Talk:Hartford Whalers

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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Carolina, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve North Carolina-related articles to a feature-quality standard.
North Carolina Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Peer review Hartford Whalers has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This page should be merger with the Carolina Hurricanes as the Whalers relocatd to Carolina and are now the Hurricanes. It is the same team. Wikipedia does not have seperate pages for other teams that have relocated to other cities. The North Stars redirect to Dallas Stars, Brooklyn Dodgers redirect to Los Angeles Dodgers what is so special about the Whalers?

  • I believe there is enough information about the Whalers period to merit a seperate page. It is common practice to fork information out to seperate articles rather than have one long article on a subject. See Soviet Union for example. Under numerous headings it says "Main article: such-and-such-page" with a link to another article, still about the Soviet Union but with information on a specific topic. This page has specific information about the Whalers period of the Hurricanes franchise. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 02:23, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think you are just a big fan who still upset the team is no longer in Hartford. Actually at comparing the the two articles alot of the info or very similar information about the Hartford years is already included in the Hurricanes page. I think the two pages should be put together.

  • A big fan? I was 11 when the team moved. I live in Florida. I never even heard about the team until last year. I just spent a lot of time putting this article together and I think it merits its own page. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 21:04, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I agree, it should not be merged. Masterhatch 8 August 2005

Similarly, never mind that the various other shifted franchises -- Quebec Nordiques, Minnesota North Stars, Winnipeg Jets, etc -- have their own pages still. (Besides which what level of condescension does it take to claim that you have to be a Hartford Whalers' fan to take this stance?) RGTraynor 15:23, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

  • I concur - there is no way I would tie in a Whalers page to that of the Hurricanes. The Whalers were their own team - regardless of the legalities of franchises. --Brentmid 22:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree as well. Don't merge the two articles. The Whalers were, are, and forever shall be a DIFFERENT team than the Hurricanes. And oh BTW, does it seems strange to you that you're the only one saying the articles should be merged? -- FairBol 22 February 2007

Erm ... that's a two year old discussion, actually. Long since resolved. RGTraynor 05:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] List of Hartford Whalers players

I have started a List of Hartford Whalers players. It would be great if other people could help add to this list. Thanks! Masterhatch 8 August 2005

[edit] Whalerpedia?

I would like to know if there is any interest out there to create a separate web page using the Wiki technology based solely on the Hartford Whalers. This page can have in depth articles on related subjects just as the Carolina Hurricanes, Whaler players and Whaler draft picks, Whaler trades, the NHL, the WHA, the Binghamton Whalers, Springfield Indians, Howard Baldwin, and so on. Let me know if anyone else is interested in starting this web page. Thanks. Whalerguy1 20:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


As long as the rights can be acquired to play the Brass Bonaza theme song...endlessly..(from a Whaler fan who still misses the crafty play calling of Bob Neumeyer (CT-Guilford)

[edit] Big E

Did the Whalers really play games at the Big E before the official move to Hartford? My understanding was they only did before the Civic Center was completed and during the period of the roof collapse. RGTraynor 12:44, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I believe they played in the Boston Garden, then the old mall, then it collapsed, then Springfeild, then back to Hartford, then Carolina (:-() DavidReject 12:46, April 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, they played at the Big E for the first half of the 1974-75 season while The Hartford Civic Center was being built. The Whalers played at The Boston Garden for the 1972-73 season and the 1973-74 season.

[edit] Question on Editing

Well I did my first edit, it was adding Dineen's, Francis's, and Samuelsson's numbers to the retired section. I was there tonight when they hung the numbers up at the Civic center. Let me tell you it was otherworldly. It must be strange realizing that now you have a tiny bit of Immortality to your name. I just wanted to make sure that everything is all set.

