Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive91

Please add reliable sources. If not, then it's likely to be deleted in the next 7 weeks. Bearian (talk) 09:21, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian I have added some sources, though I'm not sure if it would cover GNG. Conyo14 (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Searching newspapers.com for "Knoxville Knights" + hockey, and filtering for years 1961 to 1968 brings 4,784 results mostly in Tennesee and North Carolina. It seems likely that is enough to pass GNG, but I don't have the time to read all of those. Flibirigit (talk) 06:20, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

North Bay Trappers (1962–1982) is listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Bay Trappers (1962–1982). The article has been significantly expanded since nomination. Comments are welcome on the nomination page. Flibirigit (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

An editor has created Template:2026 men's ice hockey gold medal team that was then moved to Template:2026 United States men's ice hockey Olympic team. I have reverted all transclusions, because longstanding consensus at WP:NHL is against having such navboxes. Could someone nominate it for deletion? – sbaio 20:27, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Deletion discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 February 24#Template:2026 United States men's ice hockey Olympic team. – sbaio 17:24, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I recently created a draft about the Brazilian women’s ice hockey and inline hockey player Ana Boghossian. She has played an important role in the development of ice hockey in Brazil and has represented the country for several years in both the ice and inline national teams. I came here to ask for your help in finding additional reliable sources about her and to get your opinion on the overall quality of the draft. Any help would be of great assistance Haddad Maia fan (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I've created it to get off the ground, but it's late and I don't have the time nor energy to finish stripping the rest of the playoff section to its base state. Any help would be appreciated immensely. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:37, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Just want to note everyone that one specific editor is making trivial edits to Olympic players. For example, Macklin Celebrini or Tage Thompson. I understand listing the White House visit, but to list that someone wore some hat or shares some social media account with other player looks like a clear violation of WP:NOTEVERYTHING (also WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE). – sbaio 05:26, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean it's definitely trivial and seems like a bit much to further detail. Conyo14 (talk) 06:20, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Such trivia can be deleted. Unfortunately the editor seems to fight against removal. Flibirigit (talk) 13:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

If the editor is fighting against removal? The editor needs to be removed. GoodDay (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Update: I've gone ahead & deleted the (IMHO) politicial trivia (including the White House bits) from the Men's 2026 Olympic hockey bios, as being "too trivial". At best we should keep such bios as apolitical as possible. At worst the editor who added such info across so many bios, has a politicial agenda to push. PS - If my deletions get reverted on some or all the bios-in-question? I'll leave it to others to decide, on the next steps. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Reverted - The visit needs to be mentioned. It was an honour given specifically to the US players, and much like the Tim Thomas non-visit to Barack Obama's presidential invite, needs to be mentioned somehwere due to the coverage it got. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan page. Llammakey (talk) 19:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

That being said, the MAGA stuff can be deleted. That stuff is political agenda nonsense. There does have to be a mention of Kash Patel somewhere to give some context to the the reason why it became so notable. Llammakey (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

It doesn't need to mentioned on the player's pages. Maybe it can be mentioned on Kash Patel's page and also the US men's ice hockey page? Conyo14 (talk) 20:08, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Your re-additions & changes should be reverted, IMHO. That info is better suited for the US men's ice hockey article. Not 20+ ice hockey bios. GoodDay (talk) 11:10, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Why would it not need to be mentioned on the player's pages? The honour was to the players, not the Olympic national program, otherwise the women would have been there. Hellebuyck got a Presidential award at the ceremony, how does that not require context? And why has he come out and said his wife if being attacked for his decision to attend? If Tkachuk, Matthews, or Hellebuyck get traded this offseason from their Canadian teams due to the vitriol being directed at them by those upset by this, the context will need to be provided. Once again, there was WP:SIGCOV of this event and individual players such as Swayman, Matthews, the Hughes brothers, Brady Tkachuk, Connor Hellebuyck, Jake Guentzel, etc. were asked pointed questions about this situation. They went on mass media TV shows to address the situation. This is pretty self-explanatory. Look, I tried to get the language more neutral, and since all the players did not attend, you cannot generalize "the team". Also, it should also be on the US Men's Olympic Hockey Team in great detail, not one or the other. I am also open to making the language as neutral as possible. I do not want to turn this into a MAGA witch hunt nor do I want to stick my head in the sand. Besides, for the players they do consider it an honour. Llammakey (talk) 17:21, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Include basic facts only, not the trivia. Flibirigit (talk) 17:46, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Isn't it a little inconsiderate to be discussing this without actually mentioning them? I see that there's a warning on their talk page now, but perhaps we should invite them to participate in the discourse. mftp dan ^oops 22:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey guys, I'm newer to Wikipedia editing and the community as a whole. I really don't know how to create articles but there are some that I'd really like created. I added them to the requested section. Anyone willing to get them done? Kivi36 (talk) 15:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I just ran all of the names you put up, and honestly, not a single one of them would meet notability standards. The ones you listed top out at (relatively short term) career minor leaguers, and one of them has a single major junior game to his credit; he was playing on his high school team a week ago. Generally speaking, a hockey player without NHL or significant overseas top-flight experience won't pass muster. Ravenswing 17:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

A handfull of those guys are NHL draft picks though Kivi36 (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

It's mostly they need to pass the general notable guideline and WP:BIO for them to be articles. Right now there is no significant coverage of these players across newspapers, websites, or books. Conyo14 (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I feel as though there is for people like

• Nathan Aspinall (ice hockey)

Kivi36 (talk) 18:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

For Aspinall, there is mostly content relating to his ELC signing. I think if you were to create an article for him it would likely go uncontested (I have created a couple biographies that passed AfC which were similar in nature) but I don't think others are likely to see taking up this article on your behalf as a good use of their time. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

I've undone recent bold changes to Template:Infobox international hockey competition, concerning adding 'promoted' & 'relegated' perimeters. Also undid additions made to the 2026 World Jrs Divisions' I, II, III tournaments' infoboxes. Should the recent additions remain? GoodDay (talk) 22:20, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Myself & @Sbaio: have come to a disagreement on how to handle this issue in Latvian player infoboxes 'birth/death' places. Why the grey area? Latvia has different dates for when it became (post-Soviet) independent.
Go by the 4 May 1990 - declaration date?, we use "Latvia" or
Go by the 21 August 1991 - restoration date? we use "Latvian SSR, Soviet Union"
Which should be used? GoodDay (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

This is the wrong place to ask this. Please do so at WP:LATVIA. – sbaio 04:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

We're dealing with hockey player bios. GoodDay (talk) 04:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The same guideline should apply to all Latvians, no matter what field they're in. This not a decision that should be made on a hockey talk page. Indefatigable (talk) 04:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I've brought this to MOSBIO's talkpage. I just want clarity on which date to go by. GoodDay (talk) 05:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Michalis2504: has created both List of Mens Olympic records in ice hockey and List of Womens Olympic records in ice hockey. Here are several concerns for the project to consider:

1. List of Mens Olympic records in ice hockey should be men's, with no capital letter and with an apostrophe.
2. List of Womens Olympic records in ice hockey should be women's, with no capital letter and with an apostrophe.
3. The articles are mostly sourced to statistical databases without clear independent third party reliable which establish WP:NLIST. In other words, do these lists actually meet notability criteria? More sources are needed to validate why such a list of records meets those criteria, failing which a WP:AFD discussion might be necessary.

Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 03:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

TBH, those articles should be deleted. GoodDay (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

They probably should be merged into the ice hockey at the Olympic Games. Conyo14 (talk) 04:07, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

1 and 2 don't really require consensus as uncontroversial corrections of obvious errors, so I've done them with titles now at List of women's Olympic records in ice hockey and List of men's Olympic records in ice hockey. For future reference, issues like 1 and 2 can be posted to WP:RMTR for a page mover to handle, or any autoconfirmed user can move it themselves and tag the remnant redirects with {{db-error}} for an admin to delete. Left guide (talk) 05:58, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey everybody,

The reasoning of the creation of those two pages, is to be able to recognise Olympic Ice Hockey achievements as some other sports already have their appropriate wiki pages. I have been editting in the past for records in another sport, and after watching the latest Olympic Games, the commentators were mentioning constantly Olympic Records, which were very difficult for me to find somewhere online which I am able to see and compare. Therefore, I wanted to spend time and will continue so, in improving as much as possible those two pages, for both the mens and womens divisions. I am more than happy for the contribution of several established editors such as yourself in improving the referencing and record analysis of many different aspects in Ice Hockey. A talk page discussing improvements and reference validation would improve the pages much more.

Inputting several records on the main page would I believe increase the information and make the page irrelevant on its main output as explaining Ice Hockey in Olympics. Please respond to me here about your opinions, furthermore, and if multiple editors disagree in having such pages, then off course we can delete them, I just thought its an aspect of Ice Hockey in Olympics which would be valuable for the internet to know.

Thanks, Michalis2504 (talk) 15:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, personally I don't agree with their outright deletion, but I was going to suggest a merge of content. I think it would be fine to place on the main article. Or if there's a list of Olympic records, it could be placed there too.

However, if it is seen to pass WP:NLIST, then it won't matter. Conyo14 (talk) 17:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Also thank you for changing the name of the pages accordingly. Michalis2504 (talk) 15:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Michalis2504:, almost two weeks have passed and you have made no progress on these lists. The purpose of this conversation was to give you or others an opportunity to add reliable sources which prove WP:NLIST. Please do so promptly, or the deletion discussion is warranted. Flibirigit (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Flibirigit Hey, I have added a few references just now from newspapers talking about certain records. I will add more in the women sections shortly. Should I create another paragraph explaining why they are important? If you could tell me how many references of different records should I include to make the page notable. Apologies for not editting the pages early enough. Michalis2504 (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Just to be clear, making a paragraph about why it's important does not matter. Sources that explain why they matter or just talking about them in-depth is. Conyo14 (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely, I have included multiple sources, from media etc talking about this various records, and I included them in the intro summary. Please let me know if the article (list) is valid enough? Michalis2504 (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

It'll survive. Passes WP:NLIST Conyo14 (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

For anyone who needs a laugh, the infobox for David Beauregard is a reminder why we only list top-tier teams. I will trim it tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Jiminy Christmas. Gotta love how someone broke it down per league. These are the most satisfying cleanups to perform, I'm jealous I didn't find it first. Echoedmyron (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

At a certain point it becomes impressive! Wracking ^talk! 19:33, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Alright, So I requested a few articles and yall said they aren't worthy to be created yet which is fine and I thank yall for your help. However, I just added two more. Could someone look into them please? I feel that they are both relevant and need to be added Kivi36 (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Could you link those articles directly here please? Conyo14 (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Herb Brooks Award

• 25-26 USHL Season

Kivi36 (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Both would be good to pass GNG. Feel free to create them. Conyo14 (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Thie issue was addressed above: . I really don't know how to create articles but there are some that I'd really like created. I added them to the requested section. Anyone willing to get them done Kivi36 (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

A lot of people are busy on other tasks, both irl and here, but if you want to learn how to create an article, here is a helpful link: WP:AFC. Conyo14 (talk) 18:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Kivi36 w/ regards to 2025–26 USHL season, when I created 2022–23 USHL season I believe I copied the prior season's article and then edited it as such to update standings/awards/etc for the 22-23 season. Did a similar thing the other day to create 2025–26 Czech Extraliga season. The Kip ^(contribs) 21:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree with The Kip in using other articles to help create new ones. I create a lot of articles and I use previously created articles as "templates" for formatting purposes. Masterhatch (talk) 23:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

See diff here. That page needs some cleanup and syntax repairs. Flibirigit (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Kivi36, try using the Article Wizard (more detailed instructions). Once you've started a draft, you could come back here for feedback.

To start, try finding a few reliable sources that you can use as references. Wracking ^talk! 19:32, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a community discussion related to ice hockey edits at WP:ANI#Disruptive editing by User:At0068308. Left guide (talk) 19:51, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Just like that, it ended Conyo14 (talk) 23:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@RedBlueGreen93: has added promoted & relegated teams to the infobox of 2025 IIHF World Championship Division I
Was there a consensus for these additions? I would favor having them in the infoboxes of such lower division tournaments. GoodDay (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Don't hate it but not sure if it's needed. (It's also incomplete.) Kante4 (talk) 20:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I will attempt to complete it once this discussion is over with. RedBlueGreen93 22:08, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

The parameter was only added to the template on March 10, after the edit request at {{Infobox tournament season}} was approved on March 5. I only added it to one article, I'm also not sure why you are claiming I made edits to 2025 IIHF World Championship Division II and 2025 IIHF World Championship Division III when I haven't ([).

It seems practical to have this information in the infobox, in the absence of medal winners in the lower divisions, as it's essentially thw whole point of the tournaments to promote and relegate teams. MOS:INFOBOX describes the purpose of infoboxes as a place to summarize key facts, and the promotion and relegation of teams in those divisions is very much a key fact of the tournament. RedBlueGreen93 20:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit: GoodDay’s claim has since been withdrawn.

I've mentioned 'only' the Division I tournament. GoodDay (talk) 20:53, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I hope you know that talk page edit history, is accessible to all Wikipedia editors. You’ve since deleted that claim from your original comment, likely while I was typing my reply. RedBlueGreen93 20:56, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Thus the reason I've corrected my first post. GoodDay (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Understood, I have modified my reply accordingly. RedBlueGreen93 21:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

The problem I have with it is that the article is supposed to be for both Div 1A and Div 1B. The promoted portion gets confusing when compared to the sectioned infoboxes. I'd be okay with some creep where the Promoted category includes both A and B OR the promoted category specified the top division. Same goes for relegation. Conyo14 (talk) 22:53, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a fair point. Each group also has an infobox, so the promotion and relegation could be moved to those infoboxes instead of the leading one to avoid confusion.

More information Tournament details, Host country ...

