User talk:Alaney2k/Archive 7

Template:32TeamBracket
Hi Alaney2k. I see from the history of Template:32TeamBracket that you have previously contributed to this template. I was wondering if there was any way of hiding the first two rounds from the template when there are no teams involved in play. I am working on a section for the 1996 GAA football championship but it looks quite different from the 2010 championship. You can view what I have completed so far at my sandbox. Basically I want my information from that on my sandbox to look similar to the information here. I was also wondering why the county colours don't seem to move across to the template? Is there any way you could possibly take a look and advise me on what to do or where to ask if you're too busy? Kind regards, --MacTire02 (talk) 12:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Very limited bit of work on my part there. I don't know what to suggest. I find programming at Wikipedia of these things to be tricky and complicated. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Well thanks for getting back to me on it. I'll keep looking around. :) --MacTire02 (talk) 15:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Diacritics
We have a compromise, stick to it. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 22:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right. Thought it included team names but not place names. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 13:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the vandalism mistake, miss-click and no comment/cancel screen appeared so I could stop it. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 20:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 August 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 August 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

DVP articles
Any chance you'd be willing to share the content of those articles you've been posting? I'd love to read them! -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  02:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been using Toronto Star - Pages of the Past through my Toronto Library access. The Star and Globe are both online for free if you have a library account. Are you in Toronto? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 02:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah... but I've never noticed this. Do I access it from my library account on the website? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  04:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, great resource from the site, I use it a lot. From the Library home page, go to the 'Books, Videos, Research and more' link. Then 'Articles & Online Research' in the left-hand menu. In the third section of that page, click on 'Complete list of premium content databases '. The next page is called 'Databases' and there is an alphabet menu across the top to find your way around the page. Click on 'G' to move down the page to where it says 'Globe and Mail - Canada's Heritage from 1844' and an 'Access Online' link. For the Star, click on 'T' and you will see 'Toronto Star - Pages of the Past ' and an 'Access Online' link. Those two links actually take you to the same site, (but show different papers) where scanned pages of the newspaper you select are shown in PDF. For Canadian newspapers since 1980, there is another site called 'Canadian Newsstand ' which you can also get to from that page. (click on 'C' to find it) The Globe and Star pages are searchable, but the full-text search doesn't find everything that could match. I think that's because the scanning must have missed words. For the Don Valley Parkway, you get different results whether you add or take out 'Valley', or use 'exact phrase'. This is more of a problem for really old issues, not so much for the last 30 or so years. The Toronto Star doesn't let you browse like the Globe, but you can go to a specific date and see everything on that date by not entering a search term. The Globe goes back to 1844, but anything before 1930 you have to browse because the quality of the scan isn't too good. Still useful. I've used it to look up old hockey stories. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 13:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow. That's a whole realm of information I didn't know was available to me. Needless to say I'm going to be a hermit for the next several days :) Thank you for pointing this out! -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  15:02, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Use it almost everyday. What I find surprising from reading these old newspapers is how the stories have changed over time, and there are lots of details in today's news or books that 'aren't quite correct'. Like the parkway section opening on October 30, not October 31 as in the Filey book, stuff like that. Some other things: The Toronto Star page times out, (and you have to logon again -- then back up with your browser to get back to your results) but the Globe one will let you stay on and on and on. Which is what it takes when you find a lot of matching articles. I am sure there is tons of stuff on Highway 401, which you are working on. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 16:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Depending how recent the articles go and whether its any article published by Torstar Corp, it could be useful for a lot of historical information for Ontario. I find it's also funny going through some of these articles to see the foresight of a few ignored planners in '55. They said "if you build it, the cars will fill it." How right they were. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  18:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The rush to build the suburbs overwhelmed everything, I think. A lot of money to be made. Not sure what your point is about Torstar? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well the Toronto Star publishes in Toronto, but Torstar publishes in several outlets around Ontario (Windsor, Hamilton, Ottawa and Thunder Bay to name a few). If the collection includes stories exclusive to those papers then it would have local material from each of those cities. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  20:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The Canadian Newsstand includes other papers in Ontario, and across Canada. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 20:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 September 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 18:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

HBC Archive Indexerbot
User:HBC_Archive_Indexerbot/logs reports "Not writing to User talk:Alaney2k/Archive index as I cannot find permission (sourced from: User talk:Alaney2k) ". Replace the User talk:Alaney2k/Archive index with initiation code to start the archive indxing process. If you don't want indexing, then remove the Indexerbot code snippet from this page. Let me know if you need help. --Kslotte (talk) 12:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * replaced - let's see if it resolves itself. It seems to have been dead for a while. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems OK. --Kslotte (talk) 15:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

