bestowed an award by the prestigious organization." It seems clear that the Coyotes and the Horatio Alger Association consider Gretzky to be 'international' rather than 'American'. ColtsScore 12:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Part 2

 * The people have spoken. Wayne Gretzky is an American citizen, has lived in that country for 20 years, and is one of the USA's greatest patriots. He traded Edmonton for Hollywierd and Janet Jones. All of his children are American. Sadly, his name and legacy now belong to the American's.Generaljuice
 * You have spoken. Clearly the consensus thus far is to leave the article as it was. Resolute 22:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppets such as Generaljuice and Moosehead007 making the same edits are hardly a reversal of consensus. Flibirigit 23:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * How about a compromise people. Gretzky has dual-citzenship right? He's a Canadian born person living in the USA, right? How about describing him as a Canadian-American (Born/Residing)? GoodDay 00:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * His dual citizenship is already mentioned in the article. Current convention, plus every publication that describes him is "Canadian hockey player". Resolute 01:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. GoodDay 18:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Part 3
I feel his American nationality should be mentioned in the introduction. It is mentioned quite clearly in the Manual of Style (biographies) that the opening paragraph should mention the person's nationality, meaning the country of which he is a citizen or national. And in this news article (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1048585693197_256/?hub=TopStories), Gretzky unequivocally acknowledges his American citizenship: "I live in the United States right now. I elected the president. I happen to think he's a great leader and a wonderful president." If electing the president does not demonstrate citizenship, I don't know what does. The argument that citizenship does not equate nationality is moot, because all American citizens are nationals as provided in the Immigration and Nationality Act Section 101(a)(22) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=baeb6daf5705c4f8629f8b6ea9f7c64d) "The term "national of the United States" means: (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States." Furthermore, it should at least be mentioned, if for nothing other than to conform to Wikipedia's guidelines for consistency. His Canadian roots can be emphasized as the article follows. Kraikk 14:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well to go on the definition you provided. "owes permanent allegiance to the United States." Considering he plays for the Canadian National team. And was their General Manager as recently as 2006. I would say thats not exactly showing permanent allegiance. --Djsasso 18:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It is blindingly obvious that he does not owe permanent allegiance to Canada as well, having actively exercised his rights of American citizenship by voting and being resident in America for over 20 years. Furthermore, he would have taken the following oath upon naturalization as an American citizen: . The first line very unequivocally abjures Gretzky of allegiance to any other country: "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen." Taking into consideration that neither the Canadian government nor Gretzky recognises the oath as complete renunciation of Canadian citizenship, the appropriate solution would be to recognise Gretzky as oweing allegiance to both nations, as his actions seem to suggest.Kraikk 12:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is a reflection of what the media and scholars have published about a subject, or in this case a person. Wikipedia editors also form a consensus of how to weight references accordingly. Scholars and media have repeatedly identified Gretzky as Canadian. Previous consensus concluded that dual citizenship is not prevalent enough in the identity of Gretzky's biography. Flibirigit 05:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

With sporting figures like these, which country they play for pretty much determine their nationality, regardless of citizenship. Gretzky holding American citizenship figures little into the fact that he has played internationally for Canada and has never played internationally for the US. This makes Gretzky Canadian and not American. (A similar argument can be made for why Steve Yzerman is Canadian despite holding American citizenship or why Brett Hull is American despite being Canadian-born). I also have to note that the subject of argument is more valid in a sport where there are no international competitions: Noel Prefontaine, a Canadian football kicker, is American-born and Canadian-raised, and has non-import status in the Canadian Football League. Which nationality does that make him? Furthermore, in competitions that are primarily international, such as golf, viewpoints are very different: Stephen Ames is regarded by the Canadian media as being Canadian ever since his family started to reside in Calgary, despite the fact that he was not naturalized until very recently. Other media, even after naturalization, still refer to him as being of Trinidad and Tobago. (A similar statement can be made for, say, Lascelles Brown, who is best known for his contributions to Jamaica in bobsled but currently competes for Canada) Something to consider before making some kind of decision. kelvSYC 07:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I definitely agree with KelvSYC that the country they play for determine their nationality, but only in the case of people where their international athletic participation represents a key part of their identity. Gretzky is far more than that, achieving much of his fame as a professional athlete for both Canadian and American hockey teams, and thereafter as owner and manager of an American team. Therefore, while his Canadian nationality should certainly take precedence, I propose that the American component of his idenity deserves far more than a lone sentence deep in the article. For example, consider Kevin Kuranyi, a soccer player who has multiple nationality. He is identified as German for he has chosen to play for Germany, but his identity as Brazilian, Hungarian and Panamanian is immediately made clear. A similar method could work for Gretzky.

