Jump to content

Talk:Montreal Canadiens/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Request for references

Hi, I am working to encourage implementation of the goals of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Part of that is to make sure articles cite their sources. This is particularly important for featured articles, since they are a prominent part of Wikipedia. The Fact and Reference Check Project has more information. Thank you, and please leave me a message when a few references have been added to the article. - Taxman 18:59, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

I feel that putting Maurice Richard, the best player of his time and the first one to score 50 goals in 50 games, in the "infamous players" section, is kind of unfair. Anyone agrees ?

Mm. We're talking a player who in his time was known as one of the most hot-headed players ever, and who had been repeatedly punished for accosting or assaulting officials. No matter his stardom, if Richard was playing today and carrying on with the same antics, he'd be in Marty McSorley company; players have been banned for life in recent years for less. Whether an "infamous players" section is desirable is one thing, but Richard's periodic thuggery makes his inclusion defensible. RGTraynor 01:16, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
Just for yucks, I looked back over Coleman's account of the 1955 incident in Trail of the Stanley Cup. Richard clubbed his opponent (who'd dropped stick and gloves) over the head and shoulders with his stick, then when that was yanked out of his hands by a linesman grabbed another stick and beat Laycoe over the back until it broke, then wrenched out of a linesman's grasp to grab a third stick and beat Laycoe some more with it until a linesman wrestled him to the ice, after which Richard started punching the linesman in the face. This was Richard's second stick fight and second assault on an official just in the same season, never mind his record of previous (and subsequent) seasons. Compare and contrast to Marty McSorley and Todd Bertuzzi; nowadays mere banning for life would be academic, we're talking imprisonment. RGTraynor 10:07, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

True, but back then, there pretty much was no safety playing at all. If you tripped while going the 200, bam, your head would be in the boards...so it makes sense that a fight would be less safe. Also, though you might be right, in hockey, you NEVER hit someone with your stick in a fight. Not just because safety, but you'd look like a...lets see...pansy? Nachomania Forever!

Not to be forgotten

Do we really need this section? Isn't it kind of redundant and POV? In my humble opinion, it is simply a list of fan favourites; a list of players who, in the fans POV, are worthy of note. Most of these players already have a spot elsewhere on the page in such places as the written text about the history of the Canadiens, Hall of Famers, Future Hall of Famers, team captains, and retired numbers, not to mention here: List of Montreal Canadiens players. Masterhatch 3 August 2005

Thinking about it, yes we need a "Not to be forgotten" section. Would it be possible to set a limit on the number and importance of the players put there? The list here on the Canadiens isn't too long, but the one on the Leafs page is way too long. Masterhatch 4 August 2005

They're just overcompensating for how long our Stanley Cup list is.;)Habsfannova 18:55, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

There; I've conformed to my tacit guidelines for key players throughout the Habs' history that weren't team captains or HHOFers (although anyone who thinks Roy isn't going to be first-ballot need to up his dosage), and to correct that most of the players previously cited played in the last decade. It's not a short list, but we're talking about a hundred year old franchise here. RGTraynor 18:10, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
Racicot? I'll delete him tomorrow if there are no objections. ccwaters 23:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Ahh... nevermind. He's gone. ccwaters 23:44, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Heh. I kind of liked Andre Racicot, and think he got a hugely bum rap all in all, but it isn't quite as if he's one of the most memorable players in the history of the franchise. RGTraynor 05:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

List of Montreal Canadiens players

If you add players to the Montreal Canadiens article, could also be so kind as to add them here too: List of Montreal Canadiens players. That would be very helpful. Thanks! Masterhatch 5 August 2005

I REALLY don't think the nicknames need to be wikified...Habsfannova 02:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Nick names are a good way of separating players who have the same name as other notable people. Masterhatch 01:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Big Bird

Does anyone know, if & when the Canadiens will retire Larry Robinson's #19, it hasn't been worn since he left the Habs. Further more ,is it safe to say ,in the "Not to be forgotten" segment, that Patrice (Breeze-By) Brisebois will be forgotten?

