Jump to content

Talk:Ray Bourque

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Changing article title

[edit]

Was there any discussion about moving the article? Just wondering :-) Flibirigit 06:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a scrap of it, and I'm astonished that it was done in the first place. I've reverted the changes. Ravenswing 07:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language variations

[edit]

Djsasso says in his most recent edit summary "(To quote from WP:ENGVAR Use terminology that subjects use for themselves whenever this is possible. Playing for team Canada is most definately him indentifying himself as that.)" Quite aside from that he is quoting WP:ID, not WP:ENGVAR, Bourque has lived almost as many years in the United States as he played games for Canada internationally. That being said, this is just the sort of circumstance for which the rule about the language variant in which the article was first written governing was created. That is en-US, which was the case for at least the first two years the article existed, encompassing over a hundred edits, including a few by Djsasso himself.  Ravenswing  08:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And which is exactly why it was decided to go with the variant matching either their birth place or the place they played internationally for, so that there wouldn't have to be judgement calls. There are a few guidelines that would go to support one side of the arguement and then the one you quote to argue your side. I started quoting two different guidelines but they wouldn't fit and I accidentally deleted the wrong link. The part of WP:ENGVAR I was intending to quote was An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation uses the appropriate variety of English for that nation. Ray is best known as Canadian hockey player. And to go a bit further the game of hockey itself is best identified with Canada due to having been invented there. It's positions would have used that version of spelling because that is where it was invented. -Djsasso (talk) 15:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bourque is clearly identified as Canadian. Whereas Mike Baumgartner and Brian Leetch would clearly be American. Flibirigit (talk) 17:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Err ... excuse me; when and where was this decided? The only consensus on the birthplace/nationality front was on the issue of identifying the nation of the player ("Slovakian," "Russian"), not in determining the language variant in which an article was written. WP:ENGVAR is tolerably clear, and cannot be trumped by our private arrangements even if we had clearly done so in this case, which we have not. Your position would have the somewhat absurd (and completely POV-driven) concept that all hockey articles must be written in en-ca.  Ravenswing  19:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have never said that all articles should be written in Canadian English. Go have a look at the Mike Baumgartner history and see which editor changed it to American English, from the Canadian variant. I would gladly change any American players to the US preferences. Flibirigit (talk) 19:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look in the talk pages of the project. There was a clear idea that we go by country of birth for the spelling. It was rehased a couple of times even for the issue of spelling which were seperate debates from the nationality front. I am not saying all hockey articles should be in Canadian english, I am just pointing out that there are more than a few reasons why it is accurate for Ray Bourque. American born players, American English. Canadian born players Canadian English. WP:ENGVAR is tolerably clear that you use the form of English that is most identified with the subject. So stop trying to argue that ENGVAR is the reason you are right. ENGVAR actually works for both sides of the issue, which is why the compromise of birth place was mentioned. -Djsasso (talk) 20:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've been following the talk pages of the project for years, thanks, and there has never been a consensus (nor scarcely any mention before now) that this concept should apply to the language in which articles should be written; feel free to link to the archives saying so. ENGVAR is the reason I am right because it is the rule that whenever there is a legitimate dispute over versions, the article should be in the variant used by the creator / first major contributor. This article was, for several years, written exclusively in en-us.  Ravenswing  22:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic Notice the unless that is there? Ray has strong national ties to Canada, through playing for Canada and being born there. -Djsasso (talk) 01:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete article

[edit]

Ray Bourque is a hall of famer. There is no details on the 1-year contract that he took to give it one final go for the Cup in 2001. He deserves a better, more detailed article. I'm not a big Wikipedia person but I'm just saying, this article could be a lot better. Whoever writes these hockey articles should look into revamping this entry pronto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivand67 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The people who write these articles, are people like you who just come along and decide its missing something, so if you feel it needs more go right ahead and add what you feel is missing. -Djsasso (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree, which is why I've taken the bit in the teeth and started some serious revamping, incorporating the trivia sections into the main text and starting to add inline citations (heck, there wasn't any reference section at all). I'd be happy if anyone else'd join me at it! Certainly Bourque's Bruins career is seriously lacking.  Ravenswing  11:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

[edit]

Not a good move. Google hits for Ray Bourque: 620,000. Google hits for Raymond Bourque: a shade over 100,000. This should not have been done unilaterally, and I invite the editor who did it to move the article back, promptly. Ravenswing 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who moved the page. I should move it back, you say? If you say so. Thanks! :) MTG1989 (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS I checked Google and “Raymond” has 2k more hits than Ray. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTG1989 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't imagine what methodology you used. "Raymond Bourque" [1] returns, right at this moment, 99K hits. "Ray Bourque" [2] returns 636K hits. Ravenswing 22:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

21 Season w/Boston Bruins ... 1.5 Seasons w/ Colorado Avalache

[edit]

Both have same coverage on this page, if you are with a team for 7515 days im sure you would have a lot more to talk about than 460 days with another. After reading the entire article, it actually goes all over the place No Officially marked Boston Bruins section, Bruins talk in Avalanche section, talk about his personal life in the retirement section. I mean I suck at writing articles according the wiki standards as none of my major edits have been kept, but this article lacks any sort of reason. Bazzledorf (talk) 15:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ray Bourque. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ray Bourque. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ray_Bourque&oldid=1252194788"