Can somebody explain the 1927 Games numbers 2-0-2 ?? / 82.182.115.84 17:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Maybe I'm wrong, which is why I didn't edit, but if anyone can back me up - I remember very clearly reading somewhere that the real Cup is the one presented to the team (I'm very sure about this one, besides, it would be common sense that the winners get the real thing), one duplicate is displayed in the Hall of Fame and used for public displays and promotions, the other duplicate is kept in a vault. -- Legalizeit 13:45, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This really seems to be two different articles, one on the Stanley Cup series and one on the trophy itself. My thought is that the article should be split as such, perhaps into Stanley Cup finals and Stanley Cup (trophy); any comments or concerns? Jgm 18:29, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The Stanley Cup finals, although today is synonymous with the NHL's final series, is (on a technicality) unaffiliated with the NHL. The trustees of the Cup decide who gets to play for the Cup, and typically it's between the two NHL conference champions in the modern days. kelvSYC 21:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the part about the player with the most stanley cup rings should be reworded, since teams didn't always give out rings in the earlier days.Also, I believe when the Canadiens first gave them out, they would add to the existing ring each year for players who already had a ring (ie add more diamonds or something). I'm not 100% sure about this which is why I didn't edit, but I am fairly sure about at least the first part
I've heard the same thing about the Canadiens adding diamonds to the same ring each time a player won a cup Priester 04:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The bit about the Stanley Cup brawl is incomplete. One guy punching a referee is serious, but not a brawl. I read once that this event resulted in benches clearing. Anyone got an old book that says more?
I'm not sure this event is worthy of note, and I recommend deletion. Besides which, there have been other players banned for life in the NHL, namely Don Gallinger and Billy Taylor, both for gambling. Hoghee 20:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Henri Richard was not "The Rocket". That nickname belongs to his older brother, the late Maurice Richard who was legendary for his offensive hockey skill. As for Henri, he was usually referred to in the english-language media as "the Pocket Rocket". http://www.hhof.com/html/exSCJ_15.shtml
I think there could be described in this article how the play-off is organized - the number of teams taking part in it, who plays who in which round, how many games are played and so on. Jan.Kamenicek 21:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to say this, but shouldn't we put a picture of a team (any team, or maybe just a player we can all think about), holding the standley cup after winning the playoffs? Wouln't that be a good pic, and we could put if for nomination for the pictures! :) paat 22:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be appropriate if there were a picture of the current Stanley Cup, not just the original one. If anyone has a usable one, please upload it. Patrick 05:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
"A member of the 1905 Ottawa Silver Seven tried to see if he could drop kick the Cup across the Rideau Canal. The attempt failed, and the Cup was not retrieved until the next day; luckily the river was still frozen over."
The Rideau canal is a canal, not a river as its name implies. I haven't changed this however because they could be referring to the Rideau River and not the canal.-- 72.57.229.236 15:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)fred
It's an interesting piece of trivia, but is it important, in the grand scheme of things? Does the success of a baseball team really have anything to do with a hockey trophy? Maybe it's just me... Doogie2K 05:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Isn't it odd that only none of the playoff games of note actually focus on the play on the ice? One is about a fight, the two others about events where no one actually played hockey. I think it would be better if there was made a "Years the Stanley Cup was not awarded" section, and a "Playoff series of note" with e.g. the time (1942) the Maple Leafs won 4-3 after trailing the Red Wings 0-3. Or the start of the Islanders (1980) or oilers (1984) dynasties. What do you think? JesperLærke 08:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
I assume this issue must have come up before, but during the lockout then Governor General Adrienne Clarkson threatened to take the cup from the NHL and give it to the best Canadian Womens Hockey Team. She later backed down when the idea wasn't popular and created the Clarkson Cup. This raises an interesting question regarding who is the legal owner of the Stanley Cup, and if it is indeed still held in trust by the people of Canada. Anyone want to add something about this ? Dowew 13:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this article could use a better intro. How do you like the following?
