Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Calgary Flames award winners

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by User:Matthewedwards 19:06, 7 October 2008 [1].

List of Calgary Flames award winners

[edit]

I still have an FLC ongoing for the head coaches of the Calgary Flames, but after a complete reworking of this article over the past while, I believe this one is FL quality as well. It lists all players honoured by the league and team, for both individual and career achievements, during the 28 years the Calgary Flames have been around. Many images, easy to understand tables. (at least I think so. ;o] ) I look forward to all feedback. Resolute 02:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gary King (talk · contribs)
Resolved comments from Gary King (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The NHL's trophies on display at the 2006 NHL Awards Ceremony." – remove the period from the non-sentence
  • Done.
  • link "Canada"
  • Done. Seems like that got hit as part of the battle against overlinking, heh.
  • Oops, done.
  • Why are reference titles italicized?
  • Because of how the {{Citation}} template works. I've simply gotten into the habit of using Citation rather than Cite x templates.
  • "Retrieved on 19 September 2009" – this came from the future? :)
  • Umm, oops. Fixed.
  • "pp. pg. 23" – "page page 23"?
  • "2008-03-25" – either link the date so that it formats, or spell it out like "March 25, 2008"
  • Whoops. Both are cases of copying existing Cite x tempaltes from other articles and converting to Citation. My bad on not noticing the errors those caused. Both are now fixed.

Gary King (talk) 03:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And appreciate the comments. Resolute 15:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose several "assumptions" in the prose are particularly worrying....

  • Not sure of the relevance of the lead image, especially considering the caption - just NHL trophies - could be relevant to any NHL list?
  • I picked that lead image as it was the most appropriate I could come up with at the moment. Unfortunately, I don't have an image of a player receiving an award to use. I could just move a player up, but that is no less general than the current awards picture. I do hope to replace it with a specific image related to a Flame receiving an award during this season.
  • "are a professional ice hockey team" vs "The team has captured" - plural vs singular.
  • This is standard usage in North American descriptions of teams. "The Flames are" and "the team is" are both correct, as "the team" is treated as a singular entity, while "The foos" are referred to in the plural. I can't say for certain why this is, but I believe it is related to the general use of pluralized team nicknames in North America.
  • "—1986, 1989 and 2004, and —winning..." - odd placement of the em-dash at the end. I'd suggest a minor reword.
  • Umm, yeah, that was pretty bad. Fixed.
  • "Individually, Jarome Iginla is the team's most decorated player..." - is there any other way to be the most decorated player other than individually?
  • lol, good point. removed
  • "to go along " - "to go" is redundant.
  • Agreed, removed.
  • "in team history." - which team? Flames or all-star games team?
  • Fixed
  • "their numbers retired " - I'm sure there's a link to retired numbers somewhere around here.
  • Hmm, I guess I should have realized there is an article on everything.  ;)
  • " raised to the rafters" - means what to a non-expert?
  • I was trying to avoid a repitition, and ended up using a coloquialism. Reworded.
  • "who were associated with the Flames" - what do you mean by associated with? (question)
  • I'm referring to people who spent a significant time with the orgnaization. As this involves both players and management, that seemed the best wording.
Do you mean employed by the Flames? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not entirely Johnson and Fletcher were employees, but the players themselves I've never heard described as employees. And, of course, Hotchkiss is an owner, not an employee.
  • "hall of fame" - is this "Hall of Fame"?
  • I'm not referring to a speficic place name, but rather a general observation of the quality of the player's careers, so it doesn't seem proper to capitalize it. I'll happily change if this is incorrect.
  • long-time - quantify.
  • About this long: <--------------------->  ;) Actually, I just removed it, it's extraneous, and the time he spent with the organization is specified in his chart
  • builders - in the UK this unilaterally refers to people who construct buildings. Link or explain or something.
  • I've added a clarification statement. Basically, the NHL considers a "builder" to be anyone in management.
No decent link for builder? You use it in the lead and it's not clear to non-experts. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, I missed that usage. I've linked to a section of the Hockey Hall of Fame article that desribes who makes up the builders category.
  • " most three-star selections " - what's a three-star selection?
  • Clarified.
  • "and respect and courtesy respectively" - this sentence just becomes a little confusing..
  • reworded.
  • You have individual awards which haven't ever been awarded to Flames players. Why?
  • It was suggested by two others on the talk page that it would be good to have. I'm not convinced, but accepted the suggestion.
  • Be consistent with linking titles/names etc in captions.
  • Checked and changed where needed
  • Chronological tables should be in chronological order.
  • I am going to presume this is specific to the list of Hall of Famers, as it is in chronological order while the rest are in reverse-chronological order. I've corrected this. If this is not what you meant, could you clarify?
  • If it's not sortable, you're really overlinking in each table.
  • correcting. This should be completed before the end of the day.
  • 1982-87 - use en-dash.
  • oops, cut and pasted from another article and failed to correct that. fixed.
  • Don't just use MVP without explaining it.
  • I would have figured it would be self explainatory. Is this referring to the individual awards chart?
No, you use the abbreviation MVP once - to a non-expert this is not self-explanatory. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh. Found and spelled out the abbreviation.
  • Retired Numbers -> numbers.
  • Fixed.
  • 1982-94 and 2000-02 - en-dash again.
  • Same as above, fixed.
  • Why bold year ranges?
  • It's the way the chart came out. As a personal preference, I like how it sets a contrast from the player name column. I can correct this if desired.
Remove it - the other years/seasons etc aren't bold. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can do.
  • 94/95 not awarded Ralph T. Scurfield Humanitarian... why not?
  • I haven't found a citation for it, but the only logical reasoning is the 1994–95 NHL lockout which caused half the season to be cancelled. Given I can't cite it beyond the fact that it wasn't awarded, I'm not certain how I can explain this.
Shame - it needs to be explained. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is an outside chance I could find a newspaper article from 1995 that would explain this, but it would be a few days at least before I'll have a chance to check.
  • J.R. "Bud" McCaig Award - no need for a table. Just write prose.
  • Personally, I disagree. I think it looks better with consistent formatting, and these tables will grow as each season passes by.
  • Ref 1 - pg. 4 vs Ref 7 - pp. 23 - be consistent with single page notation.
Ref 1 only needs a p. - pp. is used for multiple pages. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 1 is "In Hanlon..." while all other refs to same work are simply "Hanlon..." - consider a General references.
  • Both errors were the result of a Cite x template that I failed to update to Citation. This has been corrected.

