Template talk:Infobox ice hockey biography/Archive 1

=Suggestions to improve the Template:= Template talk:Infobox ice hockey player/NHL Infobox Suggestions Archive

"Pro Career"
How, exactly, should we fill this in for Europeans? There seems to be some disagreement as to whether it's when a player's North American pro career begins (Mats Sundin) or when they join their respective country's elite league (Ales Hemsky). Any thoughts? Doogie2K 23:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This template is not just for NHL players, thus this field is not just for a player's NHL career. For Europeans/Russians use the year they joined their country's top league as "career_start"".  The field is Pro career, and top Euro leagues (SM-liiga, Swedish Elite League, Czech Extraliga, etc), as well as the Russian Hockey Super League are pro leagues.  I don't think the problem is disagreement as much as ignorance Jaskaramdeep 16:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the Sundin thing was my fault. I was editing player pages en masse adding in the infobox and it totally slipped my mind to consider top foreign leagues. I'll go back to all the players I've added the template to later today and ensure that they're all fine. CptUnconscious 16:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that's the rule I've been going by. Thanks for the clarification. I presume, though, we still list NHL only unless they only/predominantly play in Europe? One other question: what order should the former teams be listed as? That is, since the current team is on top, would you want them listed in reverse? Example: Dwayne Roloson - Do we put it Calgary-Buffalo-Minnesota, as it appears there, or Minnesota-Buffalo-Calgary, so that it scans Edmonton-Minnesota-Buffalo-Calgary, which is chronological. Okay, another damn question (I'm full of 'em): for Canadian and American players, should we list province/state under birth? Seems like something that can be done in the article, whereas the infobox can just be "Calgary, CAN" for the sake of consistency with the Europeans, for whom provinces/states are seldom, if ever, listed. Doogie2K (talk) 23:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If they are predominantly Euro/Russian players, use the field to reflect that.
 * I don't think it really matters how you list the former teams; as long as they are former pro teams it should all be ok
 * I'm going with what you prefer - just city then country, but I don't have problems with adding province/state as an abbreviation for north american players. For ambitious wikipedians, listing the province/state as an abbreviation (just to keep the box from stretching too much horizontally) is fine too.  Consistancy is not of supreme importance for this field - I think as long as the place of birth doesn't stretch the box too much it's all good Jaskaramdeep 16:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah like he said I don't think the order of the former teams are of great importance. I personally think they should be most recent on top and then down. --Djsasso 20:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've been editing most of them with the most recent team on top. Maybe we should set a standard just so that all the new ones created are the same. I've noticed some people editing them and reordering them both ways, so it would also cut down on edits. Just a thought --Schmackity 20:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking at most articles it appears that we do have a standard with most recent team on top. --Djsasso 00:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure if this ship has sailed, as the discussion seems quite old, but what about for the actual amateurs out there? - Women's Olympians mainly. Leafschik1967 20:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This template wouldn't apply to them as its mainly meant for professional players. I suppose someone could create a template for those circumstances. It would probably be better if they just used the generic person template. Template:Infobox Person would be what you are looking for maybe. --Djsasso 21:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just having noticed you did try to put it on one player. It just so happens she is a professional player so it was an easy enough fix. I just had to add in the first year she played pro. --Djsasso 21:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thank you. I was unaware of the generic person one.  I'll use that for the others.  Leafschik1967 14:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * If this template is meant for professional players only then fair enough. However, the template page says simply "This infobox is to be used for Ice Hockey players." How difficult would it be to have two sets of dates: one for career start and end, and another for professional career start and end? -- JD554 14:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it might be impossible to define the limits of non-professional careers in different countries, eras, etc. --Bamsefar75 14:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That is exactly the problem because if you go back far enough or go to Europe the line between pro and non-pro gets very blurry. --Djsasso 15:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it would work just as well if it were one of the optional fields, because it is difficult to define, or not necessarily applicable in all cases. Leafschik1967 15:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with that - Tony Hand being a case in point. He first played in a British senior league when he was 14 years old in 1981, but obviously wasn't a professional. So should his career start be 1981 or 1983 as it currently says as that is when he was 16? A very grey area. My thoughts are that the infobox should simply say "career" instead of "pro career" and then it would correctly be 1981 in my example. -- JD554 15:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * One thing to be aware of is that until it is ones profession (ie they are paid for it) it is not a career by the definition of the word career. I would say just make the career_start and career_end be optional fields and leave it out completely for amateurs and make it a case by case evaluation for the few players that it might be murky for. --Djsasso 16:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Player Pictures
I know of the wiki rules about copyright so where can I/we find pictures that can be used on the player pages? I have read this on wikipedia sometime and I think that the article suggested that the NHLPA should be used for player pictures. Can anyone clarify?

Looking at the info box template with Alex Hemsky looks good, but where can we find pictures like this for use on wikipedia?