I would also encourage editors to consider the cases of Pamela Anderson, Alanis Morrisette and Paul Anka. All three are identified as Canadian-American in recognition of their dual nationality. Their accomplishments occured in both Canada and America, as is in the case of Gretzky, and they all moved to America fairly late in their lives, yet the American part of their identity is recognised. Anka acquired American citizenship only at the age of 49 and Anderson has been American for less than 3 years and are all acknowledged as Canadian-American. Anka is even an officer of the Order of Canada, just like Gretzky, a point which some have tried to use to argue that Gretzky is purely Canadian. What we should be striving for in Wikipedia is consistency. What is the difference between these three individuals and Gretzky? If it is about the country they represented, then a solution like Kuranyi's should be found. As I have pointed out earlier, the route to consistency should be through Wikipedia guidelines such as these: Manual of Style (biographies).

Finally, it is tiring to hear the point that citizenship is not nationality being repeated here. In most of the world, including the USA and Canada, all citizens are nationals, although some nationals are not citizens. The distinction between the two can be observed in contexts irrelevant to Gretzky's (such as in the consideration of an individual's political rights within a jurisdiction), but in this case the difference is purely semantic. Kraikk 08:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Your argument about consistency has little standing. None of these biographies you refer to used a consensus to determine "nationality" nor "citizenship." Lack of discussion at another article does not warrant following a precedent. Flibirigit 17:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What is tiring is that this argument is dragging on. Kraikk, the consensus is clear that Gretzky is regarded as Canadian here.  If at some point you get enough people together to overturn that consensus, that might change.  Right now, it just plain doesn't matter how brilliant and exhaustive your argument seems to you, almost all of us disagree with it.  Dragging it out isn't going to change many minds.  RGTraynor 01:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Flibigrit: With regard to the other articles, I have always believed that silence equals consent on Wikipedia, as mentioned at Consensus that it is the ultimate measure of consensus. Lack of discussion does not equal a lack of consensus, and consensus is present at the other articles.

RGTraynor: I had always trusted that Wikipedia worked based on the accuracy of facts, and not whether I can "get enough people to overturn that consensus." Or is this considered a case where a supermajority has been reached? I really don't know the criteria for that, do help.

However, I appreciate that a consensus has been reached here that Gretzky is for the most part Canadian. What I have sought is at the minimum an acknowledgement, for example "Gretzky is also a naturalized American citizen.", in the introductory paragraph. To describe him as Canadian-American may be inaccurate, but to add a second nationality as United States in the infobox would also be helpful, factually accurate and consistent with Wikipedia guidelines and hardly detract from the fact that most people consider him Canadian. Recognising his American citizenship at the outset hardly equates declaring him completely American and disregarding his Canadian nationality.

I am neither American nor Canadian, but rather a curious student of immigration and nationality law. I approached this from as neutral a perspective as possible and did some research that made me feel that somehow this article is inconsistent with the rest of Wikipedia and factually incomplete. Perhaps RGTraynor is right that my argument is tiring. I rest my case hence and hope that someday others will agree that Gretzky's American nationality is an integral part of his identity, even if it may be secondary to his Canadian nationality. Kraikk 12:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That Gretzky is a naturalized American citizen is already mentioned, properly, in the article. It is not remotely close to one of the most important facts about him, and not remotely close to being a significant enough fact to warrant being in the introductory paragraph.  Despite the implication that this is a debate between The Actual, Factual Version of things and the Other Guys, this isn't even a dispute about whether Gretzky is an American citizen or not; it's a dispute as to the weight to place this factoid in the article.  Discounting the sockpuppet, the tally runs 11-2, which would meet any definition for supermajority on Wikipedia.  RGTraynor 14:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Make that 12-2. He is first and foremost thought of as being Canadian.  Unless and until he renounces his Canadian citizenship, he will be thought of as Canadian and such the article should state that.  As RGTraynor has stated, it is properly stated in article.  Even his IMDB bio mentions dual-citizenship as an after-thought.  Patken4 21:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, I refer to my previous points: Gretzky has been awarded the Order of Canada medal as discussed here. Also, his profile on the Phoenix Coyotes website states the following .. "Gretzky was named the first recipient of the International Horatio Alger Award, marking the first time in the history ... that a member of the international community was formally bestowed an award by the prestigious organization." It seems clear that the Coyotes and the Horatio Alger Association consider Gretzky to be 'international' rather than 'American'. I say leave Gretzky as Canadian. ColtsScore 03:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I can't resist saying "so does Paul Anka". But no matter, I have conceded. Kraikk 12:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Part 4
I disagree with the people arguing that Gretzky shouldn't be listed as Canadian-American. While he is viewed as Canadian, the fact is that he is Canadian and American. He holds both nationalities now since he decided to actually become an American citizen. Moreover, he lives in the United States and has even voted in presidential elections. Therefore, I do not see how you could reasonably say that his American nationality should not be mentioned in the introduction. Honestly, it should be listed as Canadian-American. He has lived in the United States for about 20 years now. He made the decision to become an American. Furthermore, whenever anyone holds dual or multiple citizenship, it has the right to be mentioned in the introduction. Scanadiense 10:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, for items to be mentioned in an introduction they must be so overly significant that there are an abundance of scholarly resources making mention of it as being a very important part of a person's legacy. Flibirigit 23:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) There is no Wikipedia policy or guideline requiring a subject's full citizenship status to be reviewed in an article's introduction;
 * 2) We have come to a fairly overwhelming consensus on the issue; and
 * 3) That consensus should hold unless significant new evidence arises.
 * Right now, you're just rehashing the same argument made above. RGTraynor 02:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Kyle Swanson?
What is the meaning of the introductory line: "Wayne Gretzky + Kyle Swanson = Love"? McConnell 16:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just some idiot vandalizing the page. Feel free to simply remove stuff like that if you see it. Resolute 16:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Some now-indefinitely-blocked idiot... —Wknight94 (talk) 16:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Short paragraphs
I was kind of surprised to see this Featured Article have several short paragraphs of 1-3 sentences, particularly in the post retirement and off-the-ice sections. Isn't this against the FA policy? Harvey100 10:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Which version of the article are you referring to, now or then? Flibirigit 22:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The current version. The post retirement and off-the-ice sections have several 1-3 sentence paragraphs. Don't want to seem negative it's a great article but those sections seems choppy because of it. Harvey100 13:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the off-the-ice section is just made up from a non-existant trivia section. We could debate making such a trivia section. We could combine some related paragraphs in the post-retirement section. Flibirigit 23:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the short paragraphs are appropriate here, although I'd have a problem with them in a section about his playing career. This is not the most noteworthy part of Gretzky's life, and it's dealt with as such. The facts are here, but without the unnecessary minutiae. --djrobgordon 01:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree I'll try to integrate them into paragraphs soon using linking statements. You can tell me what you think. This article would be near perfect then. Harvey100 03:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I redid the paragraphs and removed some trivial junk. With a guy like this or Michael Jordan if you include every pop culture reference they were involved in (like some song a small band wrote about them) you're going to have a bunch of fancruft and it hurts the encyclopedic quality of the article. I think it looks better now. Harvey100 04:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

