Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) and Colorado Avalanche: Difference between pages

(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
Wikipedia:Template locations
 
2001-present: mentioned granato as head coach
 
Line 1:
{{NHL Team
<noinclude>{{Villagepumppages|Miscellaneous|The '''miscellaneous''' section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please try to post within [[Wikipedia:Village pump (news)|news]], [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)|policy]], [[Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)|technical]], [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)|proposals]] or [[Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)|assistance]] rather than here. For general knowledge questions, please use the [[WP:RD|reference desk]].|[[WP:VPM]]}}
|team_name = Colorado Avalanche
__TOC__ __NEWSECTIONLINK__
|bg_color = #8B2942
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
|text_color = white
|-
|logo_image = Colorado Avalanche.gif
|This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by Werdnabot. Any sections older than '''7''' days are automatically archived to '''[[Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive]]'''. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
|conference = [[Western Conference (NHL)|Western]]
|-
|division = [[Northwest Division (NHL)|Northwest]]
|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-7 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
|founded = [[1972-73 WHA season|1972]]
These discussions will be kept archived for 7 more days. During this period the discussion can be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate. After 7 days the discussion will be permanently removed.
|history = '''[[Quebec Nordiques]]'''<br>[[1972-73 WHA season|1972]] - [[1994-95 NHL season|1995]]<br>'''Colorado Avalanche'''<br> [[1995-96 NHL season|1995]] - present
<br clear="all" />
|arena = [[Pepsi Center]]
|city = [[Denver, Colorado]]
|media_affiliates = [[Altitude Sports and Entertainment|Altitude]]<br>[[KKFN|KKFN (950 AM)]]
|team_colors = Burgundy, Steel Blue, Black, Silver, and White
|Rival = [[Detroit Red Wings]]
|owner = {{flagicon|USA}} [[Stan Kroenke]]
|general_manager = {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Francois Giguere]]
|head_coach = {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Joel Quenneville]]
|president = [[Pierre Lacroix]]
|captain = {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Joe Sakic]]
|minor_league_affiliates = [[Lake Erie Monsters]] ([[American Hockey League|AHL]])<br />[[Arizona Sundogs]] ([[Central Hockey League|CHL]])
|stanley_cups = [[1995-96 NHL season|1995-96]], [[2000-01 NHL season|2000-01]]
|conf_titles = [[1995-96 NHL season|1995-96]], [[2000-01 NHL season|2000-01]]
|division_titles = [[1995-96 NHL season|1995-96]], [[1996-97 NHL season|1996-97]], [[1997-98 NHL season|1997-98]], [[1998-99 NHL season|1998-99]], [[1999-00 NHL season|1999-00]], [[2000-01 NHL season|2000-01]], [[2001-02 NHL season|2001-02]], [[2002-03 NHL season|2002-03]]
}}
The '''Colorado Avalanche''' are a professional [[ice hockey]] team based in [[Denver, Colorado]], [[United States]]. They are members of the [[Northwest Division (NHL)|Northwest Division]] of the [[Western Conference (NHL)|Western Conference]] of the [[National Hockey League]] (NHL). The Avalanche have won the [[Stanley Cup]] twice, in 1996 and 2001. The franchise was founded in [[Quebec City|Quebec]] and were the [[Quebec Nordiques]] until moving to [[Denver, Colorado]] in 1995. The Avalanche have won 8 division titles and had gone to the playoffs in each of their first 10 seasons in the NHL, with the streak ending in 2007.<ref>{{cite web |title =Colorado Avalanche History|url =http://www.sportsline.com/nhl/teams/history/COL|publisher =CBS Sportsline|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> The Avalanche are also notable for being the first team in NHL history to win the Stanley Cup their first season after a re-___location.
 
From the time of their move to Denver in 1995, until the end of the 1998-99 season, the Avalanche played their home games at [[McNichols Sports Arena|McNichols Arena]]. Since then, the Avalanche have called the [[Pepsi Center]] home. The Avalanche have a notable rivalry with the [[Detroit Red Wings]], partly due to both teams having met each other five times in seven years in the Western Conference playoffs between 1996 and 2002.<ref>{{cite news |title =Welcome to NHL's nastiest rivalry|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=RM&p_theme=rm&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB4E6E5FAB223F2&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =Kravitz, Bob|publisher =Rocky Mountain News|date =1996-12-18|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref>
[[hu:Wikipédia:Kocsmafal (egyéb)]]
[[zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他]]
[[zh-yue:Wikipedia:城市論壇 (雜項)]]
[[Category:Wikipedia community forums|{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:To Village Pump (news)|redirection for navigation]]</noinclude>
 
==Franchise history==
== 4000metres = ? ==
===Quebec Nordiques (1972-1995)===
{{see also|Quebec Nordiques}}
The Quebec Nordiques were one of the [[World Hockey Association]]'s original teams when the league began play in [[1972-73 WHA season|1972]]. Though first awarded to a group in [[San Francisco]], the team quickly moved to [[Quebec City]] when the [[California]] deal soured due to financial and arena problems.<ref name="whanordiques">{{cite web |title =Quebec Nordiques|url =http://www.whahockey.com/nordiques.html|publisher =WHA Hockey|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> During their seven WHA seasons, the Nordiques won the [[Avco World Trophy]] once, in [[1976-77 WHA season|1977]] and lost the finals once, in [[1974-75 WHA season|1975]].<ref>{{cite web |title =WHA Yearly Standings|url =http://www.whahockey.com/whayearlystandings.html|publisher =WHA Hockey|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Two years later, in [[1979-80 NHL season|1979]], they entered the NHL, along with the WHA's [[Edmonton Oilers]], [[Hartford Whalers]], and [[Winnipeg Jets]].<ref>{{cite web |title =From the WHA to the NHL |url =http://www.nhl.com/history/062279.html|publisher =NHL|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref>
 
After making the postseason for seven consecutive years, from [[1980-81 NHL season|1981]] to [[1986-87 NHL season|1987]], the Nordiques fell into the league's basement.<ref name="nordiquesrecord">{{cite web |title =Quebec Nordiques Almanac|url =http://www.nordiquespreservation.com/record.html|publisher =Nordiques Preservation|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> In [[1991 NHL Entry Draft|1991]], for the third straight draft, Quebec had the first overall selection.<ref>{{cite web |title =NHL Entry Draft First Round Selections 1980-89|url =http://www.nhl.com/futures/firstround80_89.html#89|publisher =NHL|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title =NHL Entry Draft First Round Selections 1990-99|url =http://www.nhl.com/futures/firstround90_99.html|publisher =NHL|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Although [[Eric Lindros]], the draft's top-ranked player, had made it clear he did not wish to play for the Nordiques, they drafted him anyway.<ref>{{cite news |title =A look back: 1991|url =http://www.nhl.com/futures/2006draft/lookback_91_053106.html|author =Roarke,Shawn P.|publisher =NHL|date =2006-05-31|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Lindros did not even wear the jersey for the press photographs, only holding it when it was presented to him.<ref name="lindrosnhl">{{cite news |title =As expected, Quebec selects Lindros No.1|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=NewsLibrary&p_multi=DSNB&d_place=DSNB&p_theme=newslibrary2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0F360039496DAD62&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =1991-06-23|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> On advice from his mother, Lindros refused to sign a contract and began a holdout that would last over a year. On June 30, 1992, he was traded to the [[Philadelphia Flyers]] in exchange for five players, the rights to Swedish prospect [[Peter Forsberg]], two first-round draft picks, and $15 million ([[United States dollar|USD]]).<ref>{{cite web |title =Eric Lindros profile|url =http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?service=page&page=PlayerDetail&playerId=8458515&tab=crst|publisher =NHL|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> The Lindros trade is seen (at least in hindsight) as one of the most one-sided deals in NHL history, and a major foundation for the Nordiques/Avalanche franchise successes over the next decade<ref>{{cite news |title =A Franchise deal. Lindros trade laid foundation for Nordiques/Avalanche drive to berth in Stanley Cup Final|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=RM&p_theme=rm&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB4E536B44A621D&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =Benton, Jim|publisher =Rocky Mountain News|date =1996-06-06|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> and turned the Nordiques from one of the weakest teams in the NHL to a Stanley Cup contender almost overnight. In the first season after the trade, the [[1992-93 NHL season]], the Nordiques reached the playoffs for the first time in six years and would do so two seasons later.
On several different airport pages, 4000 metres mean several different things. It sometimes states 13120ft, 13123ft, yet i've gotten 13124 on my calulator using 1*3.281. Which is the most correct? It is very confusing...
:The actual conversion from meters to feet is 1 foot = .3048 meters [http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/appenB.html#B.6]. Multiplying meters by 3.281 is an approximation to this (1/.3048 is actually 3.280839895013, more or less). Using this as the conversion factor, I get 13123.359580052 (which rounds to 13123). However, if we're counting significant digits, 4000 only has 4, so using only 4 digits for the answer yields 13120. -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 02:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
::Well actually, 4000 only has one significant digit. It depends on the context, if someone is talking about a 4000m race, for example, then we know that it's 'exactly' 4000m and so an accurate conversion is more appropriate, whereas if 4000m means "nearer to 4000m than it is to 3000m or 5000m" then something more crude would be OK. On an airport page I would expect 4000m to meane "at least 4000m" as it's probably talking about runway length and you wouldn't want to be overestimating their length! You could always remove the imperial measurement. [[User:MikesPlant|MikesPlant]] 13:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
::: '''''Beware''''' - there is more than one definition for 'foot'. In the US, there is a "surveyors foot" which is still in common use - and a different definition of the foot prior to 1959(!). From the GNU 'units' program data file:
:::: "The US Metric Law of 1866 gave the exact relation 1 meter = 39.37 inches. From 1893 until 1959, the foot was exactly 1200|3937 meters. In 1959 the definition was changed to bring the US into agreement with other countries. Since then, the foot has been exactly 0.3048 meters. At the same time it was decided that any data expressed in feet derived from geodetic surveys within the US '''would continue to use the old definition'''."
::: Notice that last bit...*MANY* existing US GIS data sources (maps and airport runway data) are still using the surveyor's foot - and lots of references pre-date the 1959 (or even the 1866) laws and have "non-metric" feet (isn't that an odd phrase!). Then of course in non-US countries, the laws changed at different times with differing intermediate definitions. Hence it should come as no surprise that everything is a horrible mess! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] 19:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:::: But the difference is small - 1 200 / 3 937 = 0.30480061 So for a 4000 m runway, that is either 13,123.3333 ft for the old definition or 13,123.3596 for the new definition, ignoring sig. digits. For most applications this is within measurement uncertainty. --[[User:BenBurch|BenBurch]] 00:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
While the team experienced on-ice success, the team was far less successful off the ice. Quebec City was the smallest market in the league and in 1995,<ref name="canadianencyc">{{cite news |title =Nordiques Move to Colorado|url =http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=M1ARTM0010425|author =Deacon, James|publisher =[[Maclean's]]|date =1995-05-06|accessdate =2007-05-11}}</ref> team owner [[Marcel Aubut]] asked for a bailout from Quebec's provincial government<ref>{{cite news |title =Quebec's Government Plans Bailout to keep Nordiques from moving|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=PD&s_site=twincities&p_multi=SP&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB5DDC4964DA9E0&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =1994-04-09|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> as well as a new publicly funded arena.<ref name="canadianencyc"/> The bailout fell through and Aubut subsequently sold the team to a group of investors in [[Denver]].<ref>{{cite news |title =NHL's Nordiques sold, moving west to Denver \ Comsat Entertainment Group bought the team. Quebec had refused to fund a new hockey arena|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=PI&s_site=philly&p_multi=PI&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB32BFD6ADCFF94&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =|publisher =Philadelphia Inquirer|date =1995-05-26|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> On May 1995, the COMSAT Entertainment Group, announced an agreement in principle to purchase the team.<ref name="mediaguidemisc">{{cite web |title =Miscellaneous/Community/Altitude|url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/PDF/321134_CA_MG_325-336.pdf|publisher =Colorado Avalanche|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref>. The deal became official on [[July 1]], [[1995]] and 12,000 season tickets were sold in the 37 days after the announcement of the move to Denver.<ref name="mediaguidemisc"/> The franchise was presented as the Colorado Avalanche on [[August 10]] [[1995]].<ref name="mediaguidemisc"/> They became the second NHL franchise to play in the city: the [[Colorado Rockies (NHL)|Colorado Rockies]] played in town from 1976 to 1982 when they moved to [[New Jersey]] to become the [[New Jersey Devils|Devils]].
== Ninjas or Pirates? ==
 
===Colorado Avalanche (1995-Present)===
There is a big discussion going on about ninjas and pirates. the disscusion topic is "which is more popular, Pirates or Ninjas?". Everybody has a lot to say about this question so please say what you think and don't be afraid because you need to speak to be heard.
[[Image:Patrick_Roy_1999.jpg|thumb|left|150px|Goaltender [[Patrick Roy]], the winningest net minder in the NHL, played for the Avalanche from 1995-2003.]]
 
====1995-2001====
[[User:Gogoboi662|Gogoboi662]] 11:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Anthony Schade
After buying the team, the COMSAT Entertainment Group organized its Denver sports franchises, the Avalanche and the [[Denver Nuggets]] under a separate subsidiary, Ascent Entertainment Group Inc., which went public in 1995, with 80% of its stocks bought by COMSAT and the other 20% to be available on [[NASDAQ]].<ref name="nuggetscompanyhistory">{{cite web |title =Denver Nuggets - Company History|url =http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Denver-Nuggets-Company-History.html|publisher =Funding Universe|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref>
 
The Colorado Avalanche played their first game in the [[McNichols Sports Arena]] in [[Denver]] on [[October 6]], [[1995]] winning 3-2 against the Detroit Red Wings.<ref>{{cite web |title = October 6, 1995 - Detroit Red Wings vs. Colorado Avalanche gamesheet|url =http://www.avalanchedb.com/gamesheets/95-96/199501.htm|publisher =Colorado Avalanche Database|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> Led by [[Captain (ice hockey)|captain]] [[Joe Sakic]], forward [[Peter Forsberg]], and defenseman [[Adam Foote]] on the ice and [[Pierre Lacroix]] as the [[General Manager (ice hockey)|general manager]] and [[Marc Crawford]] as the [[head coach]], the Avalanche got stronger when former [[Montreal Canadiens]] goalie [[Patrick Roy]] joined the team. Feeling humiliated for being left in the net after having let in 9 goals in 26 shots during a Canadiens game against the Red Wings, Roy joined the Avalanche on [[December 6]] [[1995]], together with ex-Montreal captain [[Mike Keane]] in a trade for [[Jocelyn Thibault]], [[Martin Rucinsky]] and [[Andrei Kovalenko]].<ref>{{cite news |title =Roy gets call he's in Hall|url =http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nhl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23920_4810040,00.html|author =Sadowski, Rick|publisher =Rocky Mountain News|date =2006-06-29|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Roy would prove a pivotal addition for Colorado in the years to come.
:Pirate all the way! yo ho! yo ho! A Pirates life for me! also people love Caption Jack Sparrow and how many famous ninjas can you list? hmmmmmmmmm? [[User:Exnie|ШнΨ ʃǏĜĤ†¿ ĞІνΣ ÎИ тФ ΤĦƏ ɖĄГĶ Ѕǀɠё фʃ ʈНę ʃФŖĆÉǃ]] 20:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 
The Avalanche finished the regular season with a 47-25-10 record for 104 points, won the [[Pacific Division (NHL)|Pacific Division]] and finished second in the [[Western Conference (NHL)|Western Conference]]. Colorado progressed to the playoffs and won the series against the [[Vancouver Canucks]], the [[Chicago Blackhawks]] and [[Presidents' Trophy]] winners Detroit Red Wings. In the [[Stanley Cup]] [[Stanley Cup Final|Final]], the Avalanche met the [[Florida Panthers]], who were also in their first Stanley Cup final. The Avalanche swept the series 4-0. In Game Four, during the third [[overtime (ice hockey)|overtime]] and after more than 100 minutes of play with no goals, defenseman [[Uwe Krupp]] scored to claim the franchise's first Cup.<ref>{{cite news |title =No stopping the Avalanche - Colorado completes Cup sweep of Panthers with 3OT victory|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SAEC&p_theme=saec&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB03D7A86BE23F7&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =Ulman, Howard|publisher =Associated Press|date =1996-06-11|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> [[Joe Sakic]] was the playoff's scoring leader with 34 points (18 goals and 16 assists) and won the [[Conn Smythe Trophy]], awarded to the most valuable player to his team during the playoffs. The 1996 Stanley Cup was the first major professional championship won by a Denver team.<ref name="mediaguidemisc"/> With the Stanley Cup win, [[Russia]]ns [[Alexei Gusarov]] and [[Valeri Kamensky]] and Swede Peter Forsberg became members of the [[Triple Gold Club]], the exclusive group of ice hockey players who have won [[Ice hockey at the Olympic Games|Olympic gold]], [[Ice Hockey World Championship|World Championship gold]], and the Stanley Cup.<ref name="triplegoldclub">{{cite web |title =Triple Gold Club|url =http://www.iihf.com/archive/TGC.pdf|publisher =[[International Ice Hockey Federation]]|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref>
:pirates spend alot of time so drunk they can't move, the ninja would have no trouble. by theonlysmartoneherelol
 