I'm under the impression that the Habs will retire numbers in chronological order and will end up retiring Robinson's number as part of their 100th anniversary celebration. -- Xtanstic 11:05 20 October, 2005 (UTC)

We decided to get rid of blog links. The site that was left in seemed to more of a valuable research (complete with rosters, prospects, histories, etc). habsblog.com seems to be just that: some fan's personal soapbox. Not that there's anything wrong about that: but its not encylopedia material. Is it yours? The blogs certainly doesn't belong at NHL though. ccwaters 19:17, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


It is not a 'personal soapbox', there are several members engaged in Canadiens discussions and analysis. Although it is a newer site, it does collect stats , history, scores schedules, special events etc...and is updated daily at the very least.

When I originally submitted the link I did so because I felt it was relevant for someone searching for information about the Canadiens. Isn't that what an 'external link' is? If the word 'blog' wasn't in the url would it be perceived differently?

Thanks

Personally I'd get rid of all fan sites just to be fair, but that's just me. I'm not the only one watching this. They should chime in soon. ccwaters 20:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


Ok if it is all fan sites fair enough. Just let me know the final decision, Thanks.
Well, I feel (and many agree) that Wikipedia is not here to promote other websites. The "external links" is there to show reputable sources for the information in the article. If the link in external links isn't a source per se, then it shouldn't be there. Blogs and fan forums have nothing to do with an encyclopaedia nor are they good sources. It isn't just hockey that deletes the blogs and non-source links out of wiki-articles; it is most articles. Masterhatch 00:18, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Factual Statement

I was a little disappointed to see my statement removed from this Wikipedia page. It was a clear and concise fact: "Toronto is a far better team than Montreal."

It is concise, I'll grant you that. Clear or a fact? No. For one thing, "better" how? Over the course of the respective franchises? Of course not. In the expansion era? Stanley Cups for Montreal: 10, Stanley Cups for Toronto: 0. In the last six years? Alright, there's something. For another thing, it's a POV violation. For a third, it doesn't come off as informative, it comes off as an in-your-face to Habs fans, and that's behavior better suited to partisan team blogs than to an encyclopedia. Now you could certainly say "Toronto has a better record the last six seasons than Montreal," but at best that's trivial and subject to change: as to that, you have noticed that Montreal is leading Toronto in the standings this season, yes? RGTraynor 20:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Toronto (leaf nation) is not even going to make the playoffs, "Toronto is a far better team than Montreal." When, 1960's for a year or two. anyways, enjoy the playoffs this year Leaf fan.

Missing

What's missing from this page is a history of the buildings. The old Forum is as much a part of this team's history as anything else. fvincent 19:24, Nov 27, 2003 (UTC)

Hm, les Tricolores? Several sources indicate that "Le Tricolore" is the correct term, haven't found any references to "Les Tricolores". Tremblay 15:11, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Missing the coaches, too... Trekphiler 05:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I tried removing the "blank.gif" for the alternate logo, but it left [[Image:{{{alternate_logo}}}|100px]] on the page when I tried to remove it. Not sure if something else needs to be changed. Bigdottawa 01:16, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Retired "numbers?"

What's this about the Expos being "retired" by the Habs? Was a number actually set aside? If what this actually involves is a banner hanging up in the arena honoring the Expos, that's very nice, but it isn't a "retired number" and should be removed from said listing. RGTraynor 02:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

You're right, the Expos part should be removed. Also does Bob Gainey, Larry Robinson, Serge Savard & other former players, whose number haven't been worn for some time (yet aren't retired numbers) have to be listed? I don't think they should be, (unless their numbers are scheduled to be retired) GoodDay 18:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
It's back, for some reason. Being taken care of. 136.159.248.4 00:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Alternate Captains

The Habs (along with Captain Saku Koivu), have four alternate captains: #20 Richard Zednik, #27 Alexi Kovalev, #44 Sheldon Souray & #52 Craig Rivet. Is this corect? Mightberight/wrong 2:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC).