High school?
Did Gretzky go to high school? All that's talked about from his youth is his hockey accomplishments. While all this was going on did he attend school or did he drop out at 14? Maybe this should be addressed, I can't be the only one wondering this after reading that section. Quadzilla99 01:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I know that he was technically enrolled in school while playing in Sault Ste. Marie for the one year. I don't have access to the article with me at the moment, but will in a few days time. I will see what that says and if it has any relevence to this. Kaiser matias 10:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

He didn't finish high school. He was one credit short. He says in his autobiography that they offered to send him his diploma if he sent in $35. He thought if you could buy it for $35, what was the value in it? Hockey16 01:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of 1982
Here's an award that you Wikipedia never mentioned here. Wayne won an award that previously was won by the likes of Muhammad Ali, Mario Andretti, and Peggy Fleming. He was named as ABC's Wide World of Sports Athlete of the Year for 1982. Wayne was truly The Great One Joey Chesnavich 13:25, 2 March 2007
 * Sounds great. Where can one find a complete list to reference this? Flibirigit 19:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Scratch one of those records off.
You have his +\- of +98 bolded as if it were an NHL record, when it is actually the third best. In 1970-1971, with Boston, Bobby Orr produced a +124 season, which is still currently the record. Larry Robinson later produced a +120 with Montreal in 76-77, which still stands as second place.

Dannyry 07:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)DannyRy

Family Life
Wayne has 5 children, Paulina, Ty, Trevor, Tristan and Emma. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.55.133.118 (talk) 04:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Which the article mentions. RGTraynor 15:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Maurice "Rocket" Richard
The article states that Gretzky's honor of being named to all 3 stars after the game was only given to one other player, Maurice Richard in 1994. However, Richard retired in 1960. This should be changed to 1944. Gimphockey56 09:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dates corrected. Flibirigit 05:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Is there a source for that, because this is the first time that I've ever heard of anyone other than Richard being named all three stars. Kaiser matias 07:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't surprise me, but yeah, I'd like to see a source myself. RGTraynor 12:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that the Ultimate Gretzky DVD says that he was namned to all three stars. --Krm500 13:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I remember if happening, but cannot locate a source at the moment. We could add a Fact tag to it. Flibirigit 02:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the Maurice Richard statement. It was out of place (this article is not about Richard and this event isn't even mentioned in the Richard-article), uncited and incorrect (Mats Sundin has also received the honour). Daniel andersson (talk) 03:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Pretty sure the game in question was Gretzky's final game in New York before retirement in '99, after which he was proclaimed "the first and only star" by the announcer. Pedantry, really, as to whether that's the same thing...--Vonbontee (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The Hit
I wonder does anyone out there, have an image (or better yet a video) of Gretzky being pulverized by 'Bill McCreary'. It was a rare Gretzky momment, perhaps it should be added. It's rarity (Gretz getting hit) has made it memorable & noteworthy. GoodDay 20:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

On Thursday October 11, 2007 Mats Sundin also was named all three stars: Source: http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/recap?gid=2007101121 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ectobuilder (talk • contribs) 06:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