In [[1996-97 NHL season|1996-97]], Colorado won, not only their Pacific Division, but the [[Presidents' Trophy]] as well for finishing the regular season with the best record of the entire league: 49-24-9 for 107 points. The team was also the league's best scoring with an average of 3.38 goals scored per game. The Avalanche met the two lowest seeds of the Western Conference in the first two rounds of the playoffs: the [[Chicago Blackhawks]] and the [[Edmonton Oilers]], who were beaten 4-2 and 4-1. During a rematch of the previous year Conference Final, the Avalanche lost against the Detroit Red Wings in a 4-2 series. The Red Wings went on to sweep the Stanley Cup final just as Colorado had done the year before. [[Sandis Ozolinsh]] was elected for the league's first all-star team at the end of the season.
:Pirates, naturally. ;)--[[User:The Corsair|<b><font color="333333">The Corsair</font></b>]] 00:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 
In 1997, financial problems led to the selling of the Ascent Entertainment by COMSAT to the AT&T's Liberty Media Group for $755 million. Liberty put its sports assets immediately for sale.<ref name="nuggetscompanyhistory"/>
:Ninjas, clearly. [[User:Deco|Deco]] 07:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 
In the following season, Colorado won the Pacific Division with a 39-26-17 record for 95 points. The Avalanche sent the largest delegation of the NHL to the [[1998 Winter Olympics]] [[Ice hockey at the 1998 Winter Olympics|ice hockey tournament]] in [[Nagano]], [[Japan]]: 10 players representing 7 countries and coach [[Marc Crawford]] for Canada.<ref>{{cite news |title =Avalanche blame Olympics for slide that won't stop|url =http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n44_v222/ai_21251719|author =Elliott, Helene|publisher =[[Sporting News|The Sporting News]]|date =1998-11-02|accessdate =2007-07-16}}</ref> [[Milan Hejduk]] won the Gold Medal for [[Czech national ice hockey team|Czech Republic]], Alexei Gusarov and Valeri Kamensky got the Silver Medal for [[Russian national ice hockey team|Russia]] and [[Jari Kurri]] won the Bronze Medal for [[Finnish national men's ice hockey team|Finland]].<ref name="recordbook">{{cite web |title =Franchise Records|url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/PDF/321134_CA_MG_163-220.pdf|publisher =Colorado Avalanche|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> Colorado lost in their first playoff round against the [[Edmonton Oilers]] in a 7 game series, after having led the series 3-1. [[Peter Forsberg]] was the league's second highest scorer in the regular season with 91 points (25 goals and 66 assists) and was elected for the league's first all star team. After the end of the season, head coach Marc Crawford rejected the team's offer of a two-year deal.<ref>{{cite news |title =Crawford Bows Out - Avalanche Coach turns down team's offer of two-year deal|url =http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-7034317.html|author =Sadowski, Rick|publisher =[[Rocky Mountain News]]|date =1998-05-28|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> [[Bob Hartley]] was hired to the head coach position in June 1998.
:Pirates. The fact that I'm former Navy has ''absolutely nothing'' to do with it. ;) '''[[User:Durova|<font color="blue">Durova</font>]]''' 13:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 
In [[1998-99 NHL season|1998-99]], with the addition of the [[Nashville Predators]] to the league, the NHL realigned their divisions and the Colorado Avalanche were put in the new [[Northwest Division (NHL)|Northwest Division]]. Despite a slow 2-6-1 start, Colorado finished with a 44-28-10 record for 98 points, won the Northwest Division and finished second in the Western Conference. After beating the [[San Jose Sharks]] and the [[Detroit Red Wings]] in the first two rounds, Colorado met Presidents' Trophy winners [[Dallas Stars]] in the Conference Final, where they lost after a seven game series. Peter Forsberg was again elected to the league's first all-star team and [[Chris Drury]] won the [[Calder Memorial Trophy]] for the best rookie of the season. Together with [[Milan Hejduk]], both were elected for the [[NHL All-Rookie Team]] at the end of the season.
:Pirates will own ninjas any day :P --[[User:Kar the Everburning|Kar_the_Everburning]] 22:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 
It was in the [[1999-2000 NHL season|1999-2000 season]] that the Colorado Avalanche played their first game in the new [[Pepsi Center]], that cost 160 million [[US dollars]].<ref name="ksepepsicenter">{{cite web |title =KSE/Pepsi Center|url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/PDF/321134_CA_MG_299-312.pdf|publisher =Colorado Avalanche|accessdate =2007-06-13}}</ref> Milan Hejduk scored the first goal of a 2-1 victory against the [[Boston Bruins]] on [[October 13]] [[1999]].<ref>{{cite web |title =2001 NHL All-Star Game - Pepsi Center Facts|url =http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/nhl/2001/all_star/pepsi_center/|publisher =[[Sports Illustrated]]|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> The Avalanche finished the season with a 42-28-11-1 record for 96 points and won the Northwest Division. Between [[January 10]] and [[February 7]], the Avalanche had their longest winning streak ever with 12 games.<ref name="recordbook"/> Before the playoffs, the Avalanche strengthened their defense for a run towards the Stanley Cup. On March 6, [[1999-2000 NHL season|2000]], the [[Boston Bruins]] traded future [[Hockey Hall of Fame]]r defenseman [[Ray Bourque]] and [[Forward (ice hockey)|forward]] [[Dave Andreychuk]] to Colorado for [[Brian Rolston]], [[Martin Grenier]], [[Samuel Pahlsson]], and a first-round draft pick. Bourque, who had been a Bruin since [[1979-80 NHL season|1979-80]], requested a trade to a contender for one last shot at a Stanley Cup.<ref name="bourque">{{cite news |title =For Bourque, at long last Stanley!|url =http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=290833|author =Roarke, Shawn P.|publisher =[[National Hockey League|NHL]]|date =2007-03-22|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> However, and just as the year before, Colorado lost in the Conference Final against the Dallas Stars in a seven game series after beating both the Phoenix Coyotes and the Detroit Red Wings in 4-1 series. [[Joe Sakic]] won the [[Lester B. Pearson Award]] for the outstanding player of the regular season, elected by the members of the [[NHL Players Association]].
:I think ninjas may be better disciplined than pirates, but then after watching a docu-drama on the BBC about Blackbeard, I think they might be evenly matched.
 
In July 2000, after years of intrigue and several failed negotiations, the Avalanche, the Denver Nuggets and the Pepsi Center were finally bought by business [[entrepreneur]] and [[Wal-Mart]] heir [[E. Stanley Kroenke|Stan Kroenke]] in a $450 million deal. Liberty retained only 6.5% stake of the sports franchises. The deal included a guarantee to the city of Denver that the teams would not be relocated for at least 25 years. After the deal, Kroenke organized his sports assets under Kroenke Sports Enterprises.<ref name="nuggetscompanyhistory"/>
:Also pirates have cannons. Do ninjas have cannons? I don't think so. :P--[[User:Kar the Everburning|Kar_the_Everburning]] 14:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 
The [[2000-01 NHL season|2000-01]] season was the best season the team has ever had. The Avalanche won the Northwest Division and captured their second Presidents' Trophy after having finished the regular season with 52-16-10-4 for 118 points. Joe Sakic finished the regular season with 118 points (54 goals and 64 assists), only three behind [[Jaromir Jagr]]'s 121 points. On [[February 4]], [[2001]], the Colorado Avalanche hosted the [[51st National Hockey League All-Star Game|51st NHL All-Star Game]]. [[Patrick Roy]], Ray Bourque and Joe Sakic played for the North America team, who won 14-12 against the World team, that featured Milan Hejduk and Peter Forsberg. All but Hejduk were part of the starting lineups.<ref name="recordbook"/> Before the playoffs, the Avalanche acquired star defenseman [[Rob Blake]] and center [[Steven Reinprecht]] from the [[Los Angeles Kings]] in exchange for [[Adam Deadmarsh]], [[Aaron Miller]] and their first-round [[2001 NHL Entry Draft|2001 Draft]] pick.<ref>{{cite news |title =Kings take Avs' Aulin to complete Blake trade|url =http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-72313179.html|author =Sadowski, Rick|publisher =Rocky Mountain News|date =2001-03-23|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> In the playoffs, Colorado swept their Conference Quarterfinal against the [[Vancouver Canucks]]. In the Conferece Semifinal, the Avalanche won the [[Los Angeles Kings]] in a seven game series, after having wasted a 3-1 lead. After the last game of the series, Peter Forsberg underwent surgery to remove a [[ruptured spleen|ruptured]] [[spleen]] and it was announced that he would not play until the following season. The injury was a huge upset for the team; former NHL goaltender [[Darren Pang]] considered it "devastating (...) to the Colorado Avalanche".<ref>{{cite news |title =Doctor: Full recovery is expected|url =http://espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs2001/2001/0510/1194333.html|author =[[Associated Press]]|publisher =[[ESPN]]|date =2001-05-10|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> The team would overcome Forsberg's injury: in the Conference Final, Colorado won the [[St. Louis Blues]] in 4-1 series and progressed to the Stanley Cup Final, where they faced the [[New Jersey Devils]], the Stanley Cup holders. The Avalanche won the series 4-3, after winning the last game at the [[Pepsi Center]] 3-1. After being handed the Cup from [[NHL Commissioner]] [[Gary Bettman]], captain Joe Sakic immediately turned, and gave it to Ray Bourque, capping off Bourque's 22-year career with his only championship.<ref>{{cite news |title =Avalanche beat Devils to capture Stanley Cup|url =http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/cup01/games/2001-06-09-njcol.htm|author =Allen, Kevin|publisher =USA Today|date =2001-06-10|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Joe Sakic was the playoffs leading scorer with 26 points (13 goals and 13 assists). He won the [[Hart Memorial Trophy]], given to the league's most valuable player during the regular season, the [[Lady Byng Memorial Trophy]], awarded to the player that has shown the best sportsmanship and gentlemanly conduct combined with performance in play, the Lester B. Pearson Award and shared the [[NHL Plus/Minus Award]] with [[Patrik Elias]] of the Devils. Patrick Roy won the [[Conn Smythe Trophy]], awarded to the playoffs' most valuable player. [[Shjon Podein]] was awarded the [[King Clancy Memorial Trophy]] for significant humanitarian contributions to his community, namely his work on charitable organizations and his own children's foundation.<ref>{{cite web |title =2000-01 King Clancy Memorial Trophy - Podein, Shjon|url =http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=KCT&year=2000-01|publisher =Legends of Hockey|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> Ray Bourque and Joe Sakic were elected to the league's first all-star team; Rob Blake was elected to the second all-star team.
::Then again, do pirates have weapons which can barely be pronounced? I don't think so. --[[User:Joti|Joti]] 22:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 
====2001-present====
Are they fighting on land or at sea? I'd go with ninjas if on land and pirates if they were fighting on different ships. If they were fighting on the same ship, I'd still go with pirates since they might be better in a melee and would be accustomed to fighting on a ship.
[[Image:Avslineup.jpeg|right|thumb|250px|Avalanche players warming up in 2006]]
The Avalanche have failed to reach the Stanley Cup Finals since 2001. In the [[2001-02 NHL season|2001-02 season]], the team finished the regular season with 99 points of a 45-28-8-1 record and won the Northwest Division. Colorado had the league's lowest goals conceded: 169, which makes an average per game of 2.06. The NHL season was interrupted once again for the [[2002 Winter Olympics]], in [[Salt Lake City]], [[Utah]]. The Colorado Avalanche had 9 players representing 6 countries. [[Canadian national men's hockey team|Canada]] won the [[Ice hockey at the 2002 Winter Olympics|ice hockey tournament]] and [[Rob Blake]], [[Adam Foote]] and [[Joe Sakic]] won Gold medals. [[American national men's hockey team|American]] [[Chris Drury]] got a silver medal.<ref name="recordbook"/> With the win, Blake and Sakic became members of the [[Triple Gold Club]].<ref name="triplegoldclub"/> After advancing through the first two rounds of the playoffs with a 4-2 series win against the [[Vancouver Canucks]] and a 4-3 series win against the [[San Jose Sharks]], the Avalanche met their rivals of the [[Detroit Red Wings]] in the playoffs for the 5th time in 7 years. In a seven game series, Colorado had a 3-2 lead after five games, but lost Game 6 at home 2-0 and then the Red Wings won the deciding game at home 7-0. Like in 1997, Detroit went on to win the Stanley Cup. [[Patrick Roy]] won the [[William M. Jennings Trophy]], given to the goaltenders of the team with fewest goals scored against. Roy was elected for the league's first all-star team, together with Joe Sakic; Rob Blake was elected for the second all-star team.
 
The following season, [[2002-03 NHL Season|2002-03]], saw the Avalanche claim the NHL record for most consecutive division titles, nine,<ref name="divtitrec">The 1994-95 Division title was won while the franchise was still in Quebec and together with the 8 titles the Avalanche won between 1995-96 and 2002-03 makes the record number of 9 consecutive division titles</ref> breaking the [[Montreal Canadiens]] streak of eight, won between 1974 and 1982.<ref>{{cite news |title =NHL Hockey: Colorado Avalanche Team Report|url =http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-99870515.html|author =|publisher =[[The Sports Network]]|date =2003-04-10|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> The division title came after a bad start by the team, that led to the exit of head coach [[Bob Hartley]], in December.<ref>{{cite news |title =Roy, Avs put clamps on Red Wings|url =http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/games/2003-02-06-avalanche-redwings_x.htm|author =Allen, Kevin|publisher =[[USA Today]]|date =2003-02-06|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> General Manager [[Pierre Lacroix]] promoted assistant coach [[Tony Granato]] to the head coach position.<ref>{{cite news |title =Avs bench change: Hartley out, Granato in|url =http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/avalanche/2002-12-18-hartley_x.htm|author =Brehm, Mike|publisher =[[USA Today]]|date =2002-18-12|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> The team's playoff spot seemed in doubt, at one point, but the Avalanche managed to finish with 105 points, ahead of the division rivals Vancouver Canucks by one. The race to the title was exciting, namely the second-to-last game of the season, as the Avalanche needed to win the game to stay in the race, and [[Milan Hejduk]] scored with 10 seconds left in overtime to beat the [[Anaheim Ducks|Anaheim]].<ref>{{cite news |title = Colorado 4, Anaheim 3|url = http://sportsline.com/nhl/gamecenter/recap/NHL_20030404_COL@ANA|author =| publisher =CBS Sportsline|dateG=2003-04-05|accessdate =2007-05-06}}</ref> The title was guaranteed in the final day of the regular season, when the Avalanche won the [[St. Louis Blues]] 5-2 and the Vancouver Canucks lost against the [[Los Angeles Kings]] 2-0.<ref>{{cite news |title =Avalanche win game, Northwest; Hejduk gets 50th|url =http://sportsline.com/nhl/gamecenter/recap/NHL_20030406_STL@COL|author =|publisher =CBS Sportsline|date =2003-04-06|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> In the playoffs, the Avalanche blew a 3-1 series lead over the [[Minnesota Wild]], and lost in overtime of Game 7 to be eliminated from the first round of the playoffs.<ref>{{cite news |title = Minnesota 3, Colorado 2|url =http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/nhl/recaps/2003/04/22/col_min/|author =|publisher =Sports Illustrated|dateG=2003-04-22|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Peter Forsberg won the [[Art Ross Trophy]] for the leading scorer of the regular season, which he finished with 106 points (29 goals, 77 assists). Forsberg also won the [[Hart Memorial Trophy]] for the regular season's most valuable player and shared the [[NHL Plus/Minus Award]] with teammate [[Milan Hejduk]]. Hejduk scored 50 goals to win the [[Maurice 'Rocket' Richard Trophy]] for the best goalscorer of the regular season. Forsberg was elected to the league's first all-star team; Hejduk was elected to the second all-star team.
If it were cavemen versus astronauts, I'd go with cavemen as long as there were no weapons, or only primitive weapons like sticks. I think all of the hard work that the cavemen do would make them stronger and they'd probably have experience from fighting with other cavemen. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 09:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 
After that season, Patrick Roy retired and the Avalanche signed star wingers [[Paul Kariya]] and [[Teemu Selänne|Teemu Selanne]] from the [[Anaheim Ducks|Mighty Ducks of Anaheim]].<ref>{{cite news |title =Patrick Roy retires after 18 years|url =http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/05/28/roy_retires030528.html|author =|publisher =[[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation|CBC]]|date =2003-05-28|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title =Avalanche sign Kariya, Selanne to one-year deals|url =http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/news/2003/07/03/avs_signings_ap/|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2003-07-03|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Both failed to live up to the expectations: Kariya spent most of the [[2003-04 NHL season|2003-04 season]] injured and Selanne scored only 32 points (16 goals and 16 assists) in 78 games.<ref>{{cite news |title =Passion is back for Selanne|url =http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/sports_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_83_5422098,00.html|author =Sadowski, Rick|publisher =[[Rocky Mountain News]]|date =2007-03-16|accessdate =2007-05-17}}</ref> Having "nine elite players"<ref>{{cite news |title =2003-2004 NHL Season Preview: Colorado Avalanche|url =http://proicehockey.about.com/cs/nhlseasonpreview/a/03_04avalanche.htm|author =Fitzpatrick, Jamie|publisher =[[About.com]]|date =2003-09-02|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref>, "the most talented top six forwards on one team since the days of the [[Edmonton Oilers]]"<ref>{{cite news |title =Avs' silver lining has a cloud|url =http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?page=2003pvw/col|author =Heika, Mike|publisher =[[ESPN]]|date =2003-09-24|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> was not good enough as the franchise failed to win the Northwest division title, ending the NHL record streak. The 40-22-13-7 record was good enough for 100 points, one less than the Northwest division winners Vancouver Canucks. Colorado won the Conference Quarterfinal against the [[Dallas Stars]] in a five game series, but lost in the Semifinal against the [[San Jose Sharks]] in a six game series. Joe Sakic became the only Avalanche player ever to be chosen as the All-Star Game Most Valuable Player during the [[54th National Hockey League All-Star Game|2004 NHL All-Star Game]], when he scored a [[hat-trick]]. Sakic was elected for the league's first all-star team at the end of the season and won the [[NHL/Sheraton Road Performer Award]].<ref name="recordbook"/>
:This is going to change into a whole different subject because of your post, Kjkolb o.O
If a caveman took somthing from an astronaut, lets say... a laser sword(I'm so immature xD), I think you would run 'cause I don't think an astronaut would have any use for a wooden/bone club.--[[User:Kar the Everburning|Kar_the_Everburning]] 15:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 
The [[2004-05 NHL season]] was canceled due to an [[2004-05 NHL lockout|unresolved lockout]]. During the lockout, many Avalanche players played in European leagues.<ref name="nhleuropelockout">{{cite web|url=http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=9951&hubname=|title=NHLers in Europe|publisher=TSN|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref> [[David Aebischer]] returned home with [[Alex Tanguay]] to play for [[Switzerland|Swiss]] club [[Hockey Club Lugano|HC Lugano]]; Milan Hejduk and Peter Forsberg returned to their former teams in their native countries, [[HC Pardubice]] and [[MODO Hockey]]. Other nine players of the Avalanche 2003-04 roster played in European league during the lockout.<ref name="nhleuropelockout"/>
Ninjas pwn j00 {{unsigned2|22:32, 31 October 2006|Laelius1031}}
 