Which I am now reverting; the Hartford Whalers, having ceased to exist years ago, did not retire any such numbers. Perhaps the Wolfpack did, in which case they should be listed in the Wolfpack section. RGTraynor 05:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
So should Wikipedia ignore the fact that the banners will hang in the Hartford Civic Center with the Whalers logo, in Whalers colors, carrying numbers 5, 10 and 11, between the 2, 9 and 19? Look in this photo; the old banners in the background are spaced out ready to accept the new ones on the same rack. Ignoring those numbers entirely is a mistake, especially since Connecticut retained the rights to the Whalers' name, logo and records from Karmanos in the move for purposes such as this. The Wolf Pack's inaction with the numbers is irrelevant; they don't honor 2, 9 or 19 either. VT hawkeyetalk to me 19:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I can hang X players' number from Y defunct team from the tree next to my parents pond, but I really don't think anyone would care either. The Whale is dead Jim. ccwaters 20:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I was thinking "And Joe's Pizzeria can retire Torrie Robertson's and Ross McKay's numbers too, does that count?" The only entity that can retire Hartford Whalers' numbers is the Hartford Whalers. They don't exist any more, and even were Hartford to get a "new" Whalers NHL expansion team -- a huge, huge if -- following consensus format for Team Pages in the Wiki ice hockey section, that team would get its own page and its own retired numbers section. We haven't added Frank Finnigan's number to the original Ottawa Senators' retired number listings, nor taken John McKenzie's away from the Whalers just because the Hurricanes unretired #19. RGTraynor 20:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Ron Francis, Kevin Dineen, and Ulf Samuelsson's numbers were NOT retired by the Wolf Pack on January 6, 2006 because numbers 5, 10, and 11 are still used by the Wolf Pack. These three numbers were retired at the Whalers Appreciation Night in honor of the Hartford Whalers. The purpose is to show that those numbers will remain in retirement if the NHL returns to Hartford along with the three numbers the Whalers retired when they were in Hartford. I think the apporiate solution to this problem is to add Francis, Dineen, and Samuelsson to the list of retired numbers while clearly stating they were retired on January 6, 2006 at Whalers Appreciation Night. Then state that those three retired numbers would only be applied to an NHL team that comes back to Hartford. The retiring of Francis, Dineen, and Samuelsson is part of Whalers history and should be on the Hartford Whalers Wikipedia web page for the Hartford Whalers. However, I do believe those numbers should be listed seperately from Rick Ley, Gordie Howe, and John McKenzie. I hope this solves the problem.
I just edited the retired numbers as a NOTE:, because I think to not mention this on the Whalers page is an omission. That the people of Hartford still care enough about the legacy of the Whalers to pressure the Wolfpack to do this is worthy of mention.--MAntos 15:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's the arena called again?

A recent edit and reversion has me wondering. The actual name of the arena in which the Whalers played is indeed the "Hartford Civic Center Veterans Memorial Coliseum." But no one ever calls it that; it's popularly called "Hartford Civic Center." Any thoughts on which version would be preferable here? RGTraynor 14:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

The correct approach is to use the appropriate name for whatever you're talking about. The structure is the Hartford Civic Center and is comprised of several different large spaces, including an exhibition hall and a space for hockey/basketball/etc. The playing space within the Civic Center is the Veterans Memorial Coliseum. The Hartford Whalers played in the Veterans Memorial Coliseum at (or "of") the Hartford Civic Center. Beginning 20:07, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
I redirected "Hartford Civic Center Vetrans Memorial Coliseum" to the "Hartford Civic Center" page. I assume that solves the problem for now, later. DavidReject

[edit] Logo

If there are post-1992 logos these should be included on the page. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The lead logo is post-1992. RGTraynor 22:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Writing

This page has been chosen as an ideal article to be re-written under the guidelines of the ever too popular comma splice. For a definition of a comma splice and how destructive it is please see comma splicing tutorial at [1] -Rainman71 04:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Here is a very prime example - With the exception of a period in the late 1970s when the Whalers played at the Springfield Civic Center while the Hartford Civic Center was being renovated (due to the collapse of a portion of its roof after a blizzard), the franchise was located in Hartford until it relocated to North Carolina in 1997. Print that off and show that to any English professor and they'll turn that into 10 complete sentences. "When while due was after before" If you have all those words in one sentence it'll definately require disecting. -Rainman71 04:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Possibly because altogether too many college professors these days - much like many other people in this society - can't handle sentences longer than six words. Happily the Simple English Wikipedia exists for their use. [2] RGTraynor 05:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Retired numbers"