6-0?
The section Wayne Gretzky says that "Gretzky was 6-0." What does that mean? That he was six foot tall? If so, shouldn't that be written as 6'? Cows fly kites (Aecis) Rule/Contributions 15:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

height is written 6'0" 6-0 is a record of wins and loses. Rds865 (talk) 04:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Nationality
I'm too lazy, to check the archives and see if this was debated before. Anyways, Gretz nationality at the Infobox says Canadian, yet he's a 'dual citizen'. The Brett Hull article reflects Hull's dual citizenship, Which is correct? GoodDay 23:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Just read the 'above' discussion. But this is about the Infobox (only). GoodDay 23:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would argue the infobox on Brett Hull requires correction, and will remove the 🇨🇦 Canada from that infobox, as Hull has long since abandoned his Canadian identity. Gretzky, on the other hand, has not. Resolute 00:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The Trade
The trade involving Gretzky did not get the Oilers Arnott, the picked Nick Stajduhar. Arnott was their own draft pick (7th overall).dawgbone98 11:08, 09 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You're correct dawgbone. Remarkably, all three of the 1st round draft picks have the incorrect players listed and those errors have gone unnoticed for well over a year.  What's worse, it seems that many people have been incorrectly quoting Wikipedia.  If you do a google search with the names Soules Arnott Wright Gretzky you'll see that many sites have the same incorrect info.  It's also quite easy to verify who has it right and who has it wrong by looking at NHL standings reverse order of finish and figuring out which draft picks originally belonged to Edmonton and which picks originally belonged to Los Angeles.  I'll fix it now.   --Grmagne (talk) 21:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Gretzky's 99 All-Stars
I know a little about this, but maybe not enough to include it in the article yet. During the 1994-95 NHL lockout, Gretzky and IMG teamed up to create "Gretzky's 99 All-Stars," a team of out-of-work NHL players who traveled Europe, playing against local all-star and club teams. The purpose was to keep the players' skills up while promoting the NHL in Europe. While in Sweden, Gretzky even said, "Within the next 10 years, we will have some sort of division over here." I've tried searching the interwebs for more, but can't really find much. If anyone knows enough to create a good paragraph on the subject, please do so. --Muéro(talk/c) 02:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Selected anniversaries??
This talk page says that this article contains something mentioned in the August 9 "On This Day". Looking at that date nothing in the selected anniversaries mentions him. I am not familiar with him so I am not going to edit it but someone who contributes to this page may want to follow it up and possibly remove the anniversary notice. meshach 04:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Restoring CFL banner
The subject of the article was a part owner of the Toronto Argonauts for several years, and the banner was first included and recently restored on the basis of that involvement with the CFL. John Carter 15:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Revisiting "Canadian-American"
I don't think this is correct in this article. It was silently added by an IP (without consensus I believe), and I'm pretty sure the only reason it didn't get reverted was because the next edit was vandalism and got reverted. We wouldn't refer to Dominik Hasek as Czech-American, or Mario Lemieux as Canadian-American, Nik Antropov as Russian-Canadian, etc. As far as I know, Gretzky isn't referred to as "Canadian-American" in reliable sources, and he hasn't declared himself as one either. The manual of style says only to list nationality, and he hasn't declared his nationality as dual.-Wafulz (talk) 15:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We've been over this before, and as was noted in one of the edit summaries, nationality is not the same as citizenship. Resolute 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup as Resolute said, we have been over this before, he is quite clearly Canadian in this context. -Djsasso (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've inserted the link much lower in the article where appropriate, rather than in the lead section. But I've also noticed we dont have a cited source for his US citizenship. Does anyone have a reference? Flibirigit (talk) 05:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think thats part of the point, no one was ever able to source that he had citizenship as well. -Djsasso (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * According to this: "Gretzky's courtship of Janet Jones in the mid-1980s was covered breathlessly by Canadian media, their wedding in June 1988 depicted as the closest Canada could come to a royal wedding. But the euphoria was broken two months later by shocking news - the Oilers' owner, Peter Pocklington, was trading Gretzky to the Los Angeles Kings. "It's like ripping the heart out of the city," Edmonton's mayor, Laurence Decore, said. Gretzky wept at a farewell news conference, and Canadians engaged in post mortems as to whether Pocklington or Gretzky's new wife bore the bulk of the blame. Soon after his trade to the Kings, Grtezky made a point of saying he would not change citizenship. "I'm Canadian to the core, and I always will be," he said." So uh, he may not even be an American citizen to begin with. I've read that his kids have dual citizenship, but nothing about Wayne himself. -Wafulz (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've sent an email to Gretzky's official web site to see if we get a response. Flibirigit (talk) 23:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is the source that says he has American citizenship. He even voted for Bush. I'm not here to restart that argument over his Canadian/American identity, I lost that battle long ago. But I must argue Resolute's statement that citizenship is not the same as nationality. They are in most countries legally the same. Pragmatically citizenship is broader than nationality, not the other way round. Most importantly, all American citizens are US nationals. Gretzky is an American national, although I think there is no chance of that little detail ever appearing in the infobox. But I hope you take note. Kraikk (talk) 11:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Family heritage
Edits to Wayne Gretzky and Walter Gretzky have been reverted as contrary to current references. I asked User:Koukouch to provide sources for the edits. Flibirigit (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Any map of the Russian Empire will show you that Mogilev was not located in the Grodno province. Mogilev was the centre of a separate Gubernia (province) in the empire. This is as obvious as saying, for instance, that Saskatoon is located in Saskatchewan - would you ask for a reference to support this statement? I would appreciate your changing this back to my version. For historical information on Gretzky's paternal grandfather Tony, see the book "From Peasants to Labourers: Ukrainian and Belarusan Immigration from the Russian Empire to Canada" (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007), page 132. Sincerely, koukouch (talk)


