Jump to content

Talk:Tom Wilson (ice hockey)

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


Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2018

[edit]

Change the word "disgusting human being...." to "an aggressive, effective, and sometimes controversial Hocky player" Davidsalzberg (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done just because that was all vandalism. I changed it back to what it was originally. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For whenever the page is unprotected or for someone who has access to edit, here is sourcing for his most recent suspension here, and the header should be changed to say "five occasions" now. Mumblecores (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

To enforcer (ice hockey) or unlock the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.228.27 (talk) 04:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2021

[edit]

Remove "Immediately following the altercation with Buchnevich, Wilson attacked Rangers forward Artemi Panarin, thwarting him to the ice. The following day, the NHL announced that there would be no suspension for Wilson' attack on Panarin, which resulted in a backlash from around the NHL as well as the Rangers"

This section is for fines and suspensions, not for actions that should have received supplemental discipline. Ronmanning86 (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This seems to be relevant being that it was immediately after another event he was fined for. — IVORK Talk 06:22, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's no discussion of other scrums that occurred near the time of other events in the list, despite most of them having after-event scrums. I'll submit another edit request to change the existing text to be from a neutral point of view- in accordance with the five pillars Ronmanning86 (talk) 16:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2021 (2)

[edit]

Change "Immediately following the altercation with Buchnevich, Wilson attacked Rangers forward Artemi Panarin, thwarting him to the ice. The following day, the NHL announced that there would be no suspension for Wilson' attack on Panarin, which resulted in a backlash from around the NHL as well as the Rangers." to "Immediately following the incident with Buchnevich, Rangers forward Artemi Panarin engaged Wilson in the scrum, which resulted in Wilson throwing Panarin to the ice. The following day, the NHL announced that there would be no supplemental discipline for the altercation with Panarin, which incited backlash from around the NHL as well as the Rangers' management who were fined $250,000 for disparaging remarks regarding the NHL Department of Player Safety."

This edit is more in line with the five pillars, describing what happened from a neutral point of view. (and it fixes some minor typos) Ronmanning86 (talk) 16:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a rewording of the paragraph, but didn't implement your proposed changes. There's nothing to NPOV here; if sources are writing that Wilson attacked and threw Panarin, we follow suit. I don't see why we need to soften this up.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tom Wilson (ice hockey)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 13:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]

General

[edit]

Review meta comments

[edit]