Mwalcoff 03:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
The problem with the current lead is that it contradicts the lower claim about the current cups; the intro says it's never been copied, and then the lower section says there are actually two copies. According to NHL.com, the original trophy is still awarded; according to the Hockey Hall of Fame, the original bowl was retired (although it doesn't say when it was retired), which means that the current trophy awarded and carried around by the winning team is not necessarily the one that's been drop-kicked, urinated in, etc. It would be nice to have an authority on the Cup rewrite these parts and clarify exactly what the truth is. - dharmabum 22:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I am thinking about spliting the "Traditions and anecdotes" section into a seperate article -- primarily the lists of adventures, misadventures, and engraving error, which all could go on forever. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
1. The Stanely Cup is infact duplicated, three identical ones currently in the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame, 2. The NHL "adopted" the Stanley Cup as the Championship trophy in 1947 not 1926 3. There was no agreement between the NHL and the PCHA 4. The following statement is inaccurate that needs a reliable source “After the Portland Rosebuds joined the PCHA in 1914, the trustees declared that the Cup was to be symbolic of world hockey supremacy” First the desition was made in 1915, secondly it wasn’t the trustees that made that desiction it was the Governement of Canada 5. There in no agreement in place and never has been that the Stanley Cup could only be awared to an NHL champions.-- StanleyPuck 04:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I took out the description of "Lord Stanley's Mug" as a colloquial expression because it is not commonly used in speech. It's tired journalistic wit. Not a crucial point but I thought I'd better explain it. John FitzGerald 01:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Why? An article about the Stanley Cup and there isn't a single picture of a player rasing the cup? -- Krm500 20:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be worthwhile, with the vast history of the cup, to have a trivia section similar to other articles on the Wikipedia. For example, unless I'm mistaken, the Stanley Cup is known as the oldest continuously contested trophey in sports.-- Mike Melzer 02:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
"it is the most-recognized symbol in North American sports"
At the very least, this requires a citation Cheesy 04:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I want to include the mention of the Cup being referred to as the Stanley Cup as early as 1899, as cited in Hockey: Canada's Royal Winter Game (available in full at the Library and Archives of Canada site here). However I can't find the perfect place for it to fit in. So I'm hoping someone has the skill to weasle it in, as it would seem somewhat important to include how early it was being referred to as the Stanley Cup, and not just the Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup. Kaiser matias 10:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
What is the criteria for choosing which notable finals to list in this section? Otherwise, it seems more POV and original research. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Reply: It is the only game in history of the Stanley Cup final where a game was unfinished and there was circumstances beyond their control.
NHL.com has a citation in the History section. [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.118.108.222 ( talk) 19:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC).
There is a contradiction. It says they were the first team to win on the road in a game 7 finals, but the game listing shows they played at home. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raguv2000 ( talk • contribs)
In the anecdotes and traditions section, we need a few citations. This is a general notice. The Evil Clown my contributions 15:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Other than those points, I think it could make a good case for FA status. Kaiser matias 17:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
As far as when the duplicate was made, it was in 1969. Why? Err, because the original was over 75 years old, had undergone a lot of wear and tear, and silver just isn't that rugged? RGTraynor 20:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Looked over the article again. It looks a lot better, and very well written. Should make the grade to FA if you submit it, I think. Kaiser matias 20:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Who wants to get rid of the section outright? I want to see some more consensus as to wheter someone should blank it. The Evil Clown my contributions 18:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Frederick Stanley.jpg I found this picture on the French Wikipedia. Any thoughts on it? The Evil Clown my contributions 13:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
This the orignial Cup.
The Evil Clown
my contributions
13:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the image of Lord Stanley be used in the article? And imo there should be another image then the Glen Wesley one as the first image. Other then that, very good article. -- Krm500 02:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the orange shirt is not good. I've cropped the pic to this.
Evilclown93
13:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Solo cup copy.JPG
Stephane Matteau taps Wales Trophy: [2]
I'm not sure if they are good enough. Evilclown93 14:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
The caption on the photo claims that it visited soldiers who were injured in the war on terrorism. However, this is very unclear to me. Could we be more specific and say the war in Afghanistan, or the war in Iraq?
166.66.106.43 01:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, just saw the FA objects that this got. The guys who objected to the grammar and references are right. The prose needs to flow and be "brilliant" in every which way and form. I'll see what I can do when I get a chance in the next day or so. But this has to be done quickly or it is going to be shot down, so if any of you can just go through and do this that'd be great. Also make sure the references are consistent (formatted the same throughout). Sportskido8 07:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
For example, the 1998 Red Wings repeated as Stanley Cup champs, but did they, for example, have to give the Cup back before the postseason started, or do they have to give it back when the team is eliminated? Using the 1997 and 1998 Red Wings as an example, did they get to keep the Cup two years straight without having to give it back in between their 1997 and 1998 championship years? 76.177.160.69 ( talk) 00:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
This article will be on hold for GA until image copyright problem is resolved. OhanaUnited 09:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
1. Well written? Pass
Some
WP:WTA are found, but doesn't really affect a lot and pretty hard to avoid using them. So I gave it a pass.