  • I'll answer my own question. Yes it's correct, I've watched the Montreal Canadiens on the French version of Hockey Night in Canada and have seen these four players taking turns wearing the 2 'A's per game. Mightberight/wrong 23:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC).
I had this same question with my friends the other night. They said that a pair wear the A's on the road while the other wear them at home. I'm not sure if this is true or not. Can anyone shed some light? Xtanstic 01:05, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Now that you mention it (rotating the 2 A's on home-road games), that is how it's done. In fact, in the last 2-3 years, NHL teams have moved toward this trend (of more then 2 alternate captains on a team). Formerly Mightberight/wrong, Now GoodDay 15:52, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

:Once more, User: 66.131.149.19 has (in the current roster section), stripped Kovalev & Souray of their "A"s (alternate captaincies). Just because a player is injured & out of the lineup, doesn't mean they're no longer a captain or alternate captain. The Montreal Canadiens have FOUR alternate captains, two for home games & two for road games. I have edited the article to show (correctly) the 4 'A's. the current roster is the 2005-06 season.GoodDay 17:12, 26 November 2005 (UTC) ::Yet another user, (this time User: 69.157.184.205), has taken the 'A's from Kovalev & Souray. I won't change it again, though I still disagree. I've surrendered the 4 'A's fight, Go Habs Go GoodDay 22:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC) :I'm just seeking info, has Bob Gainey trimmed down the alternate captains to Kovalev & Rivet? Under Claude Julien, there were four alternate captains: Kovalev, Rivet, Souray & Zednik. GoodDay 17:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

On the subject of logo design: are you sure the "CH" doesn't have something to do with "les habitants" (hence the nickname)?

The CH is definitely an abbreviation for "Club de Hockey Canadien". The official story can even be found on the Canadiens homepage, www.canadiens.com
fvincent 19:02, Nov 27, 2003 (UTC)
Really? Would you mind giving us the full link? I always thought it stood for "C"anadiens "H"abitants. Alireza Hashemi 06:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Flags

Not to add a political stir to the page, but I was thinking: Should we add Quebecois flags to relevant players, seeing as how the team is in Quebec and takes pride in that heritage?Habsfannova 19:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Ohhh..no. That's a big can of worms. :) Its been decided that those flags are country of birth and not nationality anyway. See: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format#Player_nationalities ccwaters 20:02, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Sure, when we start putting flags on every player reflecting their province or state of birth. I'm sure that Jaromir Jagr is just as proud of growing up in whatever Czech province he did. RGTraynor 21:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, sorry, just thought it should be a special thing for the Habs...Habsfannova 22:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Well ... unless it is something that people want to extend to every player in the league, based around every provincial-level subdivision, then it does assert that something about Quebec makes it uniquely worthy for such a citation. And that is bringing in a political issue, I'm afraid. RGTraynor 01:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I understand. I don't have any alternate (Or assistant) plans, either, RG...;-) Habsfannova 01:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
If this is going to be discussed, it should be noted that, when the Forum opened in 1924, the Canadiens were considered the team of Montreal's French and the Maroons were the team of Montreal's English, until the Maroons folded in 1938. When the Quebec Nordiques went from the WHA to the NHL in 1979, it was during the first high point of Quebec nationalism, and the Nords were in the provincial capital, and so the old system was reversed: The Nordiques were the team of the French, especially the separatists, while the Canadiens were the team of the English and those French who were federalists (Canadian nationalists who wanted Quebec to stay in Canada). The Habs-Nords rivalry was tough on the ice and nasty in the stands, although there was never anything like the Richard Riot of 1955, which some Quebec nationalists still, half a century later, like to think of as the beginning of Quebec nationalism. Maurice Richard admitted he was wrong to attack Hal Laycoe and the linesman, and he was smart enough to ask the people to stop rioting in his name, and after that he was smart enough to say "Keep me out of politics." Anyway, while the Canadiens (as their name would suggest) have been dominated by players of French descent, they are, first and foremost, Montreal's team, and secondly the team of French Canada, especially now with the Nordiques gone. I should also note that, in their last few years, the Montreal Expos had the Canadian flag on their left-field fence and the provincial flag on their right-field fence. But the Canadiens, while very active in promoting Quebec youth hockey, are a Canadian team first and a Quebec team second. But then, what do I know? I'm from New Jersey and root for the Devils, but we never would have made it without ex-Montrealers Jacques Lemaire, Larry Robinson, Claude Lemieux, Stephane Richer and city native Martin Brodeur. -- Pacholeknbnj, 10:00 PM EST, March 14, 2006
Uh, the Richard Riot the start of Quebec nationalism? Not even close. I'm sure Louis-Joseph Papineau and Lionel Groulx are just a tad more important then a hockey riot. And most sports teams in Quebec have both flags...even in Centre Bell. I wouldn't even say they even have a stance on "Canada" or "Quebec" "First."Habsfannova 03:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Team announcer shared by Expos in the 1970s?