After the [[2004-05 NHL lockout]] and the implementation of a salary cap, the Avalanche were forced to let go some of their top players. Peter Forsberg and Adam Foote were lost to free agency in order to save some room in the cap for Joe Sakic and Rob Blake.<ref>{{cite news |title =Sakic, Blake to stay; Forsberg, Foote up in air|url =http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2116068|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2005-07-26|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Although the salary cap was a blow to one of the biggest spenders of the league,<ref>{{cite news |title =Winners, losers, undecided in wake of free-agent frenzy|url =http://www.sportsline.com/nhl/story/8790788|author =Goldstein, Wes|publisher =CBS Sportsline|date =2005-08-31|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> the Colorado Avalanche finished the [[2005-06 NHL season|2005-06 regular season]] with a 43-30-9 record for 95 points, good enough to finish second in the Northwest division, seven behind the [[Calgary Flames]] and tied with the Edmonton Oilers. The league stopped in February for the [[2006 Winter Olympics]] in [[Torino]], [[Italy]]. The Avalanche sent an NHL leading 11 players from 8 countries.<ref>{{cite news |title =East's snubs wait for
:Pirates, of course. (Oh, and the fact that my username, minus the numbers, is a synonym for pirate is completely coincedental!) [[User talk:Picaroon9288|Picaroon9288]] 00:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
their Olympic chances|url =http://www.nhl.com/features/east/east_notebook122705.html|author =Gormley, Chuck|publisher =NHL|date =2005-12-27|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> [[Finnish national men's ice hockey team|Finnish]] [[Antti Laaksonen]] got the silver medal, while [[Ossi Väänänen|Ossi Vaananen]] ended up not playing due to an injury; [[Czech national ice hockey team|Czech]] Milan Hejduk won a bronze medal.<ref name="recordbook"/> In the NHL playoffs, Colorado beat the team with the 2nd best record in the Western Conference, the Dallas Stars, in a five game series. In the Conference Semifinals, the Avalanche were swept for the first time ever, by the [[Mighty Ducks of Anaheim]]. The day after the loss, [[Pierre Lacroix]], who had been the General Manager of the franchise since 1994 when they were in Quebec, resigned and [[François Giguère|Francois Giguere]] was hired.<ref>{{cite news |title =Lacroix steps down as Colorado GM|url =http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/avalanche/2006-05-12-lacroix-resigns_x.htm|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2006-05-12|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title =Avs hire Giguere as team's general manager|url =http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2456902|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2006-05-24|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> Lacroix remains to this day as President of the franchise.<ref>{{cite web |title =Pierre Lacroix Profile|url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/Team/StaffBio.aspx?SID=7|publisher =Colorado Avalanche|accessdate =2007-02-25}}</ref>
 
By the beginning of the [[2006-07 NHL season|2006-07 season]] Joe Sakic and Milan Hejduk were the only two remaining members from the 2001 Stanley Cup winning squad. Joe Sakic is the only player left from the team's days in Quebec (though Hejduk was drafted by the Nordiques), but [[Paul Stastny]], son of Nordiques legend [[Peter Stastny]], also provides a link to the past. The Avalanched missed the playoffs for the first time in their history. The team had a 15-2-2 run in the last 19 games of the season to keep their playoffs hopes alive until the penultimate day of the season. A 4-2 loss against the [[Nashville Predators]] on April 7, with Peter Forsberg assisting the game winning goal scored by Paul Kariya, knocked Colorado out of the playoff race.<ref>{{cite news |title =Predators 4, Avalanche 2|url =http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?service=page&page=Recap&gameNumber=1225&season=20062007&gameType=2|author =|publisher =[[Associated Press]]|date =2007-04-07|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> The team won the last game of the season against the Calgary Flames on the following day and finished 4th in the Northwest Division and 9th in the Western Conference with a 44-31-7 record for 95 points, one less than the eight seed Calgary. During that last game of the season, Joe Sakic scored a goal and two assists and became the second-oldest player in NHL history to reach 100 points, behind only [[Gordie Howe]], who had 103 points at age 40 in the 1968-69 season.<ref>{{cite news |title =Avalanche 6, Flames 3|url =http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?service=page&page=Recap&gameNumber=513&season=20062007&gameType=2|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2007-04-08|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> Until the Avalanche's 2006-2007 season, no team in the history of the NHL had ever made it to 95 points without earning a spot in the playoffs.<ref>{{cite news |title = Avs Win Season Finale |url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/GameDay/BoxScore.aspx?PGID=93&NID=893|author =|publisher =Associated Press|date =2007-04-08|accessdate =2007-06-17}}</ref> In the [[Eastern Conference (NHL)|Eastern Conference]], three teams progressed to the [[2007 NHL playoffs|playoffs]] with less than 95 points: the [[New York Rangers]] (94), the [[Tampa Bay Lightning]] (93), and the [[New York Islanders]] (92).
<tt>ROBOTS ARE CLEARLY SUPERIOR — [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 01:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)</tt>
:<tt>INDEED. SUPERIOR TO BOTH PIRATES AND NINJAS (WHILE STILL INFERIOR TO ROBOTS) WOULD BE THE PIRATE NINJA. - [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 00:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)<tt>
 
===Rivalry with the Detroit Red Wings===
The answer is perfectly obvious: given that ninjas and pirates are both good, it surely follows that pirate ninjas (such as [[Weebl and Bob#Regulars|Chris]]) are better than either one. -- [[User:AJR|AJR]] | [[User talk:AJR|Talk]] 17:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
In [[1995-96 NHL season|1996]], the Colorado Avalanche met the [[Detroit Red Wings]] in the Western Conference Finals and won the series 4-2. During Game 6, as Red Wings player [[Kris Draper]] was skating toward the bench, he was checked into the boards face-first by Avalanche player [[Claude Lemieux]].<ref name="bloodfeud">{{cite book | last =Dater| first = Adrian| title =Blood Feud: Detroit Red Wings vs. Colorado Avalanche| publisher =Taylor Trade Publishing| date =2006| url =http://www.denverpost.com/books/ci_5106839| isbn =1589793196}}</ref> As a result, Draper had to undergo facial reconstructive surgery, and had to have his jaw wired shut for five weeks.<ref name="avsrw10y">{{cite news |title =Happy anniversary to Red Wings, Avalanche|url =http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neumann/070326|author =Neumann, Thomas|publisher =ESPN|date =2007-03-26|accessdate =2007-03-27}}</ref> After the incident, Lemieux received many threats from Red Wings players and fans, including goalie [[Chris Osgood]].<ref name="bloodfeud"/>
: Puh-lease. Just picture the Pirate/Ninja stealthily sneaking into the bedroom under cover of darkness - clinging to the ceiling with tiny bamboo-leaf sucker cups attached to fingertips and toes - and assasinating your enemy with a single drop of lethal poison by trickling it down a fine thread lowered into his mouth....with an eye patch, one wooden leg, a hook for a hand and a damn great red and blue parrot on his shoulder incessantly yelling "PIECES OF EIGHT!! PIECES OF EIGHT!!" ??? I didn't ''think'' so. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] 23:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
In the following season, in the last regular season meeting between the Avalanche and Red Wings on March 26, 1997, a brawl known as [[Brawl in Hockeytown]] broke out. The game ended with 9 fights, 11 goals, 39 penalties, 148 penalty minutes, one hat-trick (by [[Valeri Kamensky]]) and a goalie fight between Stanley Cup champion goalies [[Patrick Roy]] and [[Mike Vernon]].<ref name="avsrw10y"/> Claude Lemieux was one of the players singled out by the Red Wings players.<!--needs to be reworded, but I'm not sure how.--> The Red Wings ended up winning the game in overtime 6-5.<ref name="avsrw10y"/> Both teams met again in the Conference Finals that season, with the Red Wings emerging victorious, and going on to win the Stanley Cup. In the following five years, the Avalanche and the Red Wings met three times in the playoffs, with Colorado winning the first two and losing the last.
Pirates, DUH![[User:A7X 900|A7X 900]] 21:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 
This rivalry is often considered one of the most intense rivalries in the NHL by the press and fans.<ref>{{cite news |title =Part II -- Top rivalries|url =http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/preview2005/news/story?id=2172427|author =|publisher =ESPN|date =2005-10-29|accessdate =2007-03-27}}</ref>
Given that there are likely far more actual pirates than real ninjas in the world today, I'd say pirates are more popular, even though I personally find ninjas more interesting. But piracy a more popular occupation, judging by acquaintances I have who sail in tropical seas. I've met more people who have encountered real pirates than people who have encountered real ninjas. =[[User:Axlq|Axlq]] 22:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
:That's because nobody who meets a ninja lives to tell about it! [[User:Deco|Deco]] 09:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 
===The sell-out streak===
: Ghost pirates!(i've posted too many times here >.<)--[[User:Kar the Everburning|Kar_the_Everburning]] 14:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
After a record 487 consecutive games, the NHL's longest consecutive attendance sellout ended with the Avalanche on [[October 16]], [[2006]], after a reported attendance of 17,681, which is 326 under capacity at the [[Pepsi Center]] before a game against the [[Chicago Blackhawks]]. The streak began on [[November 9]], [[1995]], the Avalanche's eighth [[regular season]] home game during the [[1995-96 NHL season]], before a sellout of 16,061 at the [[McNichols Sports Arena]] versus the [[Dallas Stars]].<ref>{{cite news |title =Avs see sellout streak get away|url =http://www.denverpost.com/avalanche/ci_4503924|author =Frei, Terry|publisher =Denver Post|date =2006-10-17|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> The Avalanche recorded their 500th home sellout in their 515th game in Denver on [[January 20]] [[2007]], against the [[Detroit Red Wings]], a game the Avs would win 3-2.<ref>{{cite news |title = Avalanche Reaches 500th Sellout In Denver |url =http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?NID=780|author =|publisher =Colorado Avalanche|date =2006-01-20|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref>
 
==Team colors and jersey==
* There is a need for more practice of Piracy. Ninjitsu is an overrated and loathesome past time that need not be afflicted upon the peoples of the world. Someday the pirates wil be up in arms and all the Ninja will do is a pretty backflip onto some roof in the horizon, then prance about with flashy stars and I will be in my house laughing and consuming the maids latest affrontary on the consumable medium. May Satan save us all.--[[User:R.A Huston|R.A Huston]] 08:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
[[Image:Colorado-alternate.gif|thumb|left|100px|Avalanche's alternate logo: the foot of Howler]]
{{h3|Logo}}
The Colorado Avalanche logo is composed by a [[Burgundy (color)|burgundy]] letter '''''A''''' with snow wrapped around, similar to an [[avalanche]]. There is a hockey puck in the lower-right end of the snow, wrapping around the logo. Around the whole logo, there's a blue oval.
 
The team's alternate logo is the foot of Howler, and can be seen on the shoulders of the Avalanche's home and away jerseys.
*Dude! Ninjas all the way! <font face="Papyrus">'''[[User:Kyo cat/Esperanza|<span style="color:#0c0">K</span>]][[User:Kyo cat|<span style="color:#f90">yo cat</span>]]'''</font><sup>[[User talk:Kyo cat|meow!]]</sup> 06:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
{{clear}}
{{h3|Jerseys}}
[[Image:Avalanche200607jerseys.GIF|thumb|350px|right|Avalanche jerseys for the 2006-07 season: Home and away (top) and 3rd jersey (bottom)]]
The Avalanche jerseys have not changed since their first season in 1995. The team colors are burgundy, blue and white. The home jersey, which was the team's road jersey until 2003 when the [[National Hockey League|NHL]] decided to switch home and road jerseys,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.statenews.com/article.phtml?pk=15112|title=NHL 'quacked' up with hockey jersey switch|first=Kristofer|last=Karol|publisher=[[State News]]|date=[[January 27]], [[2003]]|accessdate=2006-08-30}}</ref> is dominantly burgundy and dark blue in color. There are two black and white [[zigzag]] lines along the jersey, one in the shoulders, the other near the belly. Between them, the jersey is burgundy, outside those lines it is dark blue. Similar lines exist around the neck. The Avalanche logo is in the center of the jersey. On top of the shoulders, there is the alternate logo, one on each side. The away jersey is similar, just with different colors. The burgundy part on the home jersey is white on the away jersey, the light blue part is burgundy and the black and white lines became white and dark blue.
 