List of NHL seasons
I tried adding season numbers a while back, but it was reverted. I really like what you're doing with the article right now, I think it looks a heck of a lot better, but I still believe season numbers should be added. What do you say? Jmj713 (talk) 17:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, starting with the first season, 1917-18, and skipping 2004-5, which would've been the 88th season, and instead the 88th season is 2005-06. One of the reasons I wanted to add season numbers, was the confusion the lockout season caused, oftentimes adding an extra season to a team's history in articles, for instance, and other similar gaffes. Jmj713 (talk) 17:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I think it looks great, much more useful and encyclopedic than the plain version we used to have. Way to be bold! Jmj713 (talk) 17:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I've got a question as to the early seasons having two halves. Is it correct having two top record holders for each half? Should the records be combined? I ask because I want to create a table of all-time top-record holders, and am not sure how to deal with this. What do you think? Jmj713 (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think the page is correct listing each half separately, because it's historical. For the table you describe, I would combine the records for each half. It's a record comparison. I don't think they have to match in format. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, I'll do that then. I think it would be an interesting addition. Jmj713 (talk) 17:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Dickie Boon
 — Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 21:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Challenge era is a challenge!
I'm trying to shore up the appearance table of the challenge era at the List of Stanley Cup champions, which I'm sure you know can be tricky. I think I got at least most of the omissions, but there's one weird thing that's bothering me: Brandon Wheat Kings and Brandon Wheat Cities, which I guess are really the same team. Currently the big table lists two Kings challenges and none for Cities, but the Challenges article goes into more detail, and it looks as though there is some confusion. I think the March 9–11, 1904 challenge incorrectly states Kings when it should be Cities (as in 1903–04 Ottawa Hockey Club season). Then the March 16–18, 1907 lists Kings also, but 1907 ECAHA season states "City". So I'm thinking there never were Kings to begin with, though Brandon Wheat Kings says: "An earlier incarnation of the Wheat Kings played for the Stanley Cup in 1904, but lost to the Ottawa Senators", but I guess that's wrong. Totally confusing and I think I just made it even more complicated than it probably is, but I think if anyone can sort this out it's you. Jmj713 (talk) 00:15, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You know there is a book on the history of the wheat kings out there. I've been trying to get my dad to pick it up for my since the only place I know they sell it is at the arena and I haven't wanted to pay shipping on it lol. If I manage to get ahold of it I will let you guys know what it says. -DJSasso (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be wonderful. Jmj713 (talk) 18:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Importance
I added the importance functionality into our banner tag. Do you mind if I delete the category you created? You used incorrect caps that makes it a duplicate of what our banner will want to put articles into. I can recreate with the correct capitalization. -DJSasso (talk) 18:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, please do. What is the title format you are using, so that I can put it into the importance article? I'm editing User:Alaney2k/Hockey importance if you want to look. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 18:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Template:WikiProject Ice Hockey it currently has a warning that the categories are missing. And lists what they should all be. -DJSasso (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I updated them on your page for you. I haven't created the cats yet, since there has been no official lets go on it yet. However, the functionality still works and articles are still placed in the cats. They will just be redlinks for now. -DJSasso (talk) 18:49, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Awesome work!
This is for us to share :) What's next? Gardiner? -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  <sup style="color:#3AAA3A;">τ <sub style="color:#3AAA3A;">¢  02:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Sweet! &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 04:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

