Talk:2009 Stanley Cup Finals

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[National Hockey League rivalries#Anaheim Ducks vs. Detroit Red Wings|rival]] The anchor (#Anaheim Ducks vs. Detroit Red Wings) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Page title

Before any move regarding whether it should be "Finals" or "Final" in the page title, please review the discussion at Talk:2008 Stanley Cup Finals#Page title because there was a move war regarding this issue last season – and as of now, 2008 Stanley Cup Finals is still move protected. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An RFC in 2016 has ended with keeping the current title with the "S". Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Player rosters

Should probably be updated to reflect this years series. ANy templates available with the rosters filled out?Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are, but they differ from what we put on finals pages which list their cup appearances. I am sure someone will get to updating these ones soon. -Djsasso (talk) 19:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not be better to transclude Template:Detroit Red Wings roster and Template:Pittsburgh Penguins roster until said updates are done? At the moment it's just completely incorrect information. The more detailed tables could be shunted to a WiP subpage until they're updated. Modest Genius ^talk 05:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I've done so. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone would like to undertake updating the 2008 Finals roster tables for this article? Jmj713 (talk) 20:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This will have to be done with some urgency, now that the series is complete. The roster templates that I added as a stopgap measure are already starting to be converted to off-season mode, and will soon be useless. I have a version of the rosters in my userspace here, but it has a long way to go and any small help will be appreciated, to insure that it gets done quickly and accurately. All I've done so far is take the most recent version from this article's history and removed some more Pittsburgh players that are no longer with the club. I'll try to finish as much as I can as soon as I can, but the more the merrier. Thanks. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:08, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I can help out a bit, too. Jmj713 (talk) 12:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Red Wings got robbed.

After the last scoring chance for the Wings hit the upper crossbar, it dropped and clearly crossed the red line. Wasn't even reviewed. Sounds similar to another Pittsburgh-related incident, the Warner "fumble." Point is that the Wings got robbed. But the game is over so nothing can change. It should be noted in this article regardless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spartan9199 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you can find a reliable source to back up your claims, and it cannot be your own personal point of view. Otherwise, all content regarding the officiating or controversial calls that is unsourced or poorly sourced will be removed immediately. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sour grapes much, sore loser?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.61.45 (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Max Talbot or Maxime Talbot

I've noticed that, in most places (including the infobox for GWG) he is referred to as "Max". I would think his full name, Maxime, should be written. Just as we write Sidney Crosby (even though he's referred to as "Sid" in more informal dialogue - including Mario Lemieux's postgame interview on NBC), we should follow the same rule for Talbot. Is there a reason for Max -- or has he stated a preference that way? Sme3 (talk) 03:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The press in Pittsburgh generally refer to him as Max, both the Pittsburgh Post Gazette and Tribune-Review , I believe he has stated in the past as being referred to as Max as well, but I can't seem to find said source of that now. Androsyn (talk) 04:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Just call me Max, or Superstar." "Okay Max." (referring to one of the legendary A&L Motors commercials, which can be Googled and "sourced"?). :) I believe he's stated that he prefers Max in English, just to eliminate all gender ambiguity. Crosby is a different case because he's said that either Sid or Sidney is fine. And I'll agree about the Pgh press; he's never referred to as Maxime locally. –ConkblockCity (talk) 10:31, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Statistical significance section

I'm just wondering if it might not be better to take all the uniquely notable achievements of the Penguins' victory (making the Finals again, seeding, road victory, comebacks, all the parallels with the '71 Canadiens, etc., etc.), and remove them from the lead, containing and emphasizing them in a section of their own, while keeping the header simpler and clear. –ConkblockCity (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of the things you are trying to put in the list are however trivial. In order for them to be notable each of them seperately from each other has to be the subject of articles about them (ie the article can't just mention them). So when going to make a list like this look at each piece of trivia you are trying to add and ask yourself, can I find multiple sources talking about this specific piece of trivia. If you can't then it is trivial. -Djsasso (talk) 03:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shorten Lead Introduction

Let's shorten the introduction. I agree with it, as it's too long. I think we should remove some of the information and place it elsewhere in the article. SNIyer12, (talk), 01:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rematch

It fails to mention even once in this article that this was a rematch of the 2008 Finals. But that is a very important factor in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.136.148 (talk) 05:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That problem has now been fixed. (And it was already mentioned in the 1984 Stanley Cup Finals article.) Spidey104 19:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2009 Stanley Cup Finals. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402154904/http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080611/SPORTS05/806110444/0/SPORTS05 to http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080611/SPORTS05/806110444/0/SPORTS05

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:20, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Red Wings

Does anyone think the Red Wings should've won the 2009 Stanley Cup finals instead of the Penguins returning the favor? I think Detroit should've won, not Pittsburgh. 2601:40A:8400:1820:1D86:32A9:6C6E:2556 (talk) 14:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]