User talk:Resolute/Archive 3

Time it takes...
Nice. I wanted to see how fast someone was able to catch a mistake on Wikipedia that's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kromped (talk • contribs) 20:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Review
Calgary Flames has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

CBC Anthem challenge
hey there was no cbc Anthem challenge page before i created it so whats your beef chief?CurtisOrr (talk) 19:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * alright fair enough, i'm just trying to be creative, i'm not big on the social networking sites so i thought ide try this, but seriously there was no anthem page, i created it, and stated a fact, anyone else could have come along and put there name right next to mine, and i think it would have been pretty cool,i'm sorry for "vandalising" other pages. as well as ruinning your dayCurtisOrr (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

New Review
Calgary Flames has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Fasach Nua (talk) 10:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Enough with the WP:POINT disruptions, Fasach. You are welcome to discuss your issues if you like, but stop wasting our time if you aren't capable of this. Resolute 14:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

1967-1992
Yeah, I did forget to tell you... I nominated that for GA status. :-)  Maxim  ( ☎ )  19:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ha! I noticed on my watchlist anyway.  I'd pretty much ready for that, though a mention of Mario Lemieux is still needed, given he is mentioned in the lead.  Resolute 20:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:9596Flames sm.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:9596Flames sm.gif, has been listed at Images and media 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. Fasach Nua (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Fasach Nua (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN/I
I have started an AN/I discussion concerning the dispute over the Calgary Flames article here.  Maxim  ( ☎ )  20:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kelownarockets.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kelownarockets.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Krusty the Clown
I've had more than my share of encounters with anti-fair use image crusaders, and my general policy is to just step aside and let them do their thing because there is no reasoning with most of them. However, in this case, especially with the images on Homer's article, I believe they are justified. By the way, perhaps you should look at my user page. -- Scorpion0422 15:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Bryan Adams awards
Fixed the problems. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Governors of Alaska
It's already been promoted, but I wanted to ask your opinion on the changes I made in re to your comments on the FLC. Thanks! --Golbez (talk) 07:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

History of the National Hockey League
I've re-created it with the lead, timeline, and sources, from User:Maxim/Sandbox. You make like to tweak the timeline image; it was a cut'n'paste job with Microsoft Paint from the other four images. I realised that you had used Excel to make the images only when I was almost finished filing the paperwork (looking at your description of the first image and checking for attributions purposes); it seemed too much of a timesink not to upload what I had already done. butterfly (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Restart
Normally, when a FAC hasn't garnered sufficient support after such a long time (almost a month), it would be archived, not promoted. Since I can't decipher why that FAC hasn't received sufficient attention, I decided to restart it instead, hoping that reviewers will engage a clean FAC. You can invite editors who previously declared to weigh in again, as long as you stay within WP:CANVASS. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Thanks! Resolute 02:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, it's a clean slate. Maybe the length of the previous FAC was scaring reviewers off.  Please get Awadewit or Elcobbola to clear the image issues.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I will do so, as I have to say I am not sure what issues exist. Resolute 02:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: September 2008
It wasn't me; there must be a bug in your system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.153.184.17 (talk) 17:44, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Peer review/List of Calgary Flames general managers/archive1
Hello, I've left comments on the above peer review. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Casey Gardiner
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Casey Gardiner. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ATPTennis (talk) 17:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Tiny Thompson
I've been working on this article for a fair bit; it's gotten GA status and a copyedit from Risker. However, I'm missing details on some of his personal life. Since he was a Calgary resident, and so are you, do you know anything about him? Or any sources? Or how to get them? I'd really appreciate your help with this article. Thanks a lot,  Maxim (talk)  18:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review/Roger Crozier Saving Grace Award/archive1
Hello, I left comments on the above peer review. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw, thanks! I've been so busy this past week I haven't had time to address comments and concerns raised at all.  Trying to get caught up today.  Resolute 17:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

User:SRE.K.A.L.24/Head coaches-managers
I created a page that you may like to use in the future. --  SRE.K.A nnoyomous .L. 24 [c] 07:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Reply
YOU are warning ME after you removed discussion from a talk page and I reverted? WTF? --134.153.14.165 (talk) 01:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Using a metaphor to show the absurdity of the other sides argument is an effective debating technique. What's wrong with that? --134.153.14.165 (talk) 02:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Calgary Flames draft picks
The list looks very good (and if I weren't so lazy, I'd whip the Leafs' one into shape), but there is no consensus to promote right now, so I archived it. I recommend re-submitting it right away. If users insist that you include the trades (which I'm sort of split on, it would have uses, but I think in the end isn't necessary), you could just do something like what is done here. -- Scorpion 0422  20:18, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. The problem seems to hang on the sort function, and only one user who held onto the idea that I need to list all drafts.  What I need is to figure out how to make the table sort the way people want, then try again.   I have a feeling this FLC was defeated by limitations in the templates.  Once I have time, I'll pick it back up and resubmit it.   Thanks! Resolute 21:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Is this worth noting in the Calgary Hitmen article? It seems like it's just giving undue weight to trivia, and the table isn't even complete. -- Scorpion 0422  03:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw that, and I agree with your removal of it. The teddy bear toss is already referenced, and a table showing each year's total is remarkably trivial. The article is already chart heavy as it is. Resolute 05:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Vancouver Canucks
From Djsasso's page. After posting my question about changing the founding date 1945 back to 1970, I feared you would ask the Montreal & WHA questions (as I knew it would snare me). GoodDay (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL! Sorry, but I had to.  If I have to live with 1972 as a founding date for the Calgary Flames, then everyone else has to suffer too!  ;o)  Resolute 20:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The ironic thing, is the only team out of the group I could probably budge on would be the Canucks page as it is somewhat questionable, but the others are all obviously descendants. -Djsasso (talk) 20:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Are we sure there's no records of the pre-NHL Canucks being folded (say 1-minute) before the NHL Canucks were declared. Kinda like the Progressive Conservative & the Canadian Alliance ceasing to exist, the day before the Conservative Party came into existance. GoodDay (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the point of the situation is, whether or not the pre-nhl ones did fold prior or not, they de-facto continued the team by using the same name and a huge portion of the playing personnel after the switch. Just like the tonnes of minor league teams that jump leagues all the time. People just aren't used to it happening on a major league level. Only real examples are the WHA/NHL, and ABA/NBA, and AFL/NFL which were all a slightly different situation in that they were mergers. -Djsasso (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sooo, I'm stuck with 1945 on that article. As for Honoured section, I like Resolute's idea. GoodDay (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Feel free to move them over, but I would note in your edit summary where you are moving them to. -Djsasso (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Transfer complete. Just curious, seeing as there's a Vancouver Canucks (WHL) article. Could it be argued to have (for example) a Winnipeg Jets (WHA) article? GoodDay (talk) 19:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It probably could be done, though I think it comes down to need. The WHA Jets existed only 7 years, so could fit easily within the main article.  The WHL Canucks lived for 25.  A lot more history to report on. Resolute 19:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I was going to say the same thing. Its split for size reasons, if the Jets article were to get to be too large the WHA history could be split out. At the moment its not. -Djsasso (talk) 19:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okie Dokie. GoodDay (talk) 19:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Brownmark Films
Just read your comment on the "Brownmark Films" deletion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brownmark_Films) and am wondering if you can answer a question for me. The article has been up for deletion for weeks, it's been listed three different times in different places, and there is obviously no consensus. Who finally makes the call to end the deletion vote and leave the article up, and how long does this usually take? Thanks. Shatner1 (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Interview
Hey there! I recently conducted an interview with Ruslik0 of WikiProject Solar System for the Signpost. I've been sniffing around trying to find another good person/project to interview. I asked Scorpion0422 about it, and he suggested interviewing you as a representative of Wikiproject Ice Hockey. After looking over your bragging page, I must say, you certainly fit the part. Are you interested?