 * If the team includes pictures in their press releases, than those pictures are promotional images, although you might have to manually imput the code . (The one for Hemsky was actually taken by the uploader). So, there is a few options. Briememory 21:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I just added my first infobox on a player page, Fredrik Olausson's. The image was in the press release/article on the official league web page. I don't know if I did right witht the tag that you gave me but I think everyone understands what it means.--Krm500 19:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I just added a infobox on Tommy Salo's article and I have found a good photo of him but I'm not sure if it's allowed too be used. It is a promotional image for the team more then the player. here is the picture, what do you more experienced wiki users think? --Krm500 23:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Okey, I have looked at some player pages today and I have found many images taken directly from articles and from sportsline images. Is this really alright? A high res image from sportsline used as a player picture? I was suprised when i saw this but if this really is legit (I doubt it though...) I have some really nice photos of players who doesn't have any images in their infoboxes. --Krm500 01:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Another Question (Prospects)
One more for the road: are players immediately not prospects as soon as they play an NHL game, or can they be reasonably considered prospects as long as they're rookie-eligible (under 26 and fewer than 25 games played, IIRC). I'm thinking of Yann Danis, who only played in six games, and spent the rest of the year in the AHL, and Wojtek Wolski, who played nine games for the Avs before returning to junior. Doogie2K (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure as to what you are refering. If you are talking about using the prospect feild for the AHL, that is perfectly acceptable if they are up and down throughout a season. If you are talking about the category, then a player is not considered a prospect when they assume a regular role in the NHL (which would be when they play under 10 AHL games a season). Briememory 21:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Which is pretty much what I've been doing, but going off a strict interpretation of the front page, it sounded like if they'd played in the NHL, they weren't prospects, which made no sense at all. I kind of figured that if they weren't NHL (or European professional) regulars, they'd fall under the prospect category.  Doogie2K (talk) 23:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The way I have always looked at it is if they have never played in the NHL period they are a prospect because you can't fill in any of the NHL fields like team or former team etc. But once they play a game then you can. --Djsasso 18:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * When aiming at simplicity, I made an error on the front page for this field. Indeed, if a player goes for a couple of cups of coffee in the NHL, then is re-assigned, they are still prospects.  I was going off the theory that a player would stick with the NHL team once called cup, but obviously this isn't always the case.  When you reach a consensus, feel free to edit the front page to your liking.  You're all doing a great job btw.   04:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Now sort of in relation to this, what about players like Nedved who has played a pretty long career in the NHL but has now been sent to the minors. Seems pretty rediculous to remove all the teams from the former_teams variable and put in his minor league history. I think it should either be the teams from his highest league played in or we need another variable. But if we put another variable it gets tricky cause you would have to do it for the top euro leagues as well and not just the NHL. But to suddenly take a player of Nedved's skil and make it look like he is a rookie just doesn't seem right. Now I understand with prospects who have played a single game etc in the NHL not having their NHL teams listed in the former teams but when a player has played as many years as my example I think something needs to be adjusted. Especially since this is going to happen more and more in the "new" NHL. --Djsasso 22:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've started listing former NHLers (ex - Jan Hlavac and Radovan Somik) with the differing leagues after the team names. I saw this done somewhere else (I forget which article) and I thought it was a good idea. How this would translate to someone like Nedved, a player not playing in the top professional league of the country he is playing in, I'm not sure.
 * Fomer teams (or F. Teams as it is listed) doesn't necessarily imply it has to be the same as the league listed for the current team. Another thought: perhaps we shouldn't be making distinctions between professional teams? If they played professionally for a team, that team should be listed. Even for the most extreme examples (J.J. Daigneault), it wouldn't look that ridiculous. --Sparkhurst 09:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that listing all the pro teams might be a way to go. Or placing the differing leagues after the team names. I just think its somewhat rediculous to erase the achievments of someone who has made it to the top in their respective sport just because they aren't playing in that league anymore. (Edit: I actually just took a look at the leagues after the team names and really like how that looks.) --Djsasso 01:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The way the list looks at Wayne Gretzky may be another way of listing the teams. --Sparkhurst 06:15, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Retired/Deceased Players
I do not think we should be added this template box to their pages. No offense to Sparkhurst, but when I see in big letters "deceased" on Pelle Lindbergh's page, it just doesn't feel right. So, I think that the right thing to do is to wait until Jaskaramdeep finishes with the retired player template. Briememory 20:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Or we could just put the word "None" in for current team since all the other fields would still apply. And since there is the option in the box already to put when their career ended. --Djsasso 20:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I just think that this is for current players. All I'm saying is that we should wait for a seperate template for retired players. Briememory 20:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I understand with what you are saying and totally agree that if thats what everyone wants then its all good. I personally think there should just be one single box for both retired and non-retired players for the sake of conformity. But lets hear what others think.--Djsasso 20:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Djsasso, it's how I've been structuring all the retired player pages I've made thus far. P.S. just put 'Retired' where it mentions current team, deceased is not necessary for those players that have passed.--RiverHockey

I removed the current team from Pelle Lindbergh. Now it doesn't list any of the former teams. Since Pelle only played for the Flyers this isn't really a big deal, but if I were to do the same for Jeff Hackett, the lengthy list of teams he played for will be gone. Instead of filling in RETIRED or DECEASED or leaving it blank, perhaps we should just fill in NONE? INACTIVE is another one to consider. --Sparkhurst 07:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I switched Jeff Hackett and Pelle Lindbergh to Retired, much like it appears at Steve Yzerman. --24.152.194.96 19:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Should we use the infobox on retired players? In my opinion we should. I just looked at the Bobby Orr article and it feels like something is missing from the article - a quick way too learn about the player. Just looking at the infobox you'll learn when the player was drafted and which NHL teams he has played for. Which position he played and where he is from. I can't recall seeing any famous retired player with an infobox, how come?

