text:
Talk:O'Brien Trophy (ice hockey)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 19:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

O& → O'Brien Cup — 1. Name as illustrated on trophy. Indicating that it was named O'Brien Cup through its life. 2. Current title of article can be confused with other O'Brien Trophy 3. If O'Brien Trophy is more common name, that is likely only because the trophy has been defunct for decades. — Alaney2k (talk) 00:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * (From WT:HOCKEY): When I took the photo of the O'Brien Trophy at the Hockey Hall of Fame, I noticed in big letters across the top, "The O'Brien Cup". This was probably the name it was known by, and its official name when donated. For that reason, I think we should rename the article to match what is clearly labelled on the the trophy itself. I don't think that the trophy is commonly known, and it would be likely impossible to determine the most commonly known name of the Trophy, especially during its usage lifetime, since it is has been defunct for many years. Changing it to Cup would be consistent with labelling things as they were known at the time, and especially with what is labelled on the item itself. As a final reason, it would mean it would not be confused with the Larry O'Brien Trophy also. Since it is an FL, that means some further steps would be done also. Does this seem incorrect to you folks?

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

 * Oppose Every source I've found, including the HHOF website refers to it as the O'Brien Trophy. It is possible that it was known as the O'Brien Cup for a period, but it is now more commonly called the O'Brien Trophy. -- Scorpion0422 02:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose as the common name. As Scorpion points out, every reliable hockey source, including the HHOF and the NHL, refer to it as the O'Brien Trophy. As far the NBA championship trophy is concerned, it commonly has "Larry" prefixed onto it's name anyway. NeoChaosX (talk, edits) 03:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion
The Wanderers as champions of the N.H.A took over the Stanley Cup from Ottawa. They were also presented with the O'Brien Cup, a new trophy donated by M. J. O'Brien to be emblematic of the N.H.A. championship. As Trail was written based on the newspaper reports of the time, that seems to be the correct name of the trophy. The trophy is long defunct and its proper name seems to have been forgotten. The HHOF isn't perfect, if you go to their Stanley Cup display, they list Frank McGee as being born in 1892, which would make him 13 years old when he scored 14 goals against Dawson city in 1905. Coleman is considered reliable. Alaney2k (talk) 04:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Look harder. The book "Trail of the Stanley Cup" by Charles Coleman, on page 189, in describing the Wanderers win in the first year of the NHA:
 * Looking at the image, it appears that only the actual cup portion is labelled "O'Brien Cup". Maybe that was known as the cup, but at some point it was converted into a trophy, so then it started being called the O'Brien Trophy. -- Scorpion0422 13:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * In Trail, there is a picture of the 1910 Wanderers with the trophy. It has the huge base. (Frankly the trophy has a lot of artistic details which you notice when you look at it closely, which makes it somewhat unique) Which reminds me, the trophy is supposed to be made of Cobalt silver (from O'Brien's mine) and is supposed to be very heavy. I wonder where we can find out about that? Alaney2k (talk) 14:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * In a Time Magazine article from 1927, available on the web here, it states the O'Brien Cup. Alaney2k (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Location
It's implied above that the trophy/cup is displayed at the Hockey Hall of Fame, but neither this article nor the Hall of Fame article actually says this. Probably they both should, assuming it's true. Andrewa (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It was on display when I went to the Hall. In the community trophies section, early hockey. If they stop displaying it, do we modify the article to say that, too? Alaney2k (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Probably we should just have the info as to where it's normally kept/displayed/whatever in the article on the trophy itself, and link to that article from any articles on the venue(s) themselves. But the information belongs somewhere, if the trophy is notable enough for an article, which it clearly appears to be. Andrewa (talk) 23:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

1909 awarding
The addition of 1909 awarding is not reliable. One web site, not the Hockey Hall of Fame, or some reliable source like that. Until there is a reliable source that can show it is the same trophy and that it was awarded, it should not be included. Alaney2k (talk) 17:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

O'Brien was awarded in 1924 through 1927
If you look at the team pictures for the Maroons in 1926 and the Senators in 1927, you'll see that the O'Brien Cup is in the picture.

Here is the Maroons: link (It's in the bottom right, Prince of Wales in the bottom left)

Here is the Senators: link The O'Brien is centre-right.

I think this is clear evidence that the O'Brien was still awarded until 1927 to the NHL champion.

The question is: how do we list this? Alaney2k (talk) 19:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * We need to know what it was awarded for, however. For all we know, the previous champion simply passed it to the next champion along with the POW Trophy.  It may not have been officially presented by the league. Resolute Lest We Forget 20:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to see if there is anything in the Globe online archives which I can get at through my library. I think it was given, but somehow through time it's been forgotten. Like the O'Brien Cup name. At the least, we should have a note about it soon. I just want to avoid the idea that this is original research. I think the real problem is that we are relying too much on one source, the HHOF web site, which has lots of errors. Alaney2k (talk) 21:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on O'Brien Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629213230/http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html to http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:O'Brien Trophy (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on O'Brien Trophy (ice hockey). 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930051658/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashobrien.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashobrien.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929154039/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:O'Brien Trophy (ice hockey)


text:
Talk:Presidents' Trophy

"Editing Pre-Playoffs"
What rationale constitutes not posting updates to The Trophy before the Stanley Cup Playoffs have finalized? The President's Trophy is an award independent from the Stanley Cup and is won before the playoffs begin, and is sometimes regarded a greater achievement than the Cup. Seeing as it's usually clinched before the end of the regular season, I recommend updating the page when it has been awarded and not after the Stanley Cup has been awarded. Associating the two implies not only a synonymous relationship between the Trophy and the Cup, but also that the season isn't over until the Cup is awarded. Keep in mind - it's The Stanley Cup Playoffs, not The NHL Playoffs.75.143.209.242 (talk) 09:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)James
 * If you had actually checked the page, you would have seen that it was updated. But, WP:HOCKEY policy is to wait until the end of the regular season to update stats. -- Scorpion0422 14:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Who on Earth (besides you, I guess) actually believes that it "is sometimes regarded a greater achievement than the Cup"? At most, it is a "better than nothing" award for a team whose fans are left to pine over what might have been, because if a team actually wins the Cup, nobody gives a rat's ass whether or not they also won the Presidents' Trophy.172.190.13.144 (talk) 04:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