2. Factually accurate? Pass
Seems to have sufficient information on all important facts and dates with references.
3. Broad in coverage? Fail
It looks like there's too much information on the section "Traditions and anecdotes". Do we really need to get into the details?
4. Neutral point of view? Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
I consider this a pass with due regards to the fact that it changes once a year after a team wins the Stanley Cup.
6. Images? Pass
The debate about the image of the cup is over so I give it a pass.
The only thing need to be done is to shorten up the Traditions and anecdotes section. OhanaUnited 13:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I think this page should include a broad coverage of all anecdotes. I myself would like to add one or two, but i'm limited in my capacity to do so. #29 Phil Borque was a member of the Pittsburgh Penguins when they won in the early 1990's. They won in 91 and 92, but I'm not sure which year he was on the team or which year this happened. While partying at #66 Mario Lemieux's house in Pittsburgh Phil threw the trophy into the pool. The trophy didn't fare well in the chlorene and had to be polished before the parade in downtown Pittsburgh the next day. He told this story a few days ago on the radio. He is currently the color comentator on the radio with Mike Lange on 105.9 The X, whose call letters are WXDX. There was also a commercial that stated the stanley cup engraver in 2001 finally had to learn how to spell Borque. This is incorrect because Phil Borque was already a member of the Pittsburgh Penguins when they won the cup. I apoligize for posting this in the wrong place but I knew if I put this information in here someone more knowledgable could inject it into the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.8.25.81 ( talk) 08:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I also would like to say the Traditions and Anecdotes section should atually be expanded. For a trophy which is held in such high regard with in it's community, it's actually had an incredible, long and eventfull history. That is after all what makes the cup, The Cup. Just a suggestion, if that particular area becomes rather lengthy, it could be moved to a page onto itself. Thank you all for your time, and have a good evening. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
12.106.29.202 (
talk)
04:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it known what the Stanley Cup is made of? I was a little interested in finding this out, but I didn't see any such info included in the intro or anywhere else in the article. What it is made of may be worth including in the article, IMO. Dominicus Cerberus 07:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
The article is now on the Main Page (big news... Ducks win Cup), so keep an eye out for vandalism. Evilclown93 01:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The introduction of the article claims that the Cup is "the only trophy in professional sports that has the name of the winning players, coaches, management, and club staff engraved upon it". The 'Engraving on the Cup' section, later in the article, states that this is not the case - other trophies do have these engravings, but the Stanley Cup is unique in that it has them on the chalice, as well as the base and rings. This needs to be clarified in the introductory paragraph. Ygoloxelfer 09:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
The Grey Cup article states that "like the Stanley Cup, the Grey Cup has the team's name and players, coaches, & other staff members engraved every year onto the Cup." I believe that this is correct and that Stanley Cup article needs to be corrected.
I thought I'd ask here since the Stanley Trophy is the greatest trophy in the land...What are people's thoughts on a Trophy/Award Template? There are many, and I'm sure it's in the hundreds, big-time trophies/Awards in the world ( Stanley Cup, World Cup, Claret Jug (golf trophy)Claret Jug, Naismith Award, Bednarik Award,etc). These awards stretch over all sports across the world. I think that this would be a perfect place to start lobbying people for this template. Thoughts? Fuhreeus 10:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
The Stanley Cup isn't kept in a "bank vault" at the hall of fame as stated in the picture caption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.171.32 ( talk) 18:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I have assessed this as a Good Article (as it passed the requisite criteria) and of high importance, as most people would be familiar with the topic of the article and it is vital to understanding a specific topic (hockey) in Canada. Cheers, CP 16:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Maxim has asked me to copy edit this article. As I know nothing about hockey, I will be leaving a lot of internal questions in the article to clarify points before changes are made (these are best viewed with something like wikEd that color codes different kinds of edits). Also, I encourage other editors to alert me immediately if I introduce an error into the article - I want to know about it so that I don't make the same mistake in the future. Any extended questions I have, I will list here. (By the way, I think that the idea of a featured topic on trophies is excellent. I have been working on a featured topic myself ( Template:Mary Wollstonecraft), but unfortunately, I have not had a whole project to help me out.) Awadewit | talk 22:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