We could easyily put a retired section here on the talk page. What's everyones opinion? --Krm500 22:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I have been using a retired player infobox created by User:Jaskaramdeep for a number of players, including Bobby Clarke, Pelle Lindbergh, Jeff Hackett, Steve Yzerman, and so on. Bobby Orr would look like this. --Sparkhurst 00:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I personally would rather see a single box with optional fields that you can change depending on which situation you are using so the look stays the same. But I am easy and can go either way. --Djsasso 00:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I have been adding the infobox to many retired players, it looks fine, adding a sense of organization and accord for all hockey player pages. The only difference is I put Retired for current NHL team. Ex: Paul Baxter Creating seperate info boxes for retired players will look cluttered, this adds a certain 'harmony' or agreement, if you will, between all pages.--RiverHockey
 * I must also add that the user box for current players looks much more professional than those often used for retired players. Ex:Mario Lemieux infobox looks less professional than Ex:Sidney Crosby's. The infobox designed on this page with the blue dividers looks much more professional and compliments the wikipedia borders.--RiverHockey
 * I must agree. That's exactly my thoughts and exactly what I planned to do for putting retired in current team. I think that looks alot better than having a seperate box. --Djsasso 01:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Glad you agree, guess we should start adding the infoboxes to all NHL players. Perhaps there will finally be some unison in structure. --RiverHockey
 * Suggestion: if you are going to use the current players' template for all players, do not fill in the height and weight field for retired players. I wish there was a way to fix certain fields specifically for retired players (switching Shoots to Shot for example). The filling in Retired for NHL Team looks a little silly especially when you consider some inactive players are not retired but dead. Inactive would be the better alternative. I think something worth looking at would be to fill in all of a specific player's teams for the team field instead of former_teams. The only downside is all of the teams are in italics. Unless one was to edit the template to fix that or override that through some other means, it could be overlooked. --Sparkhurst 15:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe retired hall suffice, as practically all deceased players retired prior to departing, a few exceptions ofcourse, ie: Howie Morenz. Anyway to be dead is to be retired. As for height and weight, the hockey database still lists player ht & wt as of when they retired, just to give an idea of the size of the individual, ofcourse weight always varies from season to season anyway. I should be able to change shoots to shot, but the tense of minor terms is quite petty, and since the players are retired all teams are considered former teams. As long as the infobox has the same basic layout as to give unison amongst all hockey player pages it's adequate. --RiverHockey
 * Here, I tried to make a template that says shot rather than shoots, but it's my first attempt at making my own template and needless to say I need some assistance. Anyone with more experience able to amend my errors? The link: Template:Infobox Retired Ice Hockey Player Thanks. --RiverHockey
 * I edited the current infobox and it seems I added Shot and Caught successfully. I've managed to make it so the NHL Team field is not required. Now all I have to do is add a Played for field. --Sparkhurst 13:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * After much trial-and-error, I finally have it working correctly. The current infobox can now be used for both current and retired players. Example: Jeff Hackett. --Sparkhurst 14:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I started switching shoots to shot, etc. for retired players. --RiverHockey 15:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * SOMEONE has reedited the template making all of our edits worthless! Now many of the infoboxes have errors. Can you reinstate the edits you made, otherwise we can just use the template as is and put Retired for current team. --RiverHockey 21:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The original creator of the template, Jaskaramdeep, reverted the changes. I'm assuming he saw that an anonymous editor was tinkering with the template and thought the worst. I've reverted his revert and everything appears to be fine now. --Sparkhurst 22:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Sparkhurst. Let's try adding these infoboxes to all hockey pages now. --RiverHockey 00:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I saw that a user with warnings for vandalizing templates made changes to this template. Was he wrongly accused or what? Jaskaramdeep 07:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That was me. I haven't bothered signing in as of late. The particular generic dialup IP address that was logged for me while editing the template has been used by me only to edit hockey-related articles, yesterday (Oct. 12) and in late September (28-30). Yesterday was my first attempt at editing a template and I probably should have signed in then. --Sparkhurst 14:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Women's hockey
How should I use this template if I'm referring to a female hockey player? I'm basically looking at using it to add details to the individual pages of the 2006 Canadian women's Olympic team - Tabercil 22:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Other Concerns
Could somebody add an optional image caption field to this infobox? &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  04:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Country Flags
Where have the images for the country flags gone? Can somebody fix this so that they return? Thanks. RiverHockey 16:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Former team organization
Should the former teams for which a player has played, be he retired or still playing on a different team, be listed in order of most recent first or in order of who he played for? It would probably make more sense to be the latter, but I ask because they are organized different ways on different platyer pages. Bmitchelf 16:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The latter is the case for most player pages I've come across. --207.69.137.42 08:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup further up the page we talk about this and I believe it was decided that you do the most recent team first. --Djsasso 18:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Retired and free agent players
For "Pages this infobox appears on," there is no appropriater place to put retired players, free agents, or players who have moved on to a different league after playing in the NHL. Since this page is becoming long, maybe the whole section could be moved to a different subpage, with these three different types of players as different headings, maybe for retirees, organized by who they played for most or last played for. Bmitchelf 16:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Since so many player articles have them already, it seems like it would be a waste of space and time to list every single player that has it. Perhaps the list should be changed to "pages without this infobox" or something like that? --207.69.137.42 08:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This has been brought up before to a degree. --207.69.137.42 08:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Template flagcountry2 instead of flagcountry
I've changed the template to use the new template:flagcountry2. See WikiProject Flag Template/January 2007 rework. --Ligulem 13:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And changed back to Template:flagcountry again now that the two are identical and flagcountry2 will be deprecated. Andrwsc 16:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Image not showing up
i noticed that a user had attempted to add a photo to Roberto Luongo. i can't find anything wrong with his syntax; the image exists. but the photo is not displayed on the page. can someone take a look? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hexvoodoo (talk • contribs) 04:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Prospect league and team
These two fields are currently not enabled in the code;
 * prospect_league (for players who have been drafted by an NHL team, but have yet to play a game. Any entry into this field will also automatically place the title (prospect) next to the pro team listed)
 * prospect_team (for players who have been drafted, but have yet to play in the NHL)