I understand that you are busy moving into a new house. If you are interested in doing the interview but are worried about time concerns, don't fret! I'm no in particular hurry. If it has to be pushed back an issue or too, so be it. Either way, leave me a message either here or on my talk page. Thanks! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 21:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Awesome! I posted some questions here. I suggest you add that page to your watchlist. As you respond to the questions, I will try to add follow-up questions based on your answers. Ideally, I'd like your responses to be a solid paragraph in length and to be of roughly consistent size with each other, but don't feel pressured to write more or less than you want. Cool. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been mulling it over for a couple of days, and I think you're good to go! I think the last answer you gave wraps it all up quite nicely, and I can't seem to think of anything else to ask. Feel free to edit your responses, I'll add the finishing touches to the page and submit it to the Signpost. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:
Thanks! It's already upgraded :)  aye matthew  ✡ 22:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Calgary Flames captains list
Hiya Resolute, I can't find that list anywhere. Any idea's as to where it went? GoodDay (talk) 19:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * We should re-add the list to the Calgary Flames article. The Toronto Maple Leafs own list, should be re-added to its (Maple Leafs) article aswell. GoodDay (talk) 20:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. Frankly at the moment I think the Calgary Flames set of articles are the gold standard. The team article should be more about the team than about players on it. I think most team pages are already overrun with too much about their personnel. Perhaps thats just my opinion. -Djsasso (talk) 20:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well then, can we restore the Flames captains list to the Flames Honourees article? GoodDay (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess, but I don't see the point, they weren't technically honouree's. Being a captain is technically a job title, not an award. Do you not like how they show up on the players list? -Djsasso (talk) 20:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think noting the captains in the players list is sufficient. Agreed that it isn't an honour or award in the sense of how that article is scoped.  Truthfully, I see the captains as being important to note, but not so important that a list needs to be made of it. Resolute 20:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Ohhh, that's blasphemy. They need their own list, as we've been doing for all these years. GoodDay (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Truth be told I have never seen the position of captain as being a big deal. But I know you have a love affair with captains. You could bring it to a wider forum if you wanted, but personally I think notes on a player list page is enough. -Djsasso (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * May I make a list of 'em at the List of Calgary Flames players article? Make it easier to find them. GoodDay (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Except that it would be redundant to the main list. Resolute 21:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I long for those good ole days, when the 30 articles had their respective lists. GoodDay (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You know the one thing about wikipedia is that it is not static, things are always getting edited and improved. Wikipedia is definately not a place you can get nostalgic. Alot of things are done because they are the quickest way at the time, as the lists may have been. And over time as people move from one to-do list task to another they slowly get made better. Personally I think this is one of those steps. The true goal of course being no lists at all on article pages and to just have prose for all topics on the pages, not specifically captains. -Djsasso (talk) 21:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Pardon me, gentlemen. I'm going to have a good cry. GoodDay (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Resolute. Just as I've ran out of kleenex, too. GoodDay (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Lighnting & Thrashers
Yeah, the Lightning are confusing. Meanwhile, I'm still annoyed with the Thrashers refusal to name Kozlov captain. Jumpers, they pass him over in 2005 (choosing Mellanby) & 2007 (choosing Holik) & now this no captain stuff. GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks like my changes aren't accepted at List of current NHL captains and alternate captains article. GoodDay (talk) 20:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Some information on the WHL
Got a question about something you may have a reference for. I've gotten conflicting references stating that both Trevor Linden and Dean Chynoweth were captain of the Medicine Hat Tigers during the 1987 and 1988 Memorial Cup teams. I've tried to look for an online source from the WHL itself, but haven't found anything. I'm hoping that since you follow the league way more than I do, I'm hoping you may have something along the lines that I'm talking about. Any help would be great. Kaiser matias (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for looking that up for me. Got to keep that faulty information out of the articles. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

2003 Insight Bowl FAC
Wanted to give you a heads up that an article you approved for Good Article status, 2003 Insight Bowl, is now being reviewed for featured status. Any comments, criticism, questions, or support you'd care to add to the discussion would be really appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

List of Colorado Avalanche players
Hi Resolute, I have been looking at ("sweeping", if you will) Featured lists that were promoted some time ago. I happened upon the above Featured list, and saw that while it is quite good, it does not quite meet current standards. Rather than immediately list the article for a formal review, I left a notice on the article's talk page. If you are interested and have the time, I would be more than happy to list things that need to be fixed on the article's talk page. Please contact me at my talk page. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I am about to leave the computer for now, so expect a list of issues after some time, maybe a couple hours? I will also get around to reviewing your FAC for the third NHL history article—after reading the previous article that was at FAC, I am looking forward to it. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great job on updating the list. I made some more tweaks. The only other thing I can think of at the moment is to highlight the players' names only rather than the whole row. See List of Montreal Canadiens head coaches. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Consensus Building

