Talk:Utah Hockey Club

I think it is basically done

So, the Arizona Coyotes are basically confirmed going to Utah, But when should this page get moved Wednesday or Thursday? CollegeFootball25 (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It's basically a move of assets from Arizona to Utah, not a move entirely. They just suspended the Coyotes for 5 years, and moved the assets from the Coyotes. 174.23.11.240 (talk) 15:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Well it is very complicated I don't know what the answer is some users are firm in saying this isn't a relocation I personally have no idea. If Arizona gets a team again which looks more complicated now the situation might be like the Minnesota Wild and Ottawa Senators situation in going back to a city that had the hockey team but the new hockey team has no history with the old hockey team, considering the NHL has said when Arizona gets a team again it will get an expansion draft too so it does seem like the Arizona team will be an expansion and this Utah team is a relocation but some users like to bring in the Baltimore Ravens saying this situation is the same as that situation which might be true. I don't know if I agree that they are identical because this situation seems more complex. Black roses124 (talk) 07:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Also something to note some users state the NHL has called the Utah team an expansion franchise, but I don't think this is true because I haven't found any official statements from the NHL stating this maybe the NHL did say this I just haven't found any statements of them saying this. Black roses124 (talk) 07:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

From the article lead. [1] Deadman137 (talk) 18:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok but now Arizona teams gone no longer suspended operations the owner is not pursuing a new team so is Utah hockey still a new franchise? Black roses124 (talk) 22:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Team History

Since the Coyotes are getting the old Cleveland Browns treatment, should we say that they are a new team in their history? KENGRIFFEY24FAN (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Little bit contentious it seems. Personally I am of the mind, that this is a relocation of the team itself, as all of the staff, players, picks, and assets are being transferred to this Utah team. The only thing not being transferred is the name and trademarks. Therefore, the Jets and Coyotes should be included in the team history section of the infobox. IceBergYYC (talk) 23:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

It is not a relocation, the Coyotes have suspended operations, but can resume operations if they acquire a new arena in the next five years. This explains the details [2] Deadman137 (talk) 23:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The Coyotes relocated, not suspended, Muerelo can find a new arena in 5 years, but it said Muerelo would get a BRAND NEW EXPANSION TEAM in Arizona. And since the Coyotes cannot be considered an expansion team, because it already exists, therefore the Coyotes do not exist anymore and have moved on to Utah. NHLGoCentralDivisionGo (talk) 23:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they have suspended operations, but it as not as if in 2029, if the Coyotes do return, that all of the hockey assets will be returned to them. If/when the Coyotes return, it is likely to be treated as an expansion team. When the Jets purchased the Thrashers they also did not purchase the rights to the Thrashers names and trademarks, this current situation seems much closer to that situation. IceBergYYC (talk) 23:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Both of you have no idea what is going on. This situation is similar to the Browns/Ravens situation in 1990s where the Browns suspended operations and came back as an expansion team that maintained the previous Browns' franchise history and the Ravens were the expansion team. This is the same situation, with Utah joining the league there are now 33 teams in the NHL with 32 of them being active. Now if you two are done wasting time there is work that needs to be done tonight. Deadman137 (talk) 23:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Seconding everything here. The league's made it pretty clear that Utah is formally regarded as an expansion, and the Coyotes still exist as an entity. @IceBergYYC and @NHLGoCentralDivisionGo, I suggest you read up on the Cleveland Browns relocation controversy for a similar occurrence of this. The Kip 23:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough in terms of listing the Jets/Yotes as direct lineage in the franchise history, but I do think in the franchise history section of the infobox, some sort of note or mention ought to be present, just in terms of how this is being described as a "hybrid" relocation. IceBergYYC (talk) 00:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

The Jets did purchase a few players from the Thrashers, like Evander Kane. NHLGoCentralDivisionGo (talk) 23:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Since the NHL has declared the Utah team to be an expansion franchise & thus not the Coyotes relocated. I presume when a captain is named, he'll not be considered a successor to Oliver Ekman-Larsson. GoodDay (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

This is a lie. NHL never said that. Joseph507357 (talk) 07:32, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Then prove it by citing reliable sources. 1995hoo (talk) 11:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not on me to. I'm not the one making stuff up. Joseph507357 (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

You're the one demanding that the article be changed. The burden falls on you to substantiate your point with evidence. 1995hoo (talk) 19:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:BURDEN:

The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material.