I remember the announcer shouting John Bocabella in the same way the announcer at the Forum announced Yvan Cournoyer John wesley 13:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Popularity

Something has to be put into this article about the wide popularity of the Montreal Canadiens, I know there might be some potential POV issues, but if the Toronto Maple Leafs page has a claim to being one of the most popular teams, then Montreal certainly has a claim as being one of the most popular as well. User:Kingsean1 11:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Infamous?

Maurice did start that riot, but did not approve of it, and even went on the radio, asking rioters to stop. So was making a riot happen that you wanted to stop make you infamous? And they listened to him...

No, I'd say any claim to that around Richard comes more from the fact that no superstar in hockey history has such a record of violence and assaults against officials. RGTraynor 13:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

True, but it didn't state that. Nachomania Forever!

23 or 24 Stanley Cups?

The article repeatedly claims 24 Cups, but the year-by-year listing only shows 23. 69.137.220.179 04:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

They won one in 1916, before the NHL started.Habsfan|t 18:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Proper spelling

The title of the article should be changed to "Le club de hockey Canadien" in order to reflect the proper spelling of the team name. 67.160.202.16 07:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

And of course it would be on the French Wikipedia. This is, however, the English Wikipedia. Come to that, click on the English language tab on the Habs' official website, and you're directed to a page headed with "The Official Page of the Montreal Canadiens." RGTraynor 13:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Even if we were to use the "Americanized" version, its still spelled wrong. It should be Montréal Canadiens. 67.160.202.16 19:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Americanized?? http://www.canadiens.com/eng/index.cfm http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/?hubname=nhl-canadiens http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey/_4qc90jbtip20/teamhome.cgi?Mtl http://www.cbc.ca/sports/stats/nhl/teams/ http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Montreal/home.html ccwaters 19:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
The Anglophone media spells it wrong, just like how they butcher foreign player names by not including diacritics. 67.160.202.16 22:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. Its not the Americans, its the entire English speaking world. Care to expand those in the wrong to include the Canadiens themselves? first link was the team's official site in English. ccwaters 22:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
The team's official site can't even spell the player's names properly with diacritics, so you expect me to be suprised that whoever made the team's site can't get the team name right either? Diacritics need to be included in the article, any other spelling is incorrect and unencyclopedic. 67.160.202.16 00:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
You don't get to choose what is correct. Common usage determines what is correct, and common usage falls on the side of 'no diacritics'. All these assertions from you don't change the fact that the overwhelmingly most used spelling in the english world has no acute accent, nor should it since it doesn't even reflect the common english pronunciation. Deal with it. Aottley 02:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Why do other people insist that other hockey related articles must include diacritics then, dispite this supposed "common usage"? 67.160.202.16 03:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Because there's a minority of language warriors (almost all Europeans) who insist that English usage conform to the linguistic practices and rules of their own languages. (That many English names, on their own-language Wikipedias, conform to the local spellings rather than to their English equivalents is something which they studiously avoid answering whenever the question is raised.) It's been a political football for some time. RGTraynor 04:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Alexander Perezhogin's flag

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format#Player_nationalities and User:Buchanan-Hermit/NHL Player Nationalities (Flags). Basically Perezhogin played for Russia in World Juniors and therefore represents Russia. Also if you google him you'll notice he's was most often referred to as a Russian, hardly ever a Kazakh. Perhaps his is ethnically a Russian, much like Evgeni Nabokov? The flags are meant to represent nationality not place of birth. ccwaters 12:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You're right, I'll change it. --Soopafred 22:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

French-Canadian Drafting Rights?

Has anyone else heard or read about this. Nonetheless, I'd like to see some proper referencing. — Dorvaq (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Its absolutely false: http://www.nhl.com/futures/drafthistory.html ccwaters 15:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
As part of the phasing out of the sponsorship of junior teams by NHL teams (who would thereby own the NHL rights to the junior teams' players), the Montreal Canadiens were granted two additional picks (coming before all of the other draft choices) specifically for drafting French-Canadian players. This special dispensation was eliminated for the 1970 draft. See http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/draftindex.html, http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/spot_oneononep198802.htm. It existed only for a brief period of time, and the draft itself only existed since 1963, and so doesn't play the role that was described in the section that was added to the article. Isaac Lin 20:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Accent on Montreal