 * As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 —  talk 00:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

History of the NHL
I'll go through the 1967-92 one tomorrow, and the 1992-present one at a later time, maybe on Wednesday.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 22:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All done with 1967-92. Please look for any mistakes I may have made, and change back anything that you don't like.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 18:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also done with 1967–92 for now. Since Sandy and Raul generally don't like it when archived FACs are immediately re-submitted, you should wait a couple weeks. In the meantime, try to find an editor who is not involved with sports articles to look at it. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I just worked on the lead and first section of the 1992-present article. When that one is ready for nomination, let me know and I will give the rest of it close attention. In the meantime, Dabomb is correct on both counts. Wait 2-3 weeks before re-nominating so it doesn't appear rushed, and try to find a non-sports editor willing to look at it. I can fix sentences so they read a little better, but I'm too much of a sports fan to easily spot jargon. Hopefully, the copy-edits were beneficial.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 21:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: Dude!
Haha - Sorry about that. Good news is I am done! Almost 700 edits later - the template links are working. Take a look. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

List of welterweight boxing champions
Hiya Resolute. I've been trying to fix Santos & Margarito's entries in that article's WBO section. But, everytime I try, the article goes hay-wire. Any clues, as to the problem? GoodDay (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

'Tis better, but it still won't allow me to wiki-link the names. GoodDay (talk) 17:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you. I thought the article had me in the 3rd Round. GoodDay (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyedit
Hey Resolute, it was requested in the article's FLC that either you or Maxim give List of New York Islanders award winners a copyedit. Would you mind doing it? Maxim said he didn't have enough time. Thanks,  iMatthew //  talk  //  12:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Final version
As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 21:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

25 nhl championships
My bad, the wording on the note confused me ;-) --Lvivske (talk) 01:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Dan Dorion
Hi Resolute,

I know I may come across as very pedantic here, but I would prefer it if people didn't refer to the United States as "the world". I would have thought that a Canadian would know better.

Phil Bridger (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But the league is the highest level in the entire world...not just the US. -Djsasso (talk) 00:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

My Bad
My bad, I thought it was better, but kk. It makes sense though, to encourage people to create articles. So should I go back and revert the changes? And should I give red links for all the players? My fault again, sorry. And is it okay to give the players the correct accents on their names and such? Also i don't know how to sign comments, but I'll try. Peace.

Bort08 (talk) 10:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Taro
I'm guessing you're watching the page, but please refer to the discussion on the List_of_Buffalo_Sabres_players page :) Thanks Infero Veritas (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

HockeyDraft Central
I wonder what happen to the guy, running that website? He hasn't made an update since November 13, 2005. I hope it didn't stop, 'cause Wikipedia started using his website as a source. GoodDay (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

PK Subban
Thanks for letting me know. Agree that it's probably best to bring this to AfD, my issue was with someone G4ing it multiple times based on an AfD from a year prior. Cheers -- Samir 06:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Question
I see your point with the List_of_Buffalo_Sabres_draft_picks page needing an overhaul to look like Calgary's. Might you be able to give me some instruction as to how I might work on the edits without actually posting it to the page until it's finished? I have no problem making the changes, but obviously there's some stat checking to be done, which would be alot easier if I had another place to work on it and preview it before actually posting it. Infero Veritas (talk) 19:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Calgary Flames
I don't follow the standards you're using to revert my edits. The Stanley Cups or the expansion draft are trivial, but the Calgary Hitmen aren't? Besides, the point of a template is to be inclusive so that you can link to relevant things of importance with ease, without needing to go back to the main page. Take a look at all the other NHL templates, and all the templates in the other major leagues. --Muboshgu (talk) 04:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * To respond to your message and some of your edit summaries, the hockey project rejects how alot of the other sports do their nav boxes as they violate alot of the standards for what should be in nav boxes. Secondly we keep franchises that relocate separate, so the expansion draft would be on the navbox of the Atlanta Flames and not on the Calgary Flames as the expansion draft was for the Atlanta Flames and not the Calgary Flames. And its hard to look at the other NHL templates as it appears you went and changed all o them without even consulting WP:HOCKEY. Most of our navboxes were the results of long consensus building discussions. -Djsasso (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at it, and if consensus is reached, I'll revert what needs to be reverted.--Muboshgu (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked and I don't see it. If it's buried somewhere in the archived talk pages, I'm not searching for it.  If you don't list your standards up front, how can anyone be expected to follow them?  Not to mention, I may have made edits to most, if not all, of the templates, but many of them, for instance Toronto, both New York teams, Philadelphia, and Boston to name a few essentially that way before I first edited them.  Only some, like the more recent expansion teams, Chicago and Detroit were painfully bereft of content, such that the template is more my work than anyone elses. --Muboshgu (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What I meant by consulting it was asking the users what they think of your proposed change. It considered general courtesy if you are going to make a big change that impacts many articles that you consult the editors of relevant wikiprojects. -Djsasso (talk) 23:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Practically speaking, most people wouldn't even stop to talk even after edits get reverted. And I don't understand why you want to deviate from the standards of the other major leagues. --Muboshgu (talk) 01:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Simply put, the fact that other sporting projects set poor standards is no reason for us to follow along. Resolute 01:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In terms of consensus, at this point, you have two users opposing your changes to the template. That alone should have led you to stop and discuss. I reverted it yesterday for very simple reasons:  Most of the stuff you added is already mentioned in articles.  Retired numbers do not need to be in the team template.  They are already mentioned in both the main and awards articles.  Same with Cup wins and finals appearances.  Featured in the main and seasons articles, and mentioned in several others.  To my view, they are far too trivial for inclusion in the template. At any rate, you made a change, I reverted.  That is normal Wikipedia operation.  The next step is to discuss, not to revert back to your prefered version and demand that we not change it.  One thing you will find is that we have consistently opposed the gaudy, overdone, and frankly, ridiculous templates that the other sport projects have created.   I think at this point, the best thing we can do is create a discussion at WT:HOCKEY about creating a uniform style for all 30 teams.  It seems that you've been trying that already somewhat, but I'd like to see a wider discussion on it before we start making wholesale changes. Resolute 00:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In terms of consensus, I had one editor revert the Flames template, and then one revert another. And once you reverted me twice (wasn't the same exact edit the second time) I came here to talk it out.  It is probably best to create a discussion thread.--Muboshgu (talk) 01:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Which I have done, please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey and add your thoughts. Resolute 01:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Buffalo Sabres
Just finished making the re-write of the Sabres draft picks page. I had two questions for you. First off, how do I go about adding a new picture to the page? I understand the code part of it, but I'm not sure how to get it from my computer onto wiki. And secondly, if you get the chance, could you take a look see at the page and give it the run down to make sure I didn't miss anything? The link is on my user page. Infero Veritas (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yea I know what caused the empty column, I just have to find it. I will add the notation things as well. As for adding a picture...what about all the other photos on that page? They certainly aren't the property of the person who first posted them. They're just photo's of the game. So how were those added?Infero Veritas (talk) 18:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to see if you could take another look at the article. I added the notations like you suggested. I'm arguing with myself over whether or not it's overkill (you'll see when you go to the page). I'm still trying to remember the different color codes in hex, so I'm sure adjusting some of the colors would help a little. Infero Veritas (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