"NHL League Champions"
The League chose unfortunate terminology when they picked this particular language to allow teams to display in their arenas. The article has been edited to make note of the Stanley Cup Champion "technically" being the league champion all those years. Is this entirely accurate? I took the League's choice of language to be highlighting the fine distinction between winning the NHL "League" Championship (the one the league as an institutional entity can award) and the Stanley Cup Championship, which is in some sense external to the NHL (since it predates the league's inception and officially has its own trustees). I realize this is operating at a relatively high level of abstraction and in reality may not make much of a difference, but I am just questioning whether we know enough about this theoretical concern to say with confidence that the Stanley Cup winners those years were "technically" the league champion.
 * I have commented out that text. Alaney2k (talk) 15:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Pre-Presidents' Trophy
Whatever happened to the useful listing of the top regular season finishers before the inception of the Presidents' Trophy? I can think of no better place to put that information and cannot understand why it was deleted. MrArticleOne (talk) 22:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the pre-Presidents' Trophy era league-leaders should be listed on this page, for the sake of convenience. At least a link to another page that lists them would be nice.Fofe510 (talk) 02:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason we decided not to display pre-Trophy winners is because several other trophies were previously given to the team with the top NHL record, for example the Prince of Wales Trophy from 38 to 67. -- Scorpion0422 02:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a good rationale to have a cross-reference, not to eliminate the list. The Presidents' Trophy currently goes to the team that finishes with the best overall record. If there was 1 place I would guess to look to find the list of teams that achieved that distinction in prior years, it would be on the Presidents' Trophy page. Much like I would anticipate being able to find the players that led the league in goal scoring at the Rocket Richard Trophy page. MrArticleOne (talk) 18:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that this article needs to list all of the 1st-overall finishers. Somewhere on Wikipedia, a list of the 1st-overall finishers in NHL history should be compiled. As it is currently, to splice together that list you'd have to look over a few different trophies' articles and external research on historic standings pages. I see no place more appropriate than this article to compile that list, because while historically other trophies were awarded for finishing 1st overall, currently this trophy is awarded for that, and so it makes the most sense to include that information with this. We do not (and should not), for example, have separate articles for all goal-scoring champions, and for winners of the Maurice Richard Trophy; it is natural to include the pre-Maurice Richard Trophy goal-scoring champions with the Maurice Richard Trophy article. The logic is identical here, and is not substantially affected by the fact that other trophies were sometimes (but not even uniformly) awarded for the 1st-overall distinction. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In addition, in looking through the article history, Scorpion's explanation of why this information got removed is apparently inaccurate. There was no "we" about this removal; there is no discussion that I am aware of that happened. Moreover, this diff http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Presidents%27_Trophy&diff=155866412&oldid=155866246 makes it clear that the rationale had nothing to do with the Prince of Wales Trophy, and instead was an overzealous application of a sourcing rule. But there is no sourcing problem here; it is well within the corpus of knowledge of this project to know which teams finished in 1st place any given year. Must we cite to each and every article for each season or something? Let's not be absurd. I am restoring this useful information immediately. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Overzealous? This page is an FL and thus everything added needs a source. There is nothing overzealous about it. It's out of place here since this article is about the Trophy and not just teams that led during the regular season. -- Scorpion 0422  20:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make any more sense than saying that pre-Art Ross Trophy scoring winners, or pre-Rocket Richard Trophy goal-scoring winners, shouldn't be on those respective articles. There is no other logical place for it. As for needing a source, there is no dispute over this! It's a fact. It's like needing to come up with a source for what the name of the game of ice hockey is. MrArticleOne (talk) 21:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A> The logic place would be List of NHL regular season champions etc. B> You have to source everything, the fact they lead the league could be questioned so you need a source. -Djsasso (talk) 22:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that they led the league is a fact that is derived from other information that is already available and verified within Wikipedia. It demands no independent verification. The only one that might require some verification is the very first one, where there was a tie between Montreal and Toronto; I don't know how (or if) the NHL broke that tie. Every other year, there is no verification problem. MrArticleOne (talk) 03:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying, but it has to be verifiable on the page. So that if someone questions it they can click on the reference immediately. -Djsasso (talk) 17:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Pre-Presidents' Trophy section
I think this section, instead of being a simple list, should be converted into the same table as the main table with the Presidents' Trophy winners. I'd do it myself, but I'm hoping whoever created the main table would be so kind as to do the pre- too. Thanks. Jmj713 (talk) 21:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Teams eliminated in the first round
Any objections to also mark which Presidents' Trophy winners were eliminated in the first round in the playoffs? IMO, it would also emphasize the fact that the Presidents' Trophy does not guarantee Cup success. And it is hard to notice at first glance with the different playoff systems in place during the years (i.e. conference-based seedings vs. division-based seeding). Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ...especially when the most recent winner has become "a member of this club". Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Current holder
I have reverted the current holder back to SJ. As a die hard Caps fan, I'm happy to see them clinch the trophy; however, the trophy does not get awarded until the completion of the regular season. Until April 11, the Sharks are still the current holders of the trophy. Sam (talk) 03:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The Capitals were awarded the Presidents' Trophy at their game against the Thrashers on April 9. They are now the current holders. User:Landru —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.3.158 (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As soon as a team clinches the trophy, they hold it for that season. The NHL routinely has a ceremony on the winning team's home ice before the end of the regular season when it is appropriate. MrArticleOne (talk) 01:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Playoff Experience and the "Presidents' Trophy Curse"
This is in response to the edit which claimed that San Jose's and St. Louis' Presidents' Trophy winning clubs had a "lack of playoff experience", while the 2009-10 Washington Capitals had "significant playoff experience"...

5-year Playoff Histories of Presidents' Trophy winners who lost in Confererence Quarters or Semis (the 'Curse')...

1990-91 Chicago Blackhawks - played in 9 series, won 4.

1999-00 St. Louis Blues - played in 8 series, won 3.

2003-04 Detroit Red Wings - played in 10 series, won 6.

2005-06 Detroit Red Wings - played in 10 series, won 6.

2008-09 San Jose Sharks - played in 9 series, won 5.

2009-10 Washington Capitals - played in 6 series, won 1.

Thus... as the Capitals are the clearly least playoff-experienced in this group, and whereas the opposite is just about true for the Sharks, I believe my edit was necessary. (And as I am a virginal Wiki-editor, I apologize for the number of attempts it took me to accomplish it!)
 * Removed it all as original research. -- Scorpion 0422  01:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Wrong trophy
In the Winners section, it shows a man representing Detroit holding the Stanley Cup, but this article is about the President's Trophy and the caption mentions the trophy, not the cup. Does it make sense to use that picture in this context? 173.59.59.232 (talk) 22:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have changed the image. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Curse
There is an obvious curse on the team that is the oldest never to have won the cup. Here is an ESPN article talking about it, and it's clear they're cursed, because in nearly fifty years, chances you'll win one are pretty high. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=cursed/041029 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.253.50.238 (talk) 09:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Presidents' Trophy or President's Trophy
How come the Trophy is not called the "President's Trophy" (the singular form) but the "Presidents' Trophy" (the plural form.) Should it not be in the singular, as there can only be one President at a time, not multiple ones? Reverend Edward Brain, D.D. (talk) 03:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The NHL does not have a president anymore. The office was replaced by the NHL Commissioner in the early 1990s. The trophy is thus now named to honour all the previous NHL presidents. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:54, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Results of next season
An IP attempted to recently add a column for the "Next NHL season result". I find this irrelevant and trivial, since each season is its own animal and various other factors come into play, like the effects of the shortened seasons dues to labour disputes, or the cancelled 2004-05 season, or player and head coaches movement. The only reason there is a "Playoff Result" column in the first place is that we have a whole section on "Playoff implications" and the so-called "Presidents' Trophy curse". There is no cited source that explains how the next season result is relevant. This is a concern since this page is currently a Wikipedia featured list, and such unsourced content may fall outside the featured list criteria. Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

1917-18
Anyone know how it was determined that Toronto would be listed as the 1917-18 winner on their own, considering they were tied with Montreal? Indeed, the numbers suggest, if anything, it should be the other way around:

Montreal: 13 wins, 9 losses, 26 points. 115 goals for, 84 goals against (+31 difference)

Toronto: 13 wins, 9 losses, 26 points. 108 goals for, 109 goals against (-1 difference)

So based purely on regular season record, it should either be both teams tied (via the 26 points) or Montreal ahead (based on goals scored or goal difference). We can even look at the head-to-head record and see advantage for Montreal:

Dec 26 - Tor 7, Mtl 5

Dec 29 - Mtl 9, Tor 2

Jan 9 - Tor 6, Mtl 4

Jan 19 - Mtl 5, Tor 1

Jan 28 - Tor 5, Mtl 1

Feb 2 - Mtl 11, Tor 2

Feb 9 - Tor 7, Mtl 3

Feb 18 - Mtl 9, Tor 0

Feb 20 - Mtl 5, Tor 4

Mar 2 - Tor 5, Mtl 3

So the head-to-head record was even, both teams winning 5 games, but Montreal clearly comes out ahead on the goals, scoring 55 and giving up 39.