As an actual, physical, 3 dimensional object, shouldn't this have dimensions, materials used, likely for the actual cup and then also the additional rings? Aboutmovies 11:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I was looking through the List of members of the Hockey Hall of Fame and saw this image of Syl Apps with the Cup:
and noticed the Stanley Cup looked much different than it does in any of these pictures and different than how it currently looks. So, I figured this would be a good image to have in this article, though I'm not sure if it's already been in it. Has this image already been in the article and was removed or should it be added? The only downside, I couldn't figure out the year of this picture...looking at when he played and when Toronto won cups it must have been at the end of either the 1941-42 NHL season, 1944-45 NHL season, 1946-47 NHL season, or 1947-48 NHL season. The article says the Cup was redesigned in 1948, so maybe this would be a good picture of what it looked like before hand. Bsroiaadn Talk 06:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I've a contact from the Entertainment and Publicity director of the NHL sitting in OTRS. He's looking to explore ways of getting something on the front page for the upcoming competition. Anyone who can help with this or has suggestions, please email me. -- Brian McNeil / talk 09:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
There is no mention of the controversy during the lock out season. A group of people protested the NHL not awarding the cup because it is technically not the property of the league. The NHL had to admit this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.165.5 ( talk • contribs)
Just undid some vandalism by 76.243.192.77. Checked his page and is the 2nd time hes done it. I recommend that an admin bans him. 99.240.227.140 ( talk) 03:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
This article states that 13 women have their names on the cup but the Traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup article claims 12. Which is correct? Dismas| (talk) 03:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I was astonished to read the "engraving" section of this article to learn that the cup had been, in the words of the article, "kidnapped" and held for ransom. There was no other mention of this event that I could see in the article, and the provided in-line reference doesn't mention a thing about the cup being "kidnapped" and held for ransom. I thought this might have been main-page vandalism, but I looked back through the history and saw that the version that was newly tagged as a featured article included this phrase. Ack. Shouldn't something be mentioned about this event that appears to be highly significant in the history of the subject of this article? Or is this just vandalism that nobody (including FA reviewers) noticed for months and months? Neil916 ( Talk) 07:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
On main page it says:
The Stanley Cup is the most coveted ice hockey club championship trophy in the world, awarded annually to the National Hockey League (NHL) champion.
So, how can it possibly be the most coveted trophy in THE WORLD, if it's awarded only to the NHL champion, which is American? Is wikipedia getting way too America-centric? Seems so.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.40.240.137 ( talk) 22:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
It's not really American, just a majority of the teams are. The HHOF is in Canada. Plus players fight for rankings around the world to be apart of the NHL to get their names engraved on it. That is why they call it that. Asatruar ( talk) 09:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
To win the Stanley Cup one has to be part of the NHL, and thus to be one of the 24 american or 6 canadian teams.. Sure they accept other players, but that's not like the Olympics where anyone(whose country is recognized..) can participate. Thus it can't be the most coveted hockey cup in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.40.240.137 ( talk) 18:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 12:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Is there a list of Cup wins by city? As part of the Habs centennial, a newspaper article said that Montreal has won the cup 36 times, 24 by les Canadiens. 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 03:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Why did they do it? Is it against the rules? If it is then why did they allow this in the first place? It seems the NHL is making a lot of errors and it seems strange since it seems common but unacceptable for a trophy of this significance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.31.254 ( talk) 03:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