Are there plans to add this code to the template? Please see John Tavares (ice hockey) for usage example. Currently unable to list Oshawa Generals and Ontario Hockey League as prospect team and league. Flibirigit 04:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It is enabled. Check out Matt Pelech for an example. That being said. If you read that close you will see that it says "who have been drafted". These boxes are intended for people who have already turned pro. I have played around with the info in the Tavares infobox to try to get it to look half decent. But as mentioned its not intended for undrafted players. --Djsasso 07:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Question
I propose that we add the name of the player to the top of the infobox like most infoboxes do.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 22:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Birth date and age
Should the template Template:Birth date and age be used in the infobox? It's currently used in the actor infobox and I think it's a good feature to see the players age at a quick glance. --claes 08:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking about this the other day but its daunting to have to go through every player page to change the way people have imputed that field. --Djsasso 16:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason I'm asking is that after I added the template on a page a user reverted my edit stating the template should not be used in the ice hockey player infobox. I've seen it beeing used on more than one player article though. --claes 23:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know...the point of the infobox is for everyone to be standard...so either everyone should have it or everyone should not have it. I don't have a preference either way. However if it is going to be used I think it should be coded right into the infobox itself. --Djsasso 00:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The SmackBot has and is at the moment been spending several weeks replacing the date format inside the ihp-infobox of every article on my watchlist. Is there perhaps a policy on some other intersecting project? Should perhaps the template be updated to this format too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamsefar75 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah we thought about incorporating it into the template before but I think they couldn't figure out how to get the two templates to work together. I believe SmackBot is making these changes at the request of a hockey project member. --Djsasso 19:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Official Site
I think I'll go ahead and add an official site, since it's optional, and many players now have official websites. Any other thoughts? Alex43223Talk 22:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Please fix the nationality line
The nationality line in this template needs to work like virtually every other infobox on the system that uses this field. It cannot be auto-adding flag templates, but people need to manually do them, e.g. .  A) Some flags are very, very contentious and should not be used in infoboxes to represent nationality (Northern Ireland is a strong case in point, per dispute discussions at Talk:Northern Ireland, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template, Talk:Flag of Northern Ireland, an RfC, and Wikipedia talk:Don't overuse flags, among other places.)  B) The widespread convention in bio infoboxes is to use the adjective not the noun ("Mexican", not "Mexico"). — SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;   ‹(-¿-)› 22:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image caption
Why is that not an option? I think someone should add it as it would help in certain cases. Like stating which person in the picture the player is or saying what team's jersey the player is wearing. Anyone else agree? Ofcourse, it should be an optional field. Bsroiaadn 03:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would think it wasn't put in cause they were attempting it originally to only be for press photo's. ie ones just of the player in question. But yeah I can go either way with them. I don't particularly care if we have that field or not. I wouldn't end up using it probably. --Djsasso 16:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

how to use for european players?
how should the template used for non-united-states players, where people would like to state metric system in height/weight?
 * It's going to be in feet and inches even for euro players. --Djsasso 15:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Listing players on talk page
I think its time we delete and stop updating the list below. We were keeping it when we first created the template so we knew what teams etc needed templates added to them still. I don't really think this is an issue anymore as pretty much everyone knows the existance of the template now so there isn't much point having people changing it and adding to it anymore, expecially since there are many errors in it now. --Djsasso 18:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree; it started out well, but now it's pointless. Anthony Hit me up... 13:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hall of Fame line
I recently updated Scott Stevens to include his hall of fame induction, and was disappointed to see it is nothing more than another line in the infobox. Nothing about it draws your attention to it to indicate it's something special, which it clearly is. Look at any football HOFer; the line is done in bright yellow so if you're scanning the page, you can quickly see without even having to read it that they're in the Hall. That's something I think we need for the Hockey Hall of Fame as well, but I don't know how to alter the template to make that happen; someone with better knowledge of Wiki syntax could help us out. Anthony Hit me up... 13:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I support your idea, fully. However, I too don't understand Wiki syntax (sorry). GoodDay 21:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not disagreeing but once you add colouring etc would that not be considered decorative which is against wiki standard? --Djsasso 23:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You know what, I think it would clutter up the infobox. It's simple and nice as it is now. BUT if we were to use a color it should be something very light, perhaps light blue. --Krm500 23:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I accidently added it (I basically copied the NFL one changing it from Football hall of fame to Hockey, I was trying it in my sandbox, pasted here and was gonna wait, sorry), and reverted it. So, if we decide to put it on, revert back to my first of three previous edits here (I think) and it'll be there. It will still be yellow, though, so if we change the color...you're gonna have to change the color obviously. Although, I do like the yellow. I don't think lightblue would draw your attention to it though, which is what FutureNJGov was dissapointed in.  Bsroiaadn Talk 23:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think light blue would fit the most since most of the text in the infobox is blue. I was thinking of a similar color to the background color in the Devs and Avs list of players. --Krm500 23:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, mine seems to be error prone. My sandbox is showing random syntax now and just...nevermind...someone in WP:HOCKEY must know syntax, though. And you mean like the one that shows who's names are on the Cup?  Bsroiaadn Talk 23:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, cup winner or current roster, don't know which one of them it is. I don't know syntax but after many, many "Show preview" I usually get it right :D ! --Krm500 23:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I actually just figure it out in my sandbox. Haha. And I think I know the one you're talking about, this ?  Bsroiaadn Talk 23:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added it to the template but with a different light blue, check it out and see if you all like it. It's a little annoying that there is a white stripe in the middle but I don't know if you can do it any other way. --Krm500 23:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed it, I kept the blue you used though. Look at it on Scott Stevens.  Bsroiaadn Talk 23:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