There is a simple fact at work here: the Hartford Whalers no longer exist. That the Wolfpack does, that the city of Hartford holds trademarks to the Whalers name and logo still doesn't mean that there is an active, legitimate NHL franchise called the "Hartford Whalers." It doesn't matter who else sticks banners up in the Hartford Civic Center, because it doesn't count any more than it would if some joe decided to trademark "Montreal Maroons" or "New York Americans" and declare Lorne Carr's number "retired." If - and only if - a NHL franchise named the Hartford Whalers is created again, then they can retire more numbers for the Hartford Whalers. Now if someone wants to claim in the Hartford city article that the locals have "retired" some numbers, sure, whatever, go for it. Just keep it out of this one, because it's flat out illegitimate, no matter how much you still love Ron Francis. RGTraynor 05:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The City of Hartford's ownership of the Whalers didn't come about because the Whalers' history fell into public domain. They aquired it through a legally binding contract between the city, the Carolina Hurricanes and the NHL therefore the city is the legal representative of the Hartford Whalers regardless of whether they put a team on the ice. The Wolfpack has nothing to do with the situation, as they don't recognise the retirements. The ceremony just took place at a Wolfpack game because there would already be a crowd there. Should an NHL team return to Hartford, no one will ever wear those numbers again. Do you really think three highly respected veterans of the NHL would take part in a phony ceremony?(69.177.215.199 20:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC))
A quick search of the US PTO shows that the 3 trademarks related to "Hartford Whalers" hockey are dead/abandoned. And none of them were owned by the city. (REF: [3]) ccwaters 21:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps you should get the money you paid that law school for your degree back, because you're flat out wrong. Hartford doesn't "own" the Whalers and never did; the Whalers were an NHL franchise currently owned by Peter Karmanos. What Karmanos ceded to Hartford (and pretty much out of the goodness of his heart, because he certainly didn't have to do so) was his trademarks to the team's name, colors and logo, and given CC's research, it looks like the city didn't bother to maintain that much. Where this information properly belongs is in the Hartford Civic Center article, which it currently is, and properly doesn't claim that the "Hartford Whalers" have anything to do with the latter nominations. RGTraynor 05:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Karamanos doesnt own anything that has to do with the Whalers, the name Whalers, Whalers jerseys, everything Whalers is owned by the state of Connecticut. Thats why you cant use Whalers jerseys in video games, thats why you never see brand new Whalers jerseys for sale like you see the North Stars, Nordiques, or Jets. DavidReject 28 June 2006 (UTC)
No, as I pointed out previously, the NHL owned (and abandoned) the trademark for merchandising purposes. REF: search for "Hartford Whalers" at uspto.gov ccwaters 18:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
The trademark isn't registered in the State of Connecticut either. [4] RGTraynor 18:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
My apologies, I just always hear this thing about Connecticut owning the rights to the Whalers name. [[User:DavidReject|DavidReject]
Which is the sort of thing that leads to Wikipedia requiring verification for assertions. RGTraynor 05:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Ron Francis, Kevin Dineen, and Ulf Samuelsson's numbers were NOT retired by the Wolf Pack on January 6, 2006 because numbers 5, 10, and 11 are still used by the Wolf Pack. These three numbers were retired at the Whalers Appreciation Night in honor of the Hartford Whalers. The purpose is to show that those numbers will remain in retirement if the NHL returns to Hartford along with the three numbers the Whalers retired when they were in Hartford. I think the apporiate solution to this problem is to add Francis, Dineen, and Samuelsson to the list of retired numbers while clearly stating they were retired on January 6, 2006 at Whalers Appreciation Night. Then state that those three retired numbers would only be applied to an NHL team that comes back to Hartford. The retiring of Francis, Dineen, and Samuelsson is part of Whalers history and should be on the Hartford Whalers Wikipedia web page for the Hartford Whalers. However, I do believe those numbers should be listed seperately from Rick Ley, Gordie Howe, and John McKenzie. I hope this solves the problem.