List of Stanley Cup challenge games
I had an idea when looking through this article, which you must agree is rather confusing even to those like us who know a lot about early hockey history (I know you've put a lot of work into it, and it's because of that article that I've learned a lot about that era, but I've never been truly satisfied with how it's presented). It occurred to me that we could create separate articles for yearly Stanley Cup challenges. There are 22 years from 1893 to 1914. In these we could expound upon the main list, facilitating understanding, because from just the list I don't think it's easy to wrap one's head around it. This would also allow better linking in tables like the List of Stanley Cup champions, etc. An article could be entitled, for instance, 1908 Stanley Cup challenge games, and it would talk about all five challenges that occurred in that year. Then the info already available at the current article would be moved there and expanded. Thus the main challenge games article would no longer be necessary, as its main information is already contained within the List of Stanley Cup champions. Having separate articles for challenge years, I believe, would just make things easier to grasp, especially if more explanatory info is added. Also, this would allow linking to these articles from the main champions table, too. Jmj713 (talk) 18:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've come up with a starting point: a new overview table, which you can see here. I think having those 22 yearly articles (which I now think would be better titled Stanley Cup in 1908 and so on) will be extremely beneficial, and would also provide continuity with our annual Stanley Cup Finals articles from 1915 on. The navigation would thus be greatly improved. Thoughts? Jmj713 (talk) 21:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind my thoughts, I like the idea of separate year articles since thats the same as our playoff articles. However, I would stick with the first naming format you thought of. Its much more intuitive as to what it means, and it follows the standard of having the year first. -DJSasso (talk) 21:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There's only one problem, but I guess it's minor. The first time the Cup was awarded, it wasn't on a challenge basis. Montreal was awarded the Cup in 1893 as league champions. I suppose we just leave that year be and for navigation, like now, link it to 1893 AHAC season. Jmj713 (talk) 21:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, people just walk into my place and start talking :-) I don't have any objections, just some thoughts: Is it worth the effort to make those articles? They are basically content forks of the season articles. It would take a lot of content out of the various league seasons articles. There is some symmetry with the playoff articles, however, there are several dozen of those yet to be done. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's worth it. It's nothing urgent, of course, first we'd need those uncreated NHL playoffs articles. But it should be done, I believe. Since the challenge era is such a jumbled mess, these yearly articles would put some much needed order and clarity into the issue. Jmj713 (talk) 15:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if we can ever completely untangle it, keep that in mind. Sometimes the Cup changed hands after league play, so that's not a challenge. Let's do it right, I agree. I've not really thought about it, it's sort of grown as I created the season articles for those years. But as the content gets more mature, articles like you describe seem to be the best idea. I don't mean to be wishy-washy, just not thought about it. The separate articles are a good idea. If Djsasso agrees with it, it's -usually- on the right track. ;-> (I'm sure he's watching) Should there be format changes to the season articles for that time period? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:11, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm happy there's seems to be consensus as to the validity of such articles. The challenge era really does need more attention. I'm not sure about the season articles, I think, at least for now, they're good as is. But for the Cup articles we're talking about, I'd lean toward general "Stanley Cup in [year]" sort of name, because limiting articles to challenges presents another problem, like you'd described. Perhaps we can work out a better title to use, but I think the best idea would be to describe everything that happened with the Cup as it changed hands during a calendar year. Jmj713 (talk) 15:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's use 'championship', for example, "1894 Stanley Cup championship". That will not exclude anything and follow the convention of year first. 04:21, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL I am not watching too closely...I forget why I was on the page and noticed in the first place, but yeah that does sound like a good idea. -DJSasso (talk) 12:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, sounds good. For completeness, we'll have to start with 1893 though. Jmj713 (talk) 18:22, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Lansdowne Park Ottawa Aerial 2008.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lansdowne Park Ottawa Aerial 2008.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS September 2010 Newsletter
The September 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:17, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Pre-AHAC
I just found this article you were working on: User:Alaney2k/Montreal Winter Carnival Ice Hockey Tournaments. Why didn't you create it? I was just looking for some pre-AHAC info, and Google found it, strangely enough. I think you should, and work it into the current AHAC and Pre-NHL articles. Jmj713 (talk) 23:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I reworked the List of pre-NHL seasons and I decided to add the MWC tournaments as well. Hopefully you'll finish and publish your article soon. By the way, have you seen this? Cool huh? :) Jmj713 (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It looks good. Yeah I saw that. Too bad it went for $1600. No bargains out there for hockey memorabilia, it seems. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 20:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah but the pictures are wonderful. There are lots more, too. Also, should Manitoba Hockey Association be added to the pre-NHL list? Jmj713 (talk) 21:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess you get into the 'what is a precursor'. In Total Hockey, they list Manitoba, New Ontario, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Maritime/Interprovincial/Eastern and Temiskaming pro league season standings up to 1914-15. So I could enter that. (There might not be much text available for season articles, though.) Cup challengers came from most if not all of those leagues. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 21:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Right. Maybe it shouldn't strictly be precursor, but all notable pre-NHL leagues that contributed to the overall history of the Stanley Cup. Jmj713 (talk) 22:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Danny Lewicki
I noticed you editing this article. Saw that you added a reference to From the Coal Docks to the NHL. Do you actually have this book. I have been looking for it for awhile and was curious where you might have found it. -DJSasso (talk) 00:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * At our SIHR chapter meeting, Lewicki talked to us hockey geeks about his career, and I bought a copy from him directly. The web site 'dannylewicki.com' doesn't seem to exist anymore. He was kind enough to autograph it for me. A really interesting career, with some interesting information about the times, and the absolute control the NHL had over hockey players. He did talk to us about some things that are not in the book, like the alcoholism of Muzz Patrick, as well. I don't know how else to get a copy. There is a SIHR meeting on October 29-30 here in Toronto at the MasterCard Centre and it might be on sale there. There is an e-mail listed in the book of advance AT slopitch1.com that might work. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually just after I asked you I decided to look on google again and found the slopitch site which it seems you can mail order it from. I only know a part of his story. They talk about him in a good Tim Horton bio I used to own. But he is from my home town and I saw mention awhile back that he had written this book but I had not seen it in any of the usual book sellers so had been trying to root it out. When I noticed you editing that page it reminded me I wanted to find it. I watch all the players from Thunder Bay cause I keep planning to make them all better, but now that I live so far from home its hard to get information on them without the local hall of fame to raid for info. -DJSasso (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

List of international games played by NHL teams
I'd wanted to do this article for a long time, and I finally gathered my strength and did it. I do think, however, it's incomplete. I don't know if this is something you're knowledgeable about, but please look it over and maybe you could make any corrections or additions. There does seem to be at least some confusion as to the 1990 Edmonton Oilers–St. Louis Blues European tournament. According to IIHF, the Oilers played Graz EC on Sept. 6, but that's listed after the other games. GHL states the Oilers played afterwards two games. Another source (Russian), lists three games but implies there were more. Google News Archive doesn't turn up much. Jmj713 (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a really well-done article. Good work. I don't know of anything about the 1990 series, but I will see if there is anything I can look up. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you perhaps unearthed anything? I've also added the 2006 game in Puerto Rico. For now I can't recall any others. Jmj713 (talk) 22:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The only other thing you may not be aware of is the SIHR Journals online at http://www.sihrhockey.org/public_journals.cfm. I'm pretty sure there are some articles on the topic, but I've not checked recently. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 13:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought that was open to non-members, but I see that's not the case. If there is an article, I could download it for you. SIHR does give away paper copies to libraries, maybe they've just never thought of opening up the journals to free access. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks but it's hard to discern what these articles are about from just the titles, though some do look interesting. Maybe if you have access you could look through it whenever you'll have time and add to the article as you see fit. I'm also interested in non-international exhibition games in North America, but I don't suppose an article like that is really feasible. Jmj713 (talk) 14:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

WP Ice Hockey in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Ice Hockey for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:31, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Correcting the NHL Record Book
Just looking over the interview of WP:HOCKEY, and you said that you found an error in the NHL Record Book. Just curious what the error was, and how you managed to prove to the NHL that it was indeed an error? Kaiser matias (talk) 00:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The first broadcast of the games. In the history section, they gave the first broadcast to Foster Hewitt, which is wrong. I was fixing it in Wikipedia in various places and found it was wrong in the Media Guide and Record Book. You do not have to go to the NHL to get it corrected. It's Dan Diamond and Associates that writes the book every year. There still is some dialogue here at Wikipedia (I forget the page) where one of the guys at Diamond complains that we had it wrong on Wikipedia (which was true for that page) but in fact, their book had it wrong too. The Toronto Star back issues are online so I was able to verify that it was not Foster Hewitt who was first. It felt good to spot the error. Don't know how many years it had been in there. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk )

MWCT
First of all, thanks for finally publishing this article. So much work, but it's really important to the history of hockey, and I'm extremely happy people can finally read about it. Just one question, was there a 1888 MWCT? I seem to recall reading somewhere that there wasn't one, but that can't be right, so I might be misremembering. Jmj713 (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, the 1886 was canceled, so the 1888 must've been held. Jmj713 (talk) 23:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The 1888 carnival was not held. See this link. They refer to not holding a Carnival that year. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 06:28, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I gotta say, this early hockey history fascinates me to no end, so once again I'm thankful you're on Wikipedia doing what you're doing. Also your article on the emergence of the NHL, do you want to publish that as well? It ties everything nicely together. Jmj713 (talk) 05:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why I stopped working on it. I do think it needs a bit of info around the 1927 time period. I'm thinking of Lords of the Rinks book. I agree early hockey is really interesting, and it is completely glossed over in recent histories. It's like the world began with the NHL. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 22:55, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, most people don't realize hockey goes as far back as the 1870s. In fact I think that Emergence article really should focus mainly on the pre-NHL hockey. There's a lot to focus on :) History of the NHL itself is covered well in its own articles. Once you publish it, I'll happily contribute what I can, but I don't have a lot of literature to work with. Wish I could find a copy of three volumes of The Trail of the Stanley Cup, but it's way too expensive. Jmj713 (talk) 23:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Template discussion
I saw that you had participated in a previous discussion on NHL award templates. Just wanted to let you know that there is another discussion going on right now. - PM800 (talk) 11:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Nice job man!
Thanks! Sometimes it just works out. :-) &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 02:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Daigle-yashin-1993-94.jpeg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Daigle-yashin-1993-94.jpeg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Mosmof (talk) 03:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Waivers (NHL)
I have reverted your recent edit to the Waivers (NHL) article. To create salary cap room was only one consideration for the Wade Redden demotion to the AHL. Of as much (or more) of a reason was the significant deterioration of his play. In any event, this information is better placed in the Wade Redden article where it is already covered. Please do not again make such an addition to the Waiver article without first discussing the issue to obtain a consensus. Cheers! Dolovis (talk) 20:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Alaney2k response, as posted to Dolovis' talk page, is pasted below:
 * What is the issue with noting that Redden was assigned to get the Rangers under the cap? It just seems to be you who opposes this, what is this concern about consensus? Please explain? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 21:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you refer to BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, and please keep the discussion to this talk page where it was started (and not on mine). Cheers! Dolovis (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have noticed that you have continued to edit Waivers (NHL) without first attempting to reach a consensus on the issue. As a result I have posted this matter at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Dolovis (talk) 22:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't understand what the problem is. I asked you to explain. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 22:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't understand the problem either... the edits are clearly constructive. Signed by Barts1a Suggestions/complements? Complaints? 23:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I am a bit confused myself. Alaney removed the bit that seemed to be contentious yet Dolovis is still upset? Nevermind the fact he went straight to reporting it smacks extremely of bad faith. I would counsel Dolovis to start to try and work with others rather than come to every conversation with a battle mentality. You are starting to get a rather large track record of doing things of this nature with everyone you come into contact with. -DJSasso (talk) 00:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "I'm not bad, I just edit that way" ;-) I think it might be the lack of human interaction. Lack of visual clues, body language. Sometime, I just get in there without enough discussion. Some people are happy with me -- just look elsewhere on this page. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * And look at all those times I've proposed things at wt:hockey? Frustrating.... &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The biggest thing people on wikipedia should learn is respect. Even if you adamantly disagree with someones position on something, you should always respect them because they are just doing what they think is best. I mean me and you have had some good debates in the past, but I like to think we also work well together from time to time. Atleast I assume thats why you come to me when you have issues you need help with lol. If you always go around assuming bad of people on wiki, you will never get anything accomplished. Compromise works wonders...anyways I am babbling now... Bored... was supposed to have ExpressVu installed on the weekend and the installer went to the wrong house...so no TV haha. -DJSasso (talk) 00:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * With all respect DJ, it was just a case of not taking the time to discuss. (And I know why that was, I was busy with my sons) In fact, the article was not changing that much. I understand supporting with cites, so I believed that Dolovis was merely unaware, and it just seems to have gone downhill. I never said anything nasty. Like I said, not enough interaction. In fact, I was surprised that Redden's waivering was even contentious to anyone. Was it not lame or what? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * You can always go to adthe.net to watch sports. Lots there if not high quality... &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh I know, I don't think you did anything wrong. I was more commenting on his reaction to it. Jumping to the last resort notice board immediately without going to any of the in between steps of dispute resolution is just silly. But yeah, it was a lame disagreement. You've been doing some pretty great work lately. I have read a number of the articles you have expanded or created. I've been moving and have a new house so I have been only doing gnomish work lately (not that I don't do alot of it normally anyways). -DJSasso (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the compliments. You must be lonely. ;-) You're getting sentimental ... Gnomish? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 01:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WikiGnome. LOL not sentimental. -DJSasso (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