The Avalanche introduced a third jersey during the 2001-02 season.<ref>{{cite news |title =OILERS 4, AVALANCHE 1 "Third jersey' to make debut on Halloween|url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=DP&p_theme=dp&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EF431E783FCBE23&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM|author =Dater, Adrian|publisher =Denver Post|date =2001-10-19|accessdate =2007-03-26}}</ref> It is dominantly burgundy. "Colorado" is spelled in a diagonal across the jersey where the logo is on the other jerseys. From the belly down, three large horizontal stripes, the first and the last being black and the middle one being white. In the middle of the arms, there are 5 stripes, black, white and burgundy from the outside inside in both sides.
*'''Ninjas''' Clearly way cooler than pirates --[[User:Fittysix|Fittysix]] 03:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 
==Seasons and records==
*Ninjas...for obvious reasons... ;) --<font color="pink">[[User talk:Sakuragi|さくら]]</font><font color="green">木</font> 11:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
===Season-by-season record===
''This is a partial list of the last five seasons completed by the Avalanche. For the full season-by-season history, see [[Colorado Avalanche seasons]]''
 
'''''Note:''' GP = Games played, W = Wins, L = Losses, T = Ties, OTL = Overtime Losses, Pts = Points, GF = Goals for, GA = Goals against, PIM = Penalties in minutes''
*20 legit reasons that pirates are better (from a Facebook group; I'm not responsible for any contraversial points as I didn't make them):
#Ninjas don’t choose to be sneaky, they have to be. The only way that they can kill anyone is if they sneak up and stab them in the back and then run away. Pirates basically announce that they are coming because they know that no one can stop them.
#Ninjas have poor social skills. That is why they are such loners. Do you ever see a loner pirate? No.
#Pirates get all the booty.
#Famous pirate movie: Pirates of the Caribbean (Johnny Depp is a pimp)... Famous ninja movie: 3 Ninjas (enough said) (What? did you say "what about Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?" Well see #10 below duh.)
#Pirates get pet monkeys and parrots. Ninjas get nothing.
#Pirates eat meat off the bone. Ninjas eat low fat yogurt (it’s the only thing that is transportable enough for them to carry in their black clothes or whatever the heck they wear).
#Pirates get to use cool words such as “Yo Ho,” “wench,” and “argh.” Ninjas don’t talk (poor social skills, remember?).
#84% of ninjas are homosexual. Look it up. It’s a fact.
#Pirates speak English. People who speak English are BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. Plus, they have cool accents.
#One might say, “Well, what about the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?” Now, I will admit that the Ninja Turtles are awesome. Unfortunately, they are NOT ninjas. According to TheFreeDictionary.com, The definition of a ninja is “a person skilled in ninjitsu.” The definition of a person is “a living human.” Therefore, a ninja is “a living human skilled in ninjitsu.” Since they are turtles, they are not ninjas.
#George Washington was a pirate.
#Pirates have been known to eat up to 70 pancakes in one sitting. Can a ninja do that? No sir.
#Pirates have a universal symbol: the Jolly Roger.
#Ninjas have no famous Disney characters. Pirates have Captain Hook.
#Pirates sing pirate songs. Ninjas just read Cosmo.
#No one can make artificial limbs look cool like pirates can.
#Pirates get to pillage. Pillage...what a freaking cool word.
#Shakespeare prefers pirates. There are pirates in The Tempest. Are there ninjas in any of Shakespeare's works!? No!
#In the song "That's Life", Frank Sinatra sings, "I've been a puppet, a pauper, A PIRATE, a poet, a pawn and a king." Frank Sinatra is a pirate, FRANK SINATRA. Beat that, ninjas.
#Ninjas don't get to keep the stuff that they steal, they give it to their government. You know what that means?, Ninjas work for the man, that's right, THE MAN. Nobody likes the man.
--[[User:Vic226|Vic226]] 03:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
<small>Records as of April 9, 2007.</small><ref name="hockeydb">Hockeydb.com, [http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/teamseasons.php?tid=690 Colorado Avalanche season statistics and records]</ref>
Vic226 make's a great point.[[User:A7X 900|A7X 900]] 19:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
{| class="wikitable"
== University students seek Wikipedia contributors for usage survey ==
|- style="background-color:#dddddd;" |
|Season || GP || W || L || T || OTL || Pts || GF || GA || PIM || Finish || Playoffs
|-
| [[2001-02 NHL season|2001-02]] || 82 || 45 || 28 || 8 || 1 || 99 || 212 || 169 || 1007 || 1st, Northwest || Lost in Conference Finals, 3-4 ([[Detroit Red Wings|Red Wings]])
|- bgcolor="#eeeeee"
| [[2002-03 NHL season|2002-03]] || 82 || 42 || 19 || 13 || 8 || 105 || 251 || 194 || 1084 || 1st, Northwest || Lost in Conference Quarterfinals, 3-4 ([[Minnesota Wild|Wild]])
|-
| [[2003-04 NHL season|2003-04]] || 82 || 40 || 22 || 13 || 7 || 100 || 236 || 198 || 1293 || 2nd, Northwest || Lost in Conference Semifinals, 2-4 ([[San Jose Sharks|Sharks]])
|- bgcolor="#eeeeee"
| [[2004-05 NHL season|2004-05]] || colspan="11"| ''Season cancelled due to [[2004-05 NHL Lockout]]''
|-
| [[2005-06 NHL season|2005-06]]<sup>1</sup> || 82 || 43 || 30 || — || 9 || 95 || 283 || 257 || 1130 || 2nd, Northwest || Lost in Conference Semifinals, 0-4 ([[Mighty Ducks of Anaheim|Mighty Ducks]])
|- bgcolor="#eeeeee"
| [[2006-07 NHL season|2006-07]] || 82 || 44 || 31 || — || 7 || 95 || 272 || 251 || 864 ||4th, Northwest || Did not qualify
|}
 
:<sup>1</sup> <small>As of the [[2005-06 NHL season]], all games tied after regulation will be decided in a shootout; SOL (Shootout losses) will be recorded as OTL in the standings.</small>
I'm part of a team in a management & organizational analysis at the
Stern School of Business at New York University. We selected
Wikipedia as the subject of our final analysis, and are specifically interested in what drives people to participate in Wikipedia. To this end we've compiled an anonymous, 5-minute
survey that we hoped the Wikipedia community would take part in, everyone from casual readers to editors to members of the Board.
 
===Franchise leaders===
It's available online at [http://tramchase.com/wikipedia-survey http://tramchase.com/wikipedia-survey]
''Note: This list does not include stats from the [[Quebec Nordiques]] ([[WHA]] & [[NHL]]).''
<small>Records as of April 9, 2007.</small><ref name="avsdbrb">{{cite web |title =Regular Season Record Books|url =http://www.avalanchedb.com/recordbooks/regular/page1.htm|publisher =Colorado Avalanche Database|accessdate =2007-05-12}}</ref>
{{col-start}}
{{col-2}}
{{h4|Regular season}}
*Games played: [[Joe Sakic]], 811
*Goals: Joe Sakic, 376
*Assists: Joe Sakic, 587
*Points: Joe Sakic, 963
*Penalty minutes: [[Adam Foote]], 809
*Wins: [[Patrick Roy]], 262
*Shutouts: Patrick Roy, 37
{{col-2}}
{{h4|Playoffs}}
*Games played: Joe Sakic, 150
*Goals: Joe Sakic, 75
*Assists: [[Peter Forsberg]], 93
*Points: Joe Sakic, 167
*Penalty minutes: Adam Foote, 266
*Wins: Patrick Roy, 81
*Shutouts: Patrick Roy, 18
{{col-end}}
 
===Franchise records===
Please be as detailed as possible. Your participation is much appreciated!
''Note: This list does not include records from the [[Quebec Nordiques]] ([[WHA]] & [[NHL]]). Items in '''bold''' are NHL records.'' <small>Records as of April 9, 2007.</small><ref name="avsdbrb"/>
 
{{h4|Regular season}}
:{{unsigned|Jamiew}}
*Most goals in a season: [[Joe Sakic]], 54 (2000-01)
*Most assists in a season: [[Peter Forsberg]], 86 (1995-96)
*Most points in a season: Joe Sakic, 120 (1995-96)
*Most penalty minutes in a season: [[Chris Simon]], 250 (1995-96)
*Most game-winning goals in a season: Joe Sakic, 12 (2000-01)
*Most points in a season, rookie: [[Paul Stastny]], 78 (2006-07)
*'''NHL record longest points streak, rookie: Paul Stastny, 20 games (2006-07)'''
*'''NHL record most consecutive games played by a defenseman: [[Karlis Skrastins]], 495 games (2000-2007 - 270 with the Nashville Predators and 225 with the Avalanche)'''
*Best [[Plus/minus|+/-]] record in a season: [[Milan Hejduk]] and Peter Forsberg, +52 (2002-03)
*Most wins in a season: [[Patrick Roy]], 40 (2000-01)
*Most shutouts in a season: Patrick Roy, 9 (2001-02)
*Best goal against average in a season: Patrick Roy, 1.94 (2001-02)
 
{{h4|Playoffs}}
:One might perhaps be able to make inferences about the degree of cluefulness of the survey's designers from the fact that they link back to Wikipedia using the address '''wikipedia.com''', not the more correct '''wikipedia.org''' (it's run by a noncommercial organization). [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] 00:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
*Most goals in a playoff season: Joe Sakic, 18 (1996)
::Not to mention the facts that a) the contribution here was not signed and b) the student(s) did not bother to create a userpage, which they could use to manage the communications around this matter to some degree. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 02:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
*Most assists in a playoff season: Peter Forsberg, 18 (2002)
*Most points in a playoff season: Joe Sakic, 34 (1996)
*Most penalty minutes in a playoff season: [[Adam Foote]], 62 (1997)
 
{{h4|Team}}
==Summary style violation?==
*'''Most consecutive division titles (1994-5 through 2002-3), 9'''<ref name="divtitrec"/>
*Most points in a season: 118 (2000-01)
*Most wins in a season: 52 (2000-01)
*Most goals: 336 (1995-96)
*Largest margin of victory: 10 (Dec. 12, 1995 vs San Jose (12-2))
 
==Current roster==
Curious to hear what other editors think of [[History of the Alaska Aces]]. Ignoring for a moment the article's cleanup issues, this strikes me as way too much detail for Wikipedia's coverage of a minor league hockey team. Before I rush to propose a pare-and-merge, I thought I'd solicit second opinions. Thanks. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 04:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
<small>As of April 27th, [[2006-07 NHL season|2007]]. [http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/team/PlayersNumber.asp]</small>
: Sitting here in the UK it looks like way too much information for a minor Hockey team on the west coast of the states. However, to people who live in Alaska this might be quite important and they would welcome the information. My point is that our view on what's important and how much information should be carried in an article depends on our own personal interests and where we live. So I'd be careful about removing too much information. Having said that there does seem to be too much detail and in the process of cleaning up the article I'd look to cut back the information. Once this article has been cleaned up then I decide if it should be merged. --<font color="blue">[[User:MarkS|Mark]]</font><font color="#0080A0">[[User:MarkS|S]]</font><small> ([[User_talk:MarkS|talk]])</small> 09:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 
{| width=90%
== What is it with Wikipedia and Hurricane articles? ==
!colspan=6 |<center><big>Goaltenders
|- bgcolor="#dddddd"
!width=5%|#
!width=5%|
|align=left!!width=15%|'''Player'''
!width=8%|Catches
!width=9%|Acquired
!width=37%|Place of Birth
 
|- bgcolor="#eeeeee"
--[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 04:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''31'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|SVK}}
|[[Peter Budaj]]
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2001 NHL Entry Draft|2001]]
|[[Banská Bystrica]], [[Czechoslovakia]]
 
|- bgcolor="#eeeeee"
<small>Context goes here. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 04:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)</small>
|align=center|'''60'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Jose Theodore]]
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2005-06 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Laval, Quebec]]
|}
 
{| width=90%
:Ideogram, tjstrf was pointing out that your comment requires context. Please provide some. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 04:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
!colspan=6 |<center><big>Defensemen
|- bgcolor="#dddddd"
!width=5%|#
!width=5%|
|align=left!!width=15%|'''Player'''
!width=8%|Shoots
!width=9%|Acquired
!width=37%|Place of Birth
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
::Everything I meant to say was said in the header. --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 04:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''2'''
:::I can't tell if you're saying we have too many, or not enough, or that we have the right number but they all suck, or that we're vehemently opposed to articles about hurricanes, or that they're are best group of articles and you can't figure out why, or... CONTEXT! --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 04:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
|[[Ken Klee]]
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Indianapolis, Indiana]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
::::I'm not saying. I'm asking. Which of those statements do you believe? --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 05:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''3'''
:::::Har har, [[Socratic method|Socrates]]. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 05:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|LVA}}
|[[Karlis Skrastins]]
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2003-04 NHL season|2003]]
|[[Riga]], [[Soviet Union|U.S.S.R.]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
::::::That's not quite my intent, but that's a philosophical issue impossible to discuss here. --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 05:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''4'''
:::::::...I'll be going somewhere else now... If you ever feel like ''actually asking your question'', I'm sure someone else will be able to help you. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 05:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
|[[John-Michael Liles]]
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2000 NHL Entry Draft|2000]]
|[[Zionsville, Indiana]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
Wikipedia has 7 [[WP:FL|featured lists]] about hurricanes and tropical storms. Whatever it is about Wikipedia and hurricanes, I hope it affects more pages. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 05:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''5'''
:Hey, I'll second that! We have tens of thousands of articles that could benefit from that kind of quality and attention to detail. --[[User:Doc Tropics|Doc Tropics]] <sup>[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Message in a bottle]]</sup> 05:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
::Count a third vote for the condition that has affected our hurricane articles to spread to the entire encyclopedia! ~ '''''[[User:ONUnicorn|<span style="background:#0cc;color:#fff5ee">ONUnicorn</span>]]'''''<sup>([[User talk:ONUnicorn|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/ONUnicorn|Contribs]])</sup> 16:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|[[Brett Clark]]
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2001-02 NHL season|2002]]
|[[Wapella (Saskatchewan)|Wapella]], [[Saskatchewan]]
 
|-bgcolor="eeeeee"
I do wish someone would standardize the Hurricane article names. --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 18:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''6'''
:Take it up on [[WP:TROP]] then, an outside view would be valued. I think there is an issue in the article names of the older storms (pre-1950). With more recent storms there is as much consistency as there can be; I really don't think [[Hurricane Katrina]] should be at [[Hurricane Katrina (2005)]] for example. Which article names do you have a problem with? (disclaimer: I'm a wikiproject member)--[[User:Nilfanion|Nilf]][[commons:User:Nilfanion|anion]] ([[User talk:Nilfanion|talk]]) 18:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
::I wasn't aware there was a good reason for this. It's not important enough to me to pursue. --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 19:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|[[Jeff Finger]]
::: Um, they ''are'' standardized. [[List of previous tropical cyclone names|Retired tropical cyclones]] have their name on the "main", disambiguated article page; the rest of the articles have a year disambiguator on them. If there's only one occurrence of a name ever used, then that page gets the main article page as well. Also, storms that reach [[Tropical cyclone scales|hurricane or typhoon intensity]] get their name from the basin in which they first reach that intensity; for example, [[Hurricane Ioke]] formed in the North-central Pacific Ocean, so it receives the "hurricane" designation for our purposes, in spite of it being known as [[Typhoon Ioke]] while on the Northwestern Pacific. [[User:Titoxd|Tito]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza |<span style="color:#008000;">xd</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Titoxd|?!?]])</sup> 20:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[1999 NHL Entry Draft|1999]]
|[[Houghton, Michigan]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
== Autogenerated edit summaries ==
|align=center|'''27'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|FIN}}
|[[Ossi Vaananen]]
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2003-04 NHL season|2004]]
|[[Vantaa]], [[Finland]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
Lately I've seen a lot of edit summaries by IPs and new users that say things like, "Replaced page with 'u r a turd'" or "Blanked page" or "Created page with 'blah blah blah'". This seems... odd. I know there had been some talk about autogenerating edit summaries and I'm wondering if that has now been implamented and if that's what I'm seeing. Especially since almost every thing on new pages now has an edit summary that reads like that... When did this happen? And if they are autogenerated, why don't ''all'' edits now have some sort of edit summary? ~ '''''[[User:ONUnicorn|<span style="background:#0cc;color:#fff5ee">ONUnicorn</span>]]'''''<sup>([[User talk:ONUnicorn|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/ONUnicorn|Contribs]])</sup> 17:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''34'''
:Got an example diff you can show us? | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 18:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
::Sure. Here are some pulled from recent changes and new pages in the last few minutes:
|[[Kurt Sauer]]
***[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moses&diff=prev&oldid=89283244 a diff with an edit summary of "Blanked the page"]
|align=center|L
***[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elsewhile&action=history a link to the history of a new article with an edit summary of "(←Created page with 'Elsewhile (n) (EHLS-wyle) - 1. a rarely used coloquialism used to mean "some other time" or "another time". (Derived by the same linguistical logic in which "elsew...')"]
|align=center|[[2000 NHL Entry Draft|2004]]
*** [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Free-auctions.ca&action=history link to history of new article created with no edit summary] (go quick, it could be deleted at any time)
|[[St. Cloud, Minnesota]]
*** [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrew_Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=89284043] a diff with an edit summary of, "(←Replaced page with '{{Otherpeople|Andrew Johnson}} {{Infobox_President | | name=Andrew Johnson '''FAG'''')"
::~ '''''[[User:ONUnicorn|<span style="background:#0cc;color:#fff5ee">ONUnicorn</span>]]'''''<sup>([[User talk:ONUnicorn|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/ONUnicorn|Contribs]])</sup> 19:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
:See [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-11-20/Technology report]], second bullet item. -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 19:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''44'''
::So this ''is'' a new feature, but only for changes that affect 90% of the article or new articles of 500 words or more. That ought to make life easier for RC and NP patrollers, and anyone looking at their watchlist! Cool. :) ~ '''''[[User:ONUnicorn|<span style="background:#0cc;color:#fff5ee">ONUnicorn</span>]]'''''<sup>([[User talk:ONUnicorn|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/ONUnicorn|Contribs]])</sup> 20:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
:::Until the vandals figure it out and start circumventing it. :-) But anything that makes their work harder is good. [[User:Deco|Deco]] 17:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|[[Jordan Leopold]]
Update: they do seem to be figuring this out; I've already noticed a drop-off in the Edit Summaries. It sure was nice while it lasted : ) [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 20:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Golden Valley, Minnesota]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
== Failed experiments: A method for gaining cooperation ==
|align=center|'''71'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Patrice Brisebois]]<small> ([[Injured reserve|IR]])</small>
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2005-06 NHL season|2005]]
|[[Montreal, Quebec]]
|}
 
