Talk:The Brier

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

"Further reading" section[edit]

I've added a new "Further reading" section with a link to a good website on the history of curling in Canada (from Library and Archives Canada). Is this helpful? Smobri 18:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

naming? (2004)[edit]

I think this article needs to be renamed to something like "Canadian Men's Curling Championship" as Nokia has only been the sponsor since 2001. Labatt's sponsored it for 20 years before that and then of course the original sponsor. RedWolf 01:19, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

I think this article should be called "The Brier". I think the sponsor's name should only be included in the name of the event if the sponsor never changes, eg, Scott Tournament of Hearts. If Molson decided to become the title sponsor of Hockey Night in Canada again, should the article be renamed to 'Molson Hockey Night in Canada'? I think not. Furthermore, distinguishing between sponsors leads to unnatural content. Why should the winners of the Nokia Brier be in a separate table than the winners of the Labatt Brier? This should be one single list of Brier winners or Canadian Men's Curling Champions or something to that effect. If it weren't for the discussion already present, I would have moved this myself, in accordance with WP:Bold. P0per 19:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. "The Brier" is a terrible name for the article. It has always been the tradition to use the event sponsor in the name. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Whe making reference to a particular event, eg. "The 2004 Nokia Brier", I have no problem including the sponsor. But you just have to look to pretty much any article this one links to to find out what people call the event. Russ Howard - "...been to the Brier 13 times...". Randy Ferbey "..in his first Brier..", "...won the Brier...", Jeff Stoughton "Stoughton is a two time Brier and one time World Championship skip", etc... Your claim that "the title is pretty well spread in the local venacular" is only (arguably) true when referring to specific events, and not "The Brier" in general, which is the subject of this article. P0per 20:59, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The current name of the Brier is the Tim Hortons Brier. Whether or not it is spread to the local venacular is up for debate, but it will only take time. Look at the Scott Tournament of Hearts. No one calls it "the Tournament of Hearts". Likewise, when it was the Labatt Brier, it was rarely called just "the Brier". -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly how many people called this thing the Nokia Brier , hmm? Sports commentators call this The Brier 67.68.222.42 05:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RM (7 Mar 2005)[edit]

The following is a closed 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

  • Tim Hortons Brier → The Brier -- Having the title sponser in the name is confusing, alot of people still call this the Labatt Brier, and many people just call it the Brier. It's like the Sugar Bowl, it should not have the sponsor in the title. 132.205.15.43 03:35, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
add: * Support or * Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and a signature:"~~~~"
  • Again, the sponsor in the title is pretty well spread in the local venacular, unlike the Sugar Bowl. It should not be moved. Earl Andrew 03:52, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Object to move - Naming conventions state that "The" should not be including in article titles. violet/riga (t) 09:47, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Propose do not change name leave it as Tim Hortons Brier

---Add any additional comments on the "Requested move" below this line ---

Moved from the WP:RM page in line with the consensus on that page.

    • Again, the sponsor in the title is pretty well spread in the local venacular, unlike the Sugar Bowl. It should not be moved. Earl Andrew 03:52, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • since when have most people been calling this the Tim Hortons Brier? Most people I talk to call it the Brier or the Labatt Brier, but not the Nokia Brier, or Tim Hortons Brier. 132.205.15.43 03:55, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • The Brier: The history of Canada's most celebrated curling championship (Amazon.com) - a book that calls it the Brier.

--Philip Baird Shearer 11:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

    • Using "The Brier" as a title is very akward, and most people (will) say Tim Hortons Brier, just like Labatt Brier Macdonald Brier and Nokia Brier. It is a custom to use the event sponsor in the name. Earl Andrew 04:11, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Most poeple will say the Brier or Labatt Brier, winners are referred to as Brier winners. Labatt is no longer the title sponsor, so the other common usage, The Brier comes into play. Tim Hortons Brier is extremely awkward anyways. Exactly who have you been talking to who call this thing the Tim Hortons Brier? No one I know calls it that. 132.205.15.43 04:41, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • If they dont now, they will in the future. The Brier is very akward too. It sounds too unofficial. Earl Andrew 05:09, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • As I mentioned in my original comment on the naming of this article, the title sponsor of the event has changed over the years. Almost everyone who has any interest in curling, refers to it as The Brier. I don't know if it's always been that way but it's definitely in the mainstream Canadian culture as to referring to it as such. If Tim Hortons or any of the other sponsors had always been the single sponsor, then perhaps the full name would be more commonplace. This is not however the case. Canadians refer to it as The Brier. To digress a bit, with the women's championship, Scott Paper has been the title sponsor since 1982 and Canadians do mainly refer to it as the Scott Tournament of Hearts or simply The Scott. If a sponsor stays around long enough for the men's, perhaps Canadians will starting referring to it more using the sponsor but this is not the way it has been for many years and The Brier is the most common usage among Canadians. RedWolf 06:00, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
    • Having the article at The Brier just doesnt seem right. Earl Andrew 06:09, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not enough consensus for the move. Removed from WP:RM. violet/riga (t) 18:49, 13 Mar 2005 (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.

Move request (2006)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) 08:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename (11 Mar 2006)[edit]

This page should be called The Brier 67.68.222.42 05:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Votes on rename[edit]

  • I should hope so, Tim Hortons paid alot of money to be title sponsor. That still doesn't mean anything, other than Tim Hortons really did pay to be title sponsor. 70.51.9.9 12:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sponsorship doesn't obviate correctness as part of the name for this event. And anon IPs commenting to the contrary mean little to this discussion, either. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 13:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on rename[edit]

Umm, this matter has been settled already. See the above discussion. --curling rock Earl Andrew - talk 06:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Manitoba[edit]

Mention of Manitoba's disproportionate number of victories has no place in a "neutral point of view" article. It may be a fact, but deserves no more mention than the fact that the territories have never won. Either include all such trivia, or none at all.

Assessment[edit]

I have assessed this as Start Class, as it contains more detail and organization than would be expected of a Stub, and of low importance, as it is a highly specific event within Canada. Cheers, CP 02:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Tournament of Hearts is rated as high importance though. 09:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Chart of Winners[edit]

How about having a chart showing total