2025 IIHF World Championship Division I A Tournament details Host country  Romania City Sfântu Gheorghe Venue 1 (in 1 host city) Dates 27 April – 3 May Teams 6 Promoted  Great Britain  Italy Relegated  Romania Tournament statistics Games played 15 Goals scored 81 (5.4 per game) Attendance 32,181 (2,145 per game) Scoring leader Andriy Denyskin (9 points) Official website Website

2025 IIHF World Championship Division I B Tournament details Host country  Estonia City Tallinn Venue 1 (in 1 host city) Dates 26 April – 2 May Teams 6 Promoted  Lithuania Relegated  Croatia Tournament statistics Games played 15 Goals scored 81 (5.4 per game) Attendance 15,081 (1,005 per game) Scoring leader Kim Sang-wook (8 points) Official website Website

Close

It could look something like this. RedBlueGreen93 23:10, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I think that would work better. Conyo14 (talk) 23:21, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Addendum: Based on the result of this discussion, I've boldly removed the second bullet point from WP:NCIH. If I've not understood something, please let me know, as I'm like 98% sure this was correct. mftp dan ^oops 14:21, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

As closer, my expectation was all the bullet points about diacritics could be removed in that diacritics will now follow standard wiki-wide practice. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:43, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Now I'm understanding. mftp dan ^oops 15:03, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

As a point of clarification - the implication of the close + discussion seems to be that diacritics are allowed but not mandated for North American hockey pages (ex. one can link Jonas Rondbjerg or Jonas Røndbjerg, depending on context, preference, usage in sources, etc). Per the language formerly at WP:NCIH, they've been mandated in non-North American hockey pages for some time (ex. one should link Jonas Røndbjerg at all times). Should the bullet points be re-added with amended wording (see NCIH page history - was added but reverted) to reflect this? Courtesy ping @Llammakey, @MFTP Dan, @Rosbif73. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:51, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you The Kip. Based on the discussion, option 3 was the consensus and that placed no limitations on diacritic use. I offered the options to leave NCIH alone or reflect how the NHL displayed them and that was rejected. NCIH should reflect the consensus. Llammakey (talk) 17:01, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@Llammakey Not disputing that, just asking if we should have it in text to clarify between optional diacritic usage (w/ North American pages, per this discussion and its close) and mandatory diacritic usage (non-North American pages). The Kip ^(contribs) 17:48, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Not mandated means that an editor does not have to use them, but they cannot be blocked from being used. So if another editor comes in and installs the diacritics, they cannot be reverted, because there is no basis for reversion. The point of this was to prevent edit wars over diacritic use. So if someone wants to add diacritics to the 1935 NHL season or Teemu Selanne or USHL seasons, they can. One does not mandate its usage, but one does not prevent them from being included either. Setting wording about optional usage would allow the kind of edit wars we are seeking to avoid. Llammakey (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Decided to bring this here in an attempt to avoid an edit war.

In short: @Kivi36 added the following as a milestone to the above season page yesterday:

* On April 20, 2025, Minnesota Wild Defenceman Zeev Buium became the first Israeli citizen and player born to two Israeli parents to play in an NHL game, with citations from Sporting News and The Forward.

I removed it with the following edit summary:

rvt - good faith addition, but while technically a citizen, Buium is US-born and has represented US national teams - I wouldn't call him the first Israeli player

Compare this to the Bruno Idžan milestone at 2025–26 NHL season, where Idžan is noted as the first Croat selected in the draft - he's Croatian-born and has represented Croatian national teams. Even if inclusion of his technical nationality ends up the consensus option, I still think the parents bit is not notable enough whatsoever.

Kivi then re-adds it without explanation/an edit summary. I subsequently revert them and tell them to take it to the talk page for discussion, which I'm doing here instead as season talk pages don't get much traffic.

At the top of milestone sections, there's a hidden note I wrote a few seasons ago as an attempt to standardize what we put there. It's not official policy per se, but reflects what's traditionally been included. Most of it is in the following hatnote, but...

...at the very bottom, the relevant part here is Any milestones not listed (1,200th point, etc) may be added at your discretion, but they may not be retained.

My questions are twofold:

1. Should the Buium bit be retained in the article, and

2. On a grander scale, should we workshop and/or formalize the above milestones guidelines, similar to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/NHL season pages format#Debuts and Last Games? The Kip ^(contribs) 16:12, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Kivi36's response:

My apology if it seemed as though I was attempting to entice an edit war. I did include my reasoning from undoing your reviosion in a seperate revision as the undo option did allow me to include a reasoning. I am curious to see what others believe about this case. Thank you @The Kip: working with me for the greater good of the community :) Kivi36 (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2026 (UTC)Kivi36

I agree with The Kip. If he was the first Israeli-born player, it would be different. Being born to two Israeli parents doesn't make it notable, it is trivial at best. Conyo14 (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

First israeli citizen though Kivi36 (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

I still find it extremely trivial. If he were playing for the national Israel team while in the NHL, it would be different. Conyo14 (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

@Conyo14 appreciate the feedback. Curious about your thoughts on my second point, though. The Kip ^(contribs) 05:12, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think formalizing it matters. The hidden messages are fine as a guideline. Conyo14 (talk) 16:28, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Jorhenry (talk · contribs) created an account today, and began editing articles related to the Ontario Hockey League. His username is similar the league's Director of Broadcast Partnerships & Video Content, as per their web site. I have reverted edits which are promotional in tone. It appears that he is in the process of uploading logos to the Commons for many teams, which may violate copyright. Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to disclose a conflict of interest and ask for guidance.

I work for the Ontario Hockey League in a broadcast and digital role. Because of that connection, I now understand that I should not directly edit articles related to the league or its teams.

However, I have noticed a few areas where the information or logos on several OHL related pages appear to be outdated, including:

• the primary OHL league logo

• team logos for Barrie, Ottawa, Kingston, and Sudbury

• the streaming section of the OHL article which currently only references a 2005 service

• the Priority Selection section which does not mention the announced return of an in person draft format in 2026

My goal is simply to help ensure that the information and branding used on these pages is accurate and up to date. I understand that Wikipedia content decisions must be made by independent editors, and I will follow the COI guidelines by suggesting changes on talk pages rather than editing directly.

If members of WikiProject Hockey are willing to review the talk page requests and determine whether updates are appropriate, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time and for maintaining the hockey related articles on Wikipedia. Jorhenry (talk) 23:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

There are fortunately ways to upload logos for official usage in the Commons. Using those logos on other pages is strictly forbidden, but there are workarounds. As for text itself, thank you for suggesting your comments. I don't typically work on OHL articles, but there plenty of people who do and I'm sure they'll look into your requests. Conyo14 (talk) 00:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I have PNG files of all OHL Logos - any assistance you can provide in best practices for uploading? Is SVG preferred?

Given Wikipedia's strong SEO presence I find the incorrect logos come up in google searches leading to old logos getting prominent use in media coverage of the league, hence the motivation to get uploaded logos in. Jorhenry (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Please remember that Wikipedia editors are volunteers. We are glad to help, but have busy lives and time constraints. Fixes will not be immediate. Flibirigit (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

SVG files are preferred for logos. Please note, that if images are uploaded to the Commons, then you are releasing the copyright to the logo so anyone can use it for any purpose. Is that really what the Canadian Hockey League/Ontario Hockey League wants to do with their team's logos? If not, then images can be uploaded locally intead with a WP:FAIRUSE license. Flibirigit (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the clarification on this.