 * I am not asking whether Mogilev is in a certain province. I want a source for the actual city or place the family came from and a source. Thanks for providing a source. Flibirigit (talk) 14:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Using the information koukouch provided, I've inserted Template:Cite book into reference tags. Flibirigit (talk) 14:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen any precise source that would point to the specific town or village where Gretzky's grandfather came from, but I am fairly certain that it was in the province of Grodno (this is why I removed the reference to Mogilev from the article). This information is based on my own research in Library and Archives Canada. It would be fairly safe to say that Gretzky is not Polish but Belarusian by origin, despite Wayne's own statements to the contrary. Peasant immigrants from early 20th-century Eastern Europe rarely had a sense of national/ethnic identity in its modern sense. Virtually all Belarusans at the time considered themselves either Polish or Russian, since they lived in the area that had both Russian and Polish cultural influences. Anton Gretzky (Wayne's grandfather) was no exception. Furthermore, it was easier for a Belarusian immigrant to say he was Polish, simply because nobody knew what Belarus was at that time and also because "Russian" in Canada after 1917 was almost synonymous to "Communist". Obviously, this Wiki article is not a place for this kind of analysis, but I'm posting it here so that members knew where the issue comes from. koukouch —Preceding comment was added at 03:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the response. If you find other sources please list them. Anything is useful. Flibirigit (talk) 03:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I don't see the point of including the town Gretzky's grandfather was born in. This is not an article about Walter's dad.   I think it is enough to state that Gretzky is of Polish/Belarussian descent, provided it can be sourced.  And, FWIW, my own grandfather was Belarussian, but had a Polish birth certificate, there most certainly were those from that area and that time that identified themselves as other than Polish or Russian. Resolute 05:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * You're right, the town is not really important to this article. I admit I've gotten very frustrated in the two years I've been watching this article, and how many edits have been made about ethnicity without and references. Flibirigit (talk) 05:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Your grandfather must have been born after 1918, since there was no Poland until after WWI.

 "... I haven't seen any precise source that would point to the specific town or village where Gretzky's grandfather came from, but I am fairly certain that it was in the province of Grodno (this is why I removed the reference to Mogilev from the article). This information is based on my own research in Library and Archives Canada. It would be fairly safe to say that Gretzky is not Polish but Belarusian by origin,..."

...Being from Grodno would that make hime Belarussian TODAY, or when he was born?

The whole geographical area in question was under Russian Control since 1795 until 1918. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.104.163.64 (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Ironically
The word "ironic" and the word "coincidental" are not synonyms. Can somebody please remove the word "ironically" from the two places it appears in this article before I have a heart attack. And in pretty much every other wikipedia article. Benwick666 (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I changed the first use to "coincidentally", and removed the paragraph where the second usage was entirely.  This isn't an article about Brett Hull, so I'm not at all sure why it matters that Hull played only 5 games with Phoenix. Resolute 01:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Wayne Gretzky Factual Error
The following can be found in the first paragraph, "He is the only player to total over 200 points in a season — a feat that he accomplished four times."

This is in fact not true. Although he did total 200 points four times, Mario Lemieux totaled over 200 points in the 1983-84 season as well. I am not sure how to edit the page myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmk1153 (talk • contribs)