It is, in fact, on you to. You're arguing that we should change it, but you have not demonstrated verifiability for this change. The Kip ^(contribs) 19:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if this counts but multiple articles have referred to this as a relocation when Arizona gets a new team it will be an entirely different franchise similar to Ottawa Senators situation.

1.https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/nhl-board-approves-relocation-of-arizona-coyotes-to-utah/

2.https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nhl/news/coyotes-moving-utah-relocation-sale/5809f637f27551e06c4fb0cb

3.https://thehockeywriters.com/arizona-coyotes-relocate-salt-lake-city-2024-25/

4.https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2024/04/18/arizona-coyotes-relocate-to-utah-nhl-approves-sale/ 184.144.90.12 (talk) 15:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Player-joining dates

In the "acquired" section of the roster template, should all the dates be changed to 2024? I think so because since it's technically not a relocation, so when they joined the Coyotes doesn't matter. XR228 (talk) 01:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

It is technically an expansion team so they should be updated. Deadman137 (talk) 02:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

"Utah NHL team" as singular v. plural

I noted the edits by User:Sbaio and User:Wracking regarding the first sentence: "The Utah NHL team are ..." versus "The Utah NHL team is ...," respectively. I agree with Wracking that it should be "is" and I just want to weigh in with some thoughts on the issue. The Wikipedia page (which Sbaio cited in an edit summary) discussing American and British English in this sort of situation notes as follows (footnote jumps and "defined term" omitted): "In American English, collective nouns are almost always singular in construction: the committee was unable to agree. However, when a speaker wishes to emphasize that the individuals are acting separately, a plural pronoun may be employed with a singular or plural verb: the team takes their seats, rather than the team takes its seats. Such a sentence would most likely be recast as the team members take their seats. With exceptions such as usage in The New York Times, the names of sports teams are usually treated as plurals even if the form of the name is singular." (The Washington Post slavishly and absurdly follows the Times on that issue as well.) I think two principles apply here. First, there's no question the sentence in this article is not referring to individuals acting separately. It's referring to the team as an organization. Second, "Utah NHL team" in this context is not being used as a formal team name in the manner of "Washington Capitals" or "Washington Redskins"—it's a placeholder being used until the ownership group selects a new name (I have jokingly said it should be "Utah Youths" in reference to the "Two Utes" scene in My Cousin Vinny). While it's not controlling here, there was an RfC a few years ago with regard to the ridiculous temporary name "Washington Football Team," specifically whether to treat it as singular or plural. I had voted for plural there under the principle that it was being used as the formal team name during that period, and I note the words "Football Team" were both universally capitalized when referring to it. In the years since then I've come around to agreeing with the principle that it's more of a generic placeholder ("merely descriptive," to borrow a term from trademark law), and in the Utah hockey team context I think the use of the form "NHL team," capitalized as such, is a considerably more generic term than "Washington Football Team" (capitalized as such and not referring to the NFL). 1995hoo (talk) 20:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Seconding your lattermost point, contextually it's a placeholder so IMO "is" is a fair option for now - if by some nightmare they actually use it as an in-season placeholder name, then switch to "are." The Kip 22:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I see no issue with using is until the team name is announced and then making the switch to are, which is consistent with what we did with Seattle before their name was announced. If we follow the Winnipeg timeline the name might be known by next month at the draft. Deadman137 (talk) 00:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Deadman, they won't confirm the name until the 2025-26 season. 174.23.11.240 (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Also agree. "Is" is appropriate in this circumstance. And with it being an American team, whatever makes more sense in American English should obviously be prioritized. Kerdooskistalk 17:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

This needs to be discussed again, because the team will officially use the "Utah Hockey Club" name for the 2024–25 season so it is not a placeholder name like "Utah NHL team". It is the same situation as "Washington Football Team". I tried changing it from "is" to "are", but a certain editor thinks edit warring is better than discussing. – sbaio 05:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

For what it’s worth, there was a vote on singular versus plural for "Washington Football Team" at said article's talk page and the consensus was to treat it as singular. 1995hoo (talk) 11:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

