Jump to content

Talk:Ryan Miller

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

Photos of Ryan in the Commons

[edit]

There are some Photos avaiable in the Commons, see...

-- Xgeorg

Are there any facing the camera? Ideally a Sabres pic would be best, but an Amerk pic with a normal angle is better than the current hobey baker image. ccwaters 12:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lock?

[edit]

Due to recent Canada versus Team USA game? --68.209.227.3 (talk) 03:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just put in a request at WP:RFPP. Some hostile Canadian fans.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 03:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just cruising by and given the high level of vandalism I've semi-protected it for 24 hours. That should let folks calm down a bit before they edit. (The bit about him being born in a manger outside Bethlehem was funny but still vandalism.) - Dravecky (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno how to edit the mobile version of Ryan Miller's page, but there's some vandalism on that too. Requesting some cleanup on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.253.59.154 (talk) 23:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life

[edit]

"all four" should be "all five" - Ryan + Drew + three cousins. The original article actually says "all five" so the mistake is a bit odd. Perhaps the author meant "all four plus Ryan" but it would be clearer and simpler to just say "all five". (Would have made the change but for the lock.) 143.239.96.226 (talk) 15:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. Changing it now. The semi-protection will expire soon. - Dravecky (talk) 19:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Technically, I believe Ryan Miller graduate from Sault Area High School, in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. http://www.maxpreps.com/news/akIYwCCQEd-UswAcxJTdpg/starting-point--ryan-miller-kept-nose-clean,-vision-clear-in-sault-ste-marie.htm http://www.sooeveningnews.com/news/x1759781951/Olympic-MVP 97.85.78.117 (talk) 13:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Rough consensus here is that the ice hockey player is the likeliest target for "Ryan Miller". A hatnote has been added to the top of the article for clarification. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Ryan Miller (ice hockey) → Ryan Miller — Reslisting  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC) The hockey player is far and away the most likely target for a search on "Ryan Miller". Powers T 23:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Not sufficiently famous outside the world of North American ice hockey to be considered primary useage of the name. Most of the world has never heard of him! Skinsmoke (talk) 19:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • So? First of all, our primary consideration should be the English-speaking world, not the world as a whole. Second of all, whether most of the English-speaking world knows who he is or not is irrelevant -- the question is whether he is the primary topic for "Ryan Miller". If one of the other Ryan Millers is more famous, or nearly as famous, that would be a consideration -- but if they're all much less famous, then it doesn't matter how many people know of this one. Powers T 14:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The point is that, for a football fan, the footballer would be more likely to be the primary topic (and there are more football fans than hockey fans in the English-speaking world, which encompasses far more than just North America, including a fair number of countries, such as India, where ice hockey is virtually unknown). For a music fan, it is just about conceivable that the musician would be the primary topic. You simply haven't provided any evidence, other than an assertion, that the hockey player is the primary topic. Go ahead and convince me! Skinsmoke (talk) 21:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I'm a Swedish hockey fan but I also follow football, especially Allsvenskan where the footballer Ryan Miller plays. And I never heard of him... Despite following the league with a general interest (i.e. watching the sport news and seeing at least one game a week). To me there's no question to as whom is the primary topic in this case, it's obviously the MVP, All-Star team, and best goalie of the 2010 Olympic hockey tournament, and best goaltender of the 2009-10 NHL season. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 23:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support See, it didn't take much to convince me. Thanks for that Krm500. Skinsmoke (talk) 04:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Primary topic likely for ice hockey fans, a sport which very many have no interest in. Leave the plain name as the disambig. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, like every other article on the wiki, it is of interest primarily to people who are interested in that field. But the question is, are the other uses any more prominent among the general public than this usage? I believe the answer is no, and that, in fact, even among non-hockey fans, the hockey player is likely the primary topic. Powers T 21:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The pageview statistics at [1] indicate that in June 2010, the ice hockey player's article received 8,133 views, while the other three Ryan Miller articles received a combined total of 1,519 views. Stats for December 2009 were similar. Per our primary topic guidelines, which state that an article should be located at the base title if it can be determined that readers are much more likely to be searching for that topic than for any other topic by that name, I believe the ice hockey player is the primary topic and should be moved to the base title. Propaniac (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Until I found this on requested moves, I had never heard of any of the Ryan Miller's listed here. So I've no preconceptions, although that fact does rather suggest that none of them are truly deserving of primary topic status. Reviewing the articles, I can see no particular reason to go for the ice hockey player. As previously, sports personalities in different sports with different groups of followers are hard to assign primary topic to, simply because what might be obvious to (say) an ice hockey fan would be completely alien to (say) a football fan. So my inclination is to play safe, and leave it as a dab page. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 10:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "So I've no preconceptions, although that fact does rather suggest that none of them are truly deserving of primary topic status." No, the fact that you are not familiar with any of them (which would also describe myself before this discussion) suggests that you have no perspective on which is best known, and should perhaps be interested in research about that point before providing an opinion. It doesn't matter whether the soccer fan has heard of the ice hockey player; what matters is whether there are ten times as many people looking for the ice hockey article as the soccer article. Propaniac (talk) 13:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The pageview statistics reviewed by Propaniac aren't a "particular reason"? Powers T 12:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Absolutely not. Things like pageview statistics and google hits can make part of a case, but they are not by themselves sufficient. They can be influenced by all sorts of things that have nothing to do with whether a particular name is worthy of primary topic. Like, for example, the fact that Ryan Miller (ice hockey) is the first entry in the dab page. -- 91.84.39.186 (talk) 15:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Influenced, sure, but those are overwhelming numbers. What other kinds of evidence would you like to see? Powers T 17:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • So you're arguing that several thousand users, who were not particularly interested in the ice hockey player, were compelled to click on his name simply because he was listed first on the disambiguation page? That seems... bizarre. If the dab page isn't moved, I'd be happy to experiment by changing the order in which the names are listed to see if the statistics change appreciably (they won't). No, pageviews aren't everything; a better argument than the one you made is that many of those pageviews won't come from the dab page, but from, for example, direct links from other articles. But the only criteria per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is which article readers are most likely to be looking for. Of the readers who view any of these four articles, nearly 84% view the ice hockey player, which clearly suggests to me that at least 51% of users seeking an article about someone nameed "Ryan Miller" are likely to be looking for that one. Propaniac (talk) 12:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there are sufficient other hits to be able to justify the maintenance of the base name as the disambiguation page; and having disambigs as the base definitely allows fixing the links more easily, far easier than trying to dig them out of a biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billinghurst (talk • contribs)
  • Look guys, "I've never heard of him" isn't a valid reason to oppose this under WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Please read that guideline and re-evaluate whether or not your reasons for opposing follow that guideline. Powers T 12:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support forgot to add my vote, per my reasoning above. chris_j_wood: Is it really that hard in this case? One is a scrub in the 30th something ranked football league in the world, the other was voted best at his position in the premier ice hockey league in the world and at the olympic games, where he also was voted MVP. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 15:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per Krm500's argument above. Miller is a highly recognizable athlete and likely a lot of people ending up on Ryan Miller were looking for him rather than the soccer player.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 17:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Currently, this article contains both a succession box and a navigation box for the Big Ten Athlete of the Year. Having both the succession box and the navbox on this article is redundant. Since the succession box was here first, there needs to be a clear consensus to substitute it with the navbox, and that has not yet been demonstrated. The navbox should thus be removed. Powers T 15:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First come, first serve is not a valid argument. The overwhelming consensus among sports-related WikiProjects support navboxes in favor of succession boxes for awards and titles. WP:Hockey is of course a noted holdout to this consensus. But when multi-sport topics such as the Big Ten Athlete of the Year are concerned, a larger consensus should trump that of WP:Hockey alone. Eventually, I'd like to see WP:Hockey get on board with everyone else so we can all move on to bigger and brighter things together. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting kind of sick and tired of this "hockey just needs to conform" argument. Consensus is not determined by sheer weight of numbers. Members of the hockey project are not 'holdouts' -- they just disagree. Come up with a better reason. Powers T 12:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've offered many good reasons at the village pump. No worse reason for anything on this subject has been offered than the "here first" argument you're invoking. With "here first" we'd still have legal slavery and think the sun revolved around a flat earth. Consensus is absolutely determined by weight of numbers, with regard, of course, for minority positions and a posture for mitigation. Jweiss11 (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The point about precedence is that you need a consensus to remove the succession box in favor of the navbox. Either locally, here on the talk page, or a site-wide (not just WP:SPORTS) deprecation of succession boxes in favor of navboxes. Neither is anywhere close to being achieved, so the status quo should reign. Powers T 18:33, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ryan Miller. 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) 19:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ryan_Miller&oldid=1209070175"