That’s helpful to know regarding SVG uploads to Commons and the implications around releasing copyright. In that case, I don’t believe the league would want to release the primary logo for unrestricted use.

Would the best approach be to upload the current OHL logo locally under fair use instead? If so, I’m happy to provide the most up to date SVG or PNG file and any relevant source information needed for proper licensing and attribution.

My main goal here is simply to ensure the correct current logo is reflected on the article, as the version currently displayed appears to be outdated.

If there is a preferred process for supplying the correct file to an editor who can handle the upload and placement, I’m glad to follow that.

Thanks again for the guidance, I appreciate the help. Jorhenry (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jorhenry Hello, and sorry for the late response. The best approach would be to upload the current OHL logo (and others that you are willing to update) under fair use principles. The best way to do this would be to follow the instructions at the file upload wizard. Make sure to upload under the non-free file portion. Cheers, kline / talk / contribs 18:40, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

I am working on the images in question: File:Barrie.png, File:Kingston Frontenacs.png, File:OHL Logo.png, File:Ottawa 67s.png, File:Sudbury.png. Will advise when complete. Flibirigit (talk) 21:20, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

The logos uploaded to the Commons for the Kingston Frontenacs, Ottawa 67's, and the Ontario Hockey League, are all tagged with "consists only of simple geometric shapes or text", not meeting the threshold of originality for copyright. Those three logos can be used without a fair use replacement. I will uploaded newer versions of the Barrie Colts and Sudbury Wolves logos. Flibirigit (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Permission to create a page about 100 assist seasons in the NHL? Similar to the 100 point seasons page HallowedAce (talk) 23:27, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources which prove that the subject meets notability for inclusion. Flibirigit (talk) 23:34, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

HallowedAce (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Yardbarker and StatMuse are unreliable (see discussion links at WP:NBARSU), Daily Faceoff I haven't heard of, and the other two (Athletic, ESPN) seem generally reliable. Left guide (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Daily Faceoff is reliable in my opinion Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Daily Faceoff is generally reliable in my experience, they were who Frank Seravalli wrote for for a long time. The Kip ^(contribs) 00:30, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Looking a bit deeper, I would also say Daily Faceoff is generally reliable. They maintain strict independence with their writing crew and nothing seems user-generated nor AI generated. Though they do seem to promote gambling. Conyo14 (talk) 01:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Does this mean I can create the page? HallowedAce (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

No. Only two of the provided sources are reliable, and both of those talk about 100 assists as a passing mention. Please read WP:RS and see the comment below which recommends using a WP:SANDBOX to develop. Flibirigit (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

👍 HallowedAce (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Ideally, we'd want to see evidence that the topic meets WP:NLIST's discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. For the time being, you may want to work on it in draftspace or userspace, where good-faith sandboxing is relatively immune from deletion. Left guide (talk) 23:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

At what point does an editor recieve an award, notability or special perks ( or like credibility?). I'm not sure if I'm expressing my question well enough but whatever Kivi36 (talk) 13:39, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

There are several types of editor awards shown at WP:AWARDS. Some, like the service awards, have specific thresholds. Others, like barnstars, don't have set rules; it's just a thoughtful way to recognize and appreciate a significant body of work someone else has put into a certain task, project, or endeavor. In ice hockey there's {{The Hockey Barnstar}} along with a few team-specific ones at Category:Sports barnstar templates. Left guide (talk) 16:04, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

How does one acquire a barnstar Kivi36 (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

You can read Wikipedia:Barnstars, which was linked above. Quote any specific text that you do not understand. —Bagumba (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

There are certainly no special perks or "notability" in the way you probably mean. A dwindling number of us have been around for twenty years or more, but any "credibility" we have comes from whether people think we know what we're talking about or not. Much the same as with any other editor. Ravenswing 18:50, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Over the past few days, it has now come to pass that with a bit of fact-finding and editing (with the last one being Earl Seibert), nearly every player inductee of the Hockey Hall of Fame has a profile image. All except four players have a profile picture: Cammi Granato, Geraldine Heaney, Riikka Sallinen, Krissy Wendell-Pohl (Builders and Referee are a different story, but still). Wikidude10000 (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, there's a Commons image showing Riikka Sallinen's jersey in an exhibit that might make a nice addition to her article, though likely not in the lead/infobox. Left guide (talk) 00:03, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

I know here at ice hockey we usually wait till end of season to update things. Over at Presidents' Trophy, there has been many attempts to update even though the season is not done. Usually it is anon edits. Most recently, though, it was User:Dextiboi. Thoughts anyone? Masterhatch (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You've left a courteous message on their talk page already, so if they do it again, start using the warnings at WP:VAN. Regards, PKT(alk) 01:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Kevin Hayes has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:53, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Talk:Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada#WNBA & PWHL that members of this group may be interested in. Assadzadeh (talk) 07:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

There is now a requested move regarding adding "men's" to the title of Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada. The purpose being to avoid confusion with Prominent women's sports leagues in the United States and Canada and to clearly define the leagues that should be included in the article. Assadzadeh (talk) 13:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

In my opinion, not having Stanley Cup champions on first and last games of each NHL season pages is like censorship and that doesn't feel right to do so. I think Stanley Cup Champion should be brought back in NHL season pages on those players who played their first and last games. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:19, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Most recent discussion , another discussion prior , original .

My thoughts on this haven't changed. Sorry man, there's gotta be a bit more support for this. I just really don't care if Jordan Nolan or Devante Smith-Pelly played their final NHL games. Perhaps someone else can chime in? via myself from the last discussion via myself from myself. Triple Gold Club is notable as discussed prior. Conyo14 (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

That doesn't mean anything. The Stanley Cup Champion has to count for players who achieve the other accomplishments mentioned on their first and last games. This doesn't go uncensored. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the players who retired who won the Stanley Cup along with other things they won. BattleshipMan (talk) 05:32, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Idk, seems like it could cause a real issue with good-faith editors adding in Jordan Nolan or Devante. Like I think the rules as of right now work fine. But again, others are welcome to chime in too. Conyo14 (talk) 05:38, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Not without the Stanley Cop as a notable achievement. That doesn't work without it. If there have to been some set rules about which players to include with the Stanley Cup, find a solution to it like having players who have notable accomplishments like playing over 1,000 games, winning NHL Awards (like Hart, Norris, Vezina, Selke trophies and such) and whatever else that they achieved. BattleshipMan (talk) 06:07, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Stop adding trivia. Stop Wikilawyering. Flibirigit (talk) 14:33, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

That is not what this is about. It's about adding a milestone that have been removed for questionable reasons. Winning a Stanley Cup is considered a big milestone and it's worth mentioning on the players' first and last names in each NHL season pages. We should to have Stanley Cup Champions back in it's place because removing it is like taking away what the players can achieved in their hockey careers. BattleshipMan (talk) 14:39, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Replying here only because you asked for my input. I disagree with you. This is trivia and should not be included. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 15:40, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

+1 to Conyo. Winning the cup alone doesn’t make a player notable. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:02, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

That information is not trivial at best. It's like taking out one part of the Triple Gold Club. Winning a Stanley Cup championship is considered a big achievement for many players. Does that sound trivial to you? BattleshipMan (talk) 16:11, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Should we have noted Jeff Zatkoff’s retirement in last games, despite his <50 NHL games and lack of other special notability/trophies/etc, because he won the cup?