List of National Hockey League arenas
Hey there, would you like to work on this article with me? It's a nice list, should be fairly easy to get to FLC.  iMatthew //  talk  //  19:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, yeah. Lets see how that works out.  iMatthew //  talk  //  19:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Banners
Thank you! Consider all of the very interesting subtleties that this brings up: 1. In 1985-86, the Oilers finished in 1st place in the Smythe Division and Campbell Conference. Yet the Calgary banner for the Division that year doesn't suggest otherwise. I wonder what the Edmonton banner says. Do you think you have two teams with identically-worded "Symthe Division Champions 1985-86" banners? That seems odd to me. Ditto for the Campbell Conference; the Calgary banner does not, for example, mention that it won the actual trophy (the Campbell Bowl). 2. In 1987-88 and 1988-89, although the Flames have a Presidents' Trophy banner, they did not put up anything separate for finishing 1st in the Smythe Division or Campbell Conference those years (e.g., "Regular Season Champions" or something). 3. The banner says 1994-95, even though no games were played in 1994 that season. These are the details which interest me! MrArticleOne (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fantastic stuff. It seems to me that Calgary and Edmonton are selling themselves short by not putting something up that acknowledges a 1st-place finish. MrArticleOne (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

mcguire to the max
i have very little experience amending wiki entries or using this talk section so your patience is appreciated. you acted very quickly on my mcguire amendment, impressive. i am pleased that someone with significant hockey knowledge is overseeing such changes and i appreciate your sense of humor "retart". as someone who knows hockey surely you can't deny that there has been a significant backlash against mcguire. i noticed that there were many proposed edits denouncing him so can you please elaborate on why my proposed edit was so quickly disposed? finally, how the heck do i find your response? here i assume?

got your reply, thanks. found a magazine article referencing a news paper article, the last part of the article talks about mcguire...

http://www.tribemagazine.com/board/showthread.php?t=121114

i also found this article about mcguire where he talks about his desire to broadcast "obnoxiously" (his word).

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/23/sports/nhl.php

was also considering adding that some consider him to lack credibility considering his poor coaching record...

http://www.hockey-reference.com/coaches/mcguipi99c.html

will you now support my proposed amendment?

thanks, m. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch macdonald (talk • contribs) 17:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

some helpful and fair input, thanks. will drop the point about the poor coaching record as you made a great point about gretzky. the article i referred to was from the toronto star not the globe. i found the reference on the star site. since it was a reader's poll there was no real author but i will be sure to indicate it was a readers poll with over 8,000 responses and that mcguire was at the top of the list in the "Guy whose mouth should be duct-taped" category. here is the link...

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/thestar/access/1094709011.html?dids=1094709011:1094709011&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+15%2C+2006&author=&pub=Toronto+Star&edition=&startpage=E.1&desc=Readers%27+choice%3B+Popular+poll+reveals+your+likes%2C+dislikes+Popular+poll+reveals+your+likes%2C+dislikes

there are also countless anti-pierre web sites and online petitions to remove him from broadcasting. can i not reference these?

thanks, m. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch macdonald (talk • contribs) 02:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

will my amendments go through then? do i have enough? should i edit mcguire's page now?

thanks, m. Mitch macdonald (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

History of the NHL
Nothing can be taken for granted at FAC, but I think it will pass once nominated. One thing that bugs me: why are the titles for Web references in italics? Otherwise, it looks ready to go.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 23:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I noticed after posting here that many New York Times references don't have the publisher listed. That's something that needs fixing before a nomination.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 02:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Ed Chynoweth Cup
--Dravecky (talk) 03:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The Go To Guy...
So I'm officially making you my go to guy for questions. Why you might ask? Because you answer them lol. Anyways, on to the point...Is there somewhere that I can find like a listing of the different info boxes available for use? I tried the one that was originally on the Erie Otters page, but it isn't satisfying me since I can't add color. And I found another one from the Victoria Salmon Kings, but that one doesn't have the collapsible franchise history part, which was nice. So that's my dilemma..any thoughts? Infero Veritas (talk) 13:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

AJHL 2009
Feel like updating that stats? this whole OTL/T section drives me a little batty to be honest. Especially considering the league still allows ties. DMighton (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I heard something interesting on the OPJHL (now OJHL) forum about a year ago. It turns out that the extra points from SOLs and OTLs rarely make a difference in team rankings.  The guy suggested going back to the ancient format of just wins and losses... no ties.  Reg Wins, OTWs, and SOWs all get 2 points and losing altogether gets you nothing.  Wouldn't that be something?!  DMighton (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I know... I played Tier II back in 1998-99 and 1999-00... and our coach would pull the goalie in Overtime because he was happy to already have the awarded point.


 * Personally... I've been catching a lot of Windsor Spitfires games this year... but my line on tickets has dried up recently... so I've been picking up a lot of OHA Junior B and Junior C hockey... our Jr. B is comparable to one of the lower caliber Tier II leagues (our Tier II and Jr. B were never properly segregated and are roughly the same skill level) and our Junior C is about the quality of Western Canadian Jr. B... so it has been amazing hockey to watch.


