Talk:Spokane Shock
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Fair use rationale for Image:EverettHawks.gif
[edit]
Image:EverettHawks.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 Wikipedia articles 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 06:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:SpokaneShock.gif
[edit]Image:SpokaneShock.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 08:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Merging with the Spokane Empire article
[edit]Despite what those involved with the Arena Football League and those who claim they "represent" the league are saying, the Spokane Shock (AFL) and Spokane Empire (IFL) are one in the same. True enough that the AFL owns the trademarks, but the franchise is the same no matter what some say. That is why I say the articles should be merged into one main article. That being the current Spokane Shock name and logos for the Shock should be included in the Empire because the Shock ARE a major part of the franchises history. People in Spokane have informed me that the af2 and AFL championship banners are still in the rafters at Spokane Arena and they belong to the franchise. That is why I propose we merge both articles, unlike the Portland AFL franchises which are still being claimed to this day. Many are telling me that the Thunder and Steel are separate franchises with Terry Emmert owning the Thunder franchise and the AFL owning the Steel, but that is another subject for another time. This is about the Shock/Empire franchise become one article. NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 18:47, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose conditionally: You are incorrect in your assumption of a "franchise". The franchise is the license to play in a league. Sometimes they can be transferred, but in this case the franchise, logos, and name were all retained by the AFL (for the Thunder/Steel, only the franchise was retained, the logos and Thunder name is owned by Terry). Per WP:NOTPAPER, they do not need to be merged and under the wikiproject, different franchises do not have the same page. However, since these two franchises are certainly linked, mentions of the teams on each page are warranted. As to honor previous championships with banners, it is very common to keep those up when the team is continued, whether under new ownership or just a new league. I can think of several hockey teams that keep their AHL banners up despite teams with the same name, but a different franchise, playing in the ECHL (i.e. Utah Grizzlies, Manchester Monarchs (ECHL), and Norfolk Admirals (ECHL)). Arguments could be made that the Shock/Empire are the same "team", but they are not the same franchise. Yosemiter (talk) 19:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Respectfully disagree: I have been in contact with many fans and friends in Spokane and they say this is the same franchise, though they prefer the "Empire" name better than the Shock. From what a friend of mine who just moved from Spokane told me that the fans continue to use chants used when they were the Shock and the "Ultimate 9th Man" were carried over from that era. The AFL has completely and totally screwed up the histories of these franchises and the record needs to be set straight. NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- That's nice, do you have a published source that says the franchise was purchased and transferred to the IFL. Absolutely no harm comes from having separate pages. Also, I watched the Utah Grizzlies celebrate their "20th season" in 2015–16 despite that the original IHL/AHL franchise under that name that started there in 1995 is now in Cleveland. Teams can celebrate whatever they want. As I said, they are related and should be mentioned, but the franchise is not the same. Feel free to disagree, but that is common procedure. If people feel differently about the founding date and the AFL history and want that included in the infobox, I only hid the info so it could easily be re-added. Yosemiter (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Just got a message from the Empire office in Spokane Valley about the confusion: "Similar ownership but different trademarks, LLCs, and league affiliations so would technically be considered two separate franchises. The city/fans really just take ownership of both as one." Your thoughts on their thoughts?NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 19:50, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- You mean other then what I said is exactly what they said? The current wikiproject guidelines are that separate franchises get separate pages. However, if done properly, when two franchises are inseparably linked one page can be successfully executed. I did a couple for Ice Hockey under similar circumstances (Hamilton Bulldogs (AHL), Fort Wayne Komets, and Maine Mariners), but note the complicated franchise founding dates and histories. I only did that because they were already merged and had severe overlap as well (not to mention the Ice Hockey Wikiproject typically places more emphasis on a "team" rather than a "franchise", which is why there is a page for every major pro team that has relocated despite being the same franchise, I believe it is the only project that operates that way). It doesn't need to be done because both pages meet WP:GNG but I can see a situation where it can be done. I was only stopping you because you were against the current consensus judging by the creation of the article (which you opposed a merger back then) and standard merger procedure. Yosemiter (talk) 20:03, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- For what its worth, the AFL was trying to make an example of Spokane because they were frustrated with them leaving the league, however the league does own the naming rights and could name another team in the league the Shock. I really don't know how to proceed beings how the several other arena (whether AFL or af2) franchises that moved to the IFL have kept their names (Green Bay Blizzard, Tri-Cities Fever) or changed them (Amarillo Venom or Texas Revolution.DMC511 (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- You mean other then what I said is exactly what they said? The current wikiproject guidelines are that separate franchises get separate pages. However, if done properly, when two franchises are inseparably linked one page can be successfully executed. I did a couple for Ice Hockey under similar circumstances (Hamilton Bulldogs (AHL), Fort Wayne Komets, and Maine Mariners), but note the complicated franchise founding dates and histories. I only did that because they were already merged and had severe overlap as well (not to mention the Ice Hockey Wikiproject typically places more emphasis on a "team" rather than a "franchise", which is why there is a page for every major pro team that has relocated despite being the same franchise, I believe it is the only project that operates that way). It doesn't need to be done because both pages meet WP:GNG but I can see a situation where it can be done. I was only stopping you because you were against the current consensus judging by the creation of the article (which you opposed a merger back then) and standard merger procedure. Yosemiter (talk) 20:03, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Just got a message from the Empire office in Spokane Valley about the confusion: "Similar ownership but different trademarks, LLCs, and league affiliations so would technically be considered two separate franchises. The city/fans really just take ownership of both as one." Your thoughts on their thoughts?NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 19:50, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- That's nice, do you have a published source that says the franchise was purchased and transferred to the IFL. Absolutely no harm comes from having separate pages. Also, I watched the Utah Grizzlies celebrate their "20th season" in 2015–16 despite that the original IHL/AHL franchise under that name that started there in 1995 is now in Cleveland. Teams can celebrate whatever they want. As I said, they are related and should be mentioned, but the franchise is not the same. Feel free to disagree, but that is common procedure. If people feel differently about the founding date and the AFL history and want that included in the infobox, I only hid the info so it could easily be re-added. Yosemiter (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Respectfully disagree: I have been in contact with many fans and friends in Spokane and they say this is the same franchise, though they prefer the "Empire" name better than the Shock. From what a friend of mine who just moved from Spokane told me that the fans continue to use chants used when they were the Shock and the "Ultimate 9th Man" were carried over from that era. The AFL has completely and totally screwed up the histories of these franchises and the record needs to be set straight. NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Yh, I'm not sure what to do. Most of the other arena teams just seem to have articles based on what their names' are. I mean, it looks like there are two separate franchises at Alabama Vipers but there is just one page. Also, the Bossier–Shreveport Battle Wings moved to New Orleans to become the new New Orleans VooDoo. There also seems to be two different Iowa Barnstormers franchises. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:45, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
2019 update
[edit]I have gone ahead and WP:BOLDly merged the Empire article back to here. Per this article: Naini acquired the Shock trademark about a year after the franchise folded, trading the Empire name to the AFL in exchange for the Shock trademark. Adams “worked it out” with Naini to acquire the Shock brand.
As the consensus above seemed to be "no trademark =/= no franchise", the apparent re-acquisition of the trademarks seems to make this a more solid "one franchise" consensus. Please comment here if there is any issue with my merging. Thank you, Yosemiter (talk) 20:11, 2 December 2019 (UTC)