[edit] Retired Numbers Again

I just re-added the three whalers numbers that were re-retiin your thinking about the Whalers retired numbers,the fact is; they still retired the numbers on a whalers jersey, in front of whalers fans, in the arena that they played a large numbers of games in.

And I'm taking them right back off again. THE HARTFORD WHALERS NO LONGER EXIST. More than that, you can just scroll up to read. RGTraynor 07:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that its time to put it to a vote whether or not those three numbers stay under the retired numbers
No there's nothing to vote on. Those banners were raised about 9 years after the Whalers moved away. They are listed at Hartford Civic Center where they belong. ccwaters 14:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
RG Who? Who the **** do you think you are anyways? telling us what to do, i think the majority of people here think that they should belong on the page. despite the team DOES not exist anymore. I am going to put a poll on the webpage about it. or perhaps on here.

Also, You have NO right to boss anyone around on here. this site is free for everyone. You do not OWN this page. You don't own anything. So I suggest we get an advacte person here.

I also suggest you leave the poll on the page, so we can give everyone a chance to speak there mind. I don't know where the hell you live buddy. but IIRC, This site is NOT ran by China, and is ran in the USA. Am I right?

So i suggest you stop being bossy. And let the people speak.--Dr. Pizza 20:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you acquaint yourself with Wikipedia policies, in particular the ones against personal attacks, that Wikipedia is not a democracy or a soapbox for advocacy. That being said, your "majority" of people equals three, only one of whom is a project veteran. In any event, until and unless the current legal management of the Hartford Whalers franchise (= Karmanos, Rutherford & Co.) act, the "Whalers" are still not retiring anything more. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting, on form. RGTraynor 05:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Since the Hartford Whalers do not exist, it is silly to call the numbers retired since it occurred almost nine years after the team left the city. However, I think this event can be included in the article. Here is my proposal:

"In addition, Ulf Samuelsson's #5, Ron Francis's #10 and Kevin Dineen's #11 have been honored by fans of the team. On January 7, 2006 at a Whalers appreciation night, the three numbers were hoisted to the rafters of the Hartford Civic Center during a Hartford Wolf Pack game."

I don't see any other logical and correct way that it can be in the article.Patken4 21:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've no strenuous objection to such a phrasing included in the main text of the article (the "Return to Hartford?" section most likely), although it's still no more valid than if the public skating rink in West Hartford decided to raise Nick Fotiu's and Corrie D'Alessio's numbers to the rafters, and it'd be rather neat if those editors rabid to make such changes actually devoted their energies to beefing up the article as a whole. Including anything of the sort in the strictly factual Retired Numbers section is completely out of line. RGTraynor 23:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Why does it matter? It's an interesting tidbit about Whalers History. The numbers weren't retired because they were Wolfpack players. The Springfield Falcons still hang the Calder Cup banners that were won under a different team/franchise the Springfield Indians.
It matters because its not factual. I don't think the Springfield Falcons make any claim to the Indian's championships. Nor do the Philadelphia Phantoms make any claims to the Philadelphia Flyers or Philadelphia 76ers banners still hanging in the Wachovia Spectrum. ccwaters 18:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Correct; the Falcons do not claim the Indians' championships, nor does the AHL credit those championships to the Falcons. The banners still hang in the Civic Center because the franchise and the fans (myself, as a season ticket holder sitting in the rink for those final two banners among them) like it that way, but that doesn't make them "official." I'm sure seeing a banner for Ron Francis hanging in Hartford gives local hockey fans warm, fuzzy feelings, but there's nothing official about that either. RGTraynor 03:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
So is it wrong to mention the fact that the city of Hartford, retired the numbers of said players in respect for their contribution to hockey in Southern New England. BTW, I'm a huge Bruins fan, so I am not biased towards the Whalers. I grew up in the town of Enfield, mostly Whaler fans (or as we called them, the Hartford Failures), but those fans are some of the most diehard fans in all of sports.
No, its mentioned in the proper article: Hartford Civic Center. ccwaters 15:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Departure From Hartford

I was informed this web site was rejected as a valid source regarding the Whalers leaving Hartford [5]. Well, I am the guy who created that web site. I was an intern for the Hartford Whalers during the huge season ticket drive in 1996 so some of the infomation on that web site full of "rants against the ex-governor" is first hand knowledge of what was going on at that time. The other sources I used to create the web site are from The Hartford Courant and The Hartford Advocate in 1996 and 1997. Now, those sources are only available on microfilm at the local libraries.