You’ve made the exact same argument in multiple comments and nobody has agreed. That’s when it’s time to back down. At the most I’d consider adding it solely as a supplement if there’s other special notability (ex. to Quick’s blurb), but under no circumstances should it be the grounds for an entry by itself. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:48, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Also agree with Conyo14. And I am not going to discuss this further, because same editor has been doing this every year, which is wasting everyone's time. If nobody agrees with this proposition then just back away and find something better to edit. – sbaio 17:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree with the consensus. First/last has been, historically, one of the many areas subject to bloat by any rando who fancies that This Thing or That Thing is meaningful and vitally important. Indeed, playing on a Cup winner is important. So is scoring one's first goal. So is being named NHL Rookie of the Week. So is making the NHL at all. Claiming that this long-standing consensus is "censorship" is nonsense; anyone who craves to see who's played on a Cup winner can click on the individual Stanley Cup Finals articles, which invariably list the rosters. "That doesn't work without it"? It has, in fact, worked just fine for decades now. If there is truly anyone out there who rages at the omission of Sammy Hebert (say) from the 1923-24 final games list, I recommend that they take a gummy and settle down with some soothing music. Ravenswing 19:33, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

That will I not let go. That consensus is very much flawed at best. There should be a Stanley Cup Champion listed on those players, who have played 1,000 NHL games and won whatever awards they achieved to avoid such bloat as you all described. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Amigo: With all due respect, WP:DROPTHESTICK. Flawed or not, the consensus is clear. Regards, PKT(alk) 22:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Free advice: Please read Wikipedia:Consensus - particularly this section - then step away for a bit, and then read it again before continuing this discussion. Echoedmyron (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

With all due respect, it appears that your understanding of how consensus works is what is flawed. 1995hoo (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, Let It Go. Accept that other don't view it like you do and move on, happens. Kante4 (talk) 14:56, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Translation: you don't like the consensus. Fair enough, you do you. But do you see so much as a single editor agreeing with you? No, you do not. Ravenswing's Fifth Law: "The nature of a consensus-driven encyclopedia is that sometimes you're going to be on the wrong side of consensus, in which case the only thing to do is lose gracefully and move on." There are a number of changes I'd make if I were elected the King of Wikipedia, but I haven't been, so I can't. It's time for you to lose gracefully and move on. Ravenswing 16:56, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

The article The Rink Battle Creek has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for 14 years. It has been tagged for both notability concerns and unreferenced for over 2 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. Small, run of the mill stadium.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 18:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Howdy. I was reading some articles, and I came across that of Erik Gustafsson (ice hockey, born 1988) and noticed it said when he played at Northern Michigan, the league was the CCHA. I was wondering if that was still the case so I checked Porter Martone, whose league at Michigan State was B1G, Macklin Celebrini whose league at BU was Hockey East, and George Parros whose league at Princeton was ECAC. I was wondering if it would make more sense to change it to NCAA or something of the sort, as that is closer to a league than conferences are? I couldn't find any previous discussions on this because the search term NCAA is used so frequently in discussion in the archive. If this has been discussed a bit already apologies and consider this moot. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 18:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Stat tables typically put the conference as the league for individual seasons but total all NCAA stats together at the bottom if that's the highest level played. I'm not sure if there's a good reason for or against it, that's just how it's been done since I've been editing. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 19:07, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

The NCAA isn't really a "league." It's a national governing body that also runs certain national championship playoff tournaments. The term "conference," as used in college sports, is more or less equivalent to the term "league" as used at the professional level, and some college conferences use the word "league" instead of "conference" (compare, for example, the Atlantic Coast Conference or the Big East Conference with the Ivy League, the Horizon League, or the Patriot League). There's also at least one (the CAA) that calls itself an "association" instead. All of those different conferences/leagues/associations sent teams to this year's NCAA basketball tournament, for example; it functions as a national playoff tournament. Why the differing nomenclature in college sports, where "conferences" are separate leagues, versus pro sports, where "conferences" represent groupings in the same league? I have no idea, although I suppose it bears noting that in the NFL, the two current conferences have their origins in the old separate NFL and AFL of the 1960s. The AFL teams formed the nucleus of the American Football Conference and three of the NFL teams moved over to the AFC to balance out the numbers. And then you have Major League Baseball, which consisted of two leagues that were traditionally independent legal entities until 2000; the reason for the difference there was that the National and American Leagues were originally competitors and there was no regular-season scheduling crossover between them until 1997. College sports aren't really comparable to either the NFL or MLB situations, though. Certainly in the past few years of college conference realignment we've seen how the different conferences can be quite vicious competitors at times. 1995hoo (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

@Casablanca Rock NCAA teams usually play an almost exclusively in-conference schedule until the national tournament, hence the league being the conference rather than NCAA. The Kip ^(contribs) 21:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi all. Thanks for the replies! That makes a fair amount of sense. It seems best then to leave it as it is. All the best! Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Ottawa Arena has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 26 § Ottawa Arena until a consensus is reached. ~2026-25149-07 (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion can now be found at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 26#Ottawa Arena ... PKT(alk) 11:42, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

User:Eggpot has reverted the usage of the {{Game-otl}} template multiple times on the above page, despite me mentioning this multiple times on their talk page. First talk page edit, and second talk page edit.

Background: In late 2024, I boldly created the following templates:

• {{Game-won}} (What Links Here?)
• {{Game-lost}}
• {{Game-otw}}
• {{Game-otl}}
• {{Game-tied}}

The purpose of these templates is to semantically denote whether a team won a game, instead of repeating the same background-color's on a row. (Previously, every time I went to add a background color denoting whether a team won or lost a game, I would have to think about RGB values in order, and which combinations were correct.)

I initially added these templates to the 2024–25 New York Rangers season page in this edit. I used this page as a testing ground to see how the templates would work, and how they would be accepted by the group at large.

Since then, they appear to have been widely accepted by at least the NHL and NFL editor groups -- See the "What Links Here?" link that I posted next to the Game-won template link above.

Present day: As mentioned, Eggpot has changed the background of the current Buffalo Sabres' season page for games the Sabres have lost in overtime at least 3 times over the past month or so. I did not initially set up the current Sabres' season page to use the templates, and they seem to be working just fine for Game-won and Game-lost; Eggpot only seems to have an issue with the Game-otl -- I believe they don't like the white color.

However, as I explained on their talk page, I have a couple of issues with their edits. First, they're changing the color of games lost in overtime to a pale yellow, which is the same color used for the {{Game-tied}} template currently. Second, they're making it so that the current Buffalo Sabres season uses templates for games won and lost, but manual background styling for games lost in overtime. Third, the current Sabres' season page is now different from basically all the other current NHL season pages. Fourth, they're not engaging by either replying to messages on their talk page, or by taking up the issue on the talk page for the templates, as I suggested.

