This category is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles
I propose that a separate category for Calgary Cowboy (WHA) players be allowed to stay. The current practice of lumping together the players from three different teams (Philadelphia Blazers, Vancouver Blazers, and Calgary Cowboys) does little to help a person research the players from each city-placed franchise. Please discuss to pros and cons of my proposal. Dolovis (talk) 22:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please leave articles as they are and discuss. Thank you for actually posting a message, but continuing to revert is still edit waring. -DJSasso (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a comment to make to me, please post it to your or mine talk page (we have posted much there already). This is the place to discuss the merits of a new category; it is not the place to comment on my previous edits (or your reverts of those edits). But since you raised it in this forum, I must point out that I was following the principles of Wikipedia:Be bold when I created the category and then added the 63 players into it. But it you who then, without discussion, started to revert ALL of my edits. You did not even make an attempt to first discuss closing down the new category that I created. As you have pointed out above, yes, I have started the discussion, but you started the edit war. Let the discussion begin...Dolovis (talk) 23:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BRD Says you are bold. Then I am to Revert. And then if you have an issue you discuss. You started the edit war when you skipped the discussion and reverted my revert. I made the comment here because you went and started reverting more after you posted this message. -DJSasso (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And now you are splitting out the Vancouver Blazers players. Please wait for the discussion to end as obviously creation of that category also reflects on the decision here. -DJSasso (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would favour a split as well, for pretty much the same reason why we've split almost every other franchise. Resolute 23:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A agree with Resolute... if we've done it everywhere else, then it should be here too. DMighton (talk) 00:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just as Kansas City Scouts and Colorado Rockies players are not lumped in with New Jersey Devils players, so too should the franchises be split. Anthony(talk) 00:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Have to say I'm surprised there isn't a seperate category already. Seems like something we would have done before. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I have no problem with the split myself, I just wanted it discussed because it involves 100s of pages. And I recall a discussion about the fact that we should keep all 3 together since they were in each city 2 years or less. But it was a very long time ago. Before we were firmly for splitting every team page I think. -DJSasso (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I recall, that discussion occurred even after we split most other pages, it was just argued that three cities in five years didn't leave much content. I think I pretty much proved that wrong when I split out Calgary Cowboys. Incidentally, I am going to CfD this category so as to have it renamed to match the parent article. Resolute 01:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I was thinking about renaming it if people wanted it split so that sounds good to me. -DJSasso (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the team Calgary Cowboys (AJHL), so to disambiguate the Categories for players, I suggest leaving the Category as "Category:Calgary Cowboys (WHA) players" and moving the main article to "Calgary Cowboys (WHA)". Dolovis (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The main article should be where it is now, and this category to follow. I don't know if the AJHL team had any notable alumni such to warrant a category of its own. If it was only one or two, they can go into Category:Alberta Junior Hockey League players. If it was enough for a category, that would be created as Category:Calgary Cowboys (AJHL) alumni. In general, category trees should mimic the name of the main article, and articles that are clearly the primary topic do not require disambiguation in the title. Resolute 16:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Split'er 3-ways (Calgary Cowboys, Philadelphia Blazers & Vancouver Blazers). Dolovis, please bring any future concerns to WP:HOCKEY - less dramatic that way. GoodDay (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So it looks like we have a consensus that the new Category "Calgary Cowboys (WHA) players" that I created will be allowed to stay. And it is kind of User:Djsasso to offer to revert all of my edits that he reversed to stock the category with 63 players. And I am to assume that it is now okay to continue to create the new categories for the Philadelphia and Vancover Blazers too? Dolovis (talk) 16:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Generally a discussion waits a few days to make sure everyone has their say. But yes I can run AWB through all the players and move them as needed when the discussion is closed. -DJSasso (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who created a few of the articles in the category, it never made sense to me why the New Jersey Knights, New York Raiders, and New York Golden Blades were separated, along with most other teams in the WHA that re-located, but the Cowboys and Blazers weren't. Patken4 (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