(Going back to the beginning here) I like it; it draws your eye without being so blinding, which is really all I wanted. I just thought that it was being treated like any other line in an infobox, when it's clearly more special because not everyone has it. Good job, Bsroiaadn! Anthony Hit me up... 20:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Stanley Cups
What does everyone else think about adding a "Stanley Cups" section to the template?  Bsroiaadn Talk 23:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As long as it can be added without upsetting the balance of the box. --Djsasso 23:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll test it out in my sandbox and stuff first. Anything else anything thinks should be added or suggestions or anything?  Bsroiaadn Talk 02:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Is this alright? It's simple, but I don't think it needs to be complicated.  Bsroiaadn Talk 03:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks great, but it might get too long for some player (who played for Montreal). --Krm500 13:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, how about it now? I used to a horizontal line to break up the teams, but I suppose that wouldn't be needed...just makes it a little easier in my opinion.  Bsroiaadn Talk 18:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Italic team name
I'm not quite sure when it changed, but the italics for the current team name seems unnecessary and slightly harder to read. Also, previously for a prospect, his team was italicized instead of his NHL team. Isn't it a better idea just to have the team name in plain text like it used to be? bmitchelf•T•F 02:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't actually ever remember it being in plain text? I personally like it in italics cause it makes it jump out at you. --Djsasso 02:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure why it has to "jump out" because it's the top name in the box anyway and usually in the first sentence of the article. bmitchelf•T•F 03:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Because that is the point of infoboxes. To get you information faster than reading the whole article. --Djsasso 03:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Jersey number
Another suggestion - would it be possible to include the jersey number of the player in the infobox, possibly adding in the name (as someone mentioned above) much like the MLB players have? Jersey numbers aren't mentioned at all in most players' articles unless there is a picture of the player in uniform. bmitchelf•T•F 03:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We try to avoid using/mentioning them because they change too often. --Djsasso 04:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I tend to disagree because most players have a reason for choosing them and will keep the same number if it is not taken on another team. After browsing around, I see that it is mentioned in a few player articles, though, if it is significant. bmitchelf•T•F 12:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think jersey number is significant enough to be in the infobox. Too trivial imo. --Krm500 13:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That is definately a good point as well. If there was an good story behind it such as Wayne's 99 then it could be included in the article but doesn't need to be in the info box. --Djsasso 15:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Minor-league player
I added the infobox to Mark Major who was profiled as a Did-you-know on main page. But he only played 2 games in NHL. Would appreciate a second pair of eyes on it to make sure I applied it right. He had an extensive minor career.

The hidden message
Can anyone who runs a bot have it remove the following obsolete messages from all players articles who use the template?   IrisKawling 07:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just been doing it as I go along but yeah a bot that could do it would be great. --Djsasso 17:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Working on trying to complete this task using AWB, but since there's over 2500 articles using the infobox it may take a while. IrisKawling 19:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * After running a number of different filters on AWB I think I have managed to remove it from every single template on Wiki. Even a few userpages by mistake hehe. So it probably won't end up on new players anymore unless someone copies and pastes from a file on their actual computer. --Djsasso (talk) 00:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Conversion from Weight to Convert
editprotected The template Weight is listed at TfD, where it is likely to be deleted as it is deprecated by the far superior and more versatile convert. To that end, can an administrator please perform the following replacement to remove Weight from this template:

Replace: 

With: 

Many thanks, <b style="color:forestgreen;">Happy</b>‑<b style="color:darkorange;">melon</b> 13:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Already done. :) &mdash;MJCdetroit (talk) 00:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Medals
Can we add another field, something like, like the one in Template:Infobox Swimmer to show the persons Olympic and world cup medals. I think that would both enhance the look and also reduce the code. P&#124;^&#124;C (talk) 09:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Personally I am not against doing this. However, I do prefer them to be separate so that we can have the medals template down by the International Play section so that it matches up with our page format for players. I think it makes more sense to have that listed down by their international stats. -Djsasso (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree about the flexibility part. But the usage of medal template part is not included in the International Play section. Please refer |International International play.In fact the usage of medal templates is not mentioned at all. I guess we should include this field in this template too. P&#124;^&#124;C (talk) 09:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Broken
The recent change broke this. It's missing a closing  for the new parser function. It should be placed immediately following the part that says. (→ Zachary ) 23:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been fixed. -Djsasso (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it hasn't. A  was added instead of a  . (→ Zachary ) 23:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That doesn't appear to be the issue. -Djsasso (talk) 23:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wierd now it is working...was still showing as not working for me. -Djsasso (talk) 23:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks... My bad on not double checking for all image type. Resolute 03:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Entry Draft
Just wondering if there's anyway at all that someone can write a script so that the draft section links to [*Year* NHL Amateur Draft] from 1978 and earlier. As it is right now, it just links to the redirect page via [*Year* NHL Entry Draft]. Anyway there can be what I think would be an IF statement tossed into the template at all that would link the year to NHL Amateur Entry Draft from 1963-1978 and then link to NHL Entry Draft for 1979-present? Just a thought, not sure if this has been brought up before... – Nurmsook! (talk) 05:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Documentation detail