The only reasons I can see why Toronto would be there alone are based entirely on the post-season, which is irrelevant to the Presidents Trophy.

 * It's something that we should look into further. From just a preliminary look at it, Toronto won the second half of the regular season and Montreal won the first half. As for what they used as a tiebreaker back then I'm unsure of that at the moment. I'll look into it further over the coming days, though maybe one of the other editors may have a reason for why things were written the way that they currently are. Deadman137 (talk) 04:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Prior to the institution of the Presidents' Trophy, when the teams put up a "League Champions" banner, the apparent conceit was that finishing in 1st place in the regular season standings made you the "NHL Champion," and winning the playoff tournament made you the "Stanley Cup Champion." But during the multi-league era of the Stanley Cup, wouldn't the NHL Champion just be the team that represented the NHL in the Stanley Cup series (against the PCHL or whatever)? Seems like there's no real need to fixate on the 1st place team during the regular season during that era. The 1st place team during the regular season only becomes important when the NHL is the only league left, it seems to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.109.173.50 (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Presidents' Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090403053405/http://www.nhl.com/history/fstand10s.html to http://www.nhl.com/history/fstand10s.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629213230/http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html to http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:51, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Presidents' Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929154039/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070922115938/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashpresidents.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashpresidents.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:04, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Presidents' Trophy


text:
Talk:Prince of Wales Trophy

O'Brien Trophy states that PoW Trophy was used for 3 seasons as the nhl playoff champions trophy Smith03 18:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Untitled

 * That's correct, before the NHL gained exclusive control of the Stanley Cup. Ravenswing 07:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ottawa Senators and Ottawa Senators
Corrected the list; the 'current' Senators have won the PoW trophy once, while the 'original' Senators won the PoW once. Previous list had Senators winning trophy twice. GoodDay 23:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

 * An IP did that. I think it was because it was the Ottawa franchise that won it twice but I still agre with you. --Hasek is the best 21:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You mean the Ottawa franchises, won it once 'each'. GoodDay 21:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually since the Senators' franchise folded then returned the anon thought the franchises were the same. --Hasek is the best 23:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But the franchise did not fold, then return (we don't want to confuse the anon further). A franchise folded in 1935 (as the St. Louis Eagles) and a franchise was created in 1991. They're completley seperate franchises (1884-1935 & 1991- present). GoodDay 19:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

No Defense
The Chicago Black Hawks won the Eastern Division and hence the Prince of Wales trophy in 1969-70, after which the team was transferred to the Western Division. There was some (probably whimsical) talk of the Hawks refusing to surrender the trophy to next year's Eastern champion, the argument being that they could not very well have lost the trophy, having been given no chance to defend it. Eventually, they did comply. WHPratt (talk) 19:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sydney crosby refrence needed
I really think its important to note that crosby took the tropy and scated around with it. I think its really important because even in my situation I didnt watch the end of the game and when I watched a recap I ws really surprised to see him pick it up and scate with it (but not hoist it) even after reading on wikipedia that players don't do it. So I don't think that new jersey should be the only exception mentioned in this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.31.254 (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Sic Transit Gloria
It might be nice for the article to somehow note that for the 1938–67 period, the Prince of Wales Trophy enjoyed a stature quite close to (albeit generally below) that of the Stanley Cup. It represented excellence over the 70-game schedule (or 60 or 50 in earlier years), and as a balanced schedule with many contests between the teams was employed, this was especially meaningful. Some hockey insiders regarded the P-of-W winner as the "true" champion. (I will try to find some quotes.)

After the 1967 expansion, the trophy would never be more than a "conference" award. Sometimes it was won via a playoff series, which is reasonable. At other times it was won by accumulating the best record when compared to one or more other divisional champion whose listings happened to be on your side of the page. There were years when the NHL was essentially one big league with separate standings in arbitrary divisions being kept and crossover playoffs involving teams from both conferences. WHPratt (talk) 14:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, during the so-called Original Six Era, only the NHL had a single, regular-season champion: The other North American sports had champions in leagues or divisions. Thus, the Prince of Wales Trophy had a very special status for that period of time. WHPratt (talk) 12:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Prince of Wales Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929154039/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929154039/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashprinceofwales.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

2021
In mid-May 2021, the league had announced that with the suspension of conferences because of COVID-19, both conference trophies would not be awarded this season. Now in June that the 2021 Semifinals are now known, that the Canadiens will face the Knights and the Islanders will go against the Lightning, the NHL PR dept is now saying that they will be presented after all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Prince of Wales Trophy


text:
Talk:List of Stanley Cup champions

Suggestion
THis article should contain a list of the teams who have won the cup and how many times each of them have won. 24.201.16.162 (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There's already such a list at List of Stanley Cup Finals appearances. Jmj713 (talk) 16:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

March 16–18, 1907	Brandon Wheat Kings? Brandon Wheat Cities i think... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnep (talk • contribs) 06:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Blackhawks
Why are the Chicago Blackhawks listed as the Black Hawks? Dincher (talk) 02:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Dincher (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC) For many years, the name was spelled "Black Hawks." This ambiguity was finally settled in the summer of 1986 when the club officially decided on the one-word version based on the spelling found in the original franchise documents.

Conn Smythe v Winning Goal
I think that a column of Conn Smythe winners would be a lot more helpful than the current column of who scored the winning goal. I know there is already another page with the list of Conn Smythe winners, but when hockey fans discuss past Cup finals, "Who won the Conn Smythe that year?" is a much more relevant question than "Who scored the Cup winning goal?" It would be very nice to have that information (the conn smythe) alongside the Cup Winning Team information.

12.31.164.29 (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * But the Cup winning goal is still of interest to many; most of the sources we used included that info. Since there is already a page for the Conn Smythe, but not for cup winning goals, it makes more sense to include the latter here. -- Scorpion 0422  19:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

 * The topic of this page is the Stanley Cup, so it is appropriate to list the cup-winning goal here. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 19:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Both the Conn Smythe trophy and the winning goal are important stats. When speaking about the history of the game and a particular Stanley Cup year, it is more common and meaningful that people discuss who the MVP of the Stanley Cup playoffs was in a given year as opposed to the person who scored the game winning goal. To do so would diminish the value a player brought to their team during a playoff year given that, as an example, in 2013 very unknown player named Dave Boland scored the game winning goal and has his name in this list, whereas Patrick Kane had a spectacular playoff run and won the Conn Smythe trophy and is excluded. There are other examples of this. The Conn Smythe trophy is a specific trophy awarded to the player who is deemed most valuable to their team during the Stanley Cup year and the MVP should be included in the list as a quick reference the cup season with the most valuable player for that cup season. ʘ brokenlegmike  ʘ ( talk ) 13:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Your additions have again been reverted and cannot be reinstated until this has been discussed here per WP:BRD. Adding a nameless column to the table does not help it. How are people supposed to know why those players are there? The column was originally inserted in October 2016 by an IP editor and was then removed in May 2018 when the table was reworked. The tables in this page are already huge and that is why we have the Conn Smythe Trophy page (or any other trophy for that matter). – Sabbatino (talk) 05:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