 * Gretzky's accomplishment of 200 points was in the NHL. Lemieux's accomplishment of 282 points was in junior ice hockey in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, not the NHL. Flibirigit (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes
This article needs the infoboxes (as seen on other players' wiki pages, with Preceeding and Succeeding) for captaincy of the teams he was on, as well as head coach of Phoenix. 149.72.62.207 (talk) 05:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * They are there. They're just hidden in the "navigation boxes" template at the bottom. Resolute 14:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ethnic descent
Glad we finally have a citation for this. However please realize that White Russia is the old-fashioned name for Belarus. Therefore if the article cited say Gretzky is of "White Russian" decent, he can't be of "Russian" decent but of "Belarusian" decent. (Bela = white; Rus is the ancestor sate to Russia, Ukraine, and Belrus; therefore "White Russian" as used in the article means Belarusian). See also Etymology of Rus and derivatives. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 23:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank goodness. I think almost every country in Eastern Europe has been his ethnic backround at one point or another on Wikipedia. Flibirigit (talk) 23:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Generally regarded as the best player in history
The reference for this sentence (para. 2 sent. 2) says "considered by many to be the greatest player in the history of the National Hockey League (NHL)." This is not the same as "generally regarded." Find another reference or change the wording. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaskatchewanSenator (talk • contribs) 06:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That does mean the same thing...generally and considered by many are the same thing just a different wording. -Djsasso (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Concur.   RGTraynor  17:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * They do not mean the same thing. Many people consider Gordie Howe or Bobby Orr to be "the greatest player in the history of the National Hockey League", but I wouldn't say either is "generally regarded as the best player in history."--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree with you, because the consensus of the hockey world does not currently revolve around either Howe or Orr. It does around Gretzky, an argument repeated on this talk page several times and with great tumult, and heavily sourced.  One would think that an argument not about whether Gretzky was the greatest ever, but that whether he was generally regarded as the greatest ever, would be relatively simple and sedate.    RGTraynor  19:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't intend to debate who is "generally regarded as the best player in history." Perhaps I should have used a different example. Many people consider Ronald Reagan the greatest president in the history of the United States, but that does not mean that he is generally regarded as the best president in history. "considered by many to be the greatest in history" is not equivalent to "he is generally regarded as the best... in history." That statement needs a better source or it should be changed.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Many people would mean a majority of people. Generally means in most cases. Most cases equals majority. If it wasn't the majority it wouldn't be many people it would be few people. But that being said I am sure a million sources could be found to back this up. -Djsasso (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * New ref added, though I don't see the difference. -Djsasso (talk) 20:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The new reference backs up the statement. Case closed.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 04:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with the current wording. It is not WP:POV nor is it WP:NOR. It is properly sourced. Flibirigit (talk) 00:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Though I despise Wayne (you're not allowed to hit him) Gretzky? I must agree with the majority here. The NHL's main measuring stick of talent, is statistics; Gretzky has the most NHL records. The most career & playoffs goals, assists & pts etc. GoodDay (talk) 14:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Was there any suggestion that this was original research (WP:NOR)? The article actually does violate WP:POV, but that's not a policy. Raising the issue of Wikipedia policies and guidelines did get me thinking, and the article does violate WP:Avoid peacock terms.  It would be improved by following this guideline.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Please provide an example of the violation of the 'terms'. If a player is generally agreed to be the best, do you not have to use superlatives? Alaney2k (talk) 14:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "The greatest player of all time", "best player in history" and "the greatest hockey player ever" are all peacock terms.--70.67.112.89 (talk) 18:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * And are used by the Encyclopedia Britannica to refer to Gretzky.   RGTraynor  18:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposal It seems clear to me that this will be a problem if the article goes to FARC. With this in mind, I am proposing a replacement. The first two are sourced well, so I think they can stay. However, there may be a problem with the next part, "and has been called "the greatest hockey player ever" by many sportswriters,[3][4] players,[5] and coaches." I don't have the book (ref 3), so I can't comment on that. The other refs are the opinions of one writer, one player, and zero coaches. That's not nearly enough evidence to prove that many people consider him the best ever, even if we all believe it's true. I want to change this to "and was named the greatest player in NHL history by The Hockey News in 1997".[3] That is much better proof of his place in hockey history. Another benefit it that it is mentioned in the body of the article, unlike the version I want to replace. I want to see your thoughts on this before making the change. Giants2008 (talk) 02:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with the proposal. The Hockey News ranking is the most thorough collection of expert opinion ever assembled, and Gretzky's #1 ranking should be more prominent than other rankings. How about: "Nicknamed "The Great One", Gretzky was named the greatest player in NHL history in The Hockey News ranking of the top 100 NHL players of all time."
 * I don't think the proposal goes far enough with this paragraph. The other "greatest" sentences are peacock terms and should at least be moved out of the lead section, if not removed.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 07:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