Someone went through the articles for both Expos and Canadiens and converted every occurence of "Montreal" to "Montréal" (on the grounds of "standardizing spelling" according to the comment in the history). For the same reasons set out in much greater detail on Talk:Montréal Expos, I have reverted the spellings to the English version of the city's name, in order to be consistent with most Montreal articles in the English Wikipedia. I appreciate that Montréal is the official name of the city, but Montreal (without the accent) is a perfectly valid English-language equivalent, and the one used in this Wikipedia. Frankly, the use of Montréal comes across as an affectation where the norm in this context is to use Montreal. It also reaches new heights of absurdity when an article refers to the "Montréal Gazette" or "Montréalers" -- someone probably went through the article adding accents without regard whatsoever to context.

As always, I'm happy to discuss this point further. I couldn't find a Wikipedia guideline on this point, but would obviously be interested if there is one. If there has been a prior discussion on this point elsewhere, I would be interested in knowing that as well. Skeezix1000 20:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm given to understand the en-version of Wikipedia is officially accent- and diacritical-free, which makes all the uses on all the team pages (including the liberal use of diacriticals in European player names) out of bounds. RGTraynor 22:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
While I'm not objecting to the lack of an accent in this article, I do have to question the "en-version of Wikipedia is officially accent- and diacritical-free". Given that the English language isn't "accent- and diacritical-free" (for example the word resumé) then how can Wikipedia be free of such things? Do you have a pointer to that policy? Nfitz 22:09, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
On a similar note, why is Vezina spelt "Vézina" in the article?67.160.202.16 10:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, the NHL's official website accentuates the "e" in "Montreal" [1], but not all the time. — Dorvaq (talk) 16:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Billy Coutu Incident?

Why is the Billy Coutu incident listed under the Montreal Canadiens' infamous moments? At the time, he was playing for the Boston Bruins against the Ottawa Senators. I don't see the Canadiens connection other then being traded from Montreal after the preceding NHL season. — Dorvaq 15:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and deleted the statement. — Dorvaq (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Na Na Hey Hey Song

So the following protion underneath the Trivia section isn't sourced: "Canadiens fans, especially during home playoff games, usually chant the "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" song in the final moments of a game they are about to win." But, it doesn't necessarily contravene Wikipedia's sourcing guideline, as:

  • The fact is not likely to cause contention. Any Canadian hockey fan will back this statement up. The "Na Na Hey Hey" song is very much a part of Canadian hockey — not just in Montreal. I also wouldn't be surprised if some American hockey clubs use this song as well.
  • The fact is widely known. Any hockey (not just Montreal) fan, however casual, who has watched or experienced a Montreal home playoff game where the Habs were about to beat the visiting team, will remember the Habs fans chanting the "Na Na Hey Hey" song during the final moments of the game. Note, this event occurs during regular season games as well, but is more prominent during the playoffs.

— Dorvaq (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The real issue is: Why is it notable? You can hear this at any sport venue. Why is Montreal unique regarding this? Do they do the wave up there too? ccwaters
I think it is just somewhat more popular with Montreal fans as I don't seem to hear it as much with other teams' fans, except for the Quebec Nordiques when they used to compete in the NHL. Of course, this could be anecdotal evidence on my part. On a side note, I am not the author of this statement, I simply did not agree with the reason it was removed. If the consensus is that it should be removed because it's not noteworthy enough, well then that's fair. — Dorvaq (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
"I think" isn't good enough for Wikipedia. To place such a statement here implies it carries special significance for Montreal. There needs to be a source for that information. Fagstein 21:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. "I think," "somewhat" and "seem" are way out there on the subjectivity scale. RGTraynor 01:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

'75 vs. Soviet Red Army

Someone started an article on the Super Series between the Soviet and NHL teams, but they didn't get far. Please help, especially with 1975-76 USSR Red Army ice hockey tour of North America, which involved the famous Red Army - Canadiens match-up. Thanks. Kevlar67 05:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