"The Toronto Maple Leafs won the Cup in 1918 as the Toronto Blueshirts"
The team that played in Toronto in 1918 was not called the Blueshirts, they were called the Arenas. Can someone who knows how please fix this, 70.28.250.106 (talk) 01:14, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Technically, they weren't the "Arenas" either. They had no name, and were simply the "Torontos". At any rate, I've corrected the statement to be a bit more accurate.  Cheers! Resolute 02:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but please explain "technically." If wikipedia is to disagree with all official sources (Official Guide and Record Book, The Official Encyclopedia of the NHL, NHL.com, Hockey Hall Of Fame), than there really needs to be a very well sourced explanation.174.90.254.168 (talk) 17:06, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed there is: "Toronto Arenas" was a name created for the 1918-19 season as the team had no official name in 1917-18. The NHL uses Arenas for 1917-18, but that is an anachronism. Resolute 17:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am sorry if this is discussed elsewhere, but what is the source? If you disagree with the official source and don't footnote it, that appears to be poor authorship. "Technically" the  team was called the "Blue Shirts" in some newspaper articles, but was very clearly not the same team that were known historically as the Blueshirts.  "Technically" the Toronto team in the NHA were incorporated as the "Toronto Hockey Club" but called the "Blue Shirts" in the media.  "Technically" the Ottawa team that were champions in 1903-06 were well known as the "Silver Seven" but the hall of fame (and others) calls them the "Senators".  This is a list of Stanley Cup champions that (unfootnoted) disagrees with the cup itself.  I am not challenging your (or anybodies) knowledge, but I am challenging the presentation, and point, of some of the material.174.90.250.41 (talk) 16:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * See the book "Holzman, Morey (2002). Deceptions and Doublecross. Dundurn Press." Toronto was not inscribed onto the Cup in 1918. It was inscribed as Toronto Arenas in the year 1948. The club was not incorporated until 1918 when it was incorporated as the "Toronto Arenas Hockey Club". Prior to this, the franchise was operated by the Toronto Arena Company. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 17:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The Blueshirts won the 1914 Stanley Cup & the Arenas won the 1918 Stanley Cup. GoodDay (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you alaney2k for adding the necessary references, and footnotes. Any other objections I have I will keep to myself until after I have read the source material.174.90.250.41 (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It was a bizarre set of sequences. A league folding to keep an owner out. The Toronto players were taken, although 'leased', to the temporary franchise, although the owner of the contracts wasn't paid. I think it's simpler to list Toronto Arenas, and that's why you see it listed in so many places like that. But it would be non-encyclopedic to list it like that. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 14:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe this is covered in the Toronto Arenas article, no? As well as History of the Toronto Maple Leafs and 1917–18 Toronto Hockey Club season. Jmj713 (talk) 14:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 19:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Holzman believes they were called the Blueshirts. Pg. 17 attributes Stu McMurray as having the right answer--he believes it is blueshirts. Pg. 165 calls them the blueshirts.  Appendix D identifies the 1917-18 team as the blueshirts.  However I don't believe that complicating it further would be of any benefit.  Perhaps a more suitable discussion on SIHR?174.90.231.168 (talk) 13:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

 * While I respect Holzman's research, I think we need a citation from the newspapers during that season, calling them the Blueshirts before we change the season name and the note in the article here. You could argue that the Blueshirts was only a nickname and the real name until 1920 was Toronto Hockey Club anyway. But nowadays the most common usage is Blueshirts for the NHA era, not for the NHL era. And if the Maple Leafs and the NHL do not want to credit the current franchise with the 1914 Stanley Cup, then linking is wrong. I already have a series for "Emergence of the Maple Leafs" set up. As for SIHR, we can bring it up on the message board, no problem. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 14:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Newspapers aren't a big help, unfortunately. The Toronto Globe called them the "Blue Shirts", the Quebec Telegraph simply the "Torontos". The Toronto World used all of "Torontos, Blue Shirts, Blues or Toronto". The Ottawa Citizen calls them the "Toronto Hockey Club", but also describes them as the "Blue Shirted club". The Montreal Gazette also uses "Toronto Hockey Club".  And, of course, by October 1918, they were the "Toronto Arena Hockey Club".  Personally, I would rather the note retains the club's formal name at that time because "Blue Shirts" is both ambiguous given the predecessor team's formal name and evidently used as an unofficial nickname, much like the Calgary Tigers were often referred to as the Bengals in the Calgary Herald at that time. Resolute 14:33, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps what's needed is a good and concise section on the team's history and evolution of the name to elaborate on all this so that the issue may be settled. Jmj713 (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe this is covered in the Toronto Arenas article. If it is not complete, then that would still be the place anyway. I don't think we need to do anything further on this article. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 18:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Change 'Season' column to 'Year' ?
I think we should change the left-hand link in the tables from 1915 on to just state the year of the Final, not the hockey season. E.g. 1920. For example, the Chicago Blackhawks are considered the 2010 Stanley cup champions, not the 2009-10 Stanley Cup champions. It's the way encyclopedias like 'Total Hockey' list it. Any objections?? ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 16:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Jmj713 (talk) 16:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Ottawa Senators
There is an inconsistency with the list of Appearances/Wins/Losses etc. in the NHL Era (post 1915) with regards to the Ottawa Senators. As indicated earlier in the article, the Ottawa Senators lost in 1915, but won in 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1927. Therefore their record should be 4-2 with a win pct. of .667. ʘ Maestro and the Muse  ʘ ( talk ) 13:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Huh? How are you computing a record of 4 wins and 2 losses when they only lost once in 1915? As indicated in several areas of the page in footnotes, there are two "Ottawa Senators" teams. The first one, Ottawa Senators (original), played from 1883 to 1954, and that is the one listed on the "Defunct teams" table. The current Ottawa Senators, which began play in 1992, has made only one appearance in 2007; this club is the one listed on the "Active teams" table. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Noted. I just saw the "Defunct Teams" Section now. I don't know how I missed that the first time. Comment withdrawn. Maestro and the Muse (talk) 13:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

There's no list of Stanley Cup champions in this article
There doesn't appear to be a list in this article as suggested by the title. The "main" table is ordered by Stanley Cup appearances.. why? Why isn't it ordered by the number of "champions", as suggested by the title? Just a thought. 24.84.9.97 (talk) 06:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I had changed the "Wins" column to use bold numbers, so that it was more clear; but it was reverted without explaination here. Can someone explain this? I was attempting to address the fact that there should be a table ordered by number of Stanley Cup wins, as the title of this article suggests. At the moment, there is no such table; the reader who comes to this article expects a table ordered by number of Wins, but is faced with a table ordered by number of Appearances.. shouldn't we be applying the principle of least astonishment? Why can't we order that table by number of Wins? 24.84.9.97 (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It is a sortable table. You can easily resort it by wins. Resolute 20:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

A list of champions is included from the first to the last. You're talking about a separate aggregate table which is ordered by number of appearances and then by wins. Jmj713 (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Isn't this the list in question? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies. I see your point; I had read the title as "List of teams who have won the Stanley cup", and expected a list of teams (not a list of seasons). Nevertheless, a common question readers coming to this page probably have is: How many times has team X won the Stanley Cup? Considering the title of the article, I would have expected this to be pretty obvious from one of the tables. A considerably less common question is: How many times has team X played in the Stanley Cup final? And my point is that this article emphasizes the second question, and not the first.

The reason I brought this up, is because I was at a pub quiz which asked "Which team has won the second most Stanley Cups"? I answered Toronto, but the quiz answer was Detroit. When I got home and checked Wikipedia, I saw that table and thought to myself "huh.. I guess it is Detroit". Only upon closer inspection does one realize the table isn't ordered by number of wins.. indeed the quiz-maker had come to this article, and incorrectly read the table, since it is ordered in an unintuitive way. Hence my complaint. 24.84.9.97 (talk) 20:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Please help a newbie (me)
I tried following the specific reference # 18 & the page would not load - the link (http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1924-25) is broken.

I found the correct link & cannot figure out how to fix the wiki page (I mean the link or ref#18 at the bottom of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stanley_Cup_champions).