We have a longstanding consensus, painfully hammered out, heavily sourced. There is no compelling reason to change it.  RGTraynor  12:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC) I would have to agree with RGTraynor, the sources there already more than adequatly show the statement to be correct. There is no reason to change them. -Djsasso (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Since there is no consensus for the change, I won't be making it. I still believe this could be a problem if the review goes to FARC. We'll see what happens. Giants2008 (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The odds of it making it to FARC if you fix what has been mentioned as issues are pretty low. And it looks like y'all have done a pretty good job at it. -Djsasso (talk) 18:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Is our goal to make the article better, or just keep it from being a FARC?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 10:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Both, but since its being reviewed at the moment that is the major deal. Personally I think the article is hurt by removing that part anyways. -Djsasso (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ethnic descent (revisted)
I am a bit confused why you removed the polish cat from Gretzky. Just yesterday I added a cite for when Walter said his parents were of Polish ancestry. (Note 9 from Total Gretzky.) I think some of these cats only matter to people who want persons to be of their ethnicity, but I didn't think his polish ancestry was disputed. Can you explain? Alaney2k (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I removed the Polish category as it was not sourced to his grandmother. His grandfather's "Polish" ethnicity was disputed as per previous discussions. Flibirigit (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm just surprised that you deleted the cat today. In the Redmond auto-biography, Wayne's grandmother is noted as Polish. So I've added that. (I hope that doesn't cause an issue) I've read the talk, and it seems to be focussed on the grandfather only, which is odd too. It's like people don't read anymore. :-( To me, the rest of the ethnicity is unnecessary, but I think he can be considered as having both ethnicities. Moving on ... Alaney2k (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If we have a citation for his grandmother being Polish and his grandfather being Belarussian, we can have both categories. I hope that his grandmother's "Polish" ethnicity is not a case of mistaken Belarussian ethnicity as well. Flibirigit (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that Gretzky's grandfather came from Belarus WITH his wife Mary of Pidhaitsi, Ukraine. At the time, Pidhaitsi was located in Austria-Hungary, while the Grodno Province/Governorate was located in the Russian Empire. It would have been nearly impossible for a peasant from a Russian province to be married to a woman from another country given the reality of peasant marriages of the time. I have indirect evidence that Anton Gretzky was married before coming to Canada, but like thousands of peasant emigrants of the time, left his wife at home, expecting to return or bring her to Canada later. Because of the First World War and the ensuing revolution in Russia, the family never reunited and Anton found a new wife in Canada. This was not an uncommon occurrence at that time, as my research into early twentieth-century immigration shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koukouch (talk • contribs) 13:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Stanley Cup?
So I'm looking all over the article for some mention of his having won the Stanley Cup, but since there's no mention of this fact, I have to assume that he didn't. Shouldn't this be noted somewhere? It's notable (and sad, really) that the greatest player didn't win the trophy that he holds over his head in a statue. Maybe the statue pic should have as part of the caption that he never was a part of a team that won the Stanley Cup? Hires an editor (talk) 23:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned in the lead that he won the Stanley Cup four times with the Oilers, and the Stanley Cup is mentioned eight times in total in the entire article. --Krm500 (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My bad. I guess I should have read more thoroughly, but I was really looking for some more prominent mention of it, like maybe in the caption of his statue of him holding the Cup, e.g., "Gretzky holding the Stanley Cup, which he won 4 times." I was looking for a quick reference, and didn't find it. Thanks! Hires an editor (talk) 16:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, I changed the caption to your idea. --Krm500 (talk) 19:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

A Better Picture
I ask someone to please upload a better picture of him.213.13.240.109 (talk) 20:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Images must be "free" if they are used on Wikipedia, so it's not just as simple as uploading a new picture. Luckily we have a great, free, picture of him already in the article if you haven't noticed (Image:Wgretz edit2.jpg). Regards. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 23:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

NHL.com page
Can't seem to find it...the current one is gone. Louis Waweru <font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#955619;"> Talk 21:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Rangers Section is Huge
Why does the rangers section always dwarf other sections in pages? Same thing with the Jagr page, he spends a couple seasons at the end of his career in the Palm Springs of Hockey before shoving off, and it's as documented as his time in Edmonton. In fact, his Rangers section looks bigger than his Oilers section. And most of it is just fluff, like changing the names of words in the anthem? Come on. All the stuff in his oilers section is records and cups and trophies.

Is "As the final seconds ticked away, the crowd at Madison Square Garden gave him a standing ovation, capping off "an entirely satisfying, weekend-long going-away party" in Canada,[100] as there would be "No regretzkys" really necessary in the rangers section? I'm not asking because I want to know the stupid reason it was added, I'm asking so everyone can compare that statement to any in his oilers section, and see the fluff that fills the rangers section
 * It's recentism. The Rangers 1994 Cup section was at one point as large as all the rest of the article, never mind the other Rangers' Cup wins.    RGTraynor  07:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, problem identified. Now lets get to solving it.  What recent events aren't important enough when compared to the events that received documentation decades later in the oilers section?  ie:what fluff isn't important enough to sustain the test of time and can be trashed right now? The strokes (talk) 08:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think anything needs to be trashed, I think what needs to happen is have the LA section expanded. The oiler and section and rangers section are pretty close to equal which makes sense since its where he started and ended his career. -Djsasso (talk) 11:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The tweaking of this article after we cleared the FA review should come under review. We had several editors rewrite this article to current FA standards. We even had an editor from the group that works on rewrites come in and work on the article. At some point, we have to cut off working on the history of Gretzky. It seems that people have their little points to add, like "regretskys", which seems pointless. That was added in the past six months. It seems we have to put a watch on this article. Alaney2k (talk) 19:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's the thing about wikipedia, articles are never done. They are always in flux. -Djsasso (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am talking about human behaviour. Too many people think that, with little effort, that they can do better. I've pasted in the final game paragraph from July. It does have some fluff, but not as much as what was being peddled. Alaney2k (talk) 19:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. -Djsasso (talk) 19:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

MR. Millevoi When Wanye was playing for the rangers he went to TGI Fridays to drik a couple of beers and some Long Islan Iced Tea. When he was there a fan name Mr. Millevoi asked him for a utograph. Not only did he give Millevoi a autograph he talked about hockey for about five minutes. After Wanye left Mr. Millevoi saw that he hasn't finished his bud light so he ran and got the bud light drank it and kept the bottle ever since. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.147.226 (talk) 03:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