So, instead of engaging in an edit war, I come here asking for your assistance, and kind of a referendum on the usage of these templates. While they appear to have been adopted by the NHL community, I seek confirmation.

Further, I view this referendum as separate from "which color means what?" I'm happy to also have that discussion, but I'd prefer that happen at Template talk:Game-won.

Thanks! --MikeVitale 18:13, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Why do we need colour coding for every single game won or lost? Team season articles are becoming more like a art project than actual article. Save the colours for something important like winning a trophy. Flibirigit (talk) 12:15, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

They have historically been used in articles to denote wins, losses, and ties. If intentionally denoting a loss as a tie isn't vandalism, I don't know what is.- UCO2009bluejay (talk) 00:43, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I propose a change in the linking methods for team accomplishments in the infoboxes on team pages. For the "Stanley Cups" section, the years link to the Stanley Cup Final for that year, which makes sense. However, for all other accomplishments (conf. championships, division championships, Presidents' Trophies), these years link to the NHL season for that year. I feel these should instead link to the corresponding team season page for that year. For example, if I want to look into more about the Bruins winning the Presidents' Trophy in 2022/23, the 2022–23 Boston Bruins season page would almost certainly provide me with more useful and detailed information than the 2022–23 NHL season page. This is a practice that MLB and NFL team pages use as well for the infoboxes. Red0ctober22 (talk) 23:44, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Obviously there is the argument that maybe there isn't a written page for every individual season for every team, but I am pretty sure that is not the case with NHL teams, unlike perhaps minor leagues. Red0ctober22 (talk) 23:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. This would be more intuitive and helpful for the reader interface. Left guide (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Such links are contrary to MOS:SUBMARINE. It is extremely annoying to see what appears to be a link to a team or a season, and end up at a team-season article instead. Flibirigit (talk) 14:34, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

I guess it just depends on what a majority of people naturally expect to see the link direct to. For me, across pages for any sports leagues, when I see a team won a division title or something, I naturally expect it to link to the page describing that team's season specifically. If I see the Flyers won the division one season, I am interested in the roster, their schedule, etc., all things that the NHL season page doesn't provide. Red0ctober22 (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

I support this btw. Conyo14 (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

With two people backing me I would like to move forward with this. I understand @Flibirigit's concern, but I don't really see how people viewing a page for a specific team wouldn't expect to see links to that specific team's individual season pages. Red0ctober22 (talk) 03:34, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

On one additional note, what the NBA does is link conference championships to the page for the playoffs of that year, so that is something that might want to be considered instead of linking to the team-season page. Red0ctober22 (talk) 03:47, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm also in support of that. Conyo14 (talk) 03:50, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I brought this up in the NBA talk page, and people over there are actually in favor of making conference titles link to the team-season. I figure I would just keep it standard for all. Red0ctober22 (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I would add that if the linked text shows as say "2021–22", then sure, I expect the link to take me to a season article, either league-wide or team-specific, but if the linked text shows Montreal Canadiens it better go to the team article. Too often I see seas of blue where a team name is hyperlinked repeatedly throughout an article because someone had to easter egg mutliple team seasons that way. You want to link to season articles? Structure your sentences so you can put the season years in there instead of repeating the team name over and over. Echoedmyron (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hockey Canada announced today that Misha Donskov would be the head coach of Team Canada at the 2026 and 2027 IIHF Men's Worlds and at the 2027 World Juniors. He doesn't have an article currently but a few months ago I made a draft for one. It's been sitting in AfC for months but I feel like now would be a good time to get it reviewed and published. I'm relatively new to this so apologies if I've got anything wrong in terms of the process here.

Cheers BuckyFlow (talk) 22:02, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Nope, you're good. I'm on the draft reviewer roster, for my sins, so I looked it over, accepted it, and moved it to articlespace. Good work. Ravenswing 22:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

As a curious editor, was there a consensus or a guideline over how hockey awards (NHL, OHL, for example) and honors (HOF) should be listed? For example, I see some pages such as Mark Howe listing both awards and records in bullet-form while Grant Fuhr has awards listed in a wikitable with honors listed in bullet-form; regardless, thank you for your time Wikidude10000 (talk) 02:44, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format, awards are a bullet list. The last major updates to the MOS were four years ago. Flibirigit (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I’d be open to holding a discussion on that - I’ve always found the tables to be a better format than lists for awards, simply for the fact they look cleaner and more organized than a jumbled mess of bullet points. The Kip ^(contribs) 04:53, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

In general, it seems like many editors of such articles are not even aware of the MOS. A discussion might be warranted, but it's still up to the project to find a way to implement consistency. Flibirigit (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Elite Prospects has been submitted for an article. It is in decent condition although it has many primary sources. Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@Jackesilfver: is the creator of the draft and has a clear COI on their user page showing their indication to use Wikipedia to show Elite Prospects' website. We all know Elite Prospects can be used a source for stats and articles on Wikipedia, but as its own article, secondary, independent sources would have to provide significant coverage to get past draft status. There is a single TSN article, but it does not show what Elite Prospects is. As an FYI to Jack, Swedish sources would be allowed to prove WP:GNG. Conyo14 (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I guess I'll mention the SHL source is very in-depth. It would be nice to have a second source. Conyo14 (talk) 19:38, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I added some stuff from an Athletic piece that should contibute to GNG. Wracking ^talk! 20:06, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Also added a Forbes cite (WP:FORBESCON applies, but it's an interview so I think WP:ABOUTSELF applies) Wracking ^talk! 20:26, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

The Athletic article is fairly good too, I think it would pass GNG now. Though the Forbes cite is definitely an interview, so it wouldn't count, but good to include for contextual purposes. Conyo14 (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Agree, I don't think the Forbes piece really contributes to GNG but still thought it had some useful info. Wracking ^talk! 20:50, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

If I am reading this correctly, the only three article that might contribute to GNG are: Swedish Hockey League, Forbes, and The Athletic. The Forbes article seems like a mix of a report and an interview, but less than a quarter of it is quotes of the company founder. Flibirigit (talk) 21:29, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I think the Forbes article is borderline (leaning no) for GNG as WP:FORBESCON now says to treat these pieces as self-published.

I checked the sites at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Sources#Sweden and found:

• Göteborgs-Posten article based on interviews with the founder and the CEO, pretty detailed on the history of the business
• Hockey Sverige article that seems to be based on a press release already cited in the article

Wracking ^talk! 22:06, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

A few more sources: (I haven't thoroughly reviewed all)

• A profile from the Finnish Ilta-Sanomat
• Everysport profile in Affärsvärlden business magazine, focus on EP , and another
• Aftonbladet article, republished for EP's 20-year anniversary
• Hockey Sverige nterview with Nilsson for EP's 20-year anniversary
• Profile of Nilsson in Ölandsbladet
• Profile of Nilsson in Barometern

Wracking ^talk! 22:38, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Maybe it isn't useful for the draft, but it seems that Nilsson passed away according to an article in Barometern that was published yesterday. QubeCube (talk) 12:28, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the ping and for this discussion. I want to be fully transparent: I work at Elite Prospects, which I have disclosed on my user page. I am aware of Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines and want to make clear that I have no intention of bypassing them. My only goal in submitting this draft was to have an accurate, factual article in English about Elite Prospects that meets Wikipedia's standards — nothing promotional, just a proper encyclopedic record of what the site is and its history.