For those of greater skill the working link is http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1924-25

Can someone fix this? Thank you.66.37.177.130 (talk) 02:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done, and I fixed three other references from the same site. Thank you for pointing this out! Resolute 02:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

inappropriate citation
I see this was discussed thoroughly two years ago, but never adequately fixed. Can someone add a citation, that makes sense, to the 1918 cup winners. I think how it is presented is sensible, however Holzman is cited as the source, but he does not agree, he believes they were called the Blueshirts.18abruce (talk) 15:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll try to remember to find a new source for this when I have time to look into some of my books. FWIW, if you go back into newspaper archives of the time, "Blueshirts" was often used as an informal nickname, which is likely where Holzman got it from. Resolute 01:41, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's entirely possible that they had no "real" nickname. Was the team really also called the "Arenas", or was that just because someone had to come up with a name? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I think it is appropriate to list the team name how the article does because of the ambiguity involved. The problem I have is with the citation explaining our choice since Holzman takes the time to make a case for the use of "Blueshirts".  The way the article reads (to me) is that Holzman is backing up the notion that the team shold be called the Toronto Hockey Club, but I could be wrong.  If I have misunderstood, and it is implying that Holtzman is the source for explaining why it is difficult to be certain what the name is, then that is probably okay.18abruce (talk) 02:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposal to split the "NHL Champions (Since 1927)" table into smaller tables
I propose to split this long table. Not only is it becoming long, approaching 90 rows, but it is difficult to differentiate the varied Stanley Cup Finals formats throughout the years. The article currently does not adequately mention the Original Six era when there were not any divisions or conferences, nor the late 1970s system where all the playoff teams were seeded 1 to 16 regardless of conference. Zzyzx11 (talk) 12:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Possible breakdown:
 * 1927-28: American Division vs. Canadian Division
 * 1929-38: [Not sure what to subtitle this section yet]
 * 1938-42: Seven-team league
 * 1943-67: Original Six era
 * 1968-74: East Division vs. West Division
 * 1975-81: [Also not sure what to subtitle this section yet]
 * 1982-93: Wales Conf. vs. Campbell Conf.
 * 1994-present: East Conf. vs. West Conf.
 * Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I really feel no split is necessary. I like the flow to the table as it is right now. I'd even wouldn't mind joining the prior years, basically including all annual Finals. Because to me this shows continuity. With several smaller sections you don't get that sense of continuous history. Jmj713 (talk) 05:23, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I would oppose merging The Challenge Cup era table. That era was totally different. There was no "annual" Cup Finals. Challenges could take place at any time, and thus it was common for teams to defend the Cup numerous times during the year. Furthermore, there were various formats ranging from a single-elimination game, to a total points series, to a best-of series, hus that table has an additional "playoff format" column. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, this is a Wikipedia featured list. As I mentioned above, this page "currently does not adequately mention the Original Six era when there were not any divisions or conferences, nor the late 1970s system where all the playoff teams were seeded 1 to 16 regardless of conference". So on the one hand, it may not be, under Featured list criteria, adequately "comprehensive". On the other hand, as you mentioned, it may affect the "style" and "structure" components. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:42, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not mean merging the challenge games, I meant all annual Finals, starting 1915. But I'm also okay with how it currently is. I'm sure if really necessary more prose could be added to discuss various playoff formats in all the intervening years but it shouldn't be necessary to split the table. Jmj713 (talk) 06:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Astricks next to Dallas Stars 1999 "Championship"
Considering the final "goal" was never really scored, then there should be an astericks next to the name, as well as the winning goal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.170.252.1 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Reliable sources don't put an asterisk on the Dallas Star's cup win.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 00:59, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Why has the trophy been "won 101 times" according to the first paragraph?
The sum of the wins of all teams is 103, not 101 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8388:28C7:6100:A883:3850:B39:EA6 (talk) 19:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of Stanley Cup champions. 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:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5mq4TUogx?url=http://www.nhl.com/cup/fun_facts.html to http://www.nhl.com/cup/fun_facts.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610202322/http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1911-12 to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1911-12
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930000000/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1916-17 to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SilverwareTrophyWinner.jsp?tro=STC&year=1916-17
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=153935&hubname=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629213230/http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html to http://www.nhl.com/cup/champs.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090412121457/http://www.nhl.com/cup/winninggoals.html to http://www.nhl.com/cup/winninggoals.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Cup records by team
Most sports statistics contain a column amounting to "games played" or "innings pitched". I would personally welcome a "seasons played" / "years eligible" column, because statistics with veiled denominators (in any context) set a bad precedent.

The proper treatment of the denominator is to add a second additional column: expected Stanley cup wins, which is: sum y in { season played } 1/Ny where Ny is the number of teams in the league in the given year.

This could be additionally refined relative to the playoff structure (in some seasons, different numbers of teams were eligible as the western or eastern finalist), but this is kind of meaningless because slicing the league into divisions has sometimes taken into account the weak sisters. I think it's easier to assume that every legitimately contending team has a roughly equal shot each season modulo league politics (see whipping boy expansion era).

Without adding this second additional column, comparing a six-team league to a thirty-team league is like stating the price of a car in 1974, neglecting 400% inflation.

But I also admit that I'm personally more of a stickler for statistical honesty than your median bear. — MaxEnt 22:19, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of Stanley Cup champions


text:
Pope Benedict

Benedict has been the papal name of fifteen Roman Catholic popes. The name is derived from the Latin benedictus, meaning "blessed". • Pope Benedict I (575–579)

• Pope Benedict II (684–685)

• Pope Benedict III (855–858)

• Pope Benedict IV (900–903)

• Pope Benedict V (964)

• Pope Benedict VI (972–974)

• Pope Benedict VII (974–983)

• Pope Benedict VIII (1012–1024)

• Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045–1046, 1047–1048)

• Pope Benedict XI (1303–1304)

• Pope Benedict XII (1334–1342)

• Pope Benedict XIII (1724–1730)

• Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758)

• Pope Benedict XV (1914–1922)

• Pope Benedict XVI (2005–2013) Additionally, four antipopes have used the name Benedict:
 * Antipope Benedict X (1058–1059) – several cardinals alleged that his election was irregular and he was deposed. His papacy, though later declared illegitimate, has been taken into account in the conventional numbering of subsequent Popes who took the same name.
 * Antipope Benedict XIII (1394–1423)
 * Antipope Benedict XIV (1424–1429), (1430–1437) – two individuals

title: Pope Benedict


text:
Mike Matthews

 Michael Scott Matthews (born October 24, 1973) is a former Major League Baseball pitcher who pitched from to. Matthews graduated from Woodbridge Senior High School in Woodbridge, Virginia. Matthews pitched a single season at Montgomery Junior College in Rockville, Maryland in 1992 before being drafted by the Cleveland Indians in the second round of that year's amateur draft. In August 1999, he was traded twice in a single month, first to the Boston Red Sox organization, then to the St. Louis Cardinals three weeks later. He made his major league debut with the Cardinals on May 31, 2000.

Matthews was a relief pitcher in the major leagues. He was traded to the Milwaukee Brewers toward the end of the season, signed as a free agent with the San Diego Padres for, with the Cincinnati Reds for , and with the New York Mets for 2005.

title: Mike Matthews


text:
Bucharest Stock Exchange

The Bucharest Stock Exchange (Bursa de Valori București, BVB) is the stock exchange of Romania located in Bucharest. In 2023, the BVB's market capitalization increased by 52.7% to $64.9 billion. , there were 85 companies listed on the BVB.

The capitalization of the Romanian capital market in relation to GDP was of 17.9% at the end of 2019. That same year, the stock exchange indices reached their highest level in the past 10 years. The BET index went up 35% and the BET-TR rose more rapidly, by 47%, against the dividends distributed by the companies.

, the most liquid company within the BVB’s main (Regular) market was Banca Transilvania (TLV), which owns approximately 30% of the total traded value. The following most liquid companies were Fondul Proprietatea (FP), BRD - Groupe Société Générale (BRD), Romgaz (SNG) and OMV Petrom (SNP).