{| width=90%
An effort to update the Kennedy Assassination articles using records from PBS and the 1998 work product of the federal Assassination Records Review Board has landed this editor in hot water with a group of editors who like the status quo.
!colspan=7 |<center><big>Forwards
|- bgcolor="#dddddd"
!width=5%|#
!width=5%|
|align=left!!width=15%|'''Player'''
!width=8%|Position
!width=8%|Shoots
!width=9%|Acquired
!width=37%|Place of Birth
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
Presently, the group, who believes no new information is needed, has asked this editor be banned for "harassing" them with "Flat Earth" information.
|align=center|'''8'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}<!--Note: Wolski plays for Team Canada-->
|[[Wojtek Wolski]]<sup>1</sup>
|align=center|LW
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2004 NHL Entry Draft|2004]]
|[[Zabrze]], [[Poland]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
During the course of this arbitration, one of the editors who opposes change, claims he has tried to edit cooperatively. That is good, but his methodology appears flawed. The editor states:
|align=center|'''12'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Brad Richardson]]
|align=center|C/LW
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2003 NHL Entry Draft|2003]]
|[[Belleville, Ontario]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
:::“I don't like you. I think you're an obnoxious jerk.”
|align=center|'''14'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Ian Laperriere]] - '''[[Captain (ice hockey)#Alternate captains|A]]'''
|align=center|RW/C
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2004-05 NHL season|2004]]
|[[Montreal, Quebec]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
Later he explains to the arbitration panel that this:
|align=center|'''15'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Andrew Brunette]] - '''[[Captain (ice hockey)#Alternate captains|A]]'''
|align=center|LW
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2005-06 NHL season|2005]]
|[[Sudbury, Ontario]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
:::“[I]s an attempt to find common ground between [the other editor] and myself and move forward with editing the article productively.” [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RPJ/Evidence]
|align=center|'''19'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Joe Sakic]] - '''[[Captain (ice hockey)|C]]'''
|align=center|C
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[1987 NHL Entry Draft|1987]]
|[[Burnaby, British Columbia]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
|align=center|'''20'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Mark Rycroft]]
|align=center|RW/LW
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Penticton, British Columbia]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
Back to the drawing board.
|align=center|'''23'''
[[User:RPJ|RPJ]] 21:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|CZE}}
|[[Milan Hejduk]]
|align=center|RW
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[1994 NHL Entry Draft|1994]]
|[[Ústí nad Labem]], [[Czechoslovakia]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
== What happened to Wikipedia? ==
|align=center|'''26'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}} <!--plays for Team USA-->
|[[Paul Stastny]]
|align=center|C
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Quebec City, Quebec]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
It works right now, but it looks so ugly. There's no bars on the left and top of the screen. What happened? I hope this change isn't permanent. [[User:Robocracy|Robocracy]] 07:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''28'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Ben Guite]]
|align=center|RW
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Montreal, Quebec]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
:It appears the same as always to me. — [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|দ]] 07:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''29'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
|[[Scott Parker (ice hockey)|Scott Parker]]
|align=center|RW
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2007]]
|[[Hanford, California]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
::You may need to adjust or reset your browser; I haven't noticed any differences. --[[User:Doc Tropics|Doc Tropics]] <sup>[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Message in a bottle]]</sup> 09:12, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''39'''
:Perhaps you changed your skin, or the browser didn't load one of the stylesheets. The first issue can be fixed by [[Special:Preferences]], the second by doing a hard reload, see [[Wikipedia:Bypass your cache]]. Hope that helps, [[User:Kusma|Kusma]] [[User_talk:Kusma|(討論)]] 09:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|{{flagicon|USA}}
==[[WP:NOTLEX]]==
|[[Tyler Arnason]]
[[Wikipedia:You Are Probably Not a Lexicologist or a Lexicographer]] is a new essay... please help improve!!! [[User:MPS|MPS]] 17:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|C/LW
:I would if I knew what a Lexicologist was...--[[User:SonicChao|SonicChao]] [[User talk:SonicChao|<sup>talk</sup>]] 17:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|L
:: a dictionary writer [[User:MPS|MPS]] 18:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|[[2006-07 NHL season|2006]]
|[[Oklahoma City, Oklahoma]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
== shamless self promotion: Created a new essay, want others to read and comment on it: ==
|align=center|'''40'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|SVK}}
|[[Marek Svatos]]
|align=center|RW
|align=center|R
|align=center|[[2001 NHL Entry Draft|2001]]
|[[Košice]], [[Czechoslovakia]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
I created an essay titled: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jayron32/Orthodoxy_and_heresy_at_Wikipedia Orthodoxy and heresy at Wikipedia]. It is supposed to be somewhat provocative. I am looking for comments and improvements. Please feel free to comment on the essay talk page or make any changes you see fit. Thank you. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron]][[User:Jayron32/Esperanza|<span style="color:#00FF00;">32</span>]] 21:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=center|'''53'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Brett McLean]]
|align=center|C/LW
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2004-05 NHL season|2004]]
|[[Comox, British Columbia]]
 
|-bgcolor="#eeeeee"
== A new wikipedia ==
|align=center|'''87'''
|align=center|{{flagicon|CAN}}
|[[Pierre Turgeon]] <small> ([[Injured reserve|IR]])</small>
|align=center|C
|align=center|L
|align=center|[[2005-06 NHL season|2005]]
|[[Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec|Rouyn, Quebec]]
|}
 
*To see the player roster and bios, click [http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/Team/Roster.aspx here.]
just a suggestion...
 
<small>1. Wojtek Wolski plays for Team Canada. He was born in Poland but became a naturalized Canadian citizen in 1990. </SMALL>
why not create a site 'wikipedia people' dedicated to profiles of people? Firstly a great number of people would use it and secondly i think that it would stop a lot of vandalism on the general wikipedia site if people can write about themselves elsewhere...
 
===Honored Members===
cheers
{{see also|List of Colorado Avalanche players|Colorado Avalanche notable players and award winners}}
:A project like this has been considered before but the main problem is that if anyone could have a page about them put in, there would be problems with privacy breaches and a lack of acceptable sources for the information [[User:Tra|Tra]] [[User:Tra/MyComments|(Talk)]] 17:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
{| cellpadding="1" border="0" style="float: right; margin: 0em 0em 1em 1em; width: 215px; border: 1px #bbbbbb solid; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 85%;"
|- align="center" bgcolor=#CDC0B0
! colspan="3" | Players with most games for the Colorado Avalanche
|- align="center" bgcolor=#EEDFCC
| Player || Games || Years
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Joe Sakic]] || 811 || 1995-present
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Milan Hejduk]] || 624 || 1998-present
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Adam Foote]] || 592 || 1995-2004
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Peter Forsberg]] || 533 || 1995-2004
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Stephane Yelle]] || 505 || 1995-2002
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Patrick Roy]] || 478 || 1995-2003
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Alex Tanguay]] || 450 || 1999-2006
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Adam Deadmarsh]] || 405 || 1995-2001
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Jon Klemm]] || 393 || 1995-2001
|- align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFFF
| [[Eric Messier]] || 385 || 1996-2003
|- align="center" bgcolor=#EEDFCC
| colspan="3" align="center" | ''Source: [http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/ttotdisplay.php?tid=690 HockeyDB.com]''<br>''<small>As of April 9, 2007 - Regular Season data<small/>''
|}
''Retired Numbers'': The Avalanche have retired two numbers: '''77''' of [[Ray Bourque]] and '''33''' of [[Patrick Roy]].<ref>{{cite news |title =Patrick Roy #33 to Be Retired|url =http://www.sportzdomain.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=14361&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0|author =|publisher =http://www.sportzdomain.com|date =2003-05-29|accessdate =2007-03-25}}</ref> The number '''99''' of [[Wayne Gretzky]] is retired league-wide. The numbers retired when the franchise was in Quebec were entered back into circulation after the move to Colorado.
 
''Hall of Famers'': Ray Bourque played in the NHL for 22 seasons with the [[Boston Bruins]] and was traded, by request, to Colorado in 2000 so he could have a chance of winning the Stanley Cup before retiring.<ref name="bourque"/> In a feat termed Mission 16W, the Avs were able to win the Stanley Cup, thus allowing Bourque the championship he had been seeking for 22 seasons.<ref>{{cite news |title ='Mission 16W' accomplished for Avalanche|url =http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/cup01/2001-06-11-avalanche-cover.htm|author =Allen, Kevin|publisher =[[USA Today]]|date =2001-06-10|accessdate =2007-05-11}}</ref>
::Why not just use [[Wikipedia:User page|user pages]]? -[[User:Elmer Clark|Elmer Clark]] 05:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
[[Patrick Roy]] played from 1995 to 2003 in Colorado and won two Stanley Cups with the Colorado Avalanche. Roy recorded 551 career victories, the most career wins for any goaltender in the NHL.<ref>{{cite web |title =Legends of Hockey - Roy, Patrick|url =http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/LegendsMember.jsp?mem=p200602&type=Player&page=bio&list=ByYear#photo|publisher =[[Hockey Hall of Fame]]|accessdate =2007-05-11}}</ref>
:It would ease the pressure of vanity pages. Maybe call it Wikiography? Who's Wiki Who? Any good project needs a good name. [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 00:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Both Bourque and Roy were inducted into the [[Hockey Hall of Fame]]. The only other Avalanche player to be inducted is [[Jari Kurri]] who played the last season of his career with the franchise, yet his jersey does not hang from the rafters at the Pepsi Center.<ref>{{cite web |title =Legends of Hockey - Colorado Avalanche|url =http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/LegendsPlayersByTeam.jsp?team=Colorado+Avalanche|publisher =[[Hockey Hall of Fame]]|accessdate =2007-05-11}}</ref>
== Selling out? ==
 
[[Bryan Trottier]], who was an assistant coach when the Avalanche won their second Stanley Cup in 2001, was inducted to the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1997 (as a player).<ref>{{cite web |title =Legends of Hockey - Trottier, Bryan|url =http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/LegendsMember.jsp?mem=p199702&type=Player&page=bio&list=ByTeam&team=Colorado%20Avalanche#photo|publisher =[[Hockey Hall of Fame]]|accessdate =2007-05-11}}</ref>
Does anyone know of any articles or discussions (here, or at WP:AN) about the risks of WP "selling out" or being exploited (be it by Jimbo or others)? I've seen a project page against the answers.com deal, but there was no real discussion there. Thanks. [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 17:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
:This topic comes up occasionally, see for example the "Wikimedia vs Wikipedia" thread on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29&direction=next&oldid=72044918 this version] of [[WP:VPP]]. I think the bottom line is that although the risk of this happening is not actually zero it's extremely close to zero (and, even if it were to happen, someone else could recreate all the existing content at another website). -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 18:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks. [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 18:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 
==Leaders==
== Times Accessed ==
{{h3|Team captains}}
''Note: This list of team [[Captain (hockey)|captains]] does not include captains from the [[Quebec Nordiques]] ([[WHA]] & [[NHL]]).''
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center"
|-
!rowspan="1"|
!rowspan="1"|Nat
!rowspan="1"|From
!rowspan="1"|To
!colspan="1"|Notes
|-
|align=left|[[Joe Sakic]]
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
|align=left|1995
|align=left|present
|
|-
|align=left|[[Sylvain Lefebvre]]
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
|align=left|1997
|align=left|1998
|Interim
|}
 
{{h3|General Managers}}
On the Ultimate Elder Scrolls Pages, I saw that there was a counter showing how many times a page has been accessed. Is this possible in anyway on wikipedia? [[User:Jabunga|Jabunga]] 08:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
''Note: This list does not include general managers from the [[Quebec Nordiques]] ([[WHA]] & [[NHL]]).''
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!rowspan="1"|
!rowspan="1"|Nat
!rowspan="1"|From
!rowspan="1"|To
|-
|[[Pierre Lacroix]]
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
|1995
|2006
|-
|[[François Giguère|Francois Giguere]]
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
|2006
|present
|}
 
{{h3|Head coaches}}
: Nope. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sup>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|&zeta;]])</sup> 08:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
''Note: This list does not include head coaches from the [[Quebec Nordiques]] ([[WHA]] & [[NHL]]).''
 
<small>Records as of April 9, 2007.</small><ref name="hockeydb"/>
::There is, however, [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~leon/stats/wikicharts/index.php?ns=articles&limit=100&wiki=enwiki wikicharts] which gives this information for the top 100 most-viewed pages. [[User:Tra|Tra]] [[User:Tra/MyComments|(Talk)]] 17:59, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center"
 
|-
== One for the Road: Disambiguation ==
!rowspan="2"|
 
!rowspan="2"|Nat
There are (at least) three separate articles titled "One for the Road" with different capitalizations:<br />
!rowspan="2"|From
[[One for the Road]]<br />
!rowspan="2"|To
[[One For The Road]]<br />
!colspan="7"|Regular Season
[[One for The Road]]<br />
!colspan="4"|Playoffs
 
|-
That's a bit silly, but I have no idea how to fix it. Hopefully there is someone here that can change that.
!G!!W!!L!!T!!OTL!!SOL!!Pct!!G!!W!!L!!Pct
 
|-
KUTGW,<br />
|align=left|[[Marc Crawford]]
[[User:87.68.147.72|87.68.147.72]] 22:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
 
|align=left|[[1995-96 NHL season|1995]]
:What to do about this is discussed at [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation]]. I've moved these to (respectively)<br/>
|align=left|[[1997-98 NHL season|1998]]
::[[One for the Road (play)]]</br/>
||246||135||75||36||—||—||.622||46||29||17||.630
::[[One for the Road (short story)]]</br/>
|-
::[[One For The Road (album)]]</br/>
|align=left|[[Bob Hartley]]
:[[One for the Road]] is now a disambiguation page listing all of them, and the others redirect to the disambiguation page. I also fixed all the links to point to the right article. -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 00:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
 
|align=left|[[1998-99 NHL season|1998]]
::Good job in creating the dab page. I reformatted the line items to more closely match prevailing style guidelines for dab pages, but that's a minor embellishment on your work. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 02:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=left|[[2002-03 NHL season|2002]]
 
||359||193||108||48||10||—||.618||80||49||31||.613
== The vandal wars ==
|-
 
|align=left|[[Tony Granato]]
Usually, I figure that (at least in high-traffic articles) we find and fix vandalism pretty quickly. However, I recently checked [[Uncle Tom's Cabin]], certainly not an unimportant topic; no one had touched it in over 48 hours, but I found all of this to do just by way of fixing blatant vandalism:
|{{flagicon|USA}}
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Uncle_Tom%27s_Cabin&diff=89916635&oldid=89520969]. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 23:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=left|[[2002-03 NHL season|2002]]
:Apart from the "30 books" line, most of that doesn't look like vandalism to me, just poor Wikiformatting. [[User:Lankiveil|Lankiveil]] 05:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC).
|align=left|[[2003-04 NHL season|2004]]
 
||133||72||33||17||11||—||.647||18||9||9||.500
== Present tense ==
|-
 
|align=left|[[Joel Quenneville]]
Just looking around a few articles and I notice that present tense is used far to often. For example looking at the page of [[Iffy Onuora]], in one section it says he was the last [[Gillingham F.C.|Gillingham]] player to score a hat-trick. Problem being if the article isn't checked that statement will stay for year to come. In fact I'm not even sure it is true now. True or not I bet if a Gillingham player does score a hat trick this weekend that statement won't be revised. I think it's a big problem here in Wikipedia. Present tense shouldn't be used. The statement should read, up to (enter date) he was the last player to score a hot trick for Gillingham. [[User:Jimmmmmmmmm|Jimmmmmmmmm]] 23:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
|{{flagicon|Canada}}
:Not an uncommon problem, agreed. I was looking for template tags that specifically address this matter, as I thought they might exist, and the closest might be [[Template:update]] or [[Template:copyedit]]. Personally, I would be more concerned with the verifiability, notability and neutrality of content over grammatical rectitude, but that is coming from someone who is by no means a grammarian. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 02:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
|align=left|[[2005-06 NHL season|2005]]
 
|align=left|present
== [[Mena, Arkansas]] ==
||164||87||61||—||6||10||.579||9||4||5||.444
 
|}
Somebody put a really long section into the [[Mena, Arkansas]] article regarding a local [[Yu-Gi-Oh]] tournament, including multiple external links to its website. Now, I'm not familiar enough with that local area or the Yu-Gi-Oh scene to know for sure if it's notable enough to deserve mention, but certainly this seems to be excessive prominence and detail for what seems to be a very minor event. I removed it but was reverted, and don't want to get into a revert war over it; perhaps somebody else should take a look. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] 02:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
:My opionion ... This is too much as included. A couple of sentences noting that a 'festival' like this exists is more than enough, but the remainder should be off-loaded to it's own article, thence to be judged for survival via standing notability guidelines. The extended passage reads not unlike an advertisement by one of the tourney's organizers. Out-right deletion will lead to a revert war, so work at reducing it to it's notable core and create an article for the rest ... which you might even put into the deletion stream if you feel that is warranted. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 02:33, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
::It doesn't look like the anonymous IP who has obviously written this is happy to see it reduced to a notable core, he is persisting in re-inflating the section with plainly unencyclopaedic detail. Any other ideas other than revert warring on how we can solve this? [[User:Lankiveil|Lankiveil]] 12:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC).
::: Banning always works. --<font face="Verdana">[[User:Elaragirl|<font color="SteelBlue">Elar</font>]][[User:Elaragirl/a|<font color="orange">'''a'''</font>]][[User:Elaragirl/Signatures|<font color="SteelBlue">girl</font>]]<small><sup>[[User_Talk:Elaragirl|Talk]]|[[User:Elaragirl/EditCount|Count]]</sup></small></font> 21:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== Has anyone noticed that Wikipedia doesn't work any more? ==
 
I'm increasingly noticing that Wikipedia is loosing the battle against vandalism. When I started editing here a couple of years ago, there was a FAQ somewhere saying something like
:*''But if anyone can edit, isn't Wikipedia open to vandalism''
:to which the answer was
:*''Sure, Wikipedia is vandalised all the time, but it always gets reverted by the many other editors who want the encyclopedia to improve''
This isn't really true anymore.
 