 * It looks like the Saints and the Storm are the powerhouses in the AJHL this year... what happened to the Kodiaks!?! Here, I am not sure if there is a threat out of Ontario this year or not.  The OHA needs to take the top 12 teams from the OJHL and the top 5 from the GOJHL and recreate OHA Junior A.... then demote the rest to Jr. B... then you'll see real hockey coming out of Ontario again... lol.   DMighton (talk) 15:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that. DMighton (talk) 19:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi
You just made an extremely good comment to the ranter. I love it. Very good answer. Syjytg (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that he is so educated and knows so many terms. The irony is that I don't know when he is trying to say, his terms are so complicated so even if he wants to make a point, I am afraid that we can't understand what he is trying to say! Syjytg (talk) 18:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety  talk 02:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hockey players
There are two new articles to watch, Jody Lehman and Kevin Shmyr if anyone with expertise in hockey wants to look at these articles and see how they are doing wiki-wise that would be awesome. SriMesh | talk  00:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Leopold
Back with Calgary, how you liking that? Totally told someone this morning that I bet Calgary trades for Leopold. Now to see if TSN is right that a Jokinen deal is all but official with Calgary as well. I also find it ironic that they got him for the 2nd round pick they got from montreal for Tanguay who they got for Leopold. -Djsasso (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nycholat and Wilson cost us nothing to acquire, and weren't really in the plans anyway, so nothing lost there. Leopold for a 2nd?  I can handle that.  We needed a puck mover with Gio out, and this allows Keenan to move Vandermeer back to forward.  Definitely helps the team with no cost off the roster. Resolute 17:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah I figured the only major hole (ignoring injuries) for the flames was a fast moving D-man and I think Leo does that without hurting anything major on the team. I think it was a shrewd move by Sutter. -Djsasso (talk) 17:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Hate to call in a favour before I've actually earned it...
...but I've gone ahead and started on the history of the NHL article and will look at Iginla when I'm done that (I grew up in St. Albert, and he and I share a favourite burger joint there, so fundamentally he's alright, like Glencross...unlike Phaneuf, Regehr, and Bertuzzi). I'm wondering if you'd be able to have a look at Alexander Cameron Rutherford, which is at FAC now, where a reviewer has recently indicated that he thinks it needs a going over from somebody new to the article (he said it needs "Several hours by a GOOD copy-editor ... at LEAST," though I don't know that it's as bad as all that). Any fixes you could make would be helpful and appreciated, and maybe you could make sure I haven't unconsciously written in an anti-Calgary bias. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. And careful about saying that you enjoy reading about history - I could provide you with targets for copyediting fast than you can copyedit them (I've got three more articles on Alberta political history that I think are about ready for FAC...).  And I agree that I use too many parentheticals; the problem comes in fixing it.  Anyway, thanks again, and I'll try to finish up on the history article and get started on Jarome tomorrow. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 05:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * John Brownlee sex scandal is indeed one of them, and probably the most ready. Arthur Sifton's another (the writing there still needs some polish, I think, especially with the damned parentheticals) and Charles Stewart (Canadian politician)'s the third (I'd really like to improve the broadness of the section dealing with his federal career, but nothing I've found on the MacKenzie King government says much about him).  To be clear, though, I consider anything I do on the NHL history and Iginla articles to be fully repaid by Rutherford; that's a long article.  I'd be happy to trade work on these three for futures, though. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 06:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

A humble request
I'm making this request of you (and Maxim) as Scorpion0422 suggested you might be inclined to take on this task. I note with some sorrow the passing of Colleen Howe, the one and only "Mrs. Hockey" and now-late wife of Gordie Howe, I also note with some surprise that there only a stub article with Colleen Howe as its subject. Sure, there's a school in School District 34 Abbotsford named for her but only a stub on Wikipedia for this author, pioneering female sports agent, and member in her own right of the United States Hockey Hall of Fame? If you're interested, this would make a fine addition to the encyclopedia and an easy DYK candidate. (I would, of course, have to recuse myself from approving or promoting any such hook.)

Here are a few sources that would get a writer started: Yahoo Sports obit, New York Times obit, USA Today obit, National Post article from 2008, 1974 NYT article by Howe, Corporate Detroit article from 1991, Globe and Mail article from 2003, Washington Post article about HOF induction, NYT article from 1993, [Sports Illustrated article from 1980], and, well, I think you get the idea. There are a jillion good sources out there. - Dravecky (talk) 21:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

TBL
Hi

just a word to say "great photos of the Lightning".

--TaraO (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC) (from wp.fr)
 * Hi
 * is there any chance you take Recchi ? --TaraO (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah ! that's awesome ! Thanks a lot (I'm lloking for a GA on french article about Recchi). --TaraO (talk) 07:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