There was no "bad faith" involved in my dealing with Alaney2k. As he said above, it was a case of Alaney2k not taking the time to discuss the issue. I apologize if I was too quick to take the matter to the notice board, and frankly, I am very confused about what the procedure is when someone disagrees with edits being made to articles. I have no doubt that the edits made to Waivers (NHL) by Alaney2k were made in good faith, but it is my opinion that the extra comments about the Salary cap and Wade Redden are superfluous to the article and should be place in more appropriate articles. I explained this to Alaney2k and, following the [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle guidelines, I reverted and tried to discuss the issue with Alaney2k. Please tell me what else I should have done before making a report of my concern after it became clear that Alaney2k was going to continue to make his contentious edits without discussion and consensus? Dolovis (talk) 15:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Your bad faith has lost us both some privileges. I added the content and you reverted without putting anything on the talk page. Not until a day or so later did you then discuss. I added a cite thinking that you were only unaware. I'm not the only one who did not discuss. I provoked you, yes, but I did not want to. You seemed to just 'blow up'. You're the one who is so adamant against the mention of these players. It is a lame war, why are you arguing the point? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 16:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no argument, there is no bad faith, and I am happy to see that you are finally starting to discuss the issue at Talk:Waivers (NHL). Dolovis (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Cecil Blachford
Just stumbled upon what I think are duplicate articles. You created the one linked above and there was another called Cecil Blanchford. I have redirected the second one because I think its a typo. However one article mentioned 5 stanley cups and the other mentioned 6. Thought you might want to double check. -DJSasso (talk) 19:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Ching Johnson
Are you sure he was born in 1897? Legends of Hockey says 1898. Resolute 21:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Funny thing there. The body of the text already said 1897. So I made the infobox correct. Here's the dope. It was under discussion at SIHR:


 * His attestation form says he was born Dec. 7, 1897. see it here This is consistent with the 1901 and '11 censuses, both of which report his DOB as Dec. 7, 1897. SIHR's database, along with HockeyDB, Hockey-Reference and NHL.com, report it as Dec. 7, 1898. According to the lead paragraph of a NY Times obit (can't see the rest as it's pay-for-play), Johnson died June 16, 1979, in Silver Spring, Maryland, an unincorporated area that abuts Washington, D.C., at the age of 81. Again, this indicates a 1897 birth year. And there is a Social Security death record for an Ivan Johnson, born December 7, 1897, who died in June 1979 and whose last address of record was Washington, D.C. &#x0298;  alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 22:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I see it is a GA nominee. This would have come up anyway. Best to correct it before the review. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 22:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Works for me. thanks! Resolute 23:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Richard Riot
Hi, I came across this article a while ago but after re-reading it recently and thought that it only needed a few tweeks to be a GA. I added several references and removed some of the things that I could not find references for (non of which seemed critical to the article). I was going to take it to peer review to see what improvements still needed to be made but I wanted to ask you a few things first. From what it looks like in the edit history you added the Globe and Mail references (please let me know if I'm wrong). Since I can't verify for certain the information as it's not available online I was hoping you could fill me in on a couple of questions I had.
 * 1) For the statement: "The suspension – at the time, the longest for an on-ice incident in league history – was considered by many in Montreal to be unjust and severe. No sooner had the judgment been handed out that the NHL office (then in Montreal) was deluged with calls from enraged fans." is all of this included in the reference? I'm trying to confirm the first part about it being the longest suspension at the time.
 * 2) The statement: "Richard was not suspended but did not practice, sent to the hospital by team doctors on March 15 after complaining of headaches and stomach pains." I changed it to suspended by the team but I don't know if that's accurate. It seemed contradictory the way it's worded since he obviously was suspended. I wasn't sure if it was as I stated by the team or if it meant prior to the hearing.

In general since you have the most edits on this page I was hoping you could take a look at it and make sure I got things right. I know your busy with the Bobby Orr GAN but any help would be appreciated. Thanks --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 16:20, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * for # 1: The article states that it was the longest for Richard and the most severe ever handed out by Campbell. So, I guess it does not mean the longest ever. Good spotting of that. The rest is mentioned. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * for # 2: The article states that, at that point, Campbell had not suspended Richard. There was no game in the interim. And the hearing was for the following day. He was sent to hospital as a matter of policy after a head injury.  &#x0298;  alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick response, this information is very helpful. Cheers--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 18:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bobby Orr 1966.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Bobby Orr 1966.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 14:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Riot ends game.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Riot ends game.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Richard-rampage.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Richard-rampage.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:14, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Hockey Hall of Fame

 * Thank you, thank you very much. :-) &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Alaney2k, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Alaney2k/Godzilla (2012 film). In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar
Getting the article to GA was something I intended to do but it seemed like such a daunting task. Thanks for putting in all of the effort to improve the article and best of luck getting it to featured status.


 * Thanks! Hey I doesn't have to be me alone. Any work you want to put into it is welcome. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 03:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tecumsehs1912-13.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Tecumsehs1912-13.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 18:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Did you really just send yourself a speedy deletion warning? At any rate, it isn't a fair use image.  It's public domain due to age. Resolute 18:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * twinkle does it for you automatically without turning it off. I wanted to edit it before putting it on Commons. I was on a computer without a good image editor. Surprise, because I marked it fair use, a mistake, someone resized it too small to read.  I thought about it and made a copy on Commons. &#x0298;  alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