There are many factors contributing to the Whalers leaving Hartford and it actually began when Richard Gordon bought the Whalers in 1988. The fact is John Rowland was a huge factor as the why the Whalers left Hartford and this should be mentioned along with the other factors. I read the sources now listed on the Departure From Hartford section and they are perfectly valid and definitely support the claim against Rowland. In fact, I am surprised those articles are still out on the internet. I am open to futher discussion of this subject. Unsigned comment by User:Whalerguy1 at 00:29, July 27, 2006.

Sorry, but any website that opens with "John Rowland is the dumbest politician in the history of the United States yet the voters in Connecticut were stupid enough to elect him three times" doesn't fly as a valid source. I know you're passionate, but it's just not appropriate for our purposes here. Beginning 00:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • If you have sources from the Courant and the Advocate, you can still cite the article name, the author and the date. If you can't, your information fails the WP:V requirement that all assertions, especially contentious or controversial ones, be properly sourced. RGTraynor 02:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
In all fairness, the corruption scandels that came to light in 2003 and 2004 surronding John Rowland only proves that this quote is in fact true. "John Rowland is the dumbest politician in the history of the United States yet the voters in Connecticut were stupid enough to elect him three times." Whether or not a web page beginning with that quote can be used as a valid source does not mean the quote itself or anything written on that web site is not factually accurate.
So you argue, but Wikipedia is not a debating forum. You're right that a quote like that doesn't make a website inaccurate by definition, but it sure highlights that the website doesn't pretend to be balanced or NPOV. RGTraynor 04:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
It is extremely debatable whether or not Rowland is the dumbest politician in the history of the United States. Are you familiar with Jim McGreevey?

[edit] "Return to Hartford"

Quite aside from that this is a fantasy and a pipe dream, the bit I just reverted is completely speculative and unsourced. Quite aside from that, does anyone else scratch their heads over the bizarre fact that the speculative return to Hartford was as large as the entire sections detailing the team's actual playing days on the ice, and the Departure From Hartford section is about as large as the rest of the article combined? It's pretty damn weird when what editors consider most significant about a 25-year old major pro team is that it moved to another state. RGTraynor 18:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

You're a pinhead. And FUCK the Rangers, Islanders, Bruins, AND Gary Bettman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.255.197 (talk) 20:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
This asswipe thinks that festering inbred Southern shitholes, where it never even drops below freezing and they only manage to draw like 4 fans to every game, like Memphis, Carolina, and Dallas, are more deserving of hockey teams than loyal cities with real hockey history like Hartford. Fuck him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.255.197 (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Edited to reflect the conjecture and the moot point reality re: the Penguins moving to Hartford.24.117.250.51 06:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Penguins Staying In Pittsburgh

Just letting everyone know that the penguins arn't going anywhere and that this should be removed from the article, also the entire return to Hartford is total BS, there is no truth to that. Rpgman456 02:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Return To Hartford? section to reflect the conjecture and the moot point reality re: the Penguins moving to Hartford.24.117.250.51 06:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] And here we go again ...