If that's the case, then person consistently pluralizing is going against consensus and can actually be edit warring. Conyo14 (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Here's the link to the football discussion (it's in the archives on the Commanders article's talk page): [3]. I didn't post it earlier because I was eating breakfast and typing on my iPad and then when I did get a PC in front of me I was busy with actual work. As noted in my comment above, I originally favored plural in the "Washington Football Team" context but have since come around to singular. I think I would tend to favor singular as to "Utah Hockey Club" as well because it's not a "name" in the sense of Lightning, Wild, Heat, or Magic. The Washington Post insists on using the singular for names of that sort and it's very jarring: "The Miami Heat seemed to do everything it could to hand Friday night's game to Washington." (That sentence appeared in their sports section in 2003.) It's worse when they juxtapose them with plural names: "The Tampa Bay Lightning has won the Stanley Cup in two of the last five seasons, while the Hershey Bears are hoping to replicate that feat at the AHL level." It just sounds bizarre. But I've come around to the view that a word like "Club" or "Team" changes the analysis. (Then you have the people on Wikipedia who try to use plural-form team names in the singular: "The Arizona Coyotes is an inactive NHL franchise." Ugh.) 1995hoo (talk) 14:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

It's different if it said "The Arizona Coyotes team is an inactive NHL franchise." Conyo14 (talk) 15:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Toronto Hockey Club was plural for many years until an IP editor came in November 2022 and changed it (which I reverted last week). "Utah Hockey Club" is not a generic name like "Utah NHL team", but an official one until further notice. In addition, Utah's team started using plural after revealing the name for the 2024–25 season:

• Today, Utah Hockey Club announced that their prospect development camp will take place... (offical team website)
• Coinciding with today's launch, Utah Hockey Club introduced their 2024-25 uniforms, color palette, and logos... In collaboration with renowned design firm Doubleday & Cartwright, Utah's NHL franchise has developed their 2024-2025 season identity... Reflecting their state's long-standing reverence for the sport, the club will don two jerseys during the 2024-25 NHL season that embody a clean, crisp, traditional aesthetic. (offical team website)
• On June 28, the team will host their first-ever NHL Draft Party at Delta Center where fans will have a chance to get their hands on a collection of Utah Hockey Club apparel... (offical team website)
• The team showed off their official colors to fans, which they called "rock black, salt white and mountain blue..." Utah also showed off their inaugural jersey design on social media... (NHL website)

Then there is a footnote at American and British English grammatical differences#Subject–verb agreement, which has a source (also showing Wayback Machine link, because the original link does not work) about team names, which says that plural is preferred in American English when talking about names of sports teams. – sbaio 16:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Utah's NHL franchise has developed their is an example of using singular their. (To be honest, "its" would be a better fit as a possessive pronoun to replace "franchise".) As a matter of writing style, though, note English Wikipedia is free to adopt a specific convention that it applies generally, rather than reach different conclusions on a team-by-team basis. isaacl (talk) 16:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

And just to be clear, let me note that notwithstanding my comments above, I don't really feel all that strongly about it as to the Utah team because I think it's extremely likely that the issue is going to go away next year anyway. Given how US trademark law works, it's unlikely they'd adopt "Utah Hockey Club" as a permanent name. Possible, but probably unlikely. I'm just no longer inclined to waste a lot of time on a short-term issue. 1995hoo (talk) 17:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Seconding this - my linguistic preferences would be that it's singular ("UHC is"), but considering how it's extremely likely to be a one-year name, I don't really care about it enough to debate. The Kip ^(contribs) 19:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Identity Retroactive addition

Now obviously this upcoming season will have no name, but afterwards do we add the name back to that season or treat it like the Washington Commanders when they transitioned from Redskins? (i.e. 2020 and 2021 are listed as Washington Football Team and do not have Commanders added back to them) 47.153.148.108 (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I’d assume the latter, considering they’re officially playing this season without an identity. The Kip 21:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with The Kip. It looks like "Utah" is their official identity for the first season, not merely a placeholder. Kerdooskistalk 16:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Now hold it. A temporary name and other stuff has been unveiled for the 2024-25 season. Then, they will have an official name next season. UtahJazzFan1 (talk) 20:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Stop calling it an expansion team

