User talk:Njdhockey

Brian Rafalski
Rafalski is serving only as an 'interim' alternate captain (while alternate captain Colin White is injured/out of the lineup). Therefore his 'A' at New Jersey Devils, should be unwiki-linked and he shouldn't be listed at List of current NHL captains and alternate captains. I've reversed your edits. GoodDay 20:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

 Rafalski IS an alternate captain.
 * That could be a journalist mistake, as I've never (to my memory) seen Rafalski wear an 'A' this season while the other 5 (letter man) were in the lineup. I've only seen him wear the 'A' when any of the other 5 were absent from the lineup. Add it if you wish, I've started a discussion at talk: New Jersey Devils, you can add the evidence there & at New Jersey Devils, if you wish. GoodDay 00:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Why doesn't the 'source' mention Jamie Langenbrunner? GoodDay 00:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Why haven't you 'removed' Langenbrunner? According to your source ,he isn't an alternate captain. GoodDay 16:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * In accordance with your 'reliable source?', I've removed Jamie Langenbrunner as a Devils alternate captain, at New Jersey Devils & List of current NHL captains and alternate captains. Your source mentions Rafalski, omits Langenbrunner. GoodDay 16:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

GoodDay and Njdhockey. I checked the 'source' that was listed to supporting giving Rafalski alternate captain and discovered another source one day later from the same site that shows that information was not correct. The original source listed supporting Rafalski was Dated Oct 6, 2006. However, the same site listed a Devils notebook that listed Langenbrunner as an alternate captain and not Rafalski just one day later: Dated Oct 7, 2006.

As such, it appears that Rafalski is not on the Alternate captain rotation and Langenbrunner is, unless you can come up with another source that shows that is incorrect. --Pparazorback 17:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

NJ Devs
The article NJ Devs has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Pascal.Tesson 05:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)