Talk:History of the National Hockey League (2017–present)
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of the National Hockey League (2017–present) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | History of the National Hockey League (2017–present) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
![]() | History of the National Hockey League (2017–present) is part of the History of the National Hockey League series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 19, 2025. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that National Hockey League players have not yet participated at the Olympics since the league entered its second century of operation? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | Material from History of the National Hockey League (1992–2017) was split to History of the National Hockey League (2017–present) on 29 February 2024. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:History of the National Hockey League (1992–2017). |
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:History of the National Hockey League (2017–present)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: The Kip (talk · contribs) 19:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Kimikel (talk · contribs) 05:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I will be reviewing this article as part of the January GAN drive. Please expect comments from me within the next few days. Kimikel (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- @The Kip: I've left my initial review below. Please let me know when you get a chance to address all of my comments. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my suggestions, feel free to let me know. Thank you. Kimikel (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel Hi, I have addressed the green comments. On the first "Background" comment, I decided to do a semicolon instead of a period due to the lack of flow when the sentence had a full stop. On the Verifiability comments, I might try to replace the refs with online links, but that won't negatively nor positively affect the GA. The other Verifiability comments were addressed, except for the two comments with the Spot check. I'll get to those when I can. Conyo14 (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Conyo14 Thanks for what you've done so far. Please let me know when you get a chance to address those two comments. Kimikel (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel resolved. Conyo14 (talk) 17:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel Not sure if this is possible, but given he's ended up handling the improvement work, any way to add @Conyo14 as a co-nom such that he gets credit if/when it passes? The Kip (contribs) 20:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @The Kip I'm not sure. I just posted that question in the GA talk page. Once I get a response, I'll let you guys know and we can finish out the review. Kimikel (talk) 16:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Conyo14 @The Kip According to the reply I got, I can only add Conyo14 as a co-nominator superficially; it won't have any statistical effect. If that's fine with both of you, I'll go ahead and do that, but it seems I'm not able to give official credit. One more thing before the article passes: I just noticed that the fact in the lead about the Brooklyn Americans isn't mentioned anywhere in the body or cited. Other than that, it's good to go. Kimikel (talk) 17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel resolved. I don't care about the statistical effect. The Kip and I will know and that's good enough. Conyo14 (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Conyo14 @The Kip Sorry I couldn't change it, but if you don't mind then I feel good about closing this one. I've gone through and I'm convinced there's nothing left to fix. Both of you: great work, congratulations, and thank you for bettering hockey coverage on WP. Kimikel (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel resolved. I don't care about the statistical effect. The Kip and I will know and that's good enough. Conyo14 (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Conyo14 @The Kip According to the reply I got, I can only add Conyo14 as a co-nominator superficially; it won't have any statistical effect. If that's fine with both of you, I'll go ahead and do that, but it seems I'm not able to give official credit. One more thing before the article passes: I just noticed that the fact in the lead about the Brooklyn Americans isn't mentioned anywhere in the body or cited. Other than that, it's good to go. Kimikel (talk) 17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @The Kip I'm not sure. I just posted that question in the GA talk page. Once I get a response, I'll let you guys know and we can finish out the review. Kimikel (talk) 16:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Conyo14 Thanks for what you've done so far. Please let me know when you get a chance to address those two comments. Kimikel (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kimikel Hi, I have addressed the green comments. On the first "Background" comment, I decided to do a semicolon instead of a period due to the lack of flow when the sentence had a full stop. On the Verifiability comments, I might try to replace the refs with online links, but that won't negatively nor positively affect the GA. The other Verifiability comments were addressed, except for the two comments with the Spot check. I'll get to those when I can. Conyo14 (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Well-written
[edit]Lead
[edit]- spectators, in controlled conditions > remove comma
Background
[edit]- zone, and the conferences remained > separate idea, break this into a new sentence
- interested in getting an NHL franchise > interested in acquiring an NHL franchise
The second century
[edit]- However they lost the series > They lost the series
- history; in their Presidents' > replace semicolon with period
- However, the team suffered > The team suffered
- However, the team subsequently rebounded > The Lightning subsequently rebounded,
- year, after a pandemic > remove comma
- The year after the Lightning's > In 2022, the year after the Lightning's
- coach, and traded > coach and traded
- Despite this, and like the 2018–19 Lightning, the Bruins suffered a first-round elimination to the Panthers, despite holding a 3–1 series lead four games into the series. > The Bruins suffered a first-round elimination to the Panthers, similarly to the 2018–19 Lightning, ding a 3–1 series lead four games into the series.