"The oiler and section and rangers section are pretty close to equal which makes sense since its where he started and ended his career" -except that he won 4 Stanley Cups and 8 consecutive Hart Trophies in Edmonton, compared to ... nothing in New York. the bias is funny, that it's being defended is funnier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.137.181 (talk) 21:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Anton
Hey, please change Anton to Antoni. 83.31.117.170 (talk) 20:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Pic Size
Can someone please change the size of the picture? 72.68.196.171 (talk) 14:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it too big, too small, too medium? :-) Alaney2k (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And which picture? There are a bunch on the page. -Djsasso (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Error with Kings' Captaincy
Have to correct a very common error - Gretzky wasn't named LA Kings captain until his second season with the team; Dave Taylor was captain during Gretzky's first year with the team.

YouTube clip for verification - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfxdIRuXcdM. First time you clearly see the "A" on Gretzky's jersey is 4:40, the clinching goal in Game 5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.121.2 (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's correct. GoodDay (talk) 20:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank God I'm Polish
There's such information in article, quoting Gretzky to saying these words on Hall Of Fame ceremony. But the link in the note [13] provides to site that doesn't consist any of such data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.105.5.57 (talk) 12:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

What is source?
Pardon me, if I'm missed it. But I'm looking at the references and I see one "Raymond", ex: cite 69, but I cannot, for the life of me, see what the reference is! To What source does this refer? BashBrannigan (talk) 00:50, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah... odd. There seems to be two years with that name... I'm guessing that the Raymond, 1993 cites should be Redmond, 1993, and the Raymond 1994 cites should be Taylor.  Unless someone can confirm that, I'm not going to make a change until I get a chance to confirm the cites are accurate via the books themselves. Resolute 02:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

"I moved because I was traded and that's where my job is"
This quote is interesting, in light of a special that aired last night on ESPN 2. In it, Wayne mentions he was already living full time in LA before he was ever traded there. Does this have a place in this article? --MichiganCharms (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well you have to remember his wife already lived there. So he is most likely referring to the fact they had a second home there prior to being traded there. Not really all that important I don't think. -DJSasso (talk) 03:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Polish ancestry
I've reverted Zwirski's edits here. There may be content we can use but as it stood, it was overwhelming the first paragraph of the Early years section. -- Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk to me  17:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC) If Gretz is an Anglican, why was his wedding at St. Joe's Basilica? I know the differences between the two denominations is not that great, it still seems a bit out of place unless his wife is catholic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Consulzephyr (talk • contribs) 01:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * He had his wedding there because it's the largest church in the city and it was a huge event needing a huge venue, not because he was a member of the church itself.--Львівське (talk) 02:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Lead picture and lack of an international section
A couple things I thought I should bring up. I feel like the lead should showcase the best quality picture available that most represents the content of the article. The current one looks grainy and is taken in a pretty generic setting. I would personally love to see the first picture in the Rangers section be in the lead. Secondly, for a featured article, I'm surprised there is no "International career" section, as per most ice hockey articles in FA and even GA. I think the "NHL career" section should only contain information on the club teams. Normally I would have just gone ahead and edited the article to address those issues, but seeing as this is Gretzky here, I figured I should bring it up here first. Orlandkurtenbach (talk) 23:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it is a fine idea. Dbrodbeck (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with creating an International career section. That's a good idea. I disagree about the photo. The lead photo is neutral, which is an important aspect. The Rangers period was the last three years of his career, and really not that notable in comparison. A more representative picture would be one in an Oilers uniform, or LA, for that matter. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the same as Alaney on this one. -DJSasso (talk) 15:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I see the point on the photo. Dbrodbeck (talk) 22:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact I think in the FA process that is why it was insisted we use the one not linked to a particular team if I remember correctly. It might have been the FA review. Either way I know this isn't the first time people wanted the rangers picture in the box. -DJSasso (talk) 13:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I can see that point. I will, however, go ahead with starting an international section soon when I have some extra time.  Thanks for the feedback.  Orlandkurtenbach (talk) 05:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Small Error
Article has a little error: "Oilers also won the Cup with Gretzky in 1985, ..." Should read as "Oilers also won the Cup with Gretzky in 1984, 1985, " The Fifth Column (talk) 03:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really an error, if you notice it says they also won in 85 etc. Because it was talking about them winning in 84 and then went on to say they also won in 3 more years. -DJSasso (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Points?
''He earned Rookie of the Year honours in the Metro Junior B Hockey League in 1975–76, with 60 points in 28 games. The following year, as a 15-year-old, he had 72 points in 32 game'' Why points and not goals? Gnevin (talk) 13:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

+98 a record? Not quite.
+98 is a plus-minus record for forwards, but hardly the top mark for NHLers. Bobby Orr (+124, 1970-71) holds the mark, followed by Larry Robinson (+120, 1976-77), with Gretzky a distant third. Given that the other numbers are NHL records, full stop, the distinction is worth making. Doogie2K (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)