Last night I went over to look for a photograph that I had added to the [[Guy Fawkes]] article and was only mildly surprised to find that it had disappeared. Whilst checking to see whether someone had had a valid reason to remove it (they hadn't) I trawled through a large number of diffs and found that the article had steadily degraded over the last month. During that time there were still plenty of reverts, but when there were several bad edits in a row it was often only the last bad edit hat got reverted.
 
In the same article I noticed that a whole section on 'language' had disappeared, and a sentence in the opening paragraph which used to read 'a group of Roman Catholic conspirators' had been vandalised to 'a group of Roman Catholic' which was then just corrected for grammar to read 'a group of Roman Catholics'.
 
I think the problem isn't just a rise in anonymous users making random bad edits, but rather an attrition of top flight editors. As a result articles are left with nobody taking a full time active interest in them - some vandalism gets corrected but plenty gets overlooked. It is not feasible (or desireable) for an editor to take ownership of an article and maintain it for the next 20 years, so the system only works if there are enough new good editors coming along who can keep up with the flow of detritus and outweigh the influence of the bad editors. Unfortunately I think the tide started to turn about six months ago.
 
This isn't an isolated case. I've got several thousand articles on my watchlist that I don't watch avidly, but if I compare an article with its version a week ago, many of them show signs of creeping deteriation. Of course it is much harder to repair an article once bad edits begin to build up, you can't just revert to an earlier version.
 
The good news is that the [[Guy Fawkes]] article is still significantly better than it was a year ago. -- [[User:Solipsist|Solipsist]] 09:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:It's strictly anecdotal evidence at this point but I've been having the same feeling. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 09:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
: Yep. Things that worked when we were small won't work as well when we get big. — [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 15:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::IMHO, the most interesting thing about being involved in wikipedia over the years has been watching the change in its highest-level problems (from 'not enough articles' to 'too much crap' to 'increasingly bad incompetence-vs.-editing ratio') and seeing how (or whether) the system adjusts. I think it's possible it will stop being useful in a couple of years, in which case its Google ubiquity will become a serious liability to the Net; but then again, I've thought that for a couple of years, so what do I know? - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 15:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:This is definitely a real problem. A similar thing had happened with the [[Network topology]] article last spring, with half-reverted section blanking vandalism resulting in the article steadily shrinking to less than a third of its original size over the course of about three months. (Since I reverted it in May, there have been over 150 edits to the article. What has changed? [{{fullurl:Network_topology|diff=89451002&oldid=53366327}} Not much].) The only positive side to this is that, once you do notice something like this happening, it's not that hard to go through the history and restore the article to its original glory. But still, there must be hundreds if not thousands of articles like this around, slowly eroding away because no-one is watching carefully enough. Ironically, it's the controversial articles with constant edit warring that never suffer from this problem, since those always have editors who are quick to spot any changes they dislike. What I feel we really need is some kind of a technical solution. Stable versions and/or patrolling might help. So would some way of hiding reverted edits from the edit history. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 16:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
::The term for this problem is ''edit creep.'' One way to deal with edit creep is to check the page history for the last known reliable version and delete harmful changes that occurred during the interim. The German language Wikipedia is experimenting with a ''stable versions'' option that would help address edit creep. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 17:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
: I can only add my own feelings of frustration to the mix. While it is annoying to discover, for example, that a few weeks ago, a count of the then last sixty edits to [[Cape Verde]] showed that all but two were either vandalism or reverting of such, what's worse is the editors who believe that they can add a contradictory statement to the end of an article with no context (and usually no grammar and no capital or space after the previous fulll stop). If I had a dollar for every time I've seen an article that read something like "Smith died of lung cancer in 1958, survived by his wife and two daughters.in 1933 he scored a century for England against austalia." (sic throughout)
 
Honestly, have people who add this type of edit ever read an encyclopaedia before? How difficult is it for them to add the piece of information in the right place in the article? If the answer is "too difficult", don't do it. The sooner wikipedia restricts the ability for anons to edit, the better. --[[User:Roisterer|Roisterer]] 23:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Isn't it all a part of the love/hate that is Wiki? I love that anyone can edit and contribute. I also absolutely hate that <i>anyone</i> can use that edit to misinform, pervert and vandalize. How can we have our cake and eat it too? [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 00:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I think the only thing able to restore Wikipedia's health in the long term is (1) better antivandal bots and (2) running these bots to analyze the entire history of a page, not just watch recent changes. Once a bot finds a historic vandalism that was never reverted, it is feasible to automatically revert it in the current version without affecting the useful edits that were made in the interim.
 
Surely no bots can catch all bad edits. But such bots are getting better all the time, and we can rerun them on page histories again and again to fix what was missed last time. It's reasonable to expect that bot intelligence will keep slowly approaching human intelligence - and once it gets close enough, Wikipedia may be considered officially out of danger. Perhaps the main reason for why [[Artificial intelligence|AI]] hasn't (largely) happened yet is that so far, it's been something from the "would be nice" category. And Wikipedia is now pushing it into the "essential for survival" category. [[User:Trapolator|Trapolator]] 05:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Speaking as a fairly new editor (I guess it's fair to call myself that now), I can say that there is a pretty steep learning curve to getting the hang of editing--especially editing well. Maybe a series of beginner how-to articles should be linked to in strategic places. For example, when editing an article, when looking at a page history or diffs, etc. The articles should be a mix of how to edit well, and why editing is important and the goals behind good editing. Something like an ethics for Wikipedians or how to be a good citizen of Wikipedia. I am sure that not everyone will read the articles, but it might help those who have the "spark" have an easier time becoming good editors. Otherwise, only people with actual "fire" are likely to push through the frustration and become editors. --[[User:Willscrlt|Willscrlt]] 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:: This has the makings of a [[wikipedia:essay]]. Part of me wonders whether the apparent change happened because of the the "No anon IPs can make new articles" decision or if the sheer number of articles is outpacing the number of editors. I have heard that Jimmy Wales has asked that people work more on the quality of existing articles. I also wonder if there has been an increase in vandalism simply due to the increase in publicity for wikipedia in recent months. Maybe we have reached a tipping point of some sort. [[User:MPS|MPS]] 07:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== How do I delete pages ==
 
let me know pls. thx [[User:24.16.19.181|24.16.19.181]] 21:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:See [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy]]. What's the page in question? Also, if it's a page you created and no other editors have added content, put <nowiki>{{db-author}}</nowiki> at the top and an administrator will [[WP:CSD|speedily delete]] it for you. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 22:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Lovingmelanie [[User:24.16.19.181|24.16.19.181]] 22:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== is it acceptible ==
 
Is it acceptible to humorously vandalize pages that are gonna be marked speedy deletion anyway? For example [[lovingmelanie]] {{unsigned|24.16.19.181|22:36, 26 November 2006}}
 
:No. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 22:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== US Authorities on Wikipedia? ==
 
I posed the following question which began a thread on the help desk and someone suggested the village pump would be more appropriate venue for this discussion. So if there are any further thoughts or views on this, I'd appreciate hearing them. I've purposely avoided naming specific editors/administrators in this because it's more concern based on a pattern of practice. This sinking sense I got by starting with the linked article through to its talk page and then uncovering repeated administrative maneuvering and contemptuous and intimidating encounters with other editors and administrators it made me want to stay clear of this article. However, I was worried about the reputation of Wikipedia in general. --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 01:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
----
I was wondering whether the US government is granted special permission to as editors and administrators on Wikipedia? I ask that because many of the articles associated with the [[September 11 attacks|September 11th attacks]] read like press releases from the Whitehouse instead of encyclopedia articles. Also reading through endless discussion pages reveals they look more like usenet newsgroup discussions than discussions about writing wikipedia articles. A core group of administrators and editors pretends to be ignorant of Wikipedia polices and uses they're administrative powers to be disruptive, and intimidate other editors and administrators. They seem to be immune from any disciplinary policies.
 
I thought about jumping into these discussion, but I do not want to get in any trouble with the authorities. From looking at the history any dispute reolution measures look futile. If these articles are only intended for US authorities to edit, why doesn't wikipedia simply place a notification on those articles to indicate such special treatment. I think we're losing good editors and admins who just don't know these articles are off limits. --[[User:68.30.94.147|68.30.94.147]] 22:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
:I think that a better place to discuss this would be the [[WP:AN|Admin's Noticeboard]], the [[WP:VP|village pump]], or even the [http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l mailing list]. -[[User:Royalguard11|Royalguard11]]<small>([[User talk:Royalguard11|Talk]]·[[User talk:Royalguard11/Desk|Desk]]·[[User:Royalguard11/ER|Review Me!]])</small> 22:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:No, no special rights are given to the US authorities. The reason many articles tend to agree with the official line on things is that, well, the official line on things often tends to agree with reality... [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]] | [[User talk:Shimgray|talk]] | 22:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
::No, they are not given those. It would compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia, and its [[WP:NPOV|Neutral-Point-of-View Policy]]. If you think an article too strongly leans toward one direction, you can change the article (explain why in the edit summary), but better yet, bring it up on the talk page, and cite specific examples. -[[User:Patstuart|Patstuart]]<sup>[[User_talk:Patstuart|(talk)]][[Special:contributions/Patstuart|(contribs)]]</sup> 22:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]], you raise a good point. However, I didn't realize Wikipedia had an [[official line]] that tends to match [[reality]]. These are the sme type of bizzarre arguments I see these privileged aditors and administrators make.
::: Royalguarfd11 I will try to take this to the village pump. Thanks for the suggestion. --[[User:68.30.94.147|68.30.94.147]] 23:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::Wikipedia doesn't have any kind of an "official line" on topics - what I mean by this is that when our articles tend to agree with what the White House says, or what Number 10 says, this is because what those people are saying happens to be vaguely right, not because we're letting them control the articles. Much to my astonishment, it does sometimes happen that government spokespeople make statements that describe the real world... [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]] | [[User talk:Shimgray|talk]] | 23:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::: That's true of every press release every issued. They always "make statements that describe the real world" Unfiltered press releases have no place on Wikipedia IMHO. --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 23:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::::...I think you and I are completely talking at cross purposes here. Perhaps I ought to go back to the beginning -
 
:::::::Wikipedia '''does not''' give editorial control to government agencies.
:::::::Wikipedia '''does not''' give special rights to representatives of government agencies.
:::::::Wikipedia '''does not''' take its editorial line from government agencies.
:::::::Wikipedia '''does not''' place articles "off limits" on behalf of government agencies
 
::::::Hope that clarifies things. [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]] | [[User talk:Shimgray|talk]] | 00:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I'll butt in with a hypothetical question of my own here. What if a really high ranking official, say the President, demanded adminship on Wikipedia. Are you obligated to give it to him? '''''<font color="darkblue">[[User:DoomsDay349|Dooms]]</font><font color="lightblue">[[User talk:DoomsDay349|Day349]]</font>''''' 00:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:...why on earth would we be obligated to give it to him? that's a bizzare concept. [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]] | [[User talk:Shimgray|talk]] | 00:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
[[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]], I don't know how you or any editor could be so confident of what you're saying. I mean as a fairly new editor to Wikipedia I would say I would think Wikipedia doesn't grant special permission. However,
 
* when you look at the articles I'm talking about;
 
* when you follow through with the editors and administrators who maintain them; when you see the mockery they make of other editors other administrators and Wikipedia policies;
 
* when you see the selected topics of the articles they preside over;
 
* when you see the contempt they hold for every other editor they encounter (remember these are mostly administrators); and
 
* when you see how it seems to be a coordinated effort on 24-hour watch,
 
it really makes you wonder. I know I said I'd take this to the village pump and I will do that now and stop posting here. --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 01:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
----
end of Held Desk Thread
 
Given the articles that you're discussing,[[September 11 attacks|September 11th attacks]], I suspect the answer is relatively straightforward...completely unrelated to any government activity at all, those articles are heavily edited by U.S. citizens. Americans may be a bit schizophrenic on some topics, but we can largely agree that blowing up our skyscrapers is not something we take kindly to. Any bias in the articles almost certainly relates to this, rather than a semi-conspiratorial government intervention. [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 01:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC) <small> PS - the cabal made me say that!<small>
 
 
:I work closely with the Foundation. I [[m:OTRS|answer their email]], and correspond with all sorts of people on their behalf. I follow most parts of the project's overall operational activity. I know what's going on as well as I can without being actually paid to work here. This isn't my assumption, this isn't my belief, it's a factual statement - there are not any articles "only intended for US authorities to edit", nor do we grant those authorities "special permission" in any way. It's not done from the bottom-up by the community, and it isn't done from the top-down by the Foundation
:In your specific case, these articles attract strong-willed editors - some of whom are admins, some of whom are not - and attract a vast amount of "drive-by" criticism; they represent a carefully developed and fragile consensus on what constitutes a neutral and balanced article. It is inevitable that these articles are watched heavily and that attempts to make major alterations are usually reverted on sight in favour of long meandering debates on the talk page - and that they will attract... how can I best phrase this? ...attract those of our editors who are least capable of playing well with others. Unfortunate, but there you go. It doesn't help that most attempts to alter these pages want heavy and sweeping changes, generally aiming for a completely different tone and conclusion, not something likely to get productive results.
:These "selected topics" aren't selected for heavy watching because they're politically sensitive; being politically sensitive means they get high traffic and thus the heavy watching develops, rather than being externally imposed.
:As to "making a mockery of policies", well, it's often claimed but rarely substantiated. If you have detailed and clear examples of a coterie of users forcing a particular point of view on an article against community consensus, we'd love to hear it so we can do something, but accusations of heavy-handed cabalism are ten a penny. [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray]] | [[User talk:Shimgray|talk]] | 01:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::Also note that conspiracy theories aren't looked upon too highly in Wikipedia, which is the other situation that the IP may be speaking of other than simple pro-American systematic bias. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 01:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: [[User:Shimgray|Shimgray], again I find your confidence on this matter quite disturbing. The example of the September 11 2001 attacks article is a glaring example. That article says precisely what a small group of admins want it to say. Reading through the discussion (including 17 pages of archives), no one has been able to add any balance to the article. It really does read like a press release for the Bush Whitehouse. The admins deciding what this article can say repeatedly take disciplinary measure against anyone they can, while playing fast an loose with any policies open to interpretation. Other unsuspecting administrators have found themselves disciplined just for trying to step in and provide balance.
 
::: I've been participating here long enough to know disputes are common on Wikipedia. But nowhere else on Wikipedia have I encountered such a vitriolic group of administrators attacking other administrators (and even newly registered editors) and with seeming immunity. And I am not speaking of conspiracy theories which I too disdain. I concerned about what's going on here that I worry could be like a cancer that's discouraging and chasing away good administrators and editors just to protect this one group (the Bush Whitehouse) This is about one particular entity in America. It's not particularly a pro-american bias. That's a bit like saying that anything pro General Motors is pro-American (or the opposite). --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 01:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::Ah - so ''that's'' why Karl Rove was too distracted to pay attention to the mid-term elections!
 