So I'm guessing the league wouldnt have given him permission if he asked right? Or was it that he just didnt ask? But my biggest question is how did the owner add it? Did he take an engraver and scratch out the name? I thought they had special people do it that was beyond the owner of the Stanley cup champions team —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.31.254 ( talk) 04:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be some confusion - I have changed the phrase which said the bowl was 'forged' in Sheffield as silver is not forged. It would have been made in Sheffield by one company - the hallmark will tell you who - and then sold by G R Collis and Co in London. Collis and Co didn't make it: they only operated as manufacturing silversmiths (as opposed to retailing ones) in Birmingham and London, so if the bowl was made in Sheffield it was by another compnay, and Collis acted as the retailer in London. It was a punch bowl, a specific type of bowl, so I have linked to that. Further information here [6] [7] [8]. BTW, Boodles and Dunthorne Jewellers is spelled the British way as it is a proper name. 86.137.138.12 ( talk) 11:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Can somebody explain the 1927 Games numbers 2-0-2 ?? / 82.182.115.84 17:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Maybe I'm wrong, which is why I didn't edit, but if anyone can back me up - I remember very clearly reading somewhere that the real Cup is the one presented to the team (I'm very sure about this one, besides, it would be common sense that the winners get the real thing), one duplicate is displayed in the Hall of Fame and used for public displays and promotions, the other duplicate is kept in a vault. -- Legalizeit 13:45, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This really seems to be two different articles, one on the Stanley Cup series and one on the trophy itself. My thought is that the article should be split as such, perhaps into Stanley Cup finals and Stanley Cup (trophy); any comments or concerns? Jgm 18:29, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The Stanley Cup finals, although today is synonymous with the NHL's final series, is (on a technicality) unaffiliated with the NHL. The trustees of the Cup decide who gets to play for the Cup, and typically it's between the two NHL conference champions in the modern days. kelvSYC 21:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the part about the player with the most stanley cup rings should be reworded, since teams didn't always give out rings in the earlier days.Also, I believe when the Canadiens first gave them out, they would add to the existing ring each year for players who already had a ring (ie add more diamonds or something). I'm not 100% sure about this which is why I didn't edit, but I am fairly sure about at least the first part
I've heard the same thing about the Canadiens adding diamonds to the same ring each time a player won a cup Priester 04:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The bit about the Stanley Cup brawl is incomplete. One guy punching a referee is serious, but not a brawl. I read once that this event resulted in benches clearing. Anyone got an old book that says more?
I'm not sure this event is worthy of note, and I recommend deletion. Besides which, there have been other players banned for life in the NHL, namely Don Gallinger and Billy Taylor, both for gambling. Hoghee 20:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Henri Richard was not "The Rocket". That nickname belongs to his older brother, the late Maurice Richard who was legendary for his offensive hockey skill. As for Henri, he was usually referred to in the english-language media as "the Pocket Rocket". http://www.hhof.com/html/exSCJ_15.shtml
I think there could be described in this article how the play-off is organized - the number of teams taking part in it, who plays who in which round, how many games are played and so on. Jan.Kamenicek 21:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to say this, but shouldn't we put a picture of a team (any team, or maybe just a player we can all think about), holding the standley cup after winning the playoffs? Wouln't that be a good pic, and we could put if for nomination for the pictures! :) paat 22:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be appropriate if there were a picture of the current Stanley Cup, not just the original one. If anyone has a usable one, please upload it. Patrick 05:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
"A member of the 1905 Ottawa Silver Seven tried to see if he could drop kick the Cup across the Rideau Canal. The attempt failed, and the Cup was not retrieved until the next day; luckily the river was still frozen over."
The Rideau canal is a canal, not a river as its name implies. I haven't changed this however because they could be referring to the Rideau River and not the canal.-- 72.57.229.236 15:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)fred
It's an interesting piece of trivia, but is it important, in the grand scheme of things? Does the success of a baseball team really have anything to do with a hockey trophy? Maybe it's just me... Doogie2K 05:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Isn't it odd that only none of the playoff games of note actually focus on the play on the ice? One is about a fight, the two others about events where no one actually played hockey. I think it would be better if there was made a "Years the Stanley Cup was not awarded" section, and a "Playoff series of note" with e.g. the time (1942) the Maple Leafs won 4-3 after trailing the Red Wings 0-3. Or the start of the Islanders (1980) or oilers (1984) dynasties. What do you think? JesperLærke 08:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
I assume this issue must have come up before, but during the lockout then Governor General Adrienne Clarkson threatened to take the cup from the NHL and give it to the best Canadian Womens Hockey Team. She later backed down when the idea wasn't popular and created the Clarkson Cup. This raises an interesting question regarding who is the legal owner of the Stanley Cup, and if it is indeed still held in trust by the people of Canada. Anyone want to add something about this ? Dowew 13:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this article could use a better intro. How do you like the following?