I am happy to step back from editing the draft directly and defer entirely to independent editors. Please feel free to add, remove, or adjust anything that does not fully meet Wikipedia's guidelines and editorial standards — that is exactly as it should be, and we trust the community's judgment completely.

I also wanted to flag something that has happened since I submitted the draft: our founder, Johan Nilsson, passed away on 14 May 2026 at the age of 45 after a nine-year battle with colon cancer. This has been covered by Yahoo Sports and The Hockey News, among others. I leave it to the editors here to determine how best to reflect that in the article.

Thank you again for your time and for the work already done on this draft. It is genuinely appreciated. Jackesilfver (talk) 09:37, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Ethan Edwards was moved to replace the disambiguation page with a copy-paste instead of a page move. To make matters worse, this appears to be the second time in the page's history it has happened. What is the correct thing to to here? Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 02:37, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I reverted the edits as hijacking and will also reach out to User:Emcgonigle directly, though it seems they've made other edits (an attempted merge?) in the topic area so it may be a bit messy. Wracking ^talk! 02:43, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not seeing a time this move was requested or attempted before, though—am I missing something? Wracking ^talk! 02:53, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I was mistaken about that part Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Where is/was the supposed disambiguation page? From what I can see, the only thing that happened was a cut-and-paste move/hijack attempt that was reverted, and the only thing to do for now is to warn the user. Left guide (talk) 03:32, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I had misremembered, I was confusing it with a different page Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 14:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I ran across this section which relies on stats from QuantHockey.com, which is a site I've not yet run across. Overall, I'm unfamiliar with QH.

However, in looking at the stats on the site, Maddie Rooney and Nicole Hensley are both listed with their team as "TOT" which, when expanded, shows that they have played (in the PWHL) for the Minnesota Frost as well as the "Minnesota Superior." For those not familiar, the "Superior" was the original name that was trademarked by the PWHL for the team which has since become the Frost, but "Superior" was never used in any official capacity as the team name. Similarly, Ann-Renée Desbiens seems to have played for not only the Montreal Victoire, but also the "Montreal Echo" -- same thing; originally-trademarked but never-used name for the franchise.

So these cause me to question the overall reliability of the QuantHockey website. I couldn't find anything at the Reliable Sources list, so I figured I'd ask. --MikeVitale 02:56, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

It's ran by one person with no oversight. I would say unreliable. Conyo14 (talk) 03:33, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I've generally used QuantHockey as a solid source. I feel like this discussion came up fairly recently, though. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Found it, it came up in a discussion here. From what I said at the time:

I've never had any issues with it, it's primarily a stats/information site in the same way as EliteProspects and HockeyDB and their stats line up on virtually everything. I used it as a supporting source to NHL stats websites at FL List of Vegas Golden Knights players, mainly because they bold-mark active players with that franchise in franchise leaderboards.

Regarding the PWHL, it's possible they're using the unofficial names as stand-ins for the generic "PWHL [city]" names used in year one, as I wouldn't be shocked if that would somehow cause issues for their database. That's just my 2 cents, though. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:45, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

The statistics on Quant Hockey are accurate, but do not rely on it for anything else such as commentary and history. Flibirigit (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi there. I was wondering if there was a plan to set up hockey wikipedia similar to all other sports. I love hockey but I don’t have a lot of knowledge about it and want to get into it more. I use wiki as a quick way to learn more about players in all sports but it is increasingly difficult to find out specific accolades (Stanley cup finals, Olympic medals, player awards) with hockey players specifically. With other sports I learn quickly and can really adapt to the game better. I am hoping there is a plan to change the format to make it more user friendly. Having it similar to soccer or baseball would be amazing. I would have much more usage myself and would imagine more usage generally in hockey player Wikipedia pages if had the same format as other sports ~2026-32158-11 (talk) 05:14, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

I suppose you are referring to the infobox on the right-hand side of the screen? Fortunately there is a table of contents that can take you to the section with their accolades. It has been a long-standing consensus to not overcrowd the infobox. I am neutral on that subject though. Conyo14 (talk) 07:04, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps Éric Dazé should be moved to Eric Daze? I believe his name was more common without diacritics. They're not used throughout the content of his bio article. GoodDay (talk) 15:30, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Note - an editor has since added diacritics to the aformentioend bio article. GoodDay (talk) 22:22, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

If there is a consensus to move it, yeah. From a search, there are more sources without diacritics, plus the NHL doesn't use them for his. Only Elite Prospects and Hockey Reference so far. Conyo14 (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Still beating this dead horse I see. Go to talk page and make a requested move first. Llammakey (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Conyo14. I'll consider opening up an RM in the near future. GoodDay (talk) 22:09, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Where's the discussion that overturned the 2024 Jan RM that called for the 2024 PWHL season be moved to 2023–24 PWHL season? GoodDay (talk) 01:15, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

The PWHL uses "2024 Regular Season" on its player pages (see their page for Marie-Philip Poulin, for example), so it seems reasonable to use the same label for the Wikipedia article. isaacl (talk) 02:11, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey y'all.

The Stanley Cup is currently at WP:ITNC. In the discussion, BattleshipMan (talk · contribs) made a complaint that editors on ITN were attempting to hold sourcing standards of the article higher than what was necessary. He was rebuked, but this reminded me of a similar issue that unfolded three years ago, when the SC was nominated, initially posted, then pulled over sourcing issues. The ensuing controversy even prompted me to make a discussion post about it.

Given this, I would like to know the sourcing requirements of such articles per WP:ICEHOCKEY. Are there unique standards of sourcing acceptability on here that is not being understood. Although I hold that for a Main Page posting, sourcing quality is important, it doesn't sit proper with me if we at ITN are somewhat enforcing differing standards and overriding WP:LOCALCONSENSUSES in specialized areas. — Knightoftheswords 00:05, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

If you ask me, ITN policy when it comes to sourcing is too strict and we need to ensure every championship wins get posted on the news feed as soon as possible, even with the enough sourcing that it has on it. BattleshipMan (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

ITN wants sourcing on tables of each game, even though external links to recaps should've been enough. BattleshipMan (talk) 01:17, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

All the stats were copied from some source such as the NHL site, and the article should provide corresponding citations. Whether or not the In the News project should relax its standards for certain types of information at the time of posting (with the understanding that all the information is readily sourceable and thus citations can be added) is outside of the scope of the ice hockey project. isaacl (talk) 02:21, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, we need to work on the sourcing of it real soon. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:28, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

If it's always an issue, why doesn't the nominator fix the issues then? Conyo14 (talk) 19:05, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Bot requests § Mass-removal of WikiProject categories added directly in wikicode to talk pages. Graham87 (talk) 13:39, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I just wanted to echo here that I am more than happy to do this bot run once consensus is established. phuzion (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

BRFA filed phuzion (talk) 01:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

This bot run is currently underway. phuzion (talk) 23:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Sweeping changes were made without discussion to many historical NHL transaction pages. This largely include changes to formatting such as abbreviating "round" to "rd" when listing traded draft picks, and including extraneous information on draft picks, such as what happened to the draft pick after the trade (what number it ended up being, who was selected, was it traded again, etc.), information that is accessible already on the draft pages, and, frankly, is trivia otherwise unrelated to the trade at the time it was made. For example, from 2011–12 NHL transactions:

turning into

plus additional notes about prior trades and how teams acquired picks (included on entry draft pages), incorrect team abbreviations, diacritics, random spaces, etc.

