Talk:Hartford Whalers

Hartford Whalers received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Ice Hockey

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles

Connecticut Mid‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

List of Hartford Whalers players[edit]

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

Jacques Ysaye[edit]

Firstly, this in a North American based hockey article & WP:HOCKEY prefers diacritics to not be used on North American articles. Secondly, the source uses Jacques Ysaye. GoodDay (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First off you said the agreement was off...so that means the interaction as well. Secondly the WP:HOCKEY compromise says to use them where appropriate. If we are trying to show his native spelling then we have to use them. Stop trying to cause a fight. By the way that was 3RR. You really need to learn what WP:BRD is. -DJSasso (talk) 14:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Jacques Ysaye has been removed from the article by Djsasso, this discussion is moot. GoodDay (talk) 15:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricanes/CT Whale Hatnote[edit]

In the edit summary, I alluded to a talkpage entry that had actually taken place on my user page here: User_talk:Zfish118#Hartford_Whalers. (I thought it was here and ignored, so I apologize for the crankiness of my tone in the edit summary.)

In short, I believe the unique history of the name CT Whale (so named by a former Whaler's owner) justifies a hatnote, due to the variety of keywords that might lead someone to the wrong article. --Zfish118 (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no "unique" history involved; the minor league team was named "Whale" for a couple of years until Baldwin had proven to be a pig in a poke for the umpteenth time. Variations on "Whalers" has been done by several Connecticut hockey teams now, none of which you've chosen to reflect, and ignoring the current team called "Connecticut Whale," which should be up there if any team is. In any event, I find it highly improbable that anyone looking for an ephemeral team name attached to the Wolf Pack franchise would be coming to this article. (A hatnote on the Wolf Pack article directing people here might be more like it.) If you gain consensus for your way of doing things -- so far, judging from the edit summaries, you're looking at more opposition than support -- then that can be changed. Ravenswing 14:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is NOT "my way of doing things"! I am simply maintaining what had been there for the past year. I disagreed with the original editor that changed this a few ~~years~~ hours ago that the hatnote was "completely useless", as apparently you do too, as you kept part of it. --Zfish118 (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted in talk, hat notes exist to direct users to appropriate articles in the case of duplicate titles requiring disambiguation or where there is a need to clarify an article title to prevent confusion. Hat notes are not meant to link see also items using a POV argument of "this is very important". Even using a hat note to point to the Carolina Hurricanes is not useful, given the Hurricanes article is clearly linked throughout, including the lead. Reso lute 21:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(nods to Resolute) Fair enough, the bit on the Hurricanes is defensible. Ravenswing 09:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am dropping the issue, but I did not appreciate the original edit summary that the hatnote was "completely useless". I don't remember who wrote the hatnote originally, but I do not like seeing good faith edits trashed talked. --Zfish118 (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ESPN logo citation[edit]

Putting this here because I don't want this citation buried in the edit history, I want it here for us to be able to use it but I just don't know where to use it right now:

"Uni Watch: Why Whalers' logo endures". ESPN.com. 13 January 2016. Retrieved 31 August 2019.

Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 05:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I saw this source attached to the statement in the article that said the Boston Bruins insisted the NHL force the New England Whalers to change their name to omit New England. This did not pass muster with this source because while it does allude to their name change, it does not say why the change took place. In fact, the other source given does not either, having just checked in the process of writing this post, so I am removing it altogether for the time being. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]