Mwalcoff 03:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
The problem with the current lead is that it contradicts the lower claim about the current cups; the intro says it's never been copied, and then the lower section says there are actually two copies. According to NHL.com, the original trophy is still awarded; according to the Hockey Hall of Fame, the original bowl was retired (although it doesn't say when it was retired), which means that the current trophy awarded and carried around by the winning team is not necessarily the one that's been drop-kicked, urinated in, etc. It would be nice to have an authority on the Cup rewrite these parts and clarify exactly what the truth is. - dharmabum 22:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I am thinking about spliting the "Traditions and anecdotes" section into a seperate article -- primarily the lists of adventures, misadventures, and engraving error, which all could go on forever. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
1. The Stanely Cup is infact duplicated, three identical ones currently in the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame, 2. The NHL "adopted" the Stanley Cup as the Championship trophy in 1947 not 1926 3. There was no agreement between the NHL and the PCHA 4. The following statement is inaccurate that needs a reliable source “After the Portland Rosebuds joined the PCHA in 1914, the trustees declared that the Cup was to be symbolic of world hockey supremacy” First the desition was made in 1915, secondly it wasn’t the trustees that made that desiction it was the Governement of Canada 5. There in no agreement in place and never has been that the Stanley Cup could only be awared to an NHL champions.-- StanleyPuck 04:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I took out the description of "Lord Stanley's Mug" as a colloquial expression because it is not commonly used in speech. It's tired journalistic wit. Not a crucial point but I thought I'd better explain it. John FitzGerald 01:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Why? An article about the Stanley Cup and there isn't a single picture of a player rasing the cup? -- Krm500 20:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be worthwhile, with the vast history of the cup, to have a trivia section similar to other articles on the Wikipedia. For example, unless I'm mistaken, the Stanley Cup is known as the oldest continuously contested trophey in sports.-- Mike Melzer 02:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
"it is the most-recognized symbol in North American sports"
At the very least, this requires a citation Cheesy 04:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I want to include the mention of the Cup being referred to as the Stanley Cup as early as 1899, as cited in Hockey: Canada's Royal Winter Game (available in full at the Library and Archives of Canada site here). However I can't find the perfect place for it to fit in. So I'm hoping someone has the skill to weasle it in, as it would seem somewhat important to include how early it was being referred to as the Stanley Cup, and not just the Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup. Kaiser matias 10:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
What is the criteria for choosing which notable finals to list in this section? Otherwise, it seems more POV and original research. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Reply: It is the only game in history of the Stanley Cup final where a game was unfinished and there was circumstances beyond their control.
NHL.com has a citation in the History section. [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.118.108.222 ( talk) 19:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC).
There is a contradiction. It says they were the first team to win on the road in a game 7 finals, but the game listing shows they played at home. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raguv2000 ( talk • contribs)
In the anecdotes and traditions section, we need a few citations. This is a general notice. The Evil Clown my contributions 15:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Other than those points, I think it could make a good case for FA status. Kaiser matias 17:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
As far as when the duplicate was made, it was in 1969. Why? Err, because the original was over 75 years old, had undergone a lot of wear and tear, and silver just isn't that rugged? RGTraynor 20:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Looked over the article again. It looks a lot better, and very well written. Should make the grade to FA if you submit it, I think. Kaiser matias 20:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Who wants to get rid of the section outright? I want to see some more consensus as to wheter someone should blank it. The Evil Clown my contributions 18:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Frederick Stanley.jpg I found this picture on the French Wikipedia. Any thoughts on it? The Evil Clown my contributions 13:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
This the orignial Cup.
The Evil Clown
my contributions
13:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the image of Lord Stanley be used in the article? And imo there should be another image then the Glen Wesley one as the first image. Other then that, very good article. -- Krm500 02:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the orange shirt is not good. I've cropped the pic to this.
Evilclown93
13:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Solo cup copy.JPG
Stephane Matteau taps Wales Trophy: [2]
I'm not sure if they are good enough. Evilclown93 14:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
The caption on the photo claims that it visited soldiers who were injured in the war on terrorism. However, this is very unclear to me. Could we be more specific and say the war in Afghanistan, or the war in Iraq?
166.66.106.43 01:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, just saw the FA objects that this got. The guys who objected to the grammar and references are right. The prose needs to flow and be "brilliant" in every which way and form. I'll see what I can do when I get a chance in the next day or so. But this has to be done quickly or it is going to be shot down, so if any of you can just go through and do this that'd be great. Also make sure the references are consistent (formatted the same throughout). Sportskido8 07:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
For example, the 1998 Red Wings repeated as Stanley Cup champs, but did they, for example, have to give the Cup back before the postseason started, or do they have to give it back when the team is eliminated? Using the 1997 and 1998 Red Wings as an example, did they get to keep the Cup two years straight without having to give it back in between their 1997 and 1998 championship years? 76.177.160.69 ( talk) 00:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
This article will be on hold for GA until image copyright problem is resolved. OhanaUnited 09:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
1. Well written? Pass
Some
WP:WTA are found, but doesn't really affect a lot and pretty hard to avoid using them. So I gave it a pass.