1886 Dominion Championship
I tried my best to look up any information, but alas, to no avail. So far as I can see, we have no information about this "Dominion Championship" that the Montreal Crystals won in 1886 in place of the canceled MWCT. Perhaps you have some more information. Is there anything? Jmj713 (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe I read about it in 'Ultimate Hockey'. I don't think it's mentioned in 'Total Hockey' (I don't have it with me). I figure there should be something in Google news archives of the time. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked through Google News Archive, but the search turned up nothing. Maybe I didn't search exactly right. Jmj713 (talk) 18:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Searching doesn't work well for that time period. The quality of the old newspaper scans is not too good. Unfortunately, it means reading through the old scans. I looked in 'Ultimate Hockey'. Nothing there. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

inre Godzilla (2012 film project)
The use of "2012" might be removed from the title, and simply included as sourced in the lede, as the date is not a definite and acts to confuse. And I might suggest you consider what information in the project article might be lost to Wikipedia readers in the event of a deletion of the article... for if the project article is not allowed to exist, even as a policy and guideline supported discussion of an anticipated event, then at least much of the sourced information can be used to expand on the minimal coverage of the topic currently in the franchise article, in our service to Wikipedia readers.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've copied to the contents to an article in my space User:Alaney2k/Godzilla reboot (film project). I actually like the title 'Godzilla reboot (film project)' better anyway. I added the link to IMDB. In retrospect, that seems to have been an error for the deletion discussion. However, I'm pretty sure it can be recreated in a few months in main space. I expect that Legendary will follow through. In the meantime, I'll continue on the franchise article and the article in my space. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 21:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, I like the simple "Godzilla reboot project", period... as its not yet a film, but simply a well-sourced article whose topic is a developing project... and the rebot project will quite likley include marketing of toys and novels and games (other things also not-a-film). When dates finalize and an announcement of imminent filming is made, it will be back. No doubt.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

1974–75 Buffalo Sabres season
I thought I would let you know that this one got over the hump. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Bobby Orr
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to note my appreciation for your effort in leading the charge to raise the quality of the Bobby Orr article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * But didn't Bobby Orr dislike Chicago? :-) &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:59, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Template: Ottawa Senators roster
If you do believe the extra A's belong, then I won't revert again. But don't forget to add them at List of current NHL captains and alternate captains. However they're currently going with 4 of'em (Gonchar, Michalek, Philips & Spezza). GoodDay (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Service award level
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:9px;" class="plainlinks"> There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable. Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 06:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Number of NHL seasons
Hi. Could you please add your input in this discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey. I know you and I shared the same view that the lockout should not count as an NHL season when we discussed a similar issue: Talk:List of NHL seasons. Thanks. Jmj713 (talk) 16:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no reasoning it seems... Jmj713 (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Difficult. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:48, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Old NHL Bracket
I noticed the old re-seeded NHL bracket you put together for the '70s and I thought it deserved a little recognition. Really very good work, and I'm glad to see the re-seeding visuals that we spent so much time debating (but which really do seem to be working out the last 2-3 years) get extended back to the older brackets. Do you feel that there would be a way to narrow the gaps between the boxes in order to de-emphasize the "stair step" or "ladder" effect that the early rounds has, in a fashion similar to what we're doing with the bracket design for contemporary playoff seasons? MrArticleOne (talk) 05:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Total Stanley Cup 2011
I don't know if you have this, but just found it: Total Stanley Cup 2011. Also, NHL.com has this "Stanley Cup Annual Record" feature, though I can't find the central access page, just separate pages. Looks like useful stuff. Jmj713 (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for finding this. Is this part of their site for media? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. I just found it by chance while looking up 1914 :) Jmj713 (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Bobby Orr
Hello! Your great work on the Bobby Orr article inspired me to rewrite Bobbys article in the german wikipedia. Bobby Orr has just been awarded "Lesenswert" status, which is basically "good" in the english language wikipedia. Just wanted to say thank you, becasue you deserve some credit as well. Greetings, -- Go Avs Disc. 12:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you and congratulations! &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Did you know : "Chinese authorities have turned down a proposal that Bobby Orr and a half a dozen other National Hockey League players visit Peking in the spring to coach players on China's national and provincial teams." Jmj713 (talk) 01:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

1938 European tour
I created an article for the 1938 Detroit Red Wings – Montreal Canadiens European tour. I tried to get as much bare information as I could right away, but I'm hoping you could help me get some more meat on the skeleton, such as more detailed game descriptions, perhaps even a scoring leaders table, etc. Thanks. Jmj713 (talk) 23:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't be modest. That's a good article already. I'll see what I can find, but Total Hockey does not have an article. They have one on the 1959 exhibition tour. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for any help. What I'd really like is better game descriptions and a goals scored table. Also, rosters, but the rosters in some of the articles seem to be incomplete. I'm planning to do the 1959 tour article, too, and already have been researching newspaper articles on it. But you're welcome to it, if you wish. P.S.: Unfortunately, other than a single mention, I could not find any information about the aborted tours of 1924 and 1932. Would love to have added more information about those. Jmj713 (talk) 15:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

1927 Victorias tour
That's excellent info about the Vics touring Europe. Is there enough information for a standalone article? I've been fascinated by international tours lately, and was excited to find out it's such a long-standing tradition. On a somewhat related note, I also read newspaper articles about a WCHL/NHL exhibition series played prior to the 1924-25 NHL season, but found little info. There doesn't appear to be any info on these games on Wikipedia, but they included the first game (or games) played by the Boston Bruins, for instance. The Senators also played, as did Toronto. All against WCHL teams. Should be interesting to research. Jmj713 (talk) 16:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * SIHR's Journal Fall 2009 has a very complete article on the tour, which is where I found the information. It was researched from European news reports. You should consider joining SIHR at sihrhockey.org. It's $30 per year. They have an annual journal, several newsletters, a discussion group on Yahoo and annual meetings. There is a very complete statistical database. More complete than hockeydb.com. For example, your query about the 1938 tour could be asked on the Yahoo group and there is a very good chance that someone would have more information. In fact, if you wish, I could go ahead and ask about the 1938 tour. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 16:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, that would be great. I'll check them out. Jmj713 (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

