Talk:Detroit Red Wings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ice Hockey, an attempt at building a useful ice hockey resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information).

Ice hockey Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Michigan Detroit Red Wings is part of WikiProject Michigan, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Michigan.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1


[edit] Octopus section

The piece states "In April 2008, prior to the start of the Detroit Red Wings vs. Colorado Avalanche Western Conference Semi-Finals playoff series, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman stated that a $10,000 fine would be imposed against the franchise, if Al retrieves the octopus, due to 'matter' that flies onto the ice when Al twirls it above his head." Being a non-hockey fan I am only vaguely familiar with the tradition of the octopus. I came here looking for more information. However, the syntax of that sentence is so convoluted that it makes no sense. I have no idea what the original contributor was attempting to communicate. What does it mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.62.16 (talk • contribs)

It's pretty straight forward. Al Sobatka, who usually picks up the octopii (he's also in charge of the ice surface in general and drives one of the zambonis), sometimes twirls the octopus around his head as he carries it off the ice. The commissioner is apparently concerned that 'bits of matter' will fly off while that happens and will affect the ice surface. The twirling around the head isn't really part of the tradition, it's just something that Al tends to do to fire up the crowd. Dp76764 (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
This section does need to be rewritten. It is rather confusing. Also, it needs to include the fact that the NHL has relaxed the 'rule' a bit (see [1]). I can't work on it right now, but somebody else is more than welcome to. Thanks - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sweaters or Jerseys?

I've noticed an ongoing conflict regarding whether NHL hockey players wear sweaters or jerseys. I really didn't know which term was correct. While it is true that Reebok refers to the article of clothing as a "Jersey" Reebok Store, the NHL rulebook states:

SECTION TWO: TEAMS

Rule 13 Composition of Team

b. Each player and each goalkeeper listed in the lineup of each Team shall wear an individual identifying number at least ten inches (10") high on the back of his sweater. Sweater numbers such as 00, 1/2 (fractions), .05 (decimals), 101 (three digit) are not permitted. In addition, each player and goalkeeper shall wear his surname in full, in block letters three inches (3") high, across the back of his sweater at shoulder height.

All players of each Team shall be dressed uniformly with approved design and color of their helmets, sweaters, short pants, stockings and skates.

Altered uniforms of any kind, i.e. velcro inserts, over-sized jerseys, altered collars, etc. will not be permitted. Any player or goalkeeper not complying with this Rule shall not be permitted to participate in the game. NHL Rulebook

Rather than quote every mention of Jersey or Sweater in the NHL Rulebook, I'll just point out that it's almost always called a sweater, except when the rulebook makes mention of oversized goalie jerseys.

So the question is: who's right, the company that makes the jersey or the National Hockey League that almost always calls it a sweater?--69.14.183.129 (talk) 04:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm still inclined to leave it as "jersey". This is the traditional term, used all over Wiki, and it isn't really "wrong". - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
How about this link to the NHL official web site.Asher196 (talk) 04:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
They're using the Reebok terminology for the article of clothing. I'll bet it's because this site is a redirect to a sales outlet selling Reebok merchandise.--69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
That would not be a safe bet. If you look closely, they also sell CCM jerseys.Asher196 (talk) 05:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Curious, why not? Do you believe that the NHL actually sells it's own merchandise direct to the public?--69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Because for the sake of curiousity I went through the process to purchase a jersey right up to the point of paying for it, and was never redirected to a different site.Asher196 (talk) 05:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Might I suggest some light reading? Proxy_server. This is how a website URL could be redirected to another web server. But the NHL.com site wouldn't even need that, it could just be utilizing a web service and serving the information up in a frame on the original web page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
The issue was never about what is right, but what is most commonly used. A common standard at wikipedia is to use naming that is the common usage. Such as Bill Clinton instead of his "right" name which is William. The majority of people will call them jersey's and not sweaters. Not to mention the reason they used to be called sweaters was that they were sweaters in the past, they no longer are. -Djsasso (talk) 04:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
And to affirm that "jersey" is the most common usage, "hockey jersey" gets 1.1 million google hits compared to 104,000 for "hockey sweater".Asher196 (talk) 05:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
By the way, we have an article on this. Hockey jersey----Asher196 (talk) 05:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the link to the Wiki article, it's good to know that it's been covered. However, I don't think that a comparision of Google hits would be a definitive answer for a question; otherwise I would have to start believing in UFO stories, JFK assassination plots, etc.--69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. I was simply trying to assess the most common usage. The google hits is a good way to get a rough approximation. Obviously more people use the term "jersey"Asher196 (talk) 05:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
On this point we must disagree. Obviously more web pages use the term "jersey". --69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
And people make web pages.Asher196 (talk) 05:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
And some people make web pages. And some people make more web pages than other people. My point is still that a comparison of Google hits is not a valid statistical sampling method.--69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