2. Factually accurate? Pass
Seems to have sufficient information on all important facts and dates with references.
3. Broad in coverage? Fail
It looks like there's too much information on the section "Traditions and anecdotes". Do we really need to get into the details?
4. Neutral point of view? Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
I consider this a pass with due regards to the fact that it changes once a year after a team wins the Stanley Cup.
6. Images? Pass
The debate about the image of the cup is over so I give it a pass.
The only thing need to be done is to shorten up the Traditions and anecdotes section. OhanaUnited 13:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I think this page should include a broad coverage of all anecdotes. I myself would like to add one or two, but i'm limited in my capacity to do so. #29 Phil Borque was a member of the Pittsburgh Penguins when they won in the early 1990's. They won in 91 and 92, but I'm not sure which year he was on the team or which year this happened. While partying at #66 Mario Lemieux's house in Pittsburgh Phil threw the trophy into the pool. The trophy didn't fare well in the chlorene and had to be polished before the parade in downtown Pittsburgh the next day. He told this story a few days ago on the radio. He is currently the color comentator on the radio with Mike Lange on 105.9 The X, whose call letters are WXDX. There was also a commercial that stated the stanley cup engraver in 2001 finally had to learn how to spell Borque. This is incorrect because Phil Borque was already a member of the Pittsburgh Penguins when they won the cup. I apoligize for posting this in the wrong place but I knew if I put this information in here someone more knowledgable could inject it into the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.8.25.81 ( talk) 08:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I also would like to say the Traditions and Anecdotes section should atually be expanded. For a trophy which is held in such high regard with in it's community, it's actually had an incredible, long and eventfull history. That is after all what makes the cup, The Cup. Just a suggestion, if that particular area becomes rather lengthy, it could be moved to a page onto itself. Thank you all for your time, and have a good evening. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
12.106.29.202 (
talk)
04:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it known what the Stanley Cup is made of? I was a little interested in finding this out, but I didn't see any such info included in the intro or anywhere else in the article. What it is made of may be worth including in the article, IMO. Dominicus Cerberus 07:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
The article is now on the Main Page (big news... Ducks win Cup), so keep an eye out for vandalism. Evilclown93 01:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The introduction of the article claims that the Cup is "the only trophy in professional sports that has the name of the winning players, coaches, management, and club staff engraved upon it". The 'Engraving on the Cup' section, later in the article, states that this is not the case - other trophies do have these engravings, but the Stanley Cup is unique in that it has them on the chalice, as well as the base and rings. This needs to be clarified in the introductory paragraph. Ygoloxelfer 09:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
The Grey Cup article states that "like the Stanley Cup, the Grey Cup has the team's name and players, coaches, & other staff members engraved every year onto the Cup." I believe that this is correct and that Stanley Cup article needs to be corrected.
I thought I'd ask here since the Stanley Trophy is the greatest trophy in the land...What are people's thoughts on a Trophy/Award Template? There are many, and I'm sure it's in the hundreds, big-time trophies/Awards in the world ( Stanley Cup, World Cup, Claret Jug (golf trophy)Claret Jug, Naismith Award, Bednarik Award,etc). These awards stretch over all sports across the world. I think that this would be a perfect place to start lobbying people for this template. Thoughts? Fuhreeus 10:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
The Stanley Cup isn't kept in a "bank vault" at the hall of fame as stated in the picture caption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.171.32 ( talk) 18:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I have assessed this as a Good Article (as it passed the requisite criteria) and of high importance, as most people would be familiar with the topic of the article and it is vital to understanding a specific topic (hockey) in Canada. Cheers, CP 16:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Maxim has asked me to copy edit this article. As I know nothing about hockey, I will be leaving a lot of internal questions in the article to clarify points before changes are made (these are best viewed with something like wikEd that color codes different kinds of edits). Also, I encourage other editors to alert me immediately if I introduce an error into the article - I want to know about it so that I don't make the same mistake in the future. Any extended questions I have, I will list here. (By the way, I think that the idea of a featured topic on trophies is excellent. I have been working on a featured topic myself ( Template:Mary Wollstonecraft), but unfortunately, I have not had a whole project to help me out.) Awadewit | talk 22:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
As an actual, physical, 3 dimensional object, shouldn't this have dimensions, materials used, likely for the actual cup and then also the additional rings? Aboutmovies 11:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I was looking through the List of members of the Hockey Hall of Fame and saw this image of Syl Apps with the Cup:
and noticed the Stanley Cup looked much different than it does in any of these pictures and different than how it currently looks. So, I figured this would be a good image to have in this article, though I'm not sure if it's already been in it. Has this image already been in the article and was removed or should it be added? The only downside, I couldn't figure out the year of this picture...looking at when he played and when Toronto won cups it must have been at the end of either the 1941-42 NHL season, 1944-45 NHL season, 1946-47 NHL season, or 1947-48 NHL season. The article says the Cup was redesigned in 1948, so maybe this would be a good picture of what it looked like before hand. Bsroiaadn Talk 06:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I've a contact from the Entertainment and Publicity director of the NHL sitting in OTRS. He's looking to explore ways of getting something on the front page for the upcoming competition. Anyone who can help with this or has suggestions, please email me. -- Brian McNeil / talk 09:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
There is no mention of the controversy during the lock out season. A group of people protested the NHL not awarding the cup because it is technically not the property of the league. The NHL had to admit this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.165.5 ( talk • contribs)
Just undid some vandalism by 76.243.192.77. Checked his page and is the 2nd time hes done it. I recommend that an admin bans him. 99.240.227.140 ( talk) 03:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
This article states that 13 women have their names on the cup but the Traditions and anecdotes associated with the Stanley Cup article claims 12. Which is correct? Dismas| (talk) 03:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I was astonished to read the "engraving" section of this article to learn that the cup had been, in the words of the article, "kidnapped" and held for ransom. There was no other mention of this event that I could see in the article, and the provided in-line reference doesn't mention a thing about the cup being "kidnapped" and held for ransom. I thought this might have been main-page vandalism, but I looked back through the history and saw that the version that was newly tagged as a featured article included this phrase. Ack. Shouldn't something be mentioned about this event that appears to be highly significant in the history of the subject of this article? Or is this just vandalism that nobody (including FA reviewers) noticed for months and months? Neil916 ( Talk) 07:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
On main page it says:
The Stanley Cup is the most coveted ice hockey club championship trophy in the world, awarded annually to the National Hockey League (NHL) champion.
So, how can it possibly be the most coveted trophy in THE WORLD, if it's awarded only to the NHL champion, which is American? Is wikipedia getting way too America-centric? Seems so.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.40.240.137 ( talk) 22:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
It's not really American, just a majority of the teams are. The HHOF is in Canada. Plus players fight for rankings around the world to be apart of the NHL to get their names engraved on it. That is why they call it that. Asatruar ( talk) 09:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
To win the Stanley Cup one has to be part of the NHL, and thus to be one of the 24 american or 6 canadian teams.. Sure they accept other players, but that's not like the Olympics where anyone(whose country is recognized..) can participate. Thus it can't be the most coveted hockey cup in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.40.240.137 ( talk) 18:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 12:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Is there a list of Cup wins by city? As part of the Habs centennial, a newspaper article said that Montreal has won the cup 36 times, 24 by les Canadiens. 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 03:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Why did they do it? Is it against the rules? If it is then why did they allow this in the first place? It seems the NHL is making a lot of errors and it seems strange since it seems common but unacceptable for a trophy of this significance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.31.254 ( talk) 03:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
So I'm guessing the league wouldnt have given him permission if he asked right? Or was it that he just didnt ask? But my biggest question is how did the owner add it? Did he take an engraver and scratch out the name? I thought they had special people do it that was beyond the owner of the Stanley cup champions team —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.31.254 ( talk) 04:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be some confusion - I have changed the phrase which said the bowl was 'forged' in Sheffield as silver is not forged. It would have been made in Sheffield by one company - the hallmark will tell you who - and then sold by G R Collis and Co in London. Collis and Co didn't make it: they only operated as manufacturing silversmiths (as opposed to retailing ones) in Birmingham and London, so if the bowl was made in Sheffield it was by another compnay, and Collis acted as the retailer in London. It was a punch bowl, a specific type of bowl, so I have linked to that. Further information here [6] [7] [8]. BTW, Boodles and Dunthorne Jewellers is spelled the British way as it is a proper name. 86.137.138.12 ( talk) 11:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)