 * Two of the rows in the Full empty example looks like:

| prospect_team  =

| nationality    =


 * To be a full example, they should look like:

| prospect_team  = | prospect_league =

| nationality    = | nationality_2  =

Not directly an emergency. Just for your next important edit. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 22:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. I've added those two lines. Resolute 22:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Coaching career
Over at Template:Infobox Lacrosse Player I have included a line for a player who also has a coaching career. Since the lacrosse template is based on the Ice Hockey Player Template, I thought I would add a note here. If you interested in copying, here are examples: (see Tony Resch or Sal LoCascio). - Mitico (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Conversion template
I've put in a query over at Template talk:Convert about the odd behavior of that weight conversion template. Bryan Derksen (talk) 19:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't have enough knowledge about templates to fix it myself, just didn't want the code freakout to stay there. :) -Djsasso (talk) 20:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I was going to revert it too, but for some reason I suffered a brain cramp and didn't remember I could link directly to old revisions when providing an example to the conversion people. :) Bryan Derksen (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Pro career should be optional
Requiring the "Pro career" as it is currently used creates some problems. Take for example Kevin Porter. He just won the Hobey Baker Award and he has not started his professional career. However, until a few minutes ago - his pro career was listed as 2008-present. Unfortunately, there is no way for me to remove the Pro career info so i settled with the n/a-present. That leaves a lot to be desired. I think this should either be optional or we should change the format so that you can enter something like "No professional appearances". 71.56.118.64 (talk) 03:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason it is not optional is that most players who have not played professionally are not elligable for a page on wikipedia. A Hobey Baker Award winner is an exception, and in such rare cases we put TBA as the start date. -Djsasso (talk) 00:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Former teams in current league only?
What is the rationale behind displaying former teams only for the player's current league? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is any. I think the orginal template creator put that in. I don't think anyone has ever listened to that stipulation and it should probably be removed. Only thing I can guess is that it stops people from putting every junior or minor league team in. I think the idea is to keep the former teams restricted to the highest level they played. ie NHL, SEL etc etc etc.-Djsasso (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Anyone opposed to this rewording: "Display only former professional teams" ? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 01:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's good by me. -Djsasso (talk) 14:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It should rather be something along "only former teams who were in pro leagues at the time". In comparision, Tommy Sjödin has played for Timrå IK but they did not visit the highest national league in any of his seasons there, so the team is not included in his infobox list of Pro Clubs. It can however be found in the article (only the player category so far). --Bamsefar75 (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was about to change it to: "Display only former teams that were in professional leagues.", but the template can only be edited by administrators right now. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 18:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I can do it. -Djsasso (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Professional League distinguishment
How do we distinguish professional teams in each league from each other? Take a gander at Eric Weinrich. It says his current team is the Portland Pirates of the AHL, but directly underneath is it is a list of NHL teams he's played for. It implies those NHL teams are also part of the AHL. Can we make it so that instead of just "team = X, league = Y, played_for = Z", we have distinguishers, such as "team1 = Manitoba Moose, league1 = AHL, played_for1=Iowa Stars Portland Pirates, team2=Canucks, league2=NHL, played_for2=Montreal Maroons, league3 = SEL, played_for3=MODO", etc.

Would this be too cluttered? Also, I made the possibility of two teams for the poor saps who get regularly shuttled between the NHL and AHL. Schmloof (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * We do it in the coding. You put a header between the teams in the former_teams section. An example is Wayne Gretzky or Brett Hull. (albeit in this case its the played_for section since he is retired). As for the guys that go up and down we actually change the team name when they go up and down. Of course sometimes they get missed but in general there are some editors who follow this religiously and change it each time a player goes up or down. We tried not to have all those extra variables cause it makes using the template that much more complicated. Eric Weinrich is an example of the other school of though where you just put there highest level teams in the list. But thats the old way of doing it. Now we mostly put the headers in the variables. -Djsasso (talk) 14:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Here is an example of an active player. Pasi Petriläinen. -Djsasso (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * We also do it in more ways that that, apparently.
 * Active, league indicators as headings: Peter Nordström, Rickard Wallin
 * Retired, league indicators as headings: Håkan Loob
 * Active, league indicators on each team row: Jonas Nordquist
 * Active, league indicators on some team rows: Michael Holmqvist, Tomáš Surový
 * Active (prospect), league indicators on some team rows: Cory Larose
 * Active, no league indicators: Andreas Dackell, Jörgen Jönsson, Ivan Majeský
 * Retired, no league indicators: Tommy Sjödin, Mikael Renberg
 * --Bamsefar75 (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Other than the prospect version which is acting as coded in the template, the rest are really just incorrect variations on the same thing and should be cleaned up. Either way, the point I was making is we do have ways to indicate which league the team is in without actually changing the coding of the template. -Djsasso (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Conversion from to, XHTML
Please change  to. And also change all  to , since Wikipedia uses XHTML 1.0. Thanks. —Bender235 (talk) 10:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Player name
It's pretty standard on Wikipedia to include the name of the infobox/article subject at the top. To me, this infobox looks a little bare without it. Actually, I was shocked to find that no name field existed. I figured the article where I saw the box just wasn't using it for some reason... --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually find articles that have them rather redundant, the name of the person is at the top of the page and in the opening paragraph of the article. To have it on the infobox just looks rediculous. -Djsasso (talk) 15:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but it's overwhelmingly the convention. For that reason alone, I think it belongs here. Wikipedia infobox style convention debates should probably be left for elsewhere... --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh I know I was just commenting, its not that big a deal if we were to add that field. -Djsasso (talk) 15:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Replace with
Please replace  with , because this is the standard template.

Also, please replace each  with a , since Wikipedia is using XHTML 1.0. —Bender235 (talk) 19:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Overlinking?
Linking height, weigh, born, died and nationality seems overkill to me. Rich Farmbrough, 19:13 7 June 2008 (GMT).

