Never_Retire_Steve 35 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 OPINION: Any top hockey players list that includes players from the 80s and does not include Yzerman in the Top 10 is flat-out, unarguably wrong. FYP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chairman Maouth 97 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) I keep putting Downey at #1 but it keeps being edited back after a few minutes...grrr... And you, are an idiot. The list is a list as it was published in a book at the time. It is factual in that the book is the source of the information contained in the Wiki and it is not up for revision (as some of you guys have done). It is also not eligible for revision no matter what players may have achieved since it was first published. Edited April 26, 2009 by One of the Few Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reds4Life 51 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) FACT: Any top hockey players list that includes players from the 80s and does not include Yzerman in the Top 10 is flat-out, unarguably wrong. Why? 1) Gretzky 2) Lemieux 3) Hasek & Roy 3) Hasek & Roy 5) Bourque 6) Jagr 7) Lidstrom 8) Messier 9) Sakic 10) Brodeur Edited April 26, 2009 by Reds4Life Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 It is also not eligible for revision no matter what players may have achieved since it was first published. Maybe you should ask Boulerice that... Lighten up man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chairman Maouth 97 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 Maybe you should ask Boulerice that... Lighten up man. It's people like you (editing Wiki to satisfy your sense of humour) that gives it a bad name. It's also ironic that some Red Wings fans on this very thread have complained about that exact thing. Wikipedia is a highly valuable research tool as long as people who don't have a clue what they're doing don't f*** with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZabiOfDetroit 0 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) Something is wrong here. Edited April 26, 2009 by ZabiOfDetroit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 It's people like you (editing Wiki to satisfy your sense of humour) that gives it a bad name. It's also ironic that some Red Wings fans on this very thread have complained about that exact thing. Wikipedia is a highly valuable research tool as long as people who don't have a clue what they're doing don't f*** with it. Again...lighten up. Find me one person who will need an out of date and poorly composed list of who The Hockey News thinks are the best players and maybe it wont be so funny... But that is a random article which noone is going to need to use. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edicius 3,269 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 Okay, that's funny. Complete abuse of Wikipedia, but funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cern 0 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 lolled hard at Lang being #1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chairman Maouth 97 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) Again...lighten up. Find me one person who will need an out of date and poorly composed list of who The Hockey News thinks are the best players and maybe it wont be so funny... But that is a random article which noone is going to need to use. I'll quote Wikipedia for you WikiProject Ice Hockey -- This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ice Hockey, an attempt at building a useful ice hockey resource. They are trying to build a historical database about hockey. If you don't think that's a good idea, then go f*** with the speed-walking database where pretty much no one gives a s***. Edited April 26, 2009 by One of the Few Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_redwing 495 Report post Posted April 26, 2009 I'll quote Wikipedia for you They are trying to build a historical database about hockey. If you don't think that's a good idea, then go f*** with the speed-walking database where pretty much no one gives a s***. For the third and final time: lighten up. If they want to build a "historical" database about hockey, we're doing them a favor by making whatever The Hockey News writes void. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
XxGoWingsxX 0 Report post Posted April 27, 2009 Fixed...look at number 8 hahaha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