- 2014 Winter Classic > wikilink
- Then on December 16 > On December 16
- Canada commemorating > Canada, to commemorate
- A unique series > A series
- 21, 2021 at the > 21, 2021, at the
- in a unique partnership > in a partnership
- Stadium, on the campus > remove comma
- New York City, and held > remove comma
- taking place at the Cotton Bowl between the Predators and Stars. > between the Predators and Stars taking place at the Cotton Bowl in Dallas, Texas.
- But after the National Basketball Association > remove But, wikilink NBA
- Many of the logistics still have to be negotiated, including COVID-19 testing protocols, visas, and whether these games would be held in one or more "hub" cities as the Canada–United States border remains closed to non-essential travel until June 21. > This sentence is out of date
- The league also renewed its CBA > break this acronym out for people who may not know
- Smith is paying a > Smith paid a
- The Utah Hockey Club > merge this paragraph with the previous one
- season, with a temporary name and colors, while a full identity shall be developed in time for 2025–26. > season with a temporary name and colors. A full identity will be developed in time for the 2025–26 season.
Verifiability
[edit]- Are any of the sources in the Background section available online? This is definitely not a requirement for GA, but if they're not, maybe consider replacing them with online sources, since all of this information should be out there elsewhere. Again, if you don't want to, you're not obligated to.
- I don't think the quotes in footnotes 111 and 113 are necessary.
- There's some inconsistency in how sources are written/linked. Some are wikilinked; some aren't (i.e. Toronto Star, Hamilton Spectator). Sometimes they use different names (i.e. ESPN vs. ESPN.com; nhl.com vs NHL.com vs National Hockey League). I'd prefer if all sources were wikilinked and if they were written consistently throughout the references.
- Remove Associated Press as an author in 3 and 6
Spot check
[edit]- 64: Verified
- 53: Verified
- 11: Slight distinction: it doesn't say they were the second-fastest team to win the Cup; rather, the 2nd fastest Big 4 team to win a championship after the MLB's Diamondbacks.
- 17: Only goes up to his 126th point, not his 128th. recommend adding a second source that corroborates the 128 point part.
- 93: Verified.
- Probably going to do a second round later since there were a couple of minor inaccuracies here.
Neutrality, stability, broadness
[edit]- No issues. This is a pretty broad stretch of time and there are a lot of things that could be included, but I think the article is comprehensive enough and doesn't necessarily need more.
Illustrated
[edit]- Images properly licensed and beneficial to the article.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 20:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the National Hockey League entered its second century of operation in 2017?
- Source: 1
- ALT1: ... that the National Hockey League has added three new teams since 2017? Source: Vegas, Seattle, Utah
- Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by The Kip (talk) and Conyo14 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
The Kip (contribs) 19:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC).
- The first one seems fine, though I am surprised that this wouldn't have been in DYK 8 years ago. Conyo14 (talk) 22:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
@The Kip: New enough (GA promotion January 10), long enough (23 KB), well-sourced, no copyvio (Earwig says 10.5%, and GA quality). However, your suggested hooks are not interesting. ALT0 tells readers nothing other than when the league was founded, and ALT1 lists a number that will not interest readers. You will have to come up with new hooks for me to approve this. Perhaps ALT1 could be rewritten to say that there were no new teams since 2000, but the article might have something that's even more interesting. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 20:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: My problem is that, given the scope of the article, I'm struggling to think of hooks that include the article itself, rather than someone or something in it - I'd appreciate any suggestions. Courtesy pinging @Conyo14: for insight as well. The Kip (contribs) 18:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- ... that the state of Utah and Nevada both gained their first professional ice hockey team? ... that professional ice hockey was played in Lake Tahoe? ... that NHL players have not participated in the Olympics since 2014? Conyo14 (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- It doesn't look like the article verifies the fact that Nevada gained its first team. The third proposal could maybe work; I'll suggest this phrasing:
- ALT2: ... that since the National Hockey League entered its second century of operation, its players have not yet participated in the Olympics?
- I'll approve this version if The Kip thinks it's good. I'm still open to more suggestions, but this hook is interesting enough to work.
- — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 21:03, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Vigilantcosmicpenguin:, that works for me. I appreciate your help! The Kip (contribs) 19:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- I've added one wikilink, though - feel like it completes things slightly better. The Kip (contribs) 19:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Approving ALT2. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 20:00, 13 February 2025 (UTC)