John Tavares (ice hockey)
Hey! If you're interested in going for FA on this, I'd love to collaborate with you on it. Let me know what you think, and hopefully we can tackle this guy pretty quickly. – Nurmsook!  talk...  15:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Being in St. Catharines, Ontario, I'm sure I can find some local newsprint sources. I'll see what I can dig up. I'll also take a stab at the international play section. It's pretty well done, but I think it could use a bit of a cleanup and that is always my favorite section to tackle of any player. – Nurmsook!  talk...  16:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The pre-OHL stats will definately be tough ones. The one thing I did notice though was that almost every source I checked showed Tavares with 20 games and 28 points with Milton, contrary to hockeydb, including this source from the CHL's website (which also displays different midget stats, also shows bantam stats). For what it's worth, his MySpace page also confirms these as does Saginaw Spirit, CBC. TSN actually gives him 91 goals and 76 assists in 72 games with Toronto along with the 20 Milton games. All of the newspaper sources I found in my database searches also confirmed what I put in. As much as I trust hockeydb's accuracy, I have run into inaccurate stats there in the past, and am leaning towards the 20/28 versus 16/23. Perhaps he played in 4 playoff games, as hockeydb doesn't normally cover Jr. A stats. I'll look some more, but like I said, the overwhelming majority of the sources I found (as in a solid 90%) confirmed the Milton and the midget stats I put in there (It was only the CHL source that displayed Bantam stats—so I wouldn't be totally opposed to removing them). But I'm with you on the 90 games thing...just crazy! –  Nurmsook!  talk...  04:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's comming along quite nicely. Sorry, I've been pretty busy with that typical last-month-of-the-semester load of school work, so I've been a little inactive with this article recently. I still want to do a thourough review of the international section, which I'll get done in the next couple of days. Looking at the article, we have it mostly covered pretty well. The lead is great, and the personal and early life sections seem pretty complete. Your work on the junior career section has been awesome and the international section is also great. I think you're right on the style of play section. The only FA article I've written didn't have one so I'm not totally familiar with it, but I will look for some sources on that aspect. I honestly think this will be ready for GA by the end of the week, but because of the backlog at the GA nominations page, it might be in our best interest just to nominate it now and continue editing. One thing, do you think we should just scrap the minor hockey stats from the table and keep them in the prose only? As much of a completionist I am, I'm always torn on what to do on that front. – Nurmsook!  talk...  19:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I never noticed anything major in the local sources I looked at. One example of his team play from the "There's no "I" in John Tavares" article was his desire to have his entire team included when he threw the opening pitch at the Blue Jays game. Also, I removed the minor hockey stats from the career statistics section. I don't really think they are necessary for that, but feel free to put them back if you think they fit. I'll try to find some more info on his playing style. Thanks for nominating it, hopefully it gets a review fairly quickly. One last thing, have you attempted to contact anyone at Flickr regarding releasing their photos under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA? If you haven't I'll go ahead and try to get a few...there are some pretty nice ones that are currently under copyright. – Nurmsook!  talk...  16:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

My activity levels
Hi Resolute - I just wanted to let you know that I'm going through a stressful period personally right now, and my Wikipedia activity levels have dropped substantially. I hope to finish off Iginla soon and provide an FA review of the latest history article, but unfortunately I can't make any promises at this point. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for 1992 NHL players' strike
&lowast; \ / (⁂) 01:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Mostly wrong about me, but understandably so...

 * Hi.
 * As per the hockey FAC, I am indeed quitting Wikipedia, at least for three months, and at this exact moment I believe the move is permanent.
 * There are several strands of events preceding this move. My main goal here is... to apologize for the lack of AGF (but to salve my pride by pointing out that my objections were inarguably on-target, and inarguably deserving of a "Not Promoted" call&mdash;not a dartboard-hope-it-will stick effort at all).
 * I have lost almost all of my AGF for the majority of FAC nominators, due in large part to egregious abuses by one in particular. It happened a while back. That's why I am going on... extended leave. The abuse.. made me see every single substandard nom as a deliberate  and premeditated attempt to subvert the FAC process in order to get the coveted bronze star. [The past abuse was precisely that.] This is not at all helped by fan-club passes (there are many, many of these; I won't embarrass folks by going digging for examples).
 * Fan club passes are indeed another form of subverting the FAC process, but it's possible that they may be examples of innocent subversion. The fan clubbies may not be advanced enough editors to even know that their beloved articles are substandard!
 * I don't have delusions of grandeur. Many, many FACs are patently substandard (as was yours, though I mean that in a non-aggressive way.. I hope you will be motivated to improve it). Many, many nominators are hopelessly unable to see that. A small number of reviewers are in that same category, as well. If you want to call me an elitist asshole for stating a painful truth, then I wish you well. :-)
 * You won't hear a word of the following, since you probably despise me, but I'll say it for the record:
 * Let the research select and direct what you include in the article, not your own prior thoughts. If you had dug into the topic in better sources (both articles and books), you would have repeatedly been smacked with sources discussing the importance of the business side.


 * Good luck in all you do. Again, I am sorry for the lack of AGF. Sincerely. I am quitting because of it. On the other hand, if you have no forgiveness, I am untroubled. The plain truth of my comments was probably obscured by the underlying unhappiness, but it was still present. You can choose to focus on my bad attitude, or choose to focus on the information regarding quality writing. Good luck in all you do.
 * Wow, this is a lot of typing, and a lot of space on your Talk. I'm not gonna copy/paste it to others' talk pages; I'll just point them here.
 * Ling.Nut.Public (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

BlackBerry Storm Image
Thanks for adding the very much needed BlackBerry Storm image! &#91;&#91;User:JenniferHeartsU&#124;&lt;font color=&quot;#2A52BE&quot;&gt;&#39;&#39;&#39;JenniferHeartsU&#39;&#39;&#39;&lt;/font&gt;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;User Talk:JenniferHeartsU&#124;talk&#93;&#93;) (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem! Resolute 15:58, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:1988 Olympic medals
Thank you very much. There are more medals than I thought, which medals are which (ie. Which are the ones that were used as the general medal, are any of them from the Paralympics, etc.)? -- Scorpion 0422  19:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, according to this, the design on the far left is the one that was generally given out, so I'm not sure what the other ones are for. -- Scorpion 0422  19:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent Ovechkin Edit
Regarding your latest revert of my edit in the Ovechkin article: thank you for directing my attention to this guideline, I will not be doing the same mistake again. Forseti11 (talk) 04:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

New FL criteria discussion: Final phase
Hello, I think we've hammered out a good revised Featured List criteria here. If this passes, there will be quite a few FLs that could soon be delisted just because of 3b. With that in mind, I'd like to get comments and opinions from all FLC regulars and everyone else who has participated in the discussion before it's implemented. Thanks, Scorpion 0422  18:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

2004 World Series
I've address all the issues you raised in your GA Review. BUC (talk) 08:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok just going to bug you one last time then I'll leave you alone.

Thank you for passing it first of all. Just wondering if you have any thoughts on this article chances of getting to FA status? BUC (talk) 07:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

List of Olympic ice hockey players for Canada
Hello, I was wondering if I should split this page into lists for the men's and women's teams and I was wondering if I could get your opinion. It would be somewhat hippocritical coming from me considering the current criteria discussion. I'm kind of split on the issue, because having it all in one page is useful since both are for the same sport at the Olympics. However, the two are different disciplines with completely different rosters and no interlap. The List of Toronto Maple Leafs players doesn't include a list of Toronto Marlies players (in fact, I think you could make a better case for combining those two than these two). Because it's two seperate events the text really reflects that and jumps back and forth between them (especially in the the lead, you can tell that the summary of the women's event was just thrown in) and having seperate pages would allow both to have the proper attention they deserve. But like I said, I could go either way. -- Scorpion 0422  23:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * We've got all of the NHL history pages done, as there anything else that needs to be done for a FT? -- Scorpion 0422  13:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, you did most of the work, so you should nominate it. -- Scorpion 0422  14:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I'd like to take Ice hockey at the Olympic Games to FAC before the end of the month, but I think it needs some copyediting. Unfortunately, most of the users I would turn to are very busy right now, so do you know of any who might be willing to take a look at it? -- Scorpion 0422  15:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Jersey images
Makes sense to get rid of the Reebok images. They are from the NHL store. If you delete them from the articles, I guess you can speedy delete them.