Yet another bloke's trying to jam in the spurious "retired numbers." Going on over a year now and no let up, and at this rate I'm driving down to the Hartford Civic Center and setting those banners on fire. I'd violate 3RR if I reverted again; can anyone help me out? RGTraynor 03:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that what was said above, about adding "In addition, Ulf Samuelsson's #5, Ron Francis's #10 and Kevin Dineen's #11 have been honored by fans of the team. On January 7, 2006 at a Whalers appreciation night, the three numbers were hoisted to the rafters of the Hartford Civic Center during a Hartford Wolf Pack game", would be the best way to go. It does involve the Whalers, even if the team has not played in the last nine years. Either way, there should be some mention that the numbers were added, after the team left. Kaiser matias 04:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
The easy solution, I think, is to convert that section from a list to prose. Paragraph one could detail the numbers that were actually retired by the team, and paragraph two could detail the three players honored well after the fact. It is patently false to suggest that the team retired those three numbers when the team no longer exists, but I think it should be mentioned if put in the proper context. Resolute 04:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, so long as there is mention that there is mention of them. While the Whalers obviously don't exist anymore, the city still is honouring the achievements of the players who were with thm, and that is something we need to have recorded in some form. It should explain that fact. Kaiser matias 05:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't often agree with RGTraynor when it comes to retired numbers however, I don't think these should be on the Hartford Whalers page at all as they were not recognized by the team nor the NHL which is what these sections are about. He is right that they belong in the Hartford Civic Center page as they were recognized by that entity not the Whalers. --Djsasso 13:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Which they have been, properly; there's a section in the Civic Center article saying exactly that. Anything more than that just opens a huge door, because frankly, as a fan of the Quebec Nordiques (at least I can claim that I am), I can hang up banners in my backyard "retiring" the numbers of, say, Robbie Ftorek and Anton Stastny, and demand recognition for this honoring in the Nords' article, because I have exactly as much right to speak for the Nordiques' organization as the Wolfpack does for the Whalers. RGTraynor 13:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Yup I completely agree with that. --Djsasso 15:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with RGTraynor completely. Furthermore the troublesome editor (who continues to go against consensus) should be 'blocked' for his/her uncompromising reverts & unwikipedian actions. GoodDay 20:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Based on his comments on his talk page and his not reverting it since my last revert I am willing to hold off on that course of action. But if he were to keep it up I would be more than willing to support anyone going that route. I think he mistakenly thought that he was in the majority and that RGTraynor and Me were the trouble makers. So I am going to assume good faith for now. --Djsasso 20:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I just looked at the Civic Center article, so I now stand with the majority. Kaiser matias 20:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The funny thing about this is that utilizing the logic that those 3 additional player numbers would remain retired if a new franchise goes to Hartford is erroneous speculation. There is nothing that says that any franchise, whether new or relocated, that goes to Hartford would honor ANY of the retired numbers as they would be under no real obligation to do so. Perhaps they may do so to satisfy a fan base, but lets say Tampa Bay moves to Hartford one day. They would not be obligated to honor any of the retired numbers whatsoever. As of now, there are only 2 former Hartford Whaler's players that have numbers retired in Hartford -- Rick Ley and Gordie Howe. John McKenzie never actually played for Hartford but the team nonetheless retired the number officially so it is included. Until someone can demonstrate that the Hartford Whalers NHL Franchise officially retired Ron Francis, Ulf Samuelsson, and Kevin Dineen's jersey numbers in an official team ceremony, complete with Banners being raised to the roof and Brass Bonanza playing prior to the Hartford Whalers playing an NHL Game, then those 3 players should not be listed as officially retired numbers. This is not a fan base website. It is an encyclopedia, and listing that the Hartford Whalers retired those numbers is completely false thus should not be listed as such.Pparazorback 20:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Those numbers have as much right to be listed in this article as #46 Billy Joel as over at Philadelphia Flyers. ccwaters 12:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, good point. Think about it ... how many celebs have received jerseys with "No. 1 Fan" or other such printed on the back, at center ice no less, from the team, just before an official game? Should we track down those instances and declare them to be "retired numbers?" What's the difference?  RGTraynor  12:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Billy Joel's banner refers to his 46 sellouts at the Spectrum and Wachovia Center. It is however orange and black just like Bobby Clarke's #16. ccwaters 13:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Arena Banners I've removed the image as it contradicted the retired numbers section. GoodDay (talk) 19:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pants