It's literally the same Arizona franchise. It's not a new team. The league isn't expanding. A team is moving. Every other page for a team that has moved keeps their founded date and history. Joseph507357 (talk) 07:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Because every other team has taken its franchise history with it, rather than moving under a Cleveland Browns scenario. Whether you like it or not, the league is treating Utah as a new team. Period. (For what it’s worth, I agree that it’s a rather silly approach, but "I don’t like it" is not a valid reason to ignore how the league is treating the franchise.) 1995hoo (talk) 11:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, it is an expansion team, they just moved assets from Arizona to Utah. 174.23.11.240 (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I want to point out that someone using an anonymous address made a number of changes today, including deleting the citation to the article about the NHL Board of Governors approving an expansion team in Utah, and then left the following non-displaying comment that strongly smacks of the same sorts of comments we’ve seen here on the talk page from a registered user. I don’t know anything about investigating sockpuppets and I have no way of proving that this user is one, but I certainly find it suspicious in view of the first sentence and the final four words at the end. Here's the non-displaying comment: "Stop changing my edits. There was no expansion draft. It was a relocation, and every player and staff member was sent to Salt Lake City. It literally said in lieu of an expansion draft there wasn’t one stop changing my edits." (I reverted all three of this individual's edits as vandalism.) 1995hoo (talk) 21:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It looks to me the latest edit-warring person, CanadianEditor1995, is another sockpuppet of Joseph507357. Same style of edits, same personal attacks on everyone who disagrees with him, same overall arrogant tone. Also the username is a blatant response to the last sockpuppet investigation in which User:Bbb23 found a Canadian IP editor making disruptive edits but found Joseph507357 to be from the northern US. It looks to me like CanadianEditor1995 pretty clearly violated 3RR yesterday (I was offline most of the day and didn’t see it), and his response on his talk page is pretty much to give everyone a virtual middle finger. I’m typing on iPad, which makes constructing a report to the administrators difficult, but if the issue doesn’t go away over the weekend I may try to make a report on Monday. Wondering whether the other folks who keep an eye on this article would recommend using the noticeboard for edit-warring behavior, the noticeboard for sockpuppet investigations, or both? (I pinged Bbb23 in this message in case said user has a recommendation.) 1995hoo (talk) 12:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

SPI dismissed Joseph as being the same, but I’ll file one to connect this recent acct to the IPs that were previously disruptively editing. The Kip ^(contribs) 19:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Deadman137, @HappyBoi3892, @1995hoo, @Zzyzx11 - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2607:fea8:45e3:8000:3064:461d:b189:9356. The Kip ^(contribs) 20:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Please remember to tag redirects that you create per WP:REDCAT.

voorts (talk/contributions) 23:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Page title

IIRC, the current page title "Utah NHL team" is currently our placeholder name. Since it looks like the team will eventually start the 2024-25 season with its own official placeholder name, whether it remains "Utah NHL team", "NHL Utah" (in the current style of the PWHL teams), or something else, we will have to follow suit. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

It would seem that they're moving towards Utah Hockey Club as the temporary identity, but we'll wait to move the page until that's officially confirmed - right now it's just the trademark filings, as well as the roundel being added to the NHL.com API. The Kip ^(contribs) 00:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Should the temporary logo(s) be uploaded here? https://www.ksl.com/article/51031788 Jmj713 (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Probably best to wait until officially confirmed by the team. The Kip ^(contribs) 04:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

The Official Website

It says the official website of the Utah NHL Team is nhlinutah.com, but that's not it. It's just a website launched by the SEG group. I believe that the NHL might make a website for the team, so this website is not true. It's just something about placing ticket "season deposits", and other stuff. The website is not correct, and I think they might make a website for this team at the beginning of the 2024-25 season. 65.130.154.63 (talk) 01:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Time to change the title to Utah Hockey Club

This is the name the team will use for their inaugural season

https://x.com/utahhockeyclub/status/1801358418726502911 PrisonedMuffin (talk) 21:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Seems the (temporary) logo/colors is confirmed as well. Jmj713 (talk) 21:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

You guys forgot the jerseys.

https://apnews.com/article/utah-hockey-club-83d8a28225ac391c6ded4dea32049e4a?utm_source=copy&utm_medium=share UtahJazzFan1 (talk) 20:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

They're probably being worked on, I'm not entirely sure how to utilize the template. The Kip ^(contribs) 20:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm guessing they're trying to add the jerseys to Wikipedia, but they did make temporary jerseys for the 2024-25 season. UtahJazzFan1 (talk) 03:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

External Links: Official Website

On external links: official website, it says it's nhlinutah.com, but it's now nhl.com/utah. I'd like to edit this to fix that issue. Since the official identity for the Utah Hockey Club for the 2024-25 season was released (https://www.hjnews.com/tremonton/utah-hockey-club-will-be-the-name-of-the-nhl-team-in-salt-lake-city/article_5c945a00-2cce-11ef-a924-a7b7408dff1c.html) the nhl.com/utah website has been up. So, if we fix the Official Website on External Links, it'd help a lot. UtahJazzFan1 (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

• Done, changed it in Wikidata so it links to the NHL.com site now. The Kip ^(contribs) 21:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)