1909-1932 Section

There's a sentence in this section that reads "<< This is an UNTRUE "FACT"......THE 1909-10 Team was "Le Club de hockey Canadiens"( The name it regained {after a brief time as the Canadian Athletic Club } in 1918, when the team was sold to former Canadiens Goalie Leo Dandurant ), anyone who doubts this can look for the 1909-10 team in their blue jerseys with a large white "C" on them....unfortunately, this "Haileybury myth" is still being repeated ( Including here ). ." I've deleted this sentence, because while I can't vouch for the accuracy of the statement, it's an editorial comment with no attribution. If the statement is, in fact, accurate, I'm happy to bring it into more Wikipedia-appropriate language and add it again. 64.81.139.191 02:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

It's an inaccurate statement. As the article states (cf Coleman), there was indeed an unrelated "Les Canadiens" club in the NHA in 1909, provoking a trademark controversy. I'm sure it would have been cleaner and more feelgood for certain fans if the O'Brien silver interests had sold Les Canadiens to George Kennedy and Haileybury to Eddie Livingstone instead of the other way around, but that's what happened. To quote Coleman (and I'll put the cite into the main article):

The Canadien Athletic Club represented by George Kennedy was granted a franchise, as was Quebec ... taking over the franchises of Haileybury and Cobalt. It was understood that the Canadien club in acquiring the Haileybury franchise would also obtain the players of that club ... Les Canadiens franchise owned by J.A. O'Brien of Renfrew remained in the association and it was expected to be taken over by a Toronto club in 1912.

RGTraynor 05:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. 64.81.139.191 02:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Retired Numbers

I've seen publications that have included Aurel Joliet & Elmer Lach in Habs number retirement lists. What caused the confusion? GoodDay 21:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Article fix-up

Hello all. I just saw that this article used to be featured and that it has deteriorated in recent years so I kind of felt bad and started getting it back on the right track. This is a great team with a great history and it deserves a good article. If you want to join me on this quest, take a look at the New Jersey Devils article and use that as an example. Sportskido8 18:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I've readjusted the 'team captains' & 'head coaches' sections, making them easier to follow. PS- Head Coaches (like the captains), should be listed 'by person' not 'by season' example: Geofferion 1979 then Ruel 1979-80 Instead of Geofferion & Ruel 1979-80. GoodDay 18:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

George N. Gillett, Jr.

I'm a Liverpool fan, and Gillet has just bought my club. How is he generally perceived by canadiens fans? What can we expect from him, and how do they feel about the fact he has just bought a soccer club?Musungu jim 22:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand your interest, but WP's articles aren't the place to discuss this. Anyone responding to Mr. Musungu jim should do it on his talk page. Kevlar67 20:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Tony Esposito

Under the current Honored Members guideline as WPT, Tony Esposito should be added to the Honored Members section. GoodDay 18:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Honoured Members incomplete

This section looks great (to me personally), however it doesn't conform to the guidelines at WPTP. The guideline calls for all player in the HHOF, who've played for the Habs, to be listed. For example: under the current guideline 'Denis Savard' should be listed. GoodDay 17:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Top Infobox

Removed French version of Montreal Canadiens & Bell Centre. Why? The English version aren't on the Montreal Canadiens article at French Wikipedia. GoodDay 22:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the 'Les Canadiens de Montreal'. Since, there wasn't any consensus to remove it. I used the Quebec Nordiques page, as an example. What the French Wikipedia does, is it's own choice. GoodDay 17:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I have semi-protected this article due to vandalism that is taking too long to get reverted when it appears. - Mark 05:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Haileybury Hockey Club --->Montreal Canadiens? Nope ...

