Talk:Ty Conklin

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 17:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC) So was he born in Alaska or Arizona? the article states both as his birth state in different parts of the article.

Deletion Suggestion

Any fault of Conklin's is completely impossible to prove and should not be included as part of this article. It is counter to Wikipedia's purpose to make any judgments upon or within the information.

I deleted the part where it sais many people believe he cost them the cup. Thats an incredibly stupid thing to have here. Why not also mention the team blew a 3 goal lead? you can't single handedly blame conklin for it. --Akaces23 23:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

News Flash

This just in; according to CBC.ca's NHL bios, TY Conklin has been waived and assigned to rgw AHL's Syracuse team. For Proof, go to CBC.ca.ohyeh 13:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

News references

I think that the references to Conklin's playoff performance need not be updated when the links expire- it is pretty much public record, and I doubt substantiation will be a problem. --Scimitar 16:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Too Opinionated?

I was reading this paragraph:

"Following the lockout, Conklin entered the new season as Edmonton's probable starting goaltender, backed up by Jussi Markkanen. Given the prevalent idea that either goaltender could assume the starting job, local media began using the nickname "Conkkanen" (which likely originated on internet message boards) to describe Edmonton's starting goaltender. However, during the 2005–2006 season, both goaltenders proved to be ineffective, forcing the Oilers' General Manager Kevin Lowe to acquire Dwayne Roloson from the Minnesota Wild."

I think it's unfair to say that the goalies were ineffective. They got Roli for the playoffs. Markkanen and Conklin were doing well, but I don't think they saw any reason to keep Morrison... -Britishenglish 01:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Formatting

Uh, any ideas for how to resolve the page text/"edit" links/medal box conflict we've currently got? It doesn't look very nice. ConkblockCity (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There may be a technical solution but expanding the lead would help while improving the article (it pushes down the table of contents) Moving the medal record farther down would also help.-Wafulz (talk) 21:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Aren't leads supposed to be short? ConkblockCity (talk) 22:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

They're supposed to summarize the rest of the article, which usually means being two to four paragraphs long. See WP:LEAD.-Wafulz (talk) 03:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it a B article yet? I don't think it's a Start anymore. All that's really missing now is Awards/Records, right? ConkblockCity (talk) 03:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I would say its probably a C article at the worst so I will change it to that for now. -Djsasso (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Gee (or should I say, "C"), thanks. ;) //And despite the fact that C is for Conklin, and despite the fact that they gave him the "C" at New Hampshire, I remain resolved to push for a B. // ConkblockCity (talk) 14:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course keep on going. Basically what it is missing in my mind to be a B article is his life pre-edmonton. And it needs more references for anything that can possibly be questioned. -Djsasso (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Jimmy Howard

Howard is expected to compete with Conklin, not the other way around. Holland said as much, but he also gave Conklin a one-way contract that will basically make it impossible for them to send him to the minors this year, whereas Howard can come and go freely. The info about the competition is on Jimmy's page, OK? Considering Jimmy's not even on the roster or the website at the moment, and Conklin is, I feel it's least speculative and simplest to let the facts speak for themselves. ConkblockCity (talk) 01:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so for now we should leave out what he is "expected" to do.-Wafulz (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

thank you.....! how nice it is not to be the one on the speculative end for once. ConkblockCity (talk) 16:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

How many million people in Edmonton are still cursing him, again?

Um, I'm wondering whether or not to preface "Despite having played one game between March and June..." with an illustration of the Oilers' 2006 playoffs:

"As the team proceeded to make an unexpected and unprecedented run as an eighth seed to reach Edmonton's first Stanley Cup Final in sixteen years, Roloson would play every minute in the 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs, with Conklin and Markkanen alternating games as the backup."

Just to show how sidelined he was and the unfortunate magnitude of the stage where he took the blame for losing what would not have been a tied game, had the Oilers not blown a three-goal lead.

Thoughts? –ConkblockCity (talk) 01:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that's reasonable. Also, not that this has anything to do with improving the article, but I'm an Oilers fan who was a big Conklin backer for a long time (back when he an Markkanen were fighting for the privilege of backing up Tommy Salo, I was always in Conklin's corner), but even I lost faith during 2005-2006; he was just wretched. I'm not cursing his name, though, because he was always a classy guy who owned up to his shortcomings in the media. I'm actually really pleased that he's gotten his game back. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course it has to do with improving the article! You think I would be spending all this time if I weren't an eternally grateful Pens fan who adores him kinda stupid? :D The fact that the guy just seems to ride the vicissitudes of fate just makes it more interesting. (And yeah, I know how beleaguered his reputation was even before the debacle, that's why they put him on waivers, and I put the waivers in the article – but him and Jussi having the worst SV% in the league didn't help anything (and to think, he came thisclose to the Crozier this year.....Damn you, Dan Ellis!! XD)). The only reason he was THERE to get kicked in the teeth by Youtube infamy was that no one else wanted him! But the guy's a battler; over and over and over people mention his 'fierce competitiveness', and he's willing to work, and he just has some strange deal with destiny and history repeating itself.... But the only person who thought Ty Conklin could play in the NHL again this season was Ty Conklin. Every NHL goalie's life's a drama, but I think his name is secretly "Equanimity". ;) –ConkblockCity (talk) 02:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been clearer: *your* comments had to do with improving the article. The views *I* expressed on Conklin didn't, and therefore I theoretically shouldn't have made them. Oh well. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I know what you meant. *smile* But if his exploits weren't worthy of widespread remembrance and opinion, he wouldn't have an article to improve, would he? Oh, well. (Darn, I guess I *won't* quote you, then. </*sarc*>) But regarding WP:MOS, even FA Brodeur has a line or two where he's referred to as "Martin", and I think it just looks much better in this instance. ConkblockCity (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

PS: Um, I think it's a B now? Maybe? Where does GA come in? –ConkblockCity (talk) 02:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's probably borderline B right now, but it's still quite a ways from GA status. The biggest problem at this point is that there's still tons of uncited material in there (The "Edmonton Oilers" section, for example, contains only two references). The "Personal" section is a good example of what the article should look like, citation-wise. Besides that, some of the prose could use a little cleaning up and the style of the footnotes needs to be tweaked a little. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Who assesses it for B, then? ConkblockCity (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The assessment for articles below the GA-level is pretty anarchic - anybody can do it, including people who have been involved in editing the article (I think some Wikiprojects might have specific processes you have to go through, but I'm not aware of any). For that reason, quality designations below GA don't really mean anything. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 22:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

"I'm going straight to hell."

In the same vein, out of curiosity: "Perhaps the most cuttingly accurate assessment of the {emotional and cultural} impact on Conklin's reputation was given by two popular parody videos created with tabletop hockey figures and distributed on the Internet as part of the Knob Hockey series..." Hilarious and pretty widely-seen, but can they be cited? 'Cause I'd love to quote "Ryan Smyth".... --ConkblockCity (talk) 23:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

If need be, I'd say the videos can be used as sources to support the content of the videos. However, I think that whether you can find a reliable source elsewhere is a good measure of whether the information is worth including. To put it another way, the knob hockey videos prove that the knob hockey Ty Conklin said "I'm going straight to hell". But they don't show that that fact is worth including; I suspect there's some mainstream coverage of it out there, no? Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)