Talk:Ottawa Senators

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ottawa Senators article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 12 months

Ice Hockey

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

Canada: Ontario / Ottawa / Sport High‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ottawa (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian sport.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Ottawa Senators has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 2, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
December 27, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
February 6, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
March 26, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
May 7, 2022	Good article reassessment	Kept
Current status: Good article

Connection to original Senators

From 1883 to 1954, the Ottawa Hockey Club existed in Ottawa. In 1992, a new team started play. The connection between the two is marketing, based on the popularity of the Ottawa hockey history. It is something to be proud of, the original team, the traditions of providing many great players. So, it is important to keep the Senators name, the original sweaters, and on and on. It is a genuine reverence, and the Senators have that. They are definitely connected, but no-one from the original team participated and were involved in the business and legal process. Part of the marketing, yes. And the original developers saw an angle to leverage that reverence to back their development. Ottawa is a solid hockey town. One of the originals to so many things. Organized hockey. Organized league. Organized pro hockey. NHA. NHL. Original Senators were in team guides for the current team. It was partly to claim legitimacy when the current club's management was disastrous. Today, the current Senators continue to honour that tradition, but the teams are different entities.

Anyway, so mentioning the connection in marketing is valid, but not in statistics, years of operation, number of Cups, etc. Alaney2k (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Winnipeg Jets celebrate/honour the original Winnipeg Jets, but they're not the same franchise. Indeed, the Minnesota Wild have celebrated the Minnesota North Stars & they're not the same franchise. Then there's the Colorado Avalanche's nods to the Colorado Rockies. The Senators doings aren't unique or warrant too much mention. GoodDay (talk) 20:34, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The issue has been discussed frigging exhaustively over the years; the following quote's one of mine from 2005, which needed repeating in 2010:
The NHL's own Media Guides date the franchise solely from 1992 - in year to year record, in club records, in coaching, captains' and GMs' histories, in head-to-head all-time records, in Stanley Cup wins. To quote from page 93 of the 2005 Guide, "Franchise date: December 16, 1991 - 13th NHL Season" In no way, shape or form does the NHL treat them as the same franchise, and the league's made its POV clear, whatever some scrap of metal and wood in a storage box in back of the team offices might read. I read the Senators' official site, and among other things, I glanced at their career leaders board. Not one original Senator is mentioned. Yet if it was just one franchise, Cy Denneny would be the Sens' career goals leader with 245, and Frank Nighbor, George Boucher and Hec Kilrea would make the leader board. Denneny (5th) and Nighbor (9th) should be in the career points leaders. Boucher would be second in penalty minutes with 604, King Clancy 4th, Alex Smith 5th. Hall of Famer Alec Connell should be the career leader in goaltending games, wins and shutouts, categories in which Hall of Famer Clint Benedict should be listed 5th, 3rd and 3rd respectively. If the current Sens' ownership doesn't even believe they're really one franchise, I see no reason for Wikipedia to reflect it.
If there are anon IPs who just cannot bring themselves to see fact over fantasy, perhaps the article can be semi-protected until they go away. Ravenswing 21:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, if we have IP editors that cannot let this go then maybe it is time to consider permanent semi-protection to prevent this from happening again. Deadman137 (talk) 23:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I second that (well, third that I guess). Masterhatch (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I am not arguing that the current Ottawa Senators team is a continuation of the team from the 1920s. I have no fantasy about that. 186.4.1.34 (talk) 01:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you're edit warring? It's time you should be blocked. GoodDay (talk) 01:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You keep inserting unsourced information. BRD requires you to obtain a consensus, not to force your way. 186.4.1.34 (talk) 02:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I suspect the IP to be a signed-out block evading editor. GoodDay (talk) 10:27, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reading up on you. To get out of a partial block or ban, didn't you promise not to do exactly the sort of thing you're doing on this article and this page? 186.4.1.34 (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]