Jump to content

Talk:2015 Stanley Cup Finals

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

Final/Finals

[edit]

Sorry to bring this back, but the consensus from the 2008 Final page is seven years old, and the change to "Final" is at least nine years ago now. In that time, the media has gotten a lot better on it now. Doing a Google search for "Stanley Cup Final" brings up about 31 million results; doing a Google search for "Stanley Cup Finals" brings around 14.5 million. Back in 2008, that number was different - and even if the "Final" query included pages with "Finals", there would still be 16.5 million pages with "Final" vs. 14.5 million with "Finals". NBC now uses "Final" in its on air and online coverage in the United States, and CBC, Rogers/Sportsnet, and TSN all do the same in Canada. With that, the 2008 Final consensus is, I feel, very outdated. I understand the desire for consistency; this can be achieved by changing the pre-2006 Final pages to read as such. Let go of the past, I feel. Or, we can keep the pre-2006 Final pages as they are now, 2006-beyond pages change to "Final" as with the main page, but unite them all under one category. Regarding my NBC/CBC/TSN/Sportsnet statement - as of 1:20 PM, Eastern Time, May 30, 2015, I do not see any reference to "Finals" for any of them.

Sources I found that exclusively use "Final": -NBC -CBC -TSN -CBS Sports -Chicago Tribune -Chicago Sun-Times

Sources I found that almost exclusively use "Final" with only one "Finals" use I located: -Tampa Bay Times -LA Times

The ONLY source I found with multiple mentions of mainly "Finals" is ESPN, which is not very surprising for a sports outlet that religiously talks about the NBA Finals. I also found a mix of "Final" and "Finals" on the New York Times. Besides, a large amount of "Finals" references actually said "finals" lowercase.

And anyways, littering "Finals" on the front of the page directly next to the logo saying "Final" is hypocritical. Any objections? NWRGeek (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NBC, CBC and Sportsnet have a vested interest in towing the league's official line because of their TV contracts, so I would not say they are very good NPOV third-party references for the purposes of determining the renaming of these pages. Second when I do a Google search of stanley cup final, it is also picking up many articles that use the "S" (you can tell this is the case because it is bolding both "Stanley Cup Final" and "Stanley Cup Finals" on the summary of the Stanley Cup Finals article here on Wikipedia), so the 31 million+ results may not be completely accurate. And again, there are several sources like Tampa Bay Times and LA Times that are still inconsistent. And I'm still getting others that still use the "S" like the Sporting News, USA Today, Sports Illustrated, Reuters, San Francisco Chronicle/SF Gate. As for the comment that putting "'Finals' on the front of the page directly next to the logo saying 'Final' is hypocritical": No it is not. There are cases where a company or organization's logo may have some variations of capitalization, spelling, punctuation, and formatting, but under both Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks and WP:COMMONAME, the text of the article may be different. Your recent edit to the Stanley Cup Finals article (changing the first sentence to read "also known as the Stanley Cup Finals among various media"[1]]) also in way seems to imply that the S may be part of the common name instead of the official name. "Let go of the past" is fine as long as most third party reliable sources do that first before Wikipedia does, but I still see them very inconsistent. Furthermore, whether to change from uppercase F to lowercase f should be a separate issue. Zzyzx11 (talk) 23:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was watching some of the MSG Network coverage yesterday, and their graphics used Finals, not Final. Jmj713 (talk) 23:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Both names are clearly used, but the official name is Final. So, that should be mentioned in the lead too. Alaney2k (talk) 03:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Alaney2k on this - the rule should, logically be, that if both names see considerable coverage, as is the case here, that the official name should be used. Back in 2008, when most sources used "Finals" this would be a different argument. However, there's a pretty even split on this now, it seems. It's no longer a situation where most are using Finals. It's gotten to a point where this may be the status quo is roughly a 50/50 split, in which case the official name should, I feel, be used due to lack of media consensus. To Zzyzx11 I actually did calculate out the Google thing - as I said, 31mil "Final" and "Finals" and 14mil "Finals". Assuming 14m of the 31m are "Finals", 31m-14m=17 million "Final" vs 14 million "Finals". I'd contend this is a fair argument, since the media no longer almost exclusively uses "Finals". We may be stuck at this 50/50 split for a long time because of the NBA Finals and that gets more attention in the U.S.; that being said the media has gotten better about it in recent years. Objections welcome. NWRGeek (talk) 22:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alaney2k is referring to the lead section, where all alternative names can be listed in the first section. I thought we were discussing the article titles, where the WP:COMMONNAME policy is used: "If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change". The key is the common name, not the official name. However, as you mentioned there may still be a mixed split. Coincidentally, we have news within the past couple of days about Garth Brooks having to cancel his Tampa Bay concerts because of Game 2, so it will be interesting to see how the non-sports writers and media spell it, which would be a good up-to-the minute indication. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No need to wait, here's an article from Forbes from yesterday, using "Stanley Cup Finals". Jmj713 (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That Garth Brooks concert is an interesting point. But yes, I think it is a far more even split now than in 2008. When I have access to a computer later today, I'll dig through more sources - but given that split I think the change should be made. NWRGeek (talk) 16:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Game 2 start time

[edit]

We have a bit of a problem, NHL sources are conflicting on when game 2 is starting. Some list 8pm ([2]) others list 7:15pm ([3], [4]). Even the third party reliable sources conflict ([5], [6], [7]). Which do we list? TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 04:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/25200716/stanley-cup-final-tv-schedule-lightning-vs-blackhawks is now also listing 7:15. Check the time stamps when all these articles were published. The latest ones should be current. Of course, the time currently being displayed at NHL.com should be current. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, fair enough. Seems the schedule on NBC.com support this. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 04:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect it was moved to 7:15 at this last minute because NBC wants the Game 2 to immediately follow the 2015 Belmont Stakes (of course, I'm looking for a source to back that up as well). Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rosters

[edit]

Looks like the rosters include some players that did not participate in the Finals. At least one is Rozsival. If so, "did not play" should be added. Jmj713 (talk)

Galavision/Telemundo in infobox?

[edit]

Under "Announcers" in this article's infobox, the Spanish language networks Galavision and Telemundo are listed. Did they really broadcast NHL hockey?

Also, one of the announcers listed is "Jorge Calvo". If you click on his name and go to his Wikipedia article, it says he died in 2009. Bunkyray5 (talk) 22:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2015 Stanley Cup Finals. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2015 Stanley Cup Finals. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:2015_Stanley_Cup_Finals&oldid=1224344098"