Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/NHL team abbreviations

This project page was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Move to project space, 12 May 2024, see discussion.
Keep, 30 April 2007, see discussion.

Emphasizing current teams

I think it would be useful to bold all of the current teams. Users who need to look at this list probably don't know which teams are defunct and this would help them out greatly. Schmloof (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eight years later, I can see this still being useful. –uncleben85 (talk) 02:47, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And six more years later, I think it still would be useful, so I implemented two lists. Wigbold (talk) 21:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlisted Team Names

May be worth noting the official team names that do not have a unique code/share a code:

ANA – Anaheim Ducks/Mighty Ducks of Anaheim
CGS – California Golden Seals/Bay Area Seals
CHI – Chicago Blackhawks/Chicago Black Hawks
MTL – Montreal Canadiens/Club de hockey Canadien
OAK – Oakland Seals/California Seals
QBD – Quebec Bulldogs/Quebec Athletic Club
SEN – Ottawa Senators (original)/Ottawa Hockey Club
TAN – Toronto Arenas/Toronto Hockey Club

It is not clear what you mean. Do you suggest extending team names in the template if they were known by a different name in the past? – Sabbatino (talk) 06:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I mean. Those are official team names used through the years that currently are not listed on the board. In the NHL records, the NHL lists those teams' season using existing codes. For example, all seasons where the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim were active, the NHL lists them as "ANA", the same code as the current Anaheim Ducks; the two games the Bay Area Seals played are listed as "CGS". –uncleben85 (talk) 22:02, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We could add them. But would not that be a bit too much for a template with limited space? There is another problem – this template is not used anywhere. I remember asking about it here and all the users said that this template is obsolete and I think this should be nominated for deletion. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. I created it (11 years ago... god damn) at a time when a number of our articles made a habit of using abbreviations. Evidently that is no longer the case. If it is no longer necessary, then deletion may be warranted. As to the original comment, a number of these additions are non-issues. ANA, CHI and MTL aren't "shared codes" and "TAN" is nonsensical since "TOR" works for all variations given it is the same franchise. "SEN" is made up/neologism, etc. Reso lute 14:36, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you're saying, although SEN is not made up, nor is TAN that nonsensical, and the codes are shared. Those are the abbreviations the NHL actually uses (checkout Joe Lamb as an example of SEN, or Maxim Bets to see ANA being used for the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (a team just as distinct from Anaheim Ducks as California/Oakland, Phoenix/Arizona/ St. Pats/Maple Leafs, etc. yet with no unique distinction)). We certainly don't use abbreviations much though anymore, that's true, so it's not a big deal. I've been looking at the stats leaders pages (NHL Leaders, By Country, etc.) that use them and noticed we mark when a player sticks through an organizational change by listing both PHX and ARI, for example, but have no way of tracking the above teams, like Anaheim, changing their names. Again, this is hardly actually important, though! –uncleben85 (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am well aware what abbreviations the NHL uses, because I was the person who updated them. But as I already wrote – this template should be nominated for deletion since it is not used anywhere. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:39, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only explained what I meant because you asked for clarification before. While I agree there's a case for nomination, I would say that it is a handy template for the stats pages I listed above, too.–uncleben85 (talk) 14:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anaheim Ducks and Mighty Ducks of Anaheim are not remotely as distinct as Winnipeg Jets/Phoenix Coyotes. One is a rename, the other is a relocation. Same as Chicago and Toronto (and Detroit). Your argument for Montreal makes even less sense as it isn't even a reaname, just an English name vs a French name. Reso lute 13:40, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Winnipeg Jets->Phoenix Coyotes. I agree, that's completely different. I said Phoenix Coyotes->Arizona Coyotes, where it was the same team, they just updated their name. Chicago Black Hawks->Chicago Blackhawks was the same team, just a name update; Toronto St. Pats->Toronto Maple Leafs was the same team, just a name update; Mighty Ducks of Anaheim->Anaheim Ducks was the same team, just a name update. In two of those scenarios we have made a distinction between the two different teams, and and the other two scenarios, we have ignored the name change. That's the only point I am trying to make - not all the official NHL names are accounted for. (As for Montreal, I was actually hesitant to include that, as while it is their official name, I know using the French name has been a touch subject before.) I really did not expect there to be this much conversation on the matter though, haha, half expected people to ignore me and nothing come of it! It's such a small thing for a template that isn't really used anymore.–uncleben85 (talk) 14:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Utah is missing

Utah Hockey Club is missing, it is abbreviated to UTA in the 2024 NHL Draft Lottery Guide 89.150.138.33 (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]