I understand your comments about the pre-NHL stuff. I did not work on creating those. It all seems very ad-hoc, but probably with good intentions. I've been putting the seasons articles under their league cat. The league cat still goes to the pre-NHL, and also to the defunct ice hockey leagues, so we can work out new categories, and then the leagues can go under them, and the seasons fall into line.

I think I know where you are going with the clean-up of the Evolution link template. I think there are some 'connecting articles' to be written there? Like 'History of early professional ice hockey' though I can't think of a good name right now. It's not OR to link the various leagues that led to the NHL, but clearly it's not well expressed in the articles. Alaney2k (talk) 22:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The Evolution template is not great, not well defined, but when I started working on the old hockey, there was precious little in the way of content. It's a place-holder. I've added to the Evolution link template, but then I know about the connections and links from all the books I've been reading on that era. If you have a definition for an article on that time period, I'd be happy to help out. I like the period a lot, what with all the character there were around then. I'm not working on new articles at the moment, though I know I want to work on more team seasons articles. Alaney2k (talk) 23:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice words. It takes a fair amount of digging to get at the reality. Case in point, the 1919 Stanley Cup final. Most written material assume the rules changed game-by-game. But I found in the Globe from that time period that they kept the rules from game 4 to game 5 because it was a 'replay'. I can get started on the early articles. 'Early Amateur Ice Hockey in North America'? I would also like to write an article on the March 1875 game itself. It is a pivotal game. The title stumps me a bit. 'The First Indoor Game of Ice Hockey'? 'The Victoria Rink Game'? Alaney2k (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Chinook Hockey League
Know anything about the Chinook Hockey League? I could use some assistance. DMighton (talk) 05:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There was a third league last year in Quebec... but it is currently on hiatus... money issues and being raided by the Quebec Semi-pro league I think are the issues. DMighton (talk) 14:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies
Listen, I wanted to say I am especially sorry to you. You can actually see further up my talk page a section named the same as this one here is! It's bad when there is bad blood between editors. And I really want us to suspend any wikidrama (for the second time!) and start over. Deal? - rst20xx (talk) 01:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Tavares (ice hockey)
The article John Tavares (ice hockey) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Tavares (ice hockey) for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Canadian  Nine  20:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Tavares GA
Sounds good. Good job with the article, it was nice to see it pass to problem-free! – Nurmsook!  talk...  22:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bragging
With all your WP accomplishments, you might want to shoot for a WP:FOUR award if you have not already earned one. Also, take a look back at Talk:Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:04, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have responded to your comments.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wishes
Thanks for the well wishes for the Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Did you finish the promotion. I don't see it at recent yet. As far as hockey goes, although I have lived here for nearly 9 years, I grew up in Buffalo and root for the Bills and Sabres more than the Chicago teams. Good luck to Calgary.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, I updated recent myself.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Emergence of the NHL
Here's what I've come up with. I am working on an article to bind the Emergence of the NHL articles together. The proto article is in my space and you can look at it here. This article can then bind the emergence articles together. It can then lead to the History of the NHL article and the History of the NHL topic. I've not worked on it much so far. I'd like to go into the NHL founding a bit more and the Livingstone 'pestilence' after the NHL founding a bit. And of course, it needs lots of cites. I'm undecided about the List of Pre-NHL seasons article and the Pre-NHL cat. Maybe bind them to my article. I am open to suggestions. Alaney2k (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Brett Sonne
Oh, thanks very much! Sorry to have started that article from under your nose though lol. Hadn't he achieved prior notability with his First Team All-Star selection though? That's what I based creating the Kane article on. Orlandkurtenbach (talk) 06:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Directly relevant"
Sorry, but per WP:YOUTUBE, you cannot link to material on external video sharing sites unless it was posted by an authorized party who owns the rights to the footage/content. ViperSnake151 Talk  14:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair use and linking
Unfortunately our fair use policies only cover the scope of what is actually placed within the article. Copyrights further amends that "However, if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. [...] Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry)" Unfortunately I am gonna have to remove the link. ViperSnake151 Talk  14:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

About the table in List of Calgary Flames draft picks
So I've been working on a new project that involves using a sortable table, currently located at User:Kaiser matias/Sandbox2, and copied the table from the article. I made some minor changes to it in order to have the table fit what I need, but it ended up messing up the sortablility function. So I'm wondering if you have any idea how I can fix this, seeing as how it was your table I borrowed that is messing up. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The major problem I was having regarded both the skater and goalie stats, including the SV%. The issue at hand was that when sorted, the table would use the first digit, so 1 could be higher than 20, for example. User:Ling.Nut used some code to fix this, but I'm planning on revamping the 2008 IIHF World Championship rosters to be similar to what I've got started. The only problem is that with the code, the article size comes in at around 130kb, which is huge. I'm hoping that if the code is removed and the table can be fixed to work properly, it will significantly cut down on the article size. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, I got my table issues all fixed up. Thanks for your help. Kaiser matias (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Calgary Cup
Do you happen to have Canada's roster for the Calgary Cup? DMighton (talk) 03:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This is based off of what I got from the Toronto Star... I imagine it is close. DMighton (talk) 04:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Random speedy deletion complaint
== YOU DELETED THE GREG SMEG CLEGG PAGE WHEN IT WAS NOT EVEN UP FOR AN HOUR. I HAD NOT YET FINISHED CREATING THE PAGE. WTF MAN? ==--Gregory Clegg (talk) 06:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Trigger-happy kids.... kill kill kill eh?--Melchiord (talk) 06:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Trigger happy kids who are aware that no assertion of notability is an excellent way to have an article deleted. Resolute 14:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Worlds
Hello, I am going away for the weekend, so please keep an eye on Ice Hockey World Championships, List of IIHF World Championship medalists, List of Olympic medalists in ice hockey‎ and ice hockey at the Olympic Games? I'm sure other pages will be targeted by revisionist nationalists too, but those four are all FLs or GAs, so they are of the most concern. If Russia wins, it will get very ugly (and if they don't win, it probably will anyway). I'll be back Sunday evening. Thanks, Scorpion 0422  02:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