Does anyone know something about those pants, I have seen them only short time on Whalers players. http://www.whalershockey.com/images/D/Doug%20Sulliman_3.jpg http://www.whalershockey.com/images/D/Doug%20Sulliman%20and%20Risto%20Siltanen.jpg

They were called Cooperalls, and to the best of my knowledge, only the Whalers and Flyers ever wore them. Resolute 13:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The Flyers started using them, then the Whalers. It lasted for about two seasons in the early 1980s, and then the league shot them down and compelled them to use traditional hockey pants.  RGTraynor  14:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:HartfordWhalers79.gif

Image:HartfordWhalers79.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Resolute 23:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting link spam

I've just reverted this video link [6]. While it does have good clips, it's a generic WHA site that doesn't particularly pertain to the Whalers. Furthermore, it's the editor's own website, and he's spamming several WHA-related articles, both in violation of WP:COI, WP:SPAM and WP:LINKS. I'll track down the rest of the edits and revert.  RGTraynor  16:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Whalers logo

Please see my old comments about this trademark claim here: Talk:Hartford_Whalers#.22Retired_numbers.22. Maybe I wasn't looking in the right place, could you provide more evidence? As is: I have to maintain that the US Patents and Trademark Office trumps statements on a nostalgic fan site. ccwaters 15:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a "nostalgic fan site" at all, but the State of Connecticut itself, which paid "$30,560,000 associated with the purchase of the assets of the Hartford Whalers." [7] What could that have been except for the trademarks? Then there's this report:

"Neither Baldwin nor state officials would speak to the specifics of Baldwin's most recent proposal. But in a document prepared by Baldwin and obtained by The Courant, the man who says he would bring the NHL back to Hartford proposes acquiring the authority's lease for the city-owned building and assuming responsibility for future capital improvements to the civic center. Among other things, Baldwin's company also would get the rights to the Whalers name, logo and other trademarks." [8]

CT thinks they own it, and the man who put in a bid to run the Civic Center thinks they own it. I can't explain your USPTO search, except to say that it sure appears that CT has mismanaged something it paid an awful lot of money for. --Chancemichaels
I couldn't tell you. Something is not right. ccwaters 18:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
We searched both the US and the CT patent sites at the time, with no luck. That aside, WTF? The entire Forbes-rated value of the franchise wasn't $30 million; there is no way in creation CT would have been stupid enough to pay that much for the logo and the trademark. I don't think the Canadiens trademark is worth that much. Did the team own the arena?  RGTraynor  20:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to be the case. I haven't found anything indicating that the arena was ever privately-owned. What else could that $30M have included? Broadcasting rights? Some sort of NHL Franchise rights, should Hartford ever put an ownership group together? I don't know. Regardless, the fact that Hartford thinks the trademarks are theirs to sell would warrant a mention in the article, even if they have let them lapse. Chancemichaels 15:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)--Chancemichaels
Just as an aside, do you have those Forbes rankings handy? That valuation seems a little low, considering the expansion fee paid by the Mighty Ducks a few years earlier was $50M[9] and the fee paid by the Predators the year after the Whalers moved was $80M. --Chancemichaels 16:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
The current value of the franchise is $144 million, ten years down the road for a team that at the time the list was published was the defending Cup champions. Beyond that, Forbes reported that the value of the team had increased 44% in the preceding two years. [10]  RGTraynor  16:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
That's amazing. As you say, the Cup is probably responsible for much of that 44% increase. But I'd still like to see some source for the value of the team in 1997. --Chancemichaels 20:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels

[edit] Missing logo?

The logos here show 1972-1979, then 1979-1992, but I clearly remember another logo in the '70s that featured a cartoon whale with the letters "ers" in lower case... Was this not an official logo? 162.136.192.1 (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Other logos do exist. You can see some HERE. Including every single logo however is excessive and pushes the envelope on fair use. It would be better to provide a link to see other logos. Flibirigit (talk) 23:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Beyond that, "Pucky" was just a shoulder patch, similar to what a lot of teams use now; it was never the official emblem of the team.  RGTraynor  04:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)