Happened to find this press release in which the Canadiens themselves date their founding to 1909, and do not claim the history of the Haileybury Hockey Club. I'd have mentioned this here first, but you can't get much more authoritative than a team press release. Blueboy96 16:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Just because the hockey club today doesn't reconize Haileybury becoming the Habs, doesn't mean it's true. Obviously the people associated with the Habs organization today did not do the proper research to support their claims. Its well documented in the book Trail of The Stanley Cup that Ambrose O'Brien sold George Kennedy his Haileybury HC in 1910/11. The 1909/10 Les Canadiens were a different organization then the Habs today. But todays Habs are claiming ownership of that team because they see the rosters were the same and didn't do the proper research to see if the organizations were the same. The Les Canadiens were sold to Toronto interests. This type of historic inaccuracy is very similar to how the Toronto Maple Leafs and the NHL refer to the 1917/18 team in Toronto as the 'Arenas" when they were clearly called the "Blue Shirts" or "Torontos" (Just read the newspapers on microfilm from that season and you will never see the name "Arenas" used at all!). The Arena name did not come about untill December of 1918 just before the start of the 1918/19 season. The NHL even went as far to incorrectly carve "Arenas" on the original Stanley Cup when it was retired in 1969.Giantdevilfish 18:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Regardless, we still need references verifying your point. If you have some, put them in. It's not enough to tell people to "Just read the newspapers on microfilm". I've done some digging on the internet and everything I've found agrees with Blueboy96. — Dorvaq (talk) 18:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
The reference is right in Trail of the Stanley Cup, Charles L. Coleman, Vol I, p. 201 (1966). It was properly cited in the article in this revision [2], which the revisionist historians promptly removed. There is nothing in WP:RS which requires a source to be available on the Internet.  RGTraynor  18:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you misread my point. I was not suggesting that the source needed to be from the internet. In fact, I was encouraging him to put sources in if he had any, as I couldn't find any over the internet. — Dorvaq (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Dorvaq, when I was talking about reading newspapers on microfilm I was talking about the Toronto Blue Shirts (I was able to read the Toronto Star's sports sections on microfilm from Nov 1917-Apr 1918) and I was using the whole Blue Shirts/Arenas situation as an example of how an organization can be wrong when it comes to reconizing their own history. Ask the Toronto Maple Leafs what their name was in 1917/18 and they will tell you it was "Arenas", when that is simply not true. That name didn't come about until 1918/19. (You can read about this in detail in the book Deceptions and Doublecrosses: How the NHL conquered Hockey). As far as Haileybury/Montreal goes (as RGTraynor pointed out) its documented in the book Trail of The Stanley Cup. I never had a chance to read Montreal papers on microfilm (I live in Toronto).Giantdevilfish 18:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, it just may be a good idea to do so; I'd wager the Boston Public Library has microfilm from the pertinent time period for newspapers from a city as important as Montreal. Happily, Coleman cites his sources in the intro to TOTSC. Basically, the issue here isn't really (IMHO) that the hockey establishment is deliberately covering up history. It's just that hockey is prone to as many shibboleths and myths as any other sport. Heck, Coleman said himself that many of the game's myths proved not to be true when critically examined.  RGTraynor  18:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

RG, I was talking to a hockey historian from Montreal named Michel Vignault via E-Mails. He said that he researched the season from Nov 1909-Apr 1910. He came across the legal battle between O'Brien and the CAC. He said he never came across which franchise was actually given to George Kennedy (head of the CAC). This info would be from the summer of 1910. So if you can research papers on microfilm make sure its from late April to November of 1910. Here is an excerpt of an E-Mail I had with Michel.

But my research was from November to April of each season, so I missed out some facts that were done in the summer time. One thing for sure, the CAC went to court against the Canadien for using the name without their permission. Also, the CAC, formed in 1908, wanted to get a hockey team in 1909 and 1910, so they took the opportunity for this lawsuit to get a team. Maybe you can find something by looking at the newspapers on microfilms during the period of April-November 1910. Giantdevilfish 18:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Mm, it wouldn't have occurred to me to go before the summer of 1910; the impression I had from Coleman was that the franchise was given to CAC as settlement of the suit. Why they were handed Haileybuty instead of Les Canadiens I couldn't say, but there have been other whacky franchise-for-franchise deals, like the legal shuffling of the Boston Celtics-Buffalo Braves franchises in 1978.  RGTraynor  19:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the reason Haileybury was given to George Kennedy was because the Les Canadiens had already been sold to Toronto interests, and Cobalt had been sold to the Quebec Bulldogs (who were planning on joining the league for the 1910/11 season), and since O'brien wanted to hang onto his Renfrew club, the Haileybury team was the only one available. I really would like to see the Montreal papers from the summer of 1910, because that is when the court case was apparently settled.Giantdevilfish 19:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Montrealcanadienslogo1920.gif

Image:Montrealcanadienslogo1920.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Resolute 23:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Montrealcanadienslogo1918.gif

Image:Montrealcanadienslogo1918.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Resolute 23:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Logos

I think the logos should be put into a collage together in the Logos section of the article, rather than being pictures all scattered around. It might look better. Sportskido8 19:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree... everything looks disorganized. There should be a visual timeline, not just a textual one. Cristo39 05:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Who were the first Montreal Canadiens?