Considering that the offices of Congress got collectively blocked for vandalism less than a year ago, I regard it as highly unlikely that any special privilege has been granted with regard to this article. If any credible evidence exists of this thread's alleged exception to site policy, and if an editor who has such evidence fears reprisal, e-mail me off site and I will look into the matter. As a matter of full disclosure I cannot call myself ''neutral'' on this issue: I never edit that family of articles because my nearest relative survived the World Trade Center disaster on 9/11 from a high floor and I joined the armed forces and went to war as a result. However, I am now a private citizen and am not beholden to anyone. As one of roughly 5% of administrators who list themselves at [[:Category:Administrators open to recall]] I welcome scrutiny for fairness from other Wikipedians. My e-mail address is available through my user talk page. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 02:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
: Just to clarify: wouldn't it be better an editor anonymously posted the evidence to your talk page to avoid reprisals? Emailing someone would remove the anonymity. Or are you suggesting those seeking reprisals would be able to get around the anonymous posting? I'm just trying to understand this stuff. --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 02:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::I treat e-mail as confidential (unless of course someone were to admit to child pornography or something like that). Editors are welcome to set up an anonymous e-mail account to contact me or to post to my talk page through a proxy server - it's unclear to me what type of reprisal this editor fears but I'll accommodate anything reasonable. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 02:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Thanks for the clarification. You had brought up fear of repraisals, but I didn't want someone who might be afraid of repraislas to midunderstand the technical issues involved. Obvoiusly we're only talking about Wikipedia here, its not like they're going to face a grand jury or something like that. --[[User:70.8.49.7|70.8.49.7]] 02:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::If the NSA had ''that'' much control over Wikipedia, the first thing they'd do would be to stop people from harassing a certain admin who works for them. And Jimbo has too much of a beard to be working for the government. [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 13:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: NSA!? Jimbo!? You're aiming way too high here. A friend of mine who works near the program says it's just a bunch of grunts like him with no career potential. They shunt these pawns off to this program just to give them something to do. They're only roll is to be as ddisruptive as they can be and make sure Wikipedia says what it's supposed to say. We're not talking Ethan Hunt types heree. These guys couldn't find entrigue in a brothel. [[User:67.167.7.187|67.167.7.187]] 19:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I'm still waiting for the e-mail with the eye-popping evidence. Come on, brighten up my day here...otherwise it's back to [[WP:RFI]] where I get to play Sherlock Holmes over linkspam and Spanish street slang. I'd ''much'' rather blow an NSA operative's cover story. ;) <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 22:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I don't believe that Wikipedia gives any undo authority to government officials, but when I read stories that say the [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6405962 military is tightening rules on military bloggers] and then I read [http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/31/pentagon.pr/index.html the Pentagon creates a rapid response team], and then I look at the discussion pages mentioned here, I start to wonder if US authorities are on Wikipedia. In fact, I'm sure they are, and that isn't really bad. What would be bad is if people, in the government or not, are paid to guard or edit articles.—[[User:Slipgrid|Slipgrid]] 22:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:[http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/31/battle.ideas/index.html Here's] even a better article. It says, "the Pentagon's latest recruits are not soldiers, spies or scientists but spin doctors, bloggers and YouTube DIY filmmakers as it prepares to launch a vigorous new media campaign in support of its ongoing military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan." Now, stopping the troops from blogging is one thing; recruiting people to covertly blog or create YouTube films is another thing. And, if they are doing this, it isn't a far stretch to think they are recruiting, and perhaps paying, people to edit Wikipedia. And, if this is happening, that's a problem. And, if it's happening, then it's would be on the mentioned articles that this would happen. Wacky? I hope! But, when I look at the archived talk pages on the mentioned articles, it seems that some admins are not acting in good faith. I've had some users, who may or may not be admins, tell me that homeland security is monitoring the pages, and I'd end up in Gitmo for suggesting some changes. And, I think if I've ever said anything outlandish, it's only after dealing with admins that are not acting in good faith.—[[User:Slipgrid|Slipgrid]] 22:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::''Show me the diffs.'' Vague speculation and allegations mean nothing. Evidence counts. And it's very easy to tell who's a sysop: just compare the username to [[Wikipedia:List of administrators]]. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 23:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:::If there really are secret plants among us trained to write high-quality Wikipedia articles, get along with people, and conform to Wikipedia policy, I think we should be thanking the US Government and asking them to send more over. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 23:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:::: I guess you didn't look at the article's in question. They're history and talk pages do not show high-quality Wikipedia writters conforming to Wikipedia policies and getting along with others. Just a cursory glance of these articles would show quite the opposite. And it's not easily apparant how many of these disruptive editors are administrators, but if you follow through on that it turns out ther's a lot of them. Yet most of the time they act like: &lt;prancing around like a sissy&gt; "Wikipedia policies... Oh dear I didn't know Wikipedia had policies. &lt;/prancing around like a sissy &gt; Basically these administrators act like they never read the policies before.. I've senn them knowingly and defiantly add liebe3lous material to biographies of living persons. They just don't give a shit because sites like Wikipedia are a threat to national security in their way of thinking.. --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 02:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Wow! the article that [[User:Slipgrid|Slipgrid]] points to is very disconcerting. I can just imagine the profile of someone they might recruit for that. Some patsy who thought the answer to these attacks was to join the military to fight for Haliburton in Afghanistan. Clearly such a person wouldn't have the skills to think through serious intelligence matters,, but they'd be perfect for an assignment like this. Wikipedia should really take steps to prevent this sort of attack. Its integrity cannot withstand an attack like this..--[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 00:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:22 hours after my call for evidence I still haven't received one darn thing. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 01:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
: All I can say is i'm devestarted. this is not supposed to happen :=( --[[User:12.2.23.146|12.2.23.146]] 01:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:: The evidence is right above in the posts above. Are you just plugging your ears and saying "I'm not listening" --[[User:67.37.179.61|67.37.179.61]] 03:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I would add to this discussion that I had been wondering how such behavior could continue unchecked for so long. This would be a good explanation. I've been trying to think of others but so far I draw a blank. I know some may say that's just how a decentered, democratic site works, but that wouldn't explain how so many disruptive editors could also rise to administrator positions. Any other thoughts about explanations? --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 02:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
After having read oodles of postings to innumerable web forums, over the years, I'm only surprised when people take a rational, moderate, open-minded approach to any discussion on any subject. And some years ago Forbes (I think) published an article about corporate America paying folks to create and maintain stoogeblogs to battle criticisms from indie blogs, and since the government lately seems to be mostly about spin, rather than action, in the real world, as opposed to the fake world of television, I'm hardly surprised to hear suspicions raised about government employees sneaking in and editing things...especially since ''perception is reality.'' [[User:Cryptonymius|Cryptonymius]] 04:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
I'm just reading through this stuff starting from [[September_11%2C_2001_attacks]] and just following through from one link to the next. Read the talk pages of these editors. Read the administrative actions they've taken. There's so much questionable behavior it's stunning. Right now there's a group of them going after User:Seabhcan. These repeated frivilous administrative actions typically involve the same group of editors/admins and just seems to be playing the system without regard driving away decent editors or fueling animosity. No good will or assumptions of good faith whatsoever. Even if they aren't paid professionals they're certainly overtaxing the administrative processes of the wiki. When you see how they engage editors before taking administrative it's stern and not quite civil, but almost. But from the pattern, as anon mentioned, you can see how they just seemt to be trying to evoke a personal attacks or violations of the 3rr from those they disagree with. Once they have these personal attacks and 3rr violations in hand they begin more frivilous disciplinary pursuits. It definitely looks like a full-time gig for these folks considering hos much time they devote to the wiki. It's astonishing. At first I thought they just didn't no how to compromise on the talk pages, but when you keep following through and it looks really bad. This is not good. It's hard to tell how many articles have been tainted by this. And sorting through all this evidence would take a full-time staff. --[[User:67.37.179.61|67.37.179.61]] 04:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:Why don't you create an account? It's hard to follow your points with difference anonymous IP's. --[[User:Tbeatty|Tbeatty]] 04:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::Yah...seriously...if there are paid webspammers, it would be the conspiracy theorists trying to misuse Wikipedia to promote pet theories about the events of 9/11. They have more incentive for profit by being able to get their word out here and surely Wiki isn't considered a threat by the U.S. Government as a whole...all higher level governement officials are far more worried about whistle blowers and the press and than the "offical government" facts related to 9/11 being severely tested by misrepresentations in a Wikipedia article. Besides, the little pet theories do have an article here...[[9/11 conspiracy theories]]...and their ripoff books and other spam advertising are listed at the bottom of that article. Buyer beware.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 05:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Um, looking at the archives, I think you, MONGO, are one of the people they are talking about. You are the first to post on this topic to point the finger the other way. Your post above reflects your post on the talk pages in question. You admit their is a large number of people with a different point of view, but you allow the pages to call people who question the official White House version of events anti-semitic, which isn't the case. You claim to know what "higher level governement officals (sic)" are thinking. You are so certain that people with evidence to the contrary, that is document in the main stream press, are "webspammers" working for profit, that you respond to their good faith request for simple and basic edits to move the articles to a NPOV with nothing more than a "No Thanks." You may be some of the problem.—[[User:72.49.187.83|72.49.187.83]] 07:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Mongo, you make a good point. This would be a problem no matter who was doing it. However, the evidence points to people pushing a very pro Whitehouse position. And certainly high government officials have much more pressing matters to attend to. However, as someone said above,. these are not high government officials, but some sort of hardly tie their own shoes types of grunts involved. The US military budget is something like $1 trillion dollars (best spoiken with Dr. Evil's voice). Somewhere I read recently, this budget was greater than all other military budgets worldwide cobined. Surely that hires a lot of thugs at minimum wage. Take a look at the articles Slipgrid posted. They're quite telling.. --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 05:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Simply not likely...there have been times that we are well aware of that staffers have edited articles about U.S. Representatives and Senators, but the "need" for a disinformation campaign regarding the events of 9/11 seems really just more of the type of thing a conspiracy theorist would be prone to believe. The feds don't give a hoot about Wikipedia as a whole, though individual persons may sometimes be very worried about misrepresentations in their biographies. In all seriousness, there is little profit margin for the feds to hire people to defend the improperly labelled "government story" on wikipedia, whereby, with books to sell and conferences to charges tickets to, the 9/11 Truth Movement and related entities do have a potential profit realization that may be enhanced by being seen as "mainstream" as far as the worlds largest web based encyclopedia is concerned.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 08:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::::Simply not likely, but [http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/31/battle.ideas/index.html support by evidence in the mainstream press], as well as evidence on the discussion pages, as well as your actions. Where's the evidence to support your conspiracy theory?←[[User:72.49.187.83|72.49.187.83]] 10:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:Cplot says, "the US military budget is something like $1 trillion dollars (best spoiken with Dr. Evil's voice)." But on September 10, 2001, [http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010910-secdef.html Donald Rumsfeld said] that "according to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions." I don't believe that should go in the article, but a section of foreknowledge should be part of the article. Users have asked for that for many months.—[[User:72.49.187.83|72.49.187.83]] 07:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: Mongo, you're really not helping make your case. This idea that the hundreds of billions of dollars Haliburton and other defense contracts have made off the war on terror is "nothing compared to what these conspiracy theroists make selling their books and DVDs" is a talking point used on Fox News. Fox News reporters have revealed off camera that these talking-points come from the Whitehouse. I've seen you use this same talking-point numerous times. It's thoroughly lauphable. Aren't you a little embarrased to make such claims? BTW, I think we should try to avoid rehashing discussion of the article here at the village pump. --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 09:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:::: Also Mongo, throughout the debates you have defined "conspiracy theory" as anything that disagrees with the Bush administration. That's quite telling in my view. --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 18:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Please provide some specific edits that you think were made by US authorities...either article edits or talk page edits. If you can't do that then this is all a waste of time. The path of the righteous is followed by those that talk about edits and not editors. Raising suspicions of this kind and not providing any evidence is the taking bad faith to it's extreme. [[User:Rx StrangeLove|Rx StrangeLove]] 21:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: The evidence has been pointed to, again and agin in this post. Talk about bad faith. You don't even bother to looki n to it. It's just not worth your truble I guess. --[[User:70.8.56.126|70.8.56.126]] 01:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::: I now see, they're vageuly admiting to it and just saying "so what. as long as we follow the rules" which is specifically what's at issue. They're using the rules to bully other editors and admins with ridiculous and repeated disciplinary actions. I thought it was considered cowardly around here to turn to disciplinary action everytime someone says the slightes disagreeable statement. So it's not even conjecture at this point. There's a group of admins who blieve it would be OK if paid US authorities were disrupting articles, intimidating editors and other administrators and basically lower the standards of Wikipedia in general. Now they're welcome to their opinions, but I think maybe this is a discussion that should be made much more explicit. What policies should exist around government authorities (from any government), pushing a specific agenda onto Wikipedia in a very disruptive way? --[[User:70.8.56.126|70.8.56.126]] 01:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::::::No one's pointed to a single edit to any article/talk page in this section, until someone shows some some specific edits that are done by suspected US authorities there's nothing here. And just to repeat something, anyone is allowed to edit here as long as they stay within policy. In the meantime point out something specific or stop making these accusations. [[User:Rx StrangeLove|Rx StrangeLove]] 02:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Omegatron is right: ''ROBOTS ARE CLEARLY SUPERIOR!!!'' [[User:Cryptonymius|Cryptonymius]] 06:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
You want evidence take a look at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29&oldid=90986574#Federal_Authorities_are_now_blocking_any_IP_discussing_their_disruption_of_Wikipedia history] of the village pump. You'll find these messages deleted across every category of the village pump. Check the log, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.30.87.114 of the IP] reporting the Feds inappropriate inovlement and you find it is now [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.30.87.114 blocked]. This one will likely be blocked now too. And all that IP did was post to the village pump something that should concern every legitiimate member of the Wikipedia community. There's clear evidence that something is going on here. Sure this evidence either shows inapprorpriate involvement of Federal Authoritieis or it could just be a prank by some editors and administrators trying to fuel "conspiracy theories": so they make it look like that by deleting "controversial" claims. If so then I'm likely in on it too. However, I have knowledge that it's the former (inappropriate Federal involvement)), but even if it's only a prank, it's inappropriate behavior. Something should be done about it. --[[User:70.8.132.79|70.8.132.79]] 21:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 
=== Some targetted editors ===
67.37.179.61 brought up User:Seabhcan as one of the targets of these admins. Tom Harrison also pointed me to User:Zen-master as another casualty of these friviolous disciplinary measures. Maybe Village Pump isn't the place for this, but perhaps we could set aside another page to compile the issues together. That way If anyone knew how to reach these lost editors, they could be encouraged to reeturn and appeal or simply return if they were just frustrated away. Obviously it takes a carfeul reexamination of each disciplinary case to see if it fits in this pattern. I don't pretend to know about these cases in extreme detail. But from a first look at them they seem to fit the pattern..
 
As somewhat of a novice here I had been reading blog rants against Wikipedia complaining it doesn't stand up to its mission and my first thought was: you just don't understand how it works. After reading through this stuff , though I'm thinking: maybe this seemingly crazed blog ratner was one of those editors targetted --[[User:Cplot|Cplot]] 06:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC).
 
:: I guess CPlot should be added to this list of targeted editors. He now faces an indefinite block without any clear allegations. I should also note that he was one of the only ones who did not post to this thread anonymously: aside from Federal agents (Clowns) pathetically trying to redirect the discussion. They're tactics are so transparrent. Is this some kind of junior high recruitment? program? --[[User:70.8.150.242|70.8.150.242]] 21:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
This is why you can't win against conspiracy theorists: If you oppose them, you're part of the conspiracy. If you don't oppose them, you become part of the "silent majority" that they claim to represent. If you prove them wrong, they just make more junk up to explain away your objections and claim you're repressing The Truth(tm)! CPlot is being blocked for disruptive behaviour and paranoid accusations towards other editors. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 21:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== I am being bullied by admin [[User:FisherQueen]] ==
 
I am being bullied and I dont like it. First, this person bullied me into making me feel that my article are rubbish and the comments and feedback I got are not very nice. Please talk to me on my talkpage. Thanks --[[User:Hammersmith123|Hammersmith123]] 12:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
*FisherQueen is not an admin. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 12:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
Ok I didnt know that, but otherwise, I am being bullied by this user. --[[User:Hammersmith123|Hammersmith123]] 12:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
* You create articles like "The Effects of Eyesight while consuming Bacon" and then consider FisherQueen's (under the circumstances) polite warnings about vandalism bullying? You're not getting any sympathy here. --[[User:Roisterer|Roisterer]] 12:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::[[User:Hammersmith123]] has been indefinitely blocked as a vandal-only account. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 13:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
 
== I am also being Bullied by User:FisherQueen ==
 
He makes my articles feel rubbish. Taking the mick out of anything i do and i dont seem to be the only one complaing. I have no connection with Hammersmith123 but he's absoloutly right. {{unsigned|Stone not Wood house}}
 
: Either you are a sockpuppet - or you've had your Wikipedia account for less than 24 hours. Either way, it's a bit premature to be complaining about FisherQueen. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] 22:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== Possible vandalism ==
 
On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus, there's a jpeg, Human_Feces.jpg, exactly what it says. Not surprisingly, it doesn't fit its caption. Not sure how else to report it - and the possibility that this may have been done to other pages -, so I've done it here.
[[User:82.138.216.205|82.138.216.205]] 21:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Barbara Sutton
 
:The vandalism has been reverted, and the perpatrator blocked. Thanks very much for bringing this to our attention. Also, note that you can revert vandalism yourself by selecting the previous, unvandalised, version in the article's Edit History, then Saving it. Thanks again : ) [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 22:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== What's the proper way to request people to help an Editor Review? ==
 
I admit I have one up for review, but I just realized that this otherwise great idea (general input and/or RfA pre-screening) isn't getting a whole lot of help. Would it be proper to start placing some requests on a few talk pages, or should I do that to people who regularly vote on RfAs? --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 06:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== History of deleted articles ==
 
Why is it that the history of deleted articles is removed too? It seems like no matter what, history should be preserved. [[User:Goaty|Goaty]] 07:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::Deleted articles are often deleted because they're false, defamatory, offensive, or otherwise libelous, which is why the history is hidden (to non-admins). [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 08:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== Disturbing pictures. ==
 
I was trying to read the section on gangreen, but was immediately turned off by the images. Although they do fit well into the article, is there any chance wikipedia could have a feature that lets disturbing/graphic images be uncovered by a mouse click? To be quite honest I'm happy to read article on surgery without having to see surgical gore :o/ {{unsigned|Swyp}}
 
:But then who would say what is "disturbing"? Surgery? A penis? Muhammad? I'm afraid this would cause more problems than it would solve. What you can do is turn all images off on your browser. [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 13:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:Some sites allow ALL images to be turned off, through an option either in the users profile or with a cookie (I like the first better). Some people prefer plain text browsing. -[[User:Sthomson06|sthomson]] 16:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Linkimage, which puts the image one click away from the article's main page, has been used very succesfully in articles containing graphic images of sex, sexual organs, and occassionly, human corpses. While linkimage is an excellent compromise for images that might be considered "disturbing", there hasn't been any consensus to apply it to images in medical articles. [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 16:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Hmm, I didn't know about [[Template:Linkimage]]; interesting. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 05:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:Also, many browsers provide the option of turning off automated image downloads, though this would be a generally undesirable personal shield to have to erect. This option was originally designed to facilitate rendering of graphics-heavy pages over slow internet connections. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 05:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
== My Complaint Letter to Wikipedia ==
 
[[User:Martenal0001|This is my complaint]].
Thank You --[[User:Martenal0001|Martenal0001]] 11:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:Ignoring for the nonce the supercilious verbage in the above discourse (diatribe?), I might suggest that you take a gander at [[Wikipedia talk:Expert retention]], a more [[WP:CIVIL]] attempt at discussion; formulation of suggested recourse; and co-operative amongst concerned editors. In addition, if Wikipedia is not to your liking, perhaps you may wish to [[m:Right to vanish|look elsewhere]] for ways in which to eke out your continued existence. In any case, I do wish you a plethora of brightly-hued sunrises : ) - [[User:Jc37|jc37]] 11:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Does anyone mind if I move this to Martena'a userspace and replace it with a link? By the way, Martena, the most effective way of writing an essay is to structure the language around the ideas, not the other way around... [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 12:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Considering that the account would seem to have been created for just this message, I think moving it to the user's userpage would be a good idea (and feel free to delete/not bother to move my comment). We may also wish to consider the user's latest two edits, for further action. - [[User:Jc37|jc37]] 13:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:::: You do realize, of course, that once you remove all the highblown, badly over-idomized, and histronically grandeloquent phrasing that this message basically says "Waaah! You're bad!" I suggest the user spend several hours learning [[Simple English]] and learning to say what he means instead of demonstrating his ownership of a thesaurus. --<font face="Verdana">[[User:Elaragirl|<font color="SteelBlue">Elar</font>]][[User:Elaragirl/a|<font color="orange">'''a'''</font>]][[User:Elaragirl/Signatures|<font color="SteelBlue">girl</font>]]<small><sup>[[User_Talk:Elaragirl|Talk]]|[[User:Elaragirl/EditCount|Count]]</sup></small></font> 14:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::::: You do realize, of course, that his essay is a joke - probably created by a complaint letter generator? [[User:131.107.0.73|131.107.0.73]] 23:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:Done. [[User_talk:Yandman|<font color="red">'''yandman'''</font>]] 14:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Erm, this looks like someone was playing with the [http://www.pakin.org/complaint/ Complaint Generator] again. These seem to be popping up in a few places right now; the hallmark would be huge amounts of verbosity and absolutely no meaning, message or sense. [[User:Tony Fox|Tony Fox]] <small>[[User_talk:Tony Fox|(arf!)]]</small> 17:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:::I stopped halfway through the first paragraph. Why bother, when they obviously are bloviating without any other purpose? [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|(talk)]] 21:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== [[West_Cheshire_College]] ==
 
Hey, I'm not sure where else to post this, so I came here. Could some of you guys add [[West_Cheshire_College]] to your watchlist? There's been unchecked slander sitting on the page since early July, and the author has continuously returned to add more. I'm fairly sure he's not done yet. Thanks. -[[User:Patstuart|Patstuart]]<sup>[[User_talk:Patstuart|(talk)]][[Special:contributions/Patstuart|(contribs)]]</sup> 06:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks for the heads-up. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 15:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
== Anyone up for an interview? ==
 
I need to write an "ethnographic reasearch essay" for my university english course.
I thought wikipedia would make a great paper, but I need someone to interview...
 
If there are any takers, just email me and I'll send you a small list of questions.
 
Thanks!
 
[[User:ColinDC|ColinDC]] 03:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
 
==User complaint about [[History of erotic depictions]] on main page==
I was thoroughly disappointed to see the Wikipedia main article today on 'History of Eroticism'. The links that the alleged 'scientific' article brazenly provided leads one to explicit pornographic pictures!
What were the editors thinking??? Is this to improve your readership?
 
I always tell children to use Wikipedia for the wealth of knowledge it provided. But unfortunately one has to be on guard now.
The sad thing is Even Net Nanny would not stop displaying such pages since they are coming from the trusted Wikipedia. {{unsigned|205.173.58.13|05:30, 30 November 2006}}
 
:Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT|not]] censored. If you wish for your children to not encounter such things, they should probably not be allowed on the internet unsupervised at all. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 21:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::Wikipedia is definately not safe for children, nor did I ever think it was. I encourage my kids to use it for research all the time, but only with me supervising. Perhaps check the featured article of the day from now before letting your students use it on any given day? &mdash; [[User:Frecklefoot|Frecklefoot]] | [[User talk:Frecklefoot|Talk]] 21:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
::: It's important that we retain the right do this kind of thing if we have the need - but I think we should be more circumspect about how we use that privilage. So - yeah - Wikipedia needs to have the freedom to write about whatever we want and publish it without people hassling us about age-appropriateness or censorship. We have that freedom - and if we need to use that power for the good of the encyclopedia - we can certainly use it. However, we didn't need to put this kind of thing onto the front page - and we shouldn't have done so because it will definitely upset a good fraction of our readership - and that will harm us in the long run. It's not like we don't have plenty of other FA's to put there. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] 23:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 
:To me, the main page of any Website, not just Wikipedia, should remain appropriate for all ages. I saw the article, and the picture attached to the article was a tasteful depiction of naked people from antiquity. It was not at all offensive to me, but then I see nothing wrong with taking children to see classic works of art in museums, even if they contain nudity. It's a matter of opinion and taste. The problem is that by placing articles like that on the main page, parents are not given a choice about whether they feel it is in their children's best interest to see the articles or not. They are exposed to it regardless. While I oppose censorship, I do think that people should be given the option of viewing controversial issues or not. And Eroticism is not the only controversial topic that should probably be kept off the front page. The tricky thing is trying to strike a balance, because once you say one topic is inappropriate, all topics people ovject to come under scrutiny. There is no perfect solution, but the people selecting main page topics could probably have made a better choice for yesterday. --[[User:Willscrlt|Willscrlt]] 01:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::The main page ''was'' appropriate for all ages. The featured article may not have been, but the main page was kept clean. Anyone who saw the objectionable content knew exactly what they were reading an article on, and chose to view it. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 02:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:::I'm not familiar with the details of filtering software, but don't most "concerned" parents and public school libraries make use of such things and adjust the threshold to suit their comfort level? It seems a bit unbalanced to let concerns about children drive a debate about an encyclopedia. What the children view is the responsibilty of the parents, however they choose to handle it. Many reasonable parents don't regard this material as problematic at all, so it's clearly a personal and very subjective value. [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 02:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
::::As [[User:205.173.58.13|205.173.58.13]] pointed out, many filtering programs filter exclusively based on the ___domain name, not the content of individual pages. I'm sure you can understand how trying to keep track of all the pages at [[WP]] could be a nearly impossible task for any filtering product. More sophisticated filtering programs also check contextually, but the article might still have passed unnoticed. I did not mean to imply that I felt the main page was inappropriate for children, and I agree with [[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] that people who visited the article should have known what they were about to see. My comment was more to point out that with the millions of articles available, why could the topic selectors not have picked a different topic. I am sure a kid-friendly welcome page like Yahoo's Yahooligans along with a filtered search engine has been discussed before. This would be a good example of how that type of page could be helpful. --[[User:Willscrlt|Willscrlt]] 03:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
::I'm with tjstrf - there was one image on the main page, a graphic from a Roman fresco that's no different from what tourists giggle at in Pompeii. There are certainly more explicit images on that page, but that required a click-through. There is a line somewhere - would a porn-star bio really be an appropriate article to feature? - but I think this one was on the safe side of it. | [[User:MrDarcy|Mr. Darcy]] <small>[[User talk:MrDarcy|talk]]</small> 03:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
:::Porn star bios of the featured level would almost certainly involve porn stars with substantial notability outside of porn, so it probably wouldn't be as big an issue as you suggest. A more interesting question would be if a porn star bio could be a DYK? feature. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 03:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:::: It isn't a priori clear to me why [[Jenna Jameson]] couldn't eventually get featured. There's obviously enough material about her to make it feasible. I'll resist making any puns on the topic although they come readily to mind. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 04:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::::: Dammit! That wasn't deliberate! [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 04:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::::::LMAO! It's just going to happen, no matter how ''hard'' you try...[[User:Doc Tropics|Doc ]] <font color ="green">[[User talk:Doc Tropics|Tropics]]</font > 04:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::::::: Oh, but its so easy...[[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 05:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::::::::You'll notice that there actually aren't any pictures in that article which could be inappropriate for minors. Like I said, it wouldn't be as big a problem as you might think. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 05:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
:::::::::I'm sorry, but that depends upon your point-of-view. I agree with you, personally, but I'm thinking in terms of some of the parents I've known and their proclivities with respect to what they would want their children exposed to. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 05:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:It is pretty clear to me that this article being a featured article will make its way into the popular press as something like 'Wikipedia's encyclopedic treatment of porn' and will be misinterpreted by many as it was by the original poster in this thread. The statement "alleged scientific article" says it all, frankly; many many people in the general population believe that erotica and science are like oil and water - 'if it has to do with sex how could it possibly have any intellectual or scientific value'. I'm wondering if we (articulate wikipedians, that is) are prepared to defend the article, its ilk and the principles that abet its existence in op ed pieces in the newspapers where the inevitable news-for-shock-value will appear. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''[[User talk:Ceyockey|talk to me]]''</small>) 04:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:The argument that parents should be careful about what their children see online is a valid one - unsupervised browsing is not something a responsible parent is going to allow small children to do - no more than you'd want them walking through the worst parts of a city at night. I consider myself a responsible parent - and I'm not prissy. (I don't supervise my son who is now 15 - and I know damned well from his browser logs that he visits "certain sites" that I might maybe would have stopped him from going to...but I'm broad-minded - so I pretend not to notice). But let's think about a 4 or 5 year old child. In this case even the closest parental supervision wouldn't have worked. Let's work through the most likely scenario:
 
: So let us suppose that I don't want my 4 year old asking: "Why that lady is sitting on that man's lap and what happened to all of their clothes?"...that's NOT an unreasonable thing for me to wish to avoid...trust me - it's embarrasing to have to answer that question at that age. But I'm a good parent - and I'm going to supervise my little kid so he/she doesn't click on something inappropriate...so I sit with my little kid in front of a blank browser window. Little child says "Daddy - can we read about Elephants?" - "Sure! Let's go to Wikipedia and type in 'Elephants' at the search window."..."Now let me just blindfold you because I don't know what'll be on the front page today"...
 
: Surely we can all agree that this should NOT be necessary. I'm happy to sit with my kid and make sure they don't click on links to "Porn Star" or something - I'm happy to treat the Internet as a dangerous place where you don't want your kid to go unsupervised. But I really ought to be able to visit the Wikipedia front page without having to worry. I don't in the slightest bit mind that this article exists - it definitely SHOULD exist - it's a really well written and illustrated piece and it's worthy of FA status. But it doesn't have to be featured on the front page...really, truly...it's not necessary. We *WANT* children to read Wikipedia - it's the best site on the entire Internet for them - they can ask any question - ask for a picture of anything - and we can provide it for them - with appropriate supervision, sure. But there shouldn't be surprises like this. If you are heading into dubious terratory - you need fair warning - and putting it right there on the very top of the front page is a nasty surprise that no parent, even one who is trying hard to be careful, could have avoided. You can't duck out of it by demanding that parents take more care. It was a stupid, unthinking decision...period. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] 05:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
::No, we can't agree there. From a merit perspective it's a scholarly subject, far more traditionally encyclopedic than a front page article of [[Bulbasaur]]. I've seen literally dozens of articles on eroticism in scientific (archaelogical) journals, nary a one on [[Marilyn Manson]]. If the front page picture had been a high resolution shot of some porn stars bust, then I agree we might have a small problem, but the picture was sufficiently historic to meet any standard of encyclopedic propriety, and indeed quite small in its presentation on the front page. Anyone who decides to murder us in the press for that particular article will have their work cut out for them if they wish to assault its scholarly integrity or encyclopedic worthiness. Call me if [[autofellatio]] becomes the front page article. --[[User:tjstrf|tjstrf]] <small>[[User talk:Tjstrf|talk]]</small> 06:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
:The Main Page also contains a picture of a swastika at the moment, which I'm sure would offend some people. Wikipedia is not censored. Moreover, the featured article's Main Page image was quite tame and unobjectionable - if you click the featured article, which is called "history of erotic depictions", you can quite reasonably expect to see erotic depictions. The contributors went out of their way to hide some of them when it was totally blindingly obvious anyway that they'd be there - I think the images should have been displayed inline. Use some common sense here. [[User:Deco|Deco]] 05:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::It's quite simple: a fifteen-year-old son is the parents' responsibility; a four-year-old child is the parents' responsibility. Wikipedia is getting blocked in Tunisia - in China - and otherwise rational Wikipedians want to ''validate'' the principle of censorship? [[WP:NOT|No ''no'' '''no''']]. What part of that is unclear? <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charg]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0c0">e!</span>]]''</sup></font> 05:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 
==See also==
Two responses to this "controversy". 1) The article is quite an academic, NPOV treatment of the subject. It is definately worthy of featured status. 2) I am speaking as a parent: Censorship is not the solution to the wish of some people to abdicate their responsibility as parents. Merely because you don't ''want'' to have to supervise your children while they do ''Activty XXX'' does not mean that they don't need supervision. Watch your children as they use the internet if you care about them viewing objectionable content. They are children. They need supervision. There is a word for people that don't need this kind of supervision. They are called "adults". --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron]][[User:Jayron32/Esperanza|<span style="color:#00FF00;">32</span>]] 06:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*[[List of Colorado Avalanche players]]
*[[Head Coaches of the Colorado Avalanche]]
*[[Quebec Nordiques]]
*[[List of NHL players]]
*[[List of NHL seasons]]
*[[List of Stanley Cup champions]]
 
==References==
== Let's all condemn the hell out of Chinese Wikipedia editors ==
{{h4|General}}
<div class="references-small">
* {{cite web|url=http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/teamseasons.php?tid=690|title=Colorado Avalanche season statistics and records|publisher=The Internet Hockey Database|accessdate=2007-03-25}}
</div>
 
{{h4|Footnotes}}
[http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/29/news/wiki.php] What horrifying appeasers.
<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
<references/></div>
 
==External links==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lotsofissues lots of issues] | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lotsofissues&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new leave me a message] 08:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*[http://www.coloradoavalanche.com/ Official website of the Colorado Avalanche]
*[http://www.avalanchedb.com/index.htm Largest Colorado Avalanche Database]
 
{{start box}}
Lets just condem communism in general, as a load of bullshit
{{succession box | before = [[New Jersey Devils]] | title = [[Stanley Cup]] Champions | years = [[1995-96 NHL season|1995-96]] | after = [[Detroit Red Wings]]}}
{{succession box | before = [[New Jersey Devils]] | title = [[Stanley Cup]] Champions | years = [[2000-01 NHL season|2000-01]] | after = [[Detroit Red Wings]]}}
{{end box}}
 
{{Colorado Avalanche}}
[[User:The Bread|<font color ="red">'''†he Bread'''</font>]] 08:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
{{NHL}}
{{Colorado Sports}}
 
[[Category:Colorado Avalanche| ]]
== Wikipedia:Template locations ==
[[Category:Quebec Nordiques]]
[[Category:Sports clubs established in 1995]]
 
[[be-x-old:Каларада Эвеланш]]
What happened to the [[Wikipedia:Template locations]] project page? I see this page has been changed for the last time in July 2006. Should it be marked as historical? BTW, someone should close the debates there. --[[User:Eleassar|'''Eleassar''']] <sup>[[User talk:Eleassar|my talk]]</sup> 10:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[[bg:Колорадо Авеланш]]
[[cs:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[da:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[de:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[fr:Avalanche du Colorado]]
[[hr:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[lv:Kolorādo "Avalanche"]]
[[nl:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[ja:コロラド・アバランチ]]
[[no:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[pl:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[pt:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[ru:Колорадо Эвеланш]]
[[sk:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[sh:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[fi:Colorado Avalanche]]
[[sv:Colorado Avalanche]]