McGill & Queen's
I tried, and to no avail, but do you think it's possible to get articles on these hockey teams, seeing as how they're the two oldest known hockey teams? I doubt a season-by-season table can be devised for the earliest years, but who knows. Maybe SIHR has something? Same goes for the Vics, in their table of seasons there's nothing from their foundation to 1893. Looking at MLB articles, they have detailed stats going back to the early 1870s :( Sigh... Jmj713 (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * SIHR has standings for Montreal Vics going back to 1886, so that is not so bad. McGill - two seasons from 1886, then spotty from 1900 onwards. There is a McGill person at SIHR I could contact for getting some records. As for Queen's, there is not much. Again, I think there is a resource from Queen's to get records. I will put this on the discussion board. SIHR was an idea based on the baseball SABR organization, but we are many years behind in getting this all together. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The Trail of the Stanley Cup
I know you've used these books before, so I wanted to ask you, because I'm thinking of trying to find a set that's not too expensive for my book collection. Other than its limited edition quality, is it really worth getting for reading about the history of the Cup and the NHL? Or is it just dry facts? Jmj713 (talk) 19:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The later editions are not too interesting to me. I've not read them. The first edition I've used a lot. It's not just dry facts, but it is complete enough to have the last names of every Stanley Cup game going back to 1893. Coleman was old enough to remember the 20's NHL and he has comments about the players of the time. The second and third editions were put out a lot faster than the first one, so they might not have as much side content. I think that Resolute has a set. You could ask him. I've not seen cheap copies listed. The Toronto library copies are still in circulation. So I regularly borrow so that I can add more to Wikipedia. If you are a collector, I think they are a good addition to your collection. I don't see them going down in value. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I too am most interested in the first volume, and been browsing auctions and used book sites, and they're all pretty expensive, even single volumes, not to mention the whole set of three. I wonder why the NHL never republished it. Jmj713 (talk) 15:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe they don't have the rights to it. It's not clear about that. The first edition was printed at a printer. There was a printing with a publisher. It would still not be cheap to buy, I think. Total Hockey on the other hand, I was able to get for about $15 delivered. I think it was Alibris, or Abebooks, don't recall. Makes me wonder if I should do a scan the next time I borrow the book. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:13, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

1999-00 --> 1999-2000
With all due respect, I find these changes unnecessary and silly. The change tends to unbalance the tables slightly, and I very much doubt anybody is confused as to what "1999-00" means in these contexts. Resolute 23:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think you argued against it a few years ago on the NHL season page. Since the links are all the same now, it would be easy to set a standard and run AWB again. The main point was to clean up the mess - to eliminate the hundreds of redirs, and the variation in usage. Use the correct dash. There was a lot of usage of both 1999-00 and 1999-2000 in player articles, and with all sorts of dashes. A mess, really. AWB is kind of a blunt instrument. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 23:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but I do feel it important to also note that you flooded the hell out of my watchlist! ;) Resolute 02:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It should be 1999–00. It's used by most sites and 1999–2000 looks bad in the table. RandySavageFTW (talk) 00:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus at the project was to use 1999-2000. That being said I probably wouldn't have mass changed them like this. Not a big enough deal to flood talk pages. But it was done in good faith so no biggy. -DJSasso (talk) 01:58, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's used across Wikipedia too. To be completely encyclopedic in style, I think Wikipedia would use XXXX-YYYY for all seasons, but that would never fly. XXXX-YY originates in print to save space. Not a consideration here. So the use of the one case of 1999–2000 is a compromise to indicate the century change. Same thing takes place for the 1899-1900 season too. See 1899-1900 in English football, e.g. That all said, nothing on Wikipedia is carved in stone. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Like Resolute said no one should have trouble knowing it's the decade change. I think it looks really bad in the statistics tables, in the body or lead I don't have a problem with it. RandySavageFTW (talk) 19:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I was only stating why I think it's used in Wikipedia, not what the intelligence of readers of Wikipedia is. Take it up with the project or Wikipedia. It's not up to me what the Wiki standard is. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 20:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * What standard? RandySavageFTW (talk) 22:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). — <span style="font-family: Courier New, monospace ;font-style:italic">V = IR (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 23:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

More care needed with AWB
On a similar note to the above section, when using AWB to correct endashes in date ranges, please be more careful that what you're correcting is actually a date range. I noticed that when you ran it on New Jersey Devils yesterday that some of the instances of "2006-07" you changed to "2006–07" were in fact part of an ISO-formatted date in a reference (that's the YYYY-MM-DD format, which always uses hyphens). So instead of it mentioning the range between the years 2006 and 2007, it was actually intended to refer to the month of July 2006. (Even there, it was only part of the full date, as the day was fully visible). oknazevad (talk) 22:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Will be diligent. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Ottawa Convention Centre.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Ottawa Convention Centre.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skeezix1000 (talk) 22:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Potential NHL expansion
I appreciate that the bold–revert process can feel a bit abrupt; rest assured that I read your edit completely. As most of it dealt with Winnipeg, I did not realize your intent in discussing the other franchise applications. Since my earlier proposal to remove the content on Winnipeg as a potential expansion site seems to have been accepted, I did not think it was necessary to discuss my changes. Your subsequent update clarified matters, and I have made additional edits to highlight the specific cases where there have been specific proposals made for expansion, unlike many of the other cases. Thanks for your understanding. isaacl (talk) 23:08, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. I put the note into there as best I could. I wanted to introduce it with the Atlanta->Winnipeg move to link it together. Your final edit of the content is good. No complaints. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 01:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Swedish prospects
Hi, why do you want to delte articles about Swedish hockey players who play in professional leagues like the HockeyAllsvenskan?? 87.78.208.137 (talk) 07:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's enough for notability, that's all. Prodded a lot of Canadian players too. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 14:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