As it reads today, the article suggests that the team known as Les Canadiens in the 1909-1910 NHA season became the Montreal Canadiens in 1910-1911. However, it would seem that the 1910-1911 Montreal Canadiens team was actually the continuance of the 1909-1910 Haileybury Hockey Club. (See articles at Haileybury Hockey Club, Toronto Blueshirts, and National Hockey Association.) Now I know these articles are poorly referenced, but I have read on the subject and from what I can tell, "Les Canadiens" are unrelated to today's Montreal Canadiens. It would be interesting to see if anybody has some good sources to set the record straight on this matter. 209.105.207.181 23:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

That's actually the case, and I've had the article reading that from time to time; the original cite is from Coleman's Trail of the Stanley Cup. The problem is, there's a powerful stretch of revisionist history, going through to the Habs front office, that just can't stand the concept that the technical lineage of the team starts in an Anglo mining town, not in the Quebecois heartland. I think TotSC is referenced in the article, but if you want the page ref, it's pg. 201, Vol I, with the following text:

(1911) Prior to the annual meeting of the National Hockey Association, an item in the Montreal Herald stated that he Club Athletique-Canadien, a registered and incorporated body, claimed the name Canadiens. Mr. George Kennedy, proprietor of this club, was seeking admission to the NHA and if refused would insist that the NHA drop the name Les Canadiens under which a franchise was operated the previous year. He had not objected to the use of the name at the time, although he considered it was undoubtedly an infringement. The annual meeting of the NHA was held November 12th, 1910 ... The Canadien Athletic Club represented by George Kennedy was granted a franchise, as was Quebec represented by Joe Power and M.J. Quinn, taking over the franchises of Haileybury and Cobalt. It was understood that the Canadien club in acquiring the Haileybury franchise would also obtain the players of that club. However, the contracts up to that time did not provide any control over the players at the termination of a season and the clubs had bid against one another for their services. Les Canadiens franchise owned by J.A. O'Brien of Renfrew, remained in the association and it was expected to be taken over by a Toronto club in 1912.

 RGTraynor  23:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Whatever the revisionist history will of the Canadiens is, this does need to be corrected. We shouldn't let attempts at rewriting history overrule the facts. Resolute 17:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Have made edits to the article today to clarify the origins of the franchise. 209.105.207.181 18:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Number of Stanley Cups

We need to fix this problem with how many they have. Either this article is incorrect or List of Stanley Cup champions is incorrect. What are some reliable sources for stuff like this? BsroiaadnTalk 21:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Habs have 23 in the NHL and one in the NHA. They have won 24 Stanley Cups, no matter what anyone says. I have no idea why people still seem to think they have 23. Well I gues they have 23 and one more...Dbrodbeck 11:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
It's 24 Cup championships. The Montreal Canadiens and the Stanley Cup, are older then the NHL itself. The Habs first Cup victory was in 1916 (a year and a half, before the NHL's birth). GoodDay 17:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Exactly, so why do people keep changing it to 23 on the page. Seems to me it ought to be 24 in the article. Dbrodbeck 20:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Likely because they are using an NHL source, and the NHL often disregards the other major leagues that have existed in the past. Resolute 20:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The Canadiens hang a banner for 1916, so it should be recognized here.Dknights411 22:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Top Infobox

The 'french version' of Montreal Canadiens has been removed. What, about the Quebec Nordiques page? GoodDay 23:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

IMO the french name which is the official name of the franchise should be included in the infobox, just like in the Nordiques article. --Krm500 23:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I'm neither for or against 'the french version' (recently, I've stop pushing english on English Wikpedia). I'm just concerned that the Nords and Habs pages are inconsistant. Hopefully, these 'french version' inconsistancies will be resolved soon. GoodDay 23:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
To be honest I don't care either but I was just thinking of the Manual of Style. The MOS for infoboxes say that the english form should be the default and the native should be presented in parenthesis. --Krm500 01:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
That version is being added to the infobox (English top, French bottom and in parentheses), as per discussion above. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Canadian Cup Drought

Length of drought altered to reflect lockout season. Only thirteen seasons have elapsed since the Canadiens last cup win, though fourteen years have passed.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Montreal Canadiens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Montreal Canadiens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Montreal_Canadiens/Archive_1&oldid=1143878182"