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from 2008Olympian (talk · contribs) I would think that you would need to add the players and awards (such as they are) from the Atlanta Flames as well, in light of Calgary's acknowledgment of the Atlanta Flames' history. --User:2008Olympianchitchatseemywork 23:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While the Atlanta and Calgary Flames are the same franchise, and Calgary does acknowledge the Atlanta history, it is really treated as a form of "pre-history" by the Calgary Flames. i.e., the Flames don't care when the franchise reaches a milestone - i.e.: last season was the 35th season of play for the franchise as a whole but went unmarked, where the Calgary Flames' 30th season next year will be. There is also an editorial decision within WP:HOCKEY to give each incarnation of a team its own article, or set of articles. As such, the two articles: Atlanta Flames and Calgary Flames would encompass the history of the Flames franchise.
With that in mind, and given that the scope of this article specifically states that it is limited to awards won in Calgary, I'd just as soon keep the lists separate. I would be willing to consider an exception in this case, given the Atlanta Flames won only three individual awards in their history, so a separate list would be pointless, but I would very specifically denote that it was outside of the Calgary history. Resolute 16:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further Comment In the Awards column of the tables, the name of the award should be left justified. For the longer names, the lack of justification makes them spread out awkwardly. (e.g., Art       Ross, Lady       Bing).--User:2008Olympianchitchatseemywork 01:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose

  • NHL All-Rookie Team selections, NHL First All-Star Team, NHL Second All-Star Team, All-Star Game selections, Hockey Hall of Fame elections, Retired numbers are all honors, and are not specifically awards just to clarify.
  • True enough. I've revised the lead to clarify.
  • Ahh, I hadn't realized that article had been moved. Corrected.
  • You should denote player who have won the same award multiple times. For example, "2007–08 Jarome Iginla (5)" instead of "2007–08 Jarome Iginla".
  • I'm not sure I see that as strictly necessary. In things like the all-star game appearances, I think that would just clutter the page.
  • Done
  • Is Category:Calgary Flames the only category to put on this article?

-- K. Annoyomous24[c] 23:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support By the way, thanks for making this article "Canadian" since I noticed that you put "honours", instead of "honors". Also by the way, I'm also Canadian. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 02:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! It's so annoying when I work on articles for American players or teams to have to adjust to that goofy spelling. ;o) Resolute 04:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not really for me. I'm kind of Americanized on Wikipedia. When I write on homework assignment, I usually use American English. I should really stop editing Wikipedia since it's making my wording non-Canadian, but I love wikiing! -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 04:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Calgary_Flames_award_winners&oldid=1141921559"