1914 Stanley Cup
Hi, did you have any more time to research what we talked about a couple months ago at Talk:1914 Stanley Cup Finals? I still believe what I wrote over there, that the Finals should start at 1915, because the Cup was awarded twice in 1914, so that year should still belong to the Challenge era, not the Finals era. I wish I had the time to devote to those annual Stanley Cup championship articles, seems it looks like no one picked up the slack yet, except to redirect the redlinks to appropriate season articles. Jmj713 (talk) 17:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Winter Carnival
Do you by any chance know where this research is from? It's a lot more substantial than what's written in "Lord Stanley: The Man Behind the Cup", and I couldn't find relevant news articles in Google News. Jmj713 (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The fourth photograph for the item refers to the Burlington Vermont Free Press newspaper. Who wrote the text is not specified. Maybe we should write to Classic Auctions. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There is minimal coverage on Google News Archives for the period. I found that The Day newspaper of Connecticut did cover each day of the carnival. Try [this link] The Boston Globe summarized it, but the Globe is a pay-per-view online archive. Now that I know the dates I can try some other papers. I was unaware you had added it to the MWC article. We should add the 'Dominion championship' held in 1886, probably. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 20:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I added it a while ago. Didn't want to create a separate article just for it, and since it's related, I thought it wouldn't be out of place. As far as the "Dominion championship" in 1886, again I couldn't find much, if anything really. Jmj713 (talk) 20:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Team pics
I just noticed you added File:1920 Ottawa Senators.jpg. I also have been intermittently adding team pics for some of the early teams (BOS, NYR), and have been thinking for a while now about attempting to add pics to every season of every team, but I wonder how feasible would that be. And is it really necessary. I think it would be a great encyclopedic addition to the season articles, but I'm not sure. Jmj713 (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say go ahead. I think it's a good idea. Often, those are the only pictures available for early players. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 16:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 31, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/August 31, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  04:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

<div style="background-color: #D4AF37; border: 1px solid #1234aa; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -moz-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -webkit-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); border-radius: 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em; -webkit-border-radius: 1em; padding: 8px; height: 1%;"> <div class="plainlinks" style="background-color: #FFFFFF; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: #88a; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -moz-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -webkit-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); border-radius: 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em; -webkit-border-radius: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; padding: 1em 1em .5em 1em;">



The Don Valley Parkway is a controlled-access six-lane municipal expressway in Toronto connecting the Gardiner Expressway with Highway 401. North of Highway 401, it continues as Highway 404 to Newmarket. The parkway runs through the parklands of the Don River valley, after which it is named. It was the second expressway to be built by Metropolitan Toronto (Metro). Planning began in 1954, the year of Metro's formation. The first section opened on August 31, 1961, and the final section on November 17, 1966. The parkway operates well beyond its intended capacity of 60,000 vehicles per day and is known for daily traffic jams; some sections carry an average of 100,000 vehicles a day. Planned as part of a larger expressway network within Toronto, it was one of the few expressways built before the public opposition which cancelled many of the others. (more...)

Ottawa Help
I need your help. You seem to be our biggest Ottawa history guy... there isn't much known about Ottawa Intermediate hockey post-1950 -- let alone the Eastern Hardy Cup history in general. I was wondering if you could help us with one of these two lists when it comes to Ottawa...

http://icehockey.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Hardy_Cup_representatives_by_region http://icehockey.wikia.com/wiki/Ottawa_Citizen_Shield_%28Intermediate%29

I currently do not have access to the Ottawa Citizen, or I would be attempting this myself right now. Any help you can give would be great and could be used on our Wikipedia Hardy Cup articles as well. DMighton (talk) 04:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Lokomotiv
You've created lots of team season articles for various leagues, so I was just wondering if you could do the 2011–12 Lokomotiv Yaroslavl season article too? I'm just not sure where to start with it, but I feel it definitely should be created in order to document the team's tragic demise and eventual rebuild. Jmj713 (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I wasn't sure, but I think you've done the correct thing in creating it. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 22:32, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you agree. We don't have any KHL team season articles, maybe we should? Anyway, this is an unprecedented situation for a major professional league, an unfathomable tragedy, and for us as hockey historians it will be a very different and new experience documenting this team's upcoming season. Please do join in. Jmj713 (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem with season articles is that they are supposed to be mostly prose not just statistics. And we have a very hard time even getting prose on the NHL season articles, nevermind lower level leagues so the pages often fall afoul of WP:NOTSTATS. Technically any that are just stats could probably be deleted. (expecially most of those created by hockeyben or whatever his name is). In this case I agree there will be a lot of prose so its a valid article probably. -DJSasso (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I agree with that, but the KHL is a major notable league. I'm not sure we need team season articles, but it's certainly something to consider. Jmj713 (talk) 16:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * As probably the biggest creator of NHL season article stubs, I guess I am pretty guilty of that. I'm not sure we could populate the various European nations' leagues seasons articles with content from English sources. As for the NHL ones, we are seeing some progress. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 16:43, 9 September 2011 (UTC)