NHL/Stanley Cup Titles
if you look at the page's talk section it clearly states what it should be. also, the canadiens won their first cup in 1915-16, that was before there was an nhl. Warriorshockey1 (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC) Also, it is the NHL's article not the Stanley Cup so it should be "NHL Titles" Warriorshockey1 (talk) 20:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

ok
thank you for clearing that up Warriorshockey1 (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * So very true! Warriorshockey1 (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Shall we close it?
Shall we close (delete) Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-05-11/Ice Hockey World Championships, as it appears the dispute has been resolved at Ice Hockey World Championships article? GoodDay (talk) 14:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics
Hello Resolute! Seeing that you reviewed the article Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics, I like to know if you could review the article Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. I have nominated the Rio de Janeiro's article but anyone started the review process. Regards; <b style="font-size:small; font-family:vivaldi; color:black;">Felipe Menegaz</b> 21:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a really over-citation, and all is fault of my perfectionism. I designed the article to have a perfect symmetry. Well, I divided the article into three main parts: Introduction, Sections and Sub-sections. The Introduction has 3 paragraphs (in the future will have 4.) of equal size (5 lines [in my browser].) and equal number of references (5 for each of them.), alongside with the Infobox. Each of the Sections have 3 paragraphs of equal size (the first 2 paragraphs have 10 lines due to the image, and the last paragraph has 8 lines [in my browser].), equal number of references (10 for each of them.), left-aligned images of same dimensions (about 400x600.) and a related template at the section's bottom. Each of the Sub-sections have only 1 paragraph of equal size (12 lines [in my browser].) and equal number of references (20 for each of them.), alongside with right-aligned images of same dimensions (about 800x500.). Overall, the article will have 200 references and an approximate size of 100,000 bytes.


 * Please, go to Talk:Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics and see the article's project. Cheers; <b style="font-size:small; font-family:vivaldi; color:black;">Felipe Menegaz</b> 01:46, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello again! I replied to your comments at the review page. Only one topic stayed pending: the prepositions. Regards; <b style="font-size:small; font-family:vivaldi; color:black;">Felipe Menegaz</b> 16:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Should I remove the dates links of the references too? <b style="font-size:small; font-family:vivaldi; color:black;">Felipe Menegaz</b> 15:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Resolute, thank you for the review. Some tips about a FA nomination? Cheers; <b style="font-size:small; font-family:vivaldi; color:black;">Felipe Menegaz</b> 23:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

BC Human Rights Commission/Tribunal
As in my reply on my talkpage, I'm recusing myself from the Campbell article, but would like to offer two cites for the material deleted by Gold Dragon concerning the British Columbia Human Rights Commission's abolition and the cnoversion to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. It turns out that the BC Human Rights Advisory Council, a parallel body to the Commission, and the change is quite a bit more complicated than simply reduced powers and independence. If you wouldn't mind doing the honours (due to my now-hands-off status with the article), please read this summary/FAQ from the BC Human Rights Coalition and this, from a group known as LEAF (a legal association, not sure what the acronym is for at this point), and come up with a summary/precis in place of my phrasing, which again was deleted without warrant by Gold Dragon. Also abolished/weakened in the same era was the Office of the Ombudsman, but at the moment I don't have precise details.Skookum1 (talk) 23:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I was on the Gordon Wilson page and out of curiosity to see what's happened since followed through to Gordon Campbell (Canadian politician) to see what Gold Dragon had been up to and, sure enough, he POV-ized the content here, though admittedly it's not 4RR it's still edit war. He's trying to pretend that having only two seats disqualifies the constitutional obligation to recognize a Leader of teh Opposition; it only disqualifies the official party status, which is a different matter.  This happens to be very explicitly the Liberal Party spin-machine's line on the matter and is highly POV edit, as well as being distortion of the truth.  I will keep my hands-off policy on this article, but I'm sad to see you took no action against Gold Dragon for his continuation of his efforts to POV-ize content, even if it wasn't 4RR, it was still a violation of your warning.Skookum1 (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos
As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

A note re: Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review
Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">xeno</b><sup style="color:black; font-family:verdana;">talk 14:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hockey & Diacritics
I had to throw in the NHL template rosters bit. The pro-dio crowd, aren't gonna get something, without giving up something. GoodDay (talk) 23:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You really need to understand the location names isn't something we decided on. That is actually an English Language rule which all wikipedia follows and has absolutely nothing to do with our compromise. You've been told this numerous times including by people that are actually on your side as it were. -Djsasso (talk) 02:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Why are you (pro-dios) people, never satisfied. Leave the North American based articles alone (yes, that includes Quebec). GoodDay (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Well Resolute, it looking like we anti-dios folks are gonna get the 'rotten end' of the hockey stick, again. Soon, diacritics will cover all the ice hockey articles. It's just a matter of time. GoodDay (talk) 14:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * To be honest its your attitude that I think is changing most peoples opinions to allow them on everything. You constantly shove them in peoples faces. -Djsasso (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed, you do constantly shove them into peoples faces. GoodDay (talk) 15:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I never bring the topic up (I actually don't even add them into articles), you however, constantly post messages on various talk pages reminding people not to add them... -Djsasso (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * For good reasons, I did. But, I'm not going to anymore. GoodDay (talk) 16:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think Dj does have a point about how vehemently you argue the case. I agree with your view, but this is one of those debates that is going to affect Wikipedia until the servers get turned off.  All we can do is argue our points and then move on back to usual editing. Resolute 17:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've already decided to let you & others carry the torch. As I've stated years ago, I'm too emotionally high strung for these dios arguments. The pro-dios gang, have peeved me off, with their betrayal. GoodDay (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It's a new day. Having rejoined the discussion? I'll endeaver to keep my emotions 'in check'. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)