Talk:2005–06 Calgary Flames season

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

Concept article[edit]

Given the growing (positive) trend towards creating more sports almanac style articles, I have taken a shot at creating a quality article for an NHL team's season. My intention is to ultimately create an article for each of the Calgary Flames 27 years (including the lockout year), and hope that this can serve as a template for all other teams as well. Please offer any comments or suggestions on how this can be improved.

Things I am currently unsure of:

  1. The colour scheme for wins, losses, ties and overtime losses.
  2. If it is better to combine individual player stats for both the regular season and playoffs into one table, or as two separate as I currently have them. For long playoff seasons, two full rosters get excessively long. Put both into one chart
  3. If Conference standings should be included in full, in part (ie, include the two teams above that year's finish, and two below) or not at all.
  4. If things like the winning goaltender, attendance and date should be included at all for the game log. I like them, but most websites only list full logs for the four or five most recent seasons. These likely wont be included for seasons from the 80s and 90s, so is it better to be consistent across every article, or simply accept that some seasons wont be as detailed?

Resolute 23:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like it thus far, I'll have to think further on it. DMighton 23:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good job! I like it too. I think it is a great start for an article. I have a few things popping into my mind in terms of what could be added. I'll give more detailed feedback later, but probably not until the weekend. -- JamesTeterenko 23:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It looks really nice. Good job. Sportskido8 02:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Epic. Better than most of the NHL season articles created. Might have to start this for the Canucks as well. Kaiser matias 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And please do create one for the Canucks. It would also help take care of that growing conflict about the moves chart on Dave Nonis' article, as they really belong in season articles, IMNSHO. Resolute 23:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start it, though a word of caution. I've got almost no concept of design or any whatnot for presentation. So while I may be able to include some basic information about it, someone else is going to have to make up some fancy parts to it. Kaiser matias 01:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If everyone would direct their attention to the second team to have one of these started, you will note this. It's a start, but I can't see straight after 90 minutes of working on it, but is well on its way. Kaiser matias 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that would be the sixth team to have one. ;o) But still, good job so far. Resolute
Just realized you did one for 2005-06 rather than 2006-07, now the 2nd one makes sense. Resolute 05:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I had no idea Vancouver had a first one, or any other team. Its news to me. Kaiser matias 06:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Vancouver doesnt have a 2006-07 article yet, but five other teams do so far.Resolute 14:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Awards & records section[edit]

I've added a new section for awards & records achieved in the season. I was thinking about adding milestones too (e.g. Tony Amonte got his 400th goal). What does everyone think? -- JamesTeterenko 18:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like that addition, and yeah, a milestones sub-section would work well too. Resolute 21:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 3[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 4[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 5[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 6[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2005–06 Calgary Flames season. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 11:51, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]