In September 2020, the Bucharest Stock Exchange was promoted from the category of Frontier Market to the category of Secondary Emerging Market by the FTSE Russell rating agency.

On 23 August 2023, the company formed EuroCTP as a joint venture with 13 other bourses, in an effort to provide a consolidated tape for the European Union, as part of the Capital Markets Union proposed by the European Commission.

History
Beginnings of the history of the Bucharest Stock Exchange can be traced back to 1839, when the commodities-trade exchanges were established in Bucharest. It was nevertheless only on December 1, 1882, that the BVB was officially inaugurated. One week later, the first exchange rates begun being published in the Official Gazette. Throughout its early existence, the activities of the Bucharest Stock Exchange were affected by the socio-political events of the time, such as the Romanian Uprising of 1907 or the Balkan Wars that took place between 1912 and 1913. The stock exchange was moreover closed during the First World War. When BVB re-opened following the end of the war, it went through a period of 7 years of significant growth, followed by a period of 7 years of accelerated loss.

In 1948 the activity of the Market for Effects, Actions and Exchange was stopped, with the establishment of the Communist regime in Romania and the beginning of the nationalisation process. At that time, shares issued by 93 companies and 77 fixed-income instruments (bond type) were listed on the Bucharest Stock Exchange.

The Bucharest Stock Exchange reopened again in 1995, after almost 50 years of being shut down by the Communist regime. The first trading session was carried out on November 20, 1995. On that date, 905 shares issued by 6 listed companies were traded. In 2005, BVB absorbed RASDAQ – the over-the-counter electronic stock market. On February 14, 2008, Erste Bank listed on BVB and became the first international company listed on the regulated market.

Subsequently, Bucharest Stock Exchange experienced continuous development and was established as the main stock exchange in Romania. In 2010, Bucharest Stock Exchange listed on its own spot regulated market under the symbol BVB. In 2010, the Alternative trading system was launched by BVB for SMEs and start-up companies wanting to raise capital from the market. At the end of 2014, it was announced that the equities segment of the ATS market will be re-launched under a new name 'AeRO' which stands for Alternative Exchange in Romania. AeRO was officially relaunched on February 25, 2015, during an official opening of the trading session during which two companies debuted - Delivery Solutions (symbol: SDAY) and Carpathia Capital (CRPC). AeRO targets early stage companies, to finance their projects, growth stories, increase their visibility and contribute to the development of the business environment.

On December 15, 2014, BVB has launched a new website, synchronized with all the channels used by BVB, including social media pages. On March 27, 2015, BVB announced that it was joining the United Nations Sustainable Stock Exchanges initiative making it the 19th stock exchange to join. The Bucharest Stock Exchange is a member of the Federation of Euro-Asian Stock Exchanges.

Activities
The Bucharest Stock Exchange is a market and system operator authorized by the Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) that manages a Regulated market (RM) and an Alternative Trading System (ATS) compatible with European standards. BVB also operates a market section called RASDAQ. The following types of financial instruments are traded on BVB: shares, rights, bonds, fund units, structured products and futures contracts. BVB operating revenues are generated mainly from trading activity, from membership and listing fees, as well as from data vending to various users.

Regulated Market

The main market of BVB is a spot regulated market where financial instruments such as shares and rights (issued by international and Romanian entities), debt instruments (corporate, municipality and government bonds) issued by Romanian entities and international corporate bonds, UCITs (shares and fund units), structured products and ETFs are traded.

In order to be listed on the regulated market, a company has to fulfill a number of requirements prior to its listing on BVB:
 * Be a joint stock company (SA)
 * Have the value of market capitalization / shareholders’ equity of at least 1 million euro
 * Have a free-float of at least 25% (shares not owned by the company, nor by strategic investors)
 * Be active on the market for the last 3 years and have available financial reports from that period.

AeRO Market AeRO market is the equities segment of the Alternative trading system (ATS). AeRO market was designed from the need of providing a financing alternative for entrepreneurs, and is the equity segment of the alternative trading system managed by the Bucharest Stock Exchange (BVB). It is a market segment designed for listing of early stage companies, start-ups and SMEs, to finance their projects, growth stories, increase their visibility and contribute to the development of the business environment. Based on the BVB alternative trading system existing since 2010, the AeRO market, under its redesigned and reconstructed concept, was launched on February 25, 2015.

Key features of AeRO market:
 * It addresses all types of companies, regardless of their size or time since establishment,
 * It was created for both shares and bonds, as well as for other financial instruments that do not comply with the requirements of the regulated market,
 * The listing features are simplified, as there is no need for a prospectus to be admitted to trading, but only for a corporate presentation,
 * The reporting requirements are low as compared to the regulated market,
 * A company may prepare to get transferred on the regulated market by gradually increasing the free float, the cash.

Indices
Bucharest Stock Exchange has 8 local indices and one international indices:

BET

BET was the first index developed by BVB. It is the reference index for the capital markets. BET follows the evolution of the 15 most liquid companies listed on BVB regulated market, excluding financial investment companies (SIFs). It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 20%. The main selection criterion is company’s liquidity. Starting with 2015, additional requirements of transparency, quality reporting and communication with investors was imposed. BET index structure: Updated 13 November 2018

BET-TR

BET-TR is the first total return index launched by BVB. It is based on the structure of market reference index BET. BET-TR reflects the evolution of its component shares and dividend yields offered by them. Index is composed of the 13 most traded companies on BVB, excluding SIFs. Similarly to BET, the main selection criterion for BET-TR is the liquidity of the company. Starting with 2015, additional requirement of transparency, quality reporting and communication with investors will be imposed. BET-TR is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 20%.

BET-FI

BET-FI is the first sectoral index launched by BVB. It reflects the evolution of financial investment companies (SIFs) and of other similar institutions. It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 30%.

BET-XT

BET-XT reflects the price evolution of 25 most liquid companies listed on BVB, including investment firms (SIFs). It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 15%.

BET-NG

BET-NG is a sectoral index that reflects the evolution of companies listed on BVB regulated market that operate primarily in energy and utilities field. It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 30%. Number of component shares is variable.

BET-BK

Index BET-BK was created as a benchmark for the fund managers and other institutional investors. The calculation methodology reflects on legal requirements as well as limits of the investment funds. It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. Number of component shares is equal 25.

BET Plus

BET Plus reflects the evolution of Romanian companies listed on BVB regulated market that meet the minimum selection criterion with regards to liquidity and free float. Financial investment companies are excluded from this index. It is an index weighted by free float capitalization. The maximum weight of the symbol is 20%. Number of component shares is variable.

BET-XT-TR

BET-XT-TR is the total return version of BET-XT index, which includes the 25 most traded Romanian companies listed at BVB. BET-XT-TR tracks the price changes of its constituent companies and is adjusted to also reflect the dividends paid by them.

ROTX

ROTX is an index developed by BVB together with the Vienna Stock Exchange (Wiener Börse). It reflects, in real-time, the movement of the ‘blue chip’ shares traded on the Bucharest Stock Exchange. ROTX is an index weighted by free float capitalization, calculated in RON, EUR and USD and disseminated in real time by the Vienna Stock Exchange. ROTX is a tradable index and can be used as an underlying for derivatives and structured products.

Companies Listed
Some of Romania’s highest-profile companies are being traded on BVB. The largest companies by market capitalization as of November 2017 are: OMV Petrom S.A., S.N.G.N. Romgaz S.A., Banca Transilvania, BRD – Groupe Societe Generale S.A, Fondul Proprietatea, S.N.T.G.N. Transgaz S.A. and Societatea Energetica Electrica S.A.

BVB own shares
Since 2010, Bucharest Stock Exchange is listed on its own market, with a symbol BVB. Bucharest Stock Exchange has a single class of common shares and a capital of 76,741,980 lei divided in 7,674,198 shares with a nominal value of RON 10 per share. All the shares are fully paid. The free float of BVB shares is equal 100%. In accordance with the provisions of the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 90/2014 amending and supplementing the Law no. 297/2004 regarding the capital market, a shareholder of a market operator cannot own directly or indirectly more than 20% of the total voting rights. As of November 30, 2014, the Romanian legal entities constituted the largest group of the BVB shareholders (69.19%), followed by foreign legal entities (15.47%), Romanian private individuals (14.79%), and foreign private individuals (0.54%). In November 2014, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has acquired 4.99% stake in the Bucharest Stock Exchange.

Legal Framework
The legal framework for exchange operations in Romania is provided by the following legal acts: Additionally, the BVB is governed by Constitutive Act of the Commercial Company Bursa de Valori Bucuresti S.A. and the Regulation on the Organization and Functioning of the Bursa de Valori Bucuresti whereas the respective markets are governed by the Bucharest Stock Exchange Rulebook for Market Operators and ATS Rulebook for System Operators.
 * The Capital Market Law no. 297/2004
 * CNVM Regulation no. 1/2006 on Issuers and Operations with Securities
 * CNVM Regulation no. 2/2006 on Regulated Markets and Alternative Trading System

Information services
BVB supplies its participant with a wide range of tools that provide real time prices and trading data. Some of the most popular products provided by BVB are:
 * ArenaXT – provides investors with access to the live market data that professional traders rely on. It offers investors real-time, in-depth market information, delivered in a cost-effective and user-friendly way.
 * ON LINE Terminal – provides online trading information based on best prices.
 * ON LINE Quotes – provides online trading information per symbol.

Currently BVB provides real time data to, inter alia: Thomson Reuters, Bloomberg L.P., Standard & Poor’s and many others.

Opening times
Bucharest Stock Exchange trades daily from Monday to Friday. The hours differ depending on the market and the instrument type. The regulated market (REGS) has pre-market sessions from 9:30 – 9:45 AM Eastern European Time (EET), normal trading sessions from 9:45 - 17:55, pre-close session from 17:55 – 18:00, trading at last session from 18:00 until 18:10 PM and closed session at 18:10 PM. The Stock Exchange does not trade on Saturdays and Sundays as well as Romanian national holiday days, declared by BVB in advance.

title: Bucharest Stock Exchange


text:
Talk:William M. Jennings Trophy

Disputed numbers
Is it really necessary to have Note #2? For this kind of stat, I would consider the first-party source (NHL.com) to be the most accurate. Wikipedia itself agrees with the numbers listed: 05-06, 06-07 Schmloof (talk) 05:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I suspect the discrepancy is that the ESPN figures are not counting the goal that is credited to a team when it wins a shootout, but that doesn't go to any given player. The NHL counts that as a goal against for purposes of the Jennings Trophy and the goal differential tiebreaker for the playoffs. On the other hand, it isn't a goal that's like "real" goals and doesn't really reflect on how often the team gives up a goal in the course of regular play. So, I can understand why ESPN would calculate it differently. I don't know this is the cause of the discrepancy, but that's my bet. MrArticleOne (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

 * The standings listed on ESPN ( and ) show the same number of goals as NHL.com - I suspect the problem is that the link to ESPN used on the page goes to the "goals against average" stat, which does not correspond exactly to 1/82 of the goals allowed in the season (due to overtime periods and whether goals for winning shootouts are counted). I think this can be removed; at most, leave a note stating that it includes goals awarded to the opponent due to a shootout loss. PiGuy314 (talk) 21:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I want to edit this, but Yann Danis played 12 games this year, not the requisite 25, so he shouldn't be listed. Nymets180 —Preceding undated comment added 01:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC).
 * You know what? I will change it. Nymets180  —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC).

I updated the numbers for Cory Schneider and Roberto Lunongo. The opening paragraph said 177 and the table said 185. I changed them both to 180 based on nhl.com Eomund (talk) 17:08, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William M. Jennings Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090403053405/http://www.nhl.com/history/fstand10s.html to http://www.nhl.com/history/fstand10s.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William M. Jennings Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070808073925/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashvezina.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashvezina.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William M. Jennings Trophy. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070807083746/http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashjennings.htm to http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/silver_splashjennings.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:William M. Jennings Trophy


text: Talk:Curt Hammer Award

title: Talk:Curt Hammer Award


text:
Talk:Canada Cup

merge?
Idea: what about merging this with World Cup of Hockey?

 * I would say no. Ccccccccccc 05:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Since it the same series I think a merger is appropriate. Nibios 23:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I would have to say no, as thge Canada Cup is actually not the same as the World Series. The two are not actually run as one tournament. In addition, there is plenty of information on the Canada Cup which may be lossed if the two articles are merged.Savevp (talk) 23:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

name?
Should this be called Canada Cup instead, as the most prominent Canada Cup, or Canada Cup (hockey) because it's Canada, and hockey is hockey, and requires ice. Ccccccccccc 05:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Assessment
I have assessed this as a Stub, as it contains only the basic information on the topic, and of low importance, as it a highly specialized topic within Canada. Cheers, CP 14:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

rqImg
A copy of one of the Canada Cup logos should appear on this page. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 08:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you point me to an example of the logo and I should be able to make an SVG of it. Or is it pretty much just the sliced white maple leaf on red background similar to the trophy? Magu (talk) 04:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The Canada Cup image itself is sufficient. A gallery of logos (even one, actually) would run afoul of WP:NFCC as they would be used for decoration only. Tournament logos should be limited to their specific articles. Resolute 04:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

World Championships
There is too much detail about the World Championships in the history section.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 10:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

"Canada Cup winners : 1946–47"
Was there a Canada Cup pre-1976? Our Dunfermline Vikings article says that they won it in 1946-7. --Mais oui! (talk) 09:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears that the Scottish League of the 1940s and 1950s had its own Canada Cup. Unrelated to this one. Resolute 14:14, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Canada Cup


text:
Talk:NCAA women's ice hockey tournament

Title
The new title doesn't make any sense. What is it supposed to mean? Powers T 02:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Ok sorry, Thanks --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève  (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Of course, the old title also is problematic. "National Collegiate Women's Ice Hockey Championship" is a term that refers only to the Division I/II championship.  It does not refer to the Division III championship, nor does it refer to the regular season or playoffs of any of the individual leagues, all of which are discussed in this article.  The article title should be changed to match the content.  Powers T 02:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * sorry Monsieur, the NCAA Division II championship don't exist in U.S. Women ice hockey. Just Division I and III in NCAA Women ice hockey. For the title of the page, I just wanted to harmonize the page with the changes made by User:Cmm3 on the Canadian page Canadian Interuniversity Sport women's ice hockey see . --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève  (talk) 03:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * This article used to describe only the championship tournament of NCAA women's hockey, but it's scope has since expanded to include league play as well. I can't say I know much about the NCAA and what they call their individual leagues, but it seems that calling the article a "championship" or "frozen four" is no longer applicable. Unless someone has a better name, it should be called "National Collegiate Women's Ice Hockey" or "NCAA Women's Ice Hockey." Cmm3 (talk) 03:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Genevieve, you are wrong, and you've been wrong about this from the start. In NCAA women's ice hockey, Division II and Division I compete together for the same championship.  This is called the "National Collegiate Women's Ice Hockey Championship" because it is neither Division I nor Division II, but both conjoined.  Please see this web site where you can switch between "NC" and "Div III" (and compare it to the men's page where the choices are "Div I" and "Div III").  Powers T 14:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Your BIG error it's to compare the male ice hockey with the women ice hockey in USA. They are two different worlds. You know it. We are in two different worlds. --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève  (talk) 16:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * I don't understand; I merely referenced men's hockey to show the difference between them on the NCAA official web site. Powers T 18:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion
As I have worked with both of you in the past (Lt Powers, you communicated with me on ice hockey wikia as Mark_Staffieri), I wanted to try and reach a compromise and prevent a flame war from erupting. Lt. From my point of view, there are already articles about the Patty Kazmaier and Laura Hurd awards, so it really does not need to be here. I have added it to the See Also section. The Division III information should be its own article, as there is very little about Division III in Wikipedia, so I have taken the content from here and created the necessary article. Overall, the title of this article should truly be about the Frozen Four so I have moved it to NCAA Division I women's ice hockey championship (as Frozen Four was used previously). Hope this is a resonable compromise. Maple Leaf (talk) 15:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As I stated above, there is no such thing as the "NCAA Division I women's ice hockey championship". It is the "National Collegiate women's ice hockey championship" because it combines both Division I and Division II.  Powers T 15:58, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 * A compromise ??? sorry no. I defends the Women ice hockey in  its integrity .The NCAA division III is a important part of the NCAA in the same order as the NCAA Division I. I make no compromise with this monsieur LT Powers. Je signe et persiste --Cordialement féministe ♀  Cordially feminist Geneviève  (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Rename
Hi Powers, the title is now National Collegiate women's ice hockey championship. Hopefully, this will put the matter to rest.

Genevieve, I feel that this matter is being taken too personally. Our end goal is to make information easily accessible and Division III should be its own article. Should you feel otherwise, you can communicate with admins on the wiki projects for Ice Hockey and College Ice Hockey to provide a resolution. Maple Leaf (talk) 18:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Technically, it's a proper noun (I erred in my capitalization earlier) and should be in title case.
 * However, more importantly, I think, than continual name changes is determining what the scope of this article should be. If we want the article to cover just the championship tournament, then the current title (perhaps with capitalization changes) is fine.  But if the article is to cover all of DI/DII women's hockey, then the title should reflect that, and not use the name of the championship.  Powers T 18:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I am confused as to why this page was expanded to include league play when it was clearly just about the championship itself. If this article is going to remain true to the fact that it was about the championship itself then the current name is good. If you want it to be about all of DI/II women's hockey then the article will have to be named something different as LtPowers mentions. -DJSasso (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * For the answer to that, you'd have to ask Genevieve. Powers T 18:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed her making the change awhile back and I was too busy to comment at the time..but it really should just be about the championship itself. -DJSasso (talk) 18:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And that's fine, though I think there may be space for a separate article on regular season and league postseason tournaments. To be honest, though, collegiate hockey articles (both here and on Ice Hockey Wiki) are not in good or consistent shape; to an extent, we're all flying blind with little precedent.  Powers T 18:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree. I was just meant that the best way forward might be to split out the regular season stuff to its own article with an appropriate name where we can describe for example the fact that DI and DII teams competing together and leave this page to talk about the post-season as it used to do. NCAA articles are definitely in rough shape. We have a task force assembled to work on them but I don't think the project has worked together much on any goals. People mostly just signed their names to it and then moved on. Such is the problem with most task forces I suppose. -DJSasso (talk) 18:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:NCAA Division I Women's Volleyball Championship which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:NCAA women's ice hockey tournament


text: Talk:Ottawa International Hockey Festival


text:
Crosby Arboretum

The Crosby Arboretum is located in Picayune, Mississippi, United States, and is affiliated with Mississippi State University. It contains 64 acres (259,000 m2) in its interpretive center, plus over 700 acres (2.8 km2) in seven additional natural areas, sheltering over 300 species of indigenous trees and shrubs.

History and landscape
The Arboretum project  was  initiated  by  Lynn Crosby Gammill and her husband Stewart Gammill along with  her brother Osmond Crosby  to honor their father, L. O. Crosby, Jr. (1907–1978), by conserving the region's biological diversity and showcasing plants native to the Pearl River drainage basin. The seven natural areas in Pearl River, Hancock, and Lamar counties were selected for diversity of vegetation, and are preserved and managed for research. These areas contain longleaf pine forests, slash pine hardwoods, sweet bay-tupelo-swamp bay, beech-magnolia, bald cypress-tupelo, bottomland hardwoods, hillside bogs, and savannas.

 * Hillside Bog – 70 acres (283,000 m2) of highly diverse habitat in northern Hancock County, including a hillside bog, longleaf pine, sweetbay-tupelo-swampbay, and longleaf pine-scrub oak.
 * Dead Tiger Creek Hammock – 20 acres (81,000 m2) of a low, non-alluvial, hardwood swamp, home to a variety of species including Coreopsis nudata and Macranthera flammea.
 * Dead Tiger Creek Savanna – 20 acres (81,000 m2) including a pine ridge, sloping bog area with several pitcher plant bogs that contain orchids and insect eating plants, and a flat savanna, containing most of the Mississippi holly species and 2 species of pitcher plant.
 * Red Bluff – 320 acres (1.3 km2) along Catahoula Creek, with a clear-water stream, sandy white beaches, oxbow lakes, titi-lined creek banks, open sandy areas, gum swamps, and dry pine woods.
 * Talowah – 120 acres (486,000 m2) of longleaf pine ridges, maintained by periodic burning, with hardwoods along the branch bottoms.
 * Mill Creek – 20 acres (81,000 m2) of mature beech-magnolia woodland. All five species of magnolia in the state are found here, as are beech, southern magnolia, swampbay, spruce pine, and yellow-poplar.
 * Steep Hollow – A diverse and species-rich area with quaking bogs, longleaf pine slopes and ridges, and sweetbay-tupelo-swampbay areas.

Pinecote Pavilion
The Arboretum is home to the Pinecote Pavilion designed by the late E. Fay Jones. Jones was an apprentice to Frank Lloyd Wright and followed many of Wright's design principles. The pavilion is one of the architectural jewels of Mississippi.

In 1991, Pinecote Pavilion has received an Honor award from the American Institute of Architects and secured Jones to win the AIA Gold Medal. Pinecote, the 64-acre Interpretive Center, was sensitively designed by consultants Andropogon Associates and site master planner Edward L. Blake, Jr. The design for Pinecote received a 1991 Honor award from the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) and an ASLA Medallion Award (1999). Pinecote features walking journeys through 20 acres of biologically-enhanced savanna exhibits, 40 acres of woodland succession, and nearly 4 acres of created waterways.

title: Crosby Arboretum


text:
Moriyama Einosuke

Moriyama Einosuke (森山 栄之助) was a samurai during the Tokugawa shogunate, and an interpreter of Dutch and English. He studied English under Dutch merchants and Ranald MacDonald. He was called upon to assist shogunate officials during the "Manhattan Incident" of 1845, during which the American whaling ship Manhattan approached Edo to repatriate 22 castaway Japanese seamen. As Chief Dutch Interpreter, he was later one of the chief men involved in the negotiations with Commodore Perry in regard to the opening of Japan to the outside world. Samuel Wells Williams, a member of Perry's second visit noted in 1854: A new and superior interpreter came with Saborosuke, named Moriyama Yenosuke ... He speaks English well enough to render any other interpreter unnecessary, and this will assist our intercourse greatly. He ... asked if Ronald McDonald (sic) was well, or if we knew him. ... giving us all a good impression of his education and breeding. (Williams, p.120, March 3rd 1854)

title: Moriyama Einosuke


text:
Machalek

Machalek is a surname, a variant of Michálek. Notable people with the surname include:

 * Richard Machalek (born 1946), American sociologist
 * Miloslav Machálek (born 1961), Czech football manager
 * Marzena Machałek (born 1960), Polish politician

title: Machalek