For the sake of this argument it is. This just isn't important enough to sustain this much debate. Have a great day!Asher196 (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Which is what the point is. Naming conventions state that we should use the most common usage, and 1 million vs. 100k is quite a substantial usage. And websites don't just create themselves, people do which means that people also use the term jersey more often. -Djsasso (talk) 05:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Quite aside from that, I'm unimpressed by the fact that the rulebook uses the term "sweater." It also uses the term "fisticuffs," but I haven't noted we've changed the name of Fighting in ice hockey.  RGTraynor  05:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
A very good point! But was hoping for a better answer to the question than "because most people think so".--69.14.183.129 (talk) 05:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
"Most people think so" is the correct answer as far as Wikipedia policy is concerned. WP:NAME holds: "Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." When Google results for "hockey jersey" outnumber "hockey sweater" by over twenty to one, and the only counterargument proffered by the belligerent anon IPs edit warring this issue is "Well, we want this instead," this isn't an term that should remotely be in question.  RGTraynor  15:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Jerseys and sweaters are synonyms, so switching the wording is just lame. See dictionary.com's jersey reference:

1. a close-fitting, knitted sweater or shirt.

So, using the word 'jersey' is more precise, that's all. Alaney2k (talk) 14:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think Don Cherry growled ('bout a week ago), that the correct term (at least in Canada) is sweater. GoodDay (talk) 14:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Don Cherry growls a lot of things, but as in many other things, he's talking out of his backside here. Google Canada hits for Canadian pages only on "hockey sweater:" 18,200. On "hockey jersey:" 325,000. Hrm, including the CBC's own online shop. (grins)  RGTraynor  15:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Cool. GoodDay (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:LEW ccwaters (talk) 23:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


It appears that our good friend the 'sweater' advocate has resumed his crusade. I'm the one who started this 'Sweaters or Jerseys?' section, specifically to get the edit war off the article page and on to the discussion page. I even took the part of devil's advocate, hoping to get the pro-sweater faction to chip in his/her two cents (which this person has failed to do). I also honestly believed that 'jersey' was the correct term, but I wanted someone to make a valid case for it.

I think that the arguments presented were of varying validity, but RGTraynor's point re 'fisticuffs' versus 'fighting' probably was the best argument in favor of 'jerseys'.

I'd like extend RGTraynor's point to note the following: while the NHL rulebook does use the term 'sweaters' more often, the most recent rule changes by the NHL (the goalie equipment and the tie-downs straps) use the term 'jerseys'. This indicates that the ruling body for the NHL has itself accepted the new term 'jersey' over the old term 'sweater'.

I appologize to all those who, when taking a pro-jersey stance, may have felt angered or frustrated with me. I was pushing each of you in order to get (imho) your best argument and was calling you to task over what (again imho) were weak arguments. I'm sorry if it did start to seem as if we were enmeshed in the Monty Python skit Argument Clinic. --69.14.183.129 (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Current roster

Czechoslovakia doesnt exist anymore. But the flags are correct with the newer countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.227.191 (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The location used is as it was at time of birth. So players born when the country was still Czechoslovakia are listed as being born there. -Djsasso (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)