Phoenix did not trade Vermette for Stolarz and Auger. That info really is not relevant to the trade, and they are not part of the transaction that the page was designed to document. Do we want these additional notes? Or can I scrap them? –uncleben85 (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I mean if the picks were conditional, keep, but otherwise meh. Conyo14 (talk) 23:45, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Restore original format. The editor who made these changes was warned about it more than once (transactions and draft pages). It looked like the editor dropped the stick, but it appears that it is the other way around. – sbaio 03:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

+1. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Looking at User:EzraGennello/sandbox, it is possible that hockey media member wants to create an article about themself. Flibirigit (talk) 04:39, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Let them? I mean, obvious COI aside, there is nothing stopping someone from creating an article about themselves so long as it passes GNG. Conyo14 (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Autobiographies generally shouldn't be created directly in article-space by the subject, and should instead be submitted as drafts for independent AfC reviewers. Left guide (talk) 07:07, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

It could be a case of WP:IMPERSONATE too. For their protection, the account had been soft blocked. They can continue with the account name if they verify their identity (while conforming with WP:COI). —Bagumba (talk) 06:16, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

It's been a couple of years since we've had this conversation. Last time it ended with more people saying they were fine with it, but it still got railroaded, so I gave up, but it's been a while, haha. I'm coming from it with a biased lens working largely on the NHL Transaction pages, I admit, but for my argument: Contracts roll over July 1, marking new salary cap limits and cap hits; new import contracts can be signed, extensions can be offered, etc.; it's a clean consistent break that falls on the same spot every year (as opposed to the draft that we currently, arbitrarily use); it would tidy up season articles that cover two separate Junes. Plus, the NHL reframes their transactions reporting based on July 1 (see: https://www.nhl.com/news/2025-26-nhl-trades) Should our 2026-27 pages start July 1? –uncleben85 (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

In favor of July 1. Draft is way more arbitrary imo. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 21:42, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I have a question here. When do most team season pages become active on Wiki? Conyo14 (talk) 23:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Plus, the NHL reframes their transactions reporting based on July 1 – then why NHL has July 1 transactions for both 2024 and 2025 at 2024-25 NHL Trade Tracker? – sbaio 03:13, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Maybe there's a certain time of day that contracts roll over? That's my hunch. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 03:14, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah the roll over is noon Eastern, technically, I believe. Definitely not draft day though! :P –uncleben85 (talk) 12:45, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Per the 2025–26 NHL season page, the season ended on June 14, 2026. The transactions page should match that. --NHL04 (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

The issue, as well as the point raised by user NHL04 immediately above, raises an interesting question with regard to things like the Caps–Sabres sign-and-trade yesterday involving Alex Tuch. The new CBA, which is effective this coming September 15, restricts contracts to a maximum of seven years, rather than eight as the current CBA does. The NHL refers to the new agreement as taking effect in the 2026–27 NHL season. So if you use that definition, then the proper way to link the Tuch trade—and this is how I did it on the Caps' roster template—is to link the 2025–26 season and pipe the link to 2026. If, in fact, you can't sign a player to an eight-year contract as of the 2026–27 season, then the transaction could not be made during that season. I know the NFL distinguishes between the "season" and the "league year" partly because of issues like this. I don't know whether the NHL does the same, but it might be a useful distinction to observe if so. Anyone know? 1995hoo (talk) 14:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

The Tuch trade counts as a 2025-26 trade (even though the Cup has been awarded), and precisely because of the point you made (an 8 year deal would not be possible in the 2026-27 season) is why that distinction matters. Now, imagine that trade was made on Sunday, June 28, 2026. That would be well enough after the commencement of the 2026 Draft and would be placed on 2026-27 page, as per our current system, even though, once again, that is a deal that would not be possible under the new CBA, which begins in the 2026-27 season. July 1 first is a logical, consistent roll over date, that has actual bearing and significance to league business and collective agreements, and should therefore be used as a guideline for our articles (not the Entry Draft, which is arbitrary except for the fact that it symbolizes "new beginnings"!) –uncleben85 (talk) 01:32, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

That's not actually correct about the Tuch trade. The wording of the new CBA keeps the eight year window open until mid-September. Ravenswing 03:18, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Ah, fair, I guess the same could have happened July or August. That's fair! –uncleben85 (talk) 19:34, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm good with either July 1 or the first day of the draft. Big no to rolling things over the day after the Finals - that's not how things work, especially with the new CBA taking effect. The Kip ^(contribs) 00:43, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

It is literally how things work since the buyout period is directly connected to the end of the Stanley Cup Finals. "Teams can only complete a buyout during a specific window. It opens on the later of June 15 or 48 hours after the Stanley Cup Final ends, and closes on June 30 at 5 p.m. ET." There is also a clear uptick in trades at that point. --NHL04 (talk) 07:06, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

I think it's quite important to make a clear distinction for when business transactions of the prior and upcoming seasons start and end. Since, according to the CBA, players start getting paid in September, but they can sign a new contract with their current team prior to start of free agency, would that mean that Free Agency Day (July 1 most of the time) is the clear start of the 2026-27 nhl transactions? Hypothetically, if this were the very first season of the NHL, and it started with the NHL entry draft, would that not be the logical choice? But also, trades can occur prior to the draft too, so I would be okay with either draft day or start of free agency as our natural start. Conyo14 (talk) 13:46, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Buyouts don't mark the start of the new season though. –uncleben85 (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Leave it as is, what is currently established works fine. This honestly just sounds like change for change sake which seems to be the trend that a lot of Wikipedia groups are going with for some reason. Eh Oh Canada (talk)

Keeping things because "that's just how we do it" is also bad policy, though. What's the actual argument for Draft Day? July 1 is a much more consistent, relevant marker.–uncleben85 (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

I feel it helps that the NHL tracks transactions from July 1, 2025. So, I think it'd be fine for transactions to go forward from there. Conyo14 (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah July 1 is a much clearer cut point. Kante4 (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

NHL CBA Article 1 Definitions: ""League Year" means the period from July 1 of one calendar year to and including June 30 of the following calendar year or such other one year period to which the NHL and the NHLPA may agree." –uncleben85 (talk) 01:20, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

An editor is changing heading names from "Regular season and playoffs" to "League play" like in this edit. I assume only Ottawa Senators pages are affected, because editor is known to primarily edit Ottawa's topics, but I cannot check it as I am away until next week and doing it on mobile is not comfortable. – sbaio 04:20, 4 July 2026 (UTC)