Error in template?
There seems to be an error on the weight variable in the template. See Paul Healey. LarRan (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think someone is playing with the convert template which this template uses. I will take a look. -Djsasso (talk) 20:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wierd its converting all the weights wrong on all pages. This however is the only one giving the nasty red error. -Djsasso (talk) 20:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok based on a conversation at Template talk:Convert it looks like its a wikiwide issue at the moment.-Djsasso (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Remove nickname field
Per some initial discussion at WT:HOCKEY, I am suggesting that we remove the nickname field from the template. Very, very few players have actual nicknames, and fewer still are notable for them. The players with notable nicknames already have them listed in the prose section. The nickname field really only serves as a breeding ground for WP:LAME edit wars over various non-nicknames, and as a magnet for vandalism. Thus, I believe it should be removed. Seeking consensus before making this change. Resolute 15:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is just fine to remove it from the infobox. Any actual noteworthy nicknames can be brought up within the lead or somewhere else within the article. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned in the other discussion I completely agree, anyone with a notable nickname like The Great One can have it mentioned in their prose. -Djsasso (talk) 15:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm all for removing it. However, there are some legitimate sourced nicknames that are mentioned in infoboxes that aren't mentioned in the article. Would it be possible to move them to the talk page?-Wafulz (talk) 15:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm all for it! --Krm500 (talk) 15:41, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I could do that as I went through removing the field. -Djsasso (talk) 15:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is OK to remove the field. Any (future) invalid nickname field in an article implementation of the infobox template will probably be hidden from display, unless it is moved to talkpage of the article (or other location) by a bot. Plain remove (not move) of data in the field of an article makes me doubtful. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 17:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with removing the field. Like with a number of other elements ("not to be forgotten" lists, for instance), they're prey to info creep by any editor who can find some sportswriter to have uttered something once that can be construed as a nickname, and demands that said obscure nickname share equal time with "The Golden Jet," "The Great One," "Cyclone," etc.  'Tis a pity, but the end result of not doing this is having an infobox clogged with ten so-called "nicknames" per player.    RGTraynor  20:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure that this measure was properly thought through, as Almost all hockey players have a nickname, I'm not just talking about NHL players, But their nicknames are well documented and it is part of the game, the fans, the press, the media all use the nicknames and should be included in the info boxes. The article List of ice hockey nicknameseven has a partial list with documentation. I am a newer contributor, and did not participate in this, but as this is a fluid project and things are always revisited. I would like to review the discussion mentioned in the first post to this subject, does anyone know which archive it is in?--That&#39;s Life, &quot;Stuff&quot; happens, people die, life goes on. (talk) 23:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You aren't really missing much, but it started here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Archive23.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 00:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah as he mentions it was hashed out in a few places (this was really just the final lets do it discussion). Nicknames can definately be put in the article with sources, but when we had them as an infobox tag the problem came that people would add nicknames like "Staalsy" which isn't a true nickname. Its just adding an sy to a name...there is a name for those which is escaping me at the moment. Basically it came down to most nicknames aren't well documented. -Djsasso (talk) 01:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The tern that is escaping you is sobriquet or nickname. A nickname can be a shortened or familiar version of a proper name, like Bill/Will/Liam are all nicknames for William. If it's what the team/media/press call that player it's a nickname, and that is where the documentation is. I do not see a problem with the paramater being used, as long as it is properly sourced, which for anything to be included in the article also needs to be.  If we want to get really technical, we could actually stipulate that Ozzie is Osgoods nickname and The Wizard of Oz is his moniker.--That&#39;s Life, &quot;Stuff&quot; happens, people die, life goes on. (talk) 02:10, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually the phrase I was looking for was short name which is different from a nickname. Here is a definition A nickname is a descriptive name given in place of or in addition to the official name of a person, place or thing. Not to be confused with the familiar or truncated form of the proper name, which may sometimes be used simply for convenience (ex. Bob, Bobby, Bobert, Rob, Robbie, and Bert for Robert), sometimes referred to as a short name. -Djsasso (talk) 02:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It was actually people confusing the two which lead to the reason we removed the field. Basically people don't need to be told that at some point in time a person was called a short version of their name since that is true for a large majority of people notable and not. -Djsasso (talk) 02:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that 'nicknames' like "Staalsy" aren't notable and I don't want to see them in articles, but that's not really a reason to remove the field.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Error in Firefox with Modern skin
This did not occur before and seems to be related to the removal of the nickname. But something else may have changed.

In firefox, using the Modern skin, the template does not appear on the right. It pushes the text of the article down. If I change to the default monobook skin, it does appear on the right. Alaney2k (talk) 16:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You are right, I just checked and it is doing that, however, I looked at the code Resolute removed and it would not be that change that caused it. Sometimes they work on other templates that this one calls and it causes unforseen changes. I will look to see if I can find what might be doing that. Could be the font or something like that which the modern skin uses. In fact I just looked at the version prior to Resolute's and it is doing it as well. I am guessing they have mucked with something in the skin. I will check some of the other skins.-Djsasso (talk) 16:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Languages
fi:Malline:Jääkiekkoilija Ville Siliämaa (talk) 07:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Leagues
With the growth of the KHL, players playing in Europe during and since the lockout season, and players generally just moving around, should additional fields be added to the league/team fields in order to accomodate multiple professional leagues? (such as league1=NHL, league2=SM-liiga, league3=KHL, etc to go along with corresponding team fields linked to the league fields). It could also be changed so as to not link to the NHL once a professional team is entered into the currently existing team field. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 21:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It actually doesn't automatically link to the NHL, the current "league" field means the league the player is currently playing in. In general we just add the league next to team names in the "played_for" field to signify which league the team was from if its different from the league they are currently playing in. ie "Modo (SEL)" There are a few other ways its been done and its been discussed the best way to do it and I don't know that we ever ended on a specific way. But the above example is one of the more prevalent. Another example we use is found on Wayne Gretzky. Which way is used seems to be personal preference. -Djsasso (talk) 21:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * For currently active players, the field is "former_teams". The "played_for" field is for retired players. Not sure why, but both fields can be used while a player still being active. The "former_teams" can only be used when active (in a league). --Bamsefar75 (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You are right I mixed up the fields. The reason for both is that it changes the look of the box. Instead of saying former teams it says pro clubs once they are retired. -Djsasso (talk) 01:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

International Version?
what would be the international version with international measurement units? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 00:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This version shows both measurements. You have to enter in inches etc but when it shows up, it shows in both inches and cm. -Djsasso (talk) 15:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Player, later coach or GM?
There probably should be a field that allows to show if a player becomes a coach, GM, or an owner (as in the cases of of Lemieux or Gretzky). Those fields still reflect on their current careers and legacy in hockey. --Pennsylvania Penguin (talk) 14:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

EditProtected Request
Replace  with   to make that parameter invisible if it is not specified. LegoKontribsTalkM 22:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ -Djsasso (talk) 02:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

italics
I'd like to bring up again the suggestion that italics around team names be removed. It seems like an unnecessary addition to the template. Thoughts? Esrever (klaT) 03:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's only the current team that is italicized so its stands out from the list of former teams. Just looking at your last contrib you are probably looking at Jeff Carter who isn't a good example since he has only played for one team. You might want to look at say Marian Hossa. -Djsasso (talk) 03:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Title
This infobox has no title at all, which makes it hard to guess what it's describing (a perons's ice hockey career) when you were not looking for ice hockey players. Maybe add 'Ice Hockey' at the top? Or even: North American Ice Hockey? (Or is this template also used for e.g. Sweden?) Classical geographer (talk) 12:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's used for ice hockey players in any country. Personally I don't really see the point since the infobox is only on players its obvious its for players. -Djsasso (talk) 13:08, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the point of having a title is if a person is known for being more than a ice hockey player. That is, if they also have played professional soccer/football, or have been politicians, or any profession for which there exists an infobox. But those cases probably should be solved by moving the boxes to their respective sections, so the section title shows the subject. I dont know if all non-hockey wikipedians agree -- some infoboxes out there have titles, for some reason? --Bamsefar75 (talk) 15:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally I am not a fan of multiple boxes, on pages that would have multiples I always prefer to see a custom table done on the page itself that combines all aspects of their notability. Since its rare to be equally notable for more than one thing. That being said I it does make sense in the case of multiple boxes but I still don't see it as necessary. Personally I think infoboxes look better with nothing at the top as far as title or name goes. But that could just be me. -Djsasso (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have used multiple boxes for Ronald Pettersson and I don't think it looks weird. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 21:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There are some instances where it does work fine like that one, but on pages that are very short or in cases where the two infoboxes are different sizes it can look like it is just thrown in. -Djsasso (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Meaning of the nationality field
There seems to be a consensus that the nationality field is to indicate which country the player is eligible to represent in international competitions governed by the IIHF (see above in the Remove flagicons? discussion). I think this should be added to the template documentation.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 03:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you are mistaking what we are saying. We use the nation they represent to determine what country we put in the field in situations where their nationality is ambiguous. The field is not about what country the player represents internationally. This is because nationality is not determined by place of birth in all situations. So we needed a fixed NPOV way to determine which nationality to use. It's just part of the criteria used to determine what we put in there. -Djsasso (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's hold off on this discussion until there is a decision on Resolute's nationality proposal above.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

documentation change
Editprotected

This template needs to be changed to use the /doc subpage system. I have changes I'd like to make to the documentation. Powers T 00:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems an "Expression error" appears now, but only in the transcluded doc (see), not in the doc itself. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems an "Expression error" appears now, but only in the transcluded doc (see), not in the doc itself. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Notable amateur players
Oh, and what is to be done with notable amateur players? The career_start field is required and the Pro career field always appears in the infobox. Powers T 00:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Typically we fill in "TBD" in the career start field for junior players. i.e.: John Tavares (ice hockey). Resolute 00:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Team Colors
I think we should format this template with team colors, similar to Template:Infobox NFLactive. Bmf 51 (talk) 04:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been discussed before, and generally the consensus at WP:HOCKEY is that we prefer the neutral, consistent, colours. Personally, I find those gaudy, bright, templates to be a major distraction from the article itself. Resolute 18:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's pretty, but meh. Bmf 51 (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with the op, and would have done it when I created the template if I had thought of it. Make it happen  96.52.138.111 (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been !voted on numerous times in the past and is always overwhelmingly rejected by hockey editors. The most common reason is that other infoboxes like MLB's are complete eyesores and distract from the quality of the article. -Djsasso (talk) 23:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Echoing Djsasso. The NFL and MLB infoboxes are atrocious, imnsho, and the colour clash actively draws the eyes away from the article. I think this template is fine the way it is, colour wise. Resolute 01:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Management fields
I think this template needs a management field because there are some retired players have been or currently part of the NHL organizations (eg. scouts, GM, coaches, and so on). Marc87 (talk)
 * This is best taken care of in the prose of the article. The infobox is specifically about playing career. Infoboxes generally are only for what a person is most notable for. Although in some cases pages will have two infoboxes if they are long enough. -Djsasso (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Alt text support
For WP:ACCESSIBILITY for the visually impaired, this template should support alt text for images (see WP:ALT). Please install this simple sandbox change. I've updated the documentation and tested it with the testcase. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

✅ -Djsasso (talk) 18:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)