Talk:2016 Stanley Cup Finals

RFC: Stanley Cup Finals vs. Final[edit]

Consensus is for the status quo, with the article titles still having the "S" at the end. There is no consensus at this time to rename the articles. Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Shall the titles of the all the Stanley Cup series articles keep "FinalS", with an "S" at the end, or should they be moved to "Final", removing the "s". It has been almost eight years since the last major discussion, now archived at Talk:2008 Stanley Cup Finals#Page title. At the time, the WP:COMMONNAME still had the "s" even though the NHL started to officially use it without the "s". Has reliable sources changed since then to warrant such a massive page move? Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My question is, how far back would this go? If we go by the Guide and Record Book it dates all the way back to 1982. After looking at playoff game summaries from NHL.com the league was still using Finals up until 2004. Deadman137 (talk) 03:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume we would still want consistency in all the article titles, regardless what was official back then. For example, the NBA Finals used to be officially called other names like the "NBA World Championship Series" before 1986, but all those articles are all still currently named "YYYY NBA Finals". Likewise, the first Super Bowl was officially called the "AFC-NFL World Championship Game", but the current article title is at Super Bowl I. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:25, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final: This discussion involves a grammar usage in regards to how you say it. Often, sports announcers will say "this team" is going to the final. The usage of "final" describes the series as a whole, but the usage of "finals" can refer to the games in the series or there to be multiple series. Many media sources use "finals" as reference to every game in the series, but the usage of the "s" can be changed, regardless of how you read it. The most recent Guide and Record Book uses "Final" in place meaning that it describes the final series. The Stanley Cup Championship series is the "final" series of the playoffs. The same can be said of the NBA. So, the usage of "finals" should not be used to describe the final series, because there is only one series happening and there probably shouldn't be confusion among readers. Conyo14 (talk) 05:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not broke, don't fix it. One can choose to link to the 2015 Stanley Cup Finals or the 2015 Stanley Cup Final, it's the same page. It isn't worth the time and energy to rename so many pages. Kind regards, Rejectwater (talk) 06:18, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No change Its also an WP:ENGVAR issue. In Canadian English it is Finals, because a group of things is plural. A series is a group of games. And per ENGVAR we should leave things at status quo. I also think it is by far the most common usage. -DJSasso (talk) 17:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on, in America a group of things is also plural. But pluralizing a proper noun that describes the series is truly a debatable topic. Also per ENGVAR, these articles, although written mostly in Canadian-English, is not subject just to Canadians. The Final(s) can include American teams, so it can be written in American English as well. Common usage of final vs finals can be seen almost half-and-half among media sources. It may be easier to see differences when the Final happens.Conyo14 (talk) 01:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They most certainly can, but ENGVAR says to not change from one to the other when one is already in use was my point. And my comment was in reference to your comment that there is only one series so it must be final. But in Canadian English and as you point out American English, it isn't considered one final. It would be considered a group. Just like a team, in Canadian and American English a team is considered plural because its a group of players. However in British English, a team is considered singular (ie. "Manchester United is a football team" vs "Minnesota Wild are a hockey team"). When someone says "X team is going to the final." they are actually using incorrect grammar when it comes to a sport where the finals are multiple games. (unless they were talking about a British sport) -DJSasso (talk) 10:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No change Based on my earlier clarifying question in this Rfc, I cannot support changing the names on these pages as it would be historically inaccurate to do so. According to sources from the league itself, the usage of the term Finals can still be found as recently as 2004, secondary sources to this day are still all over the map with no clear consensus. I think that the fairest compromise would be to use "The YYYY Stanley Cup Final, commonly known as the YYYY Stanley Cup Finals" in the lead of all articles from 2006-present and leave all the earlier articles as they are. Deadman137 (talk) 17:30, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a historical thing that the League has done, then I have to agree with Deadman137. No change It is definitely not worth changing a hundred articles to do so.Conyo14 (talk) 20:24, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Finals: The league is not the defining source of the name. The IOC does not call each Olympics what we have as article titles. And the plural finals is more historically and grammatically correct. Jmj713 (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No Change - per reasons by other Wikipedia users. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 20:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Game Six description[edit]

So I'm not sure why the addition of relevant information to the description of Game Six was removed, as it's clearly relevant and historically significant for future researchers to ground the game in context and time. If there's no good reason, please reinstate it. Thanks. Jmj713 (talk) 21:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not relevant to the game. It is also not historically significant to the game. Even though, yes it was in the opener, it should not be added to the recap. They are more relevant to their respective articles, because many different sporting events including the NBA Finals and MLB covered it. Mainly, it didn't affect the outcome of the game. Conyo14 (talk) 23:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it need to affect the outcome of the game? It was part of the game. Jmj713 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think that the Gordie Howe part should be mentioned in some way as that is hockey related. As for the Orlando shooting I'm neutral to it being mentioned either way. Deadman137 (talk) 22:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want, you can put it at the top of the page. Ex: "in game 3, Muhammad Ali was honored before the game. In Game 6, before the game both Gordie Howe and (if you so choose) the victims of the Orlando shooting were honored." Previously, the finals articles made by wiki have never mentioned anything that happens in the opening moments nor the intermissions. Unless it involves something that preempts the game, or the players. Conyo14 (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Linesmen missing from infobox[edit]

If the infobox lists the referees, it also should list the linesmen. Fdssdf (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should add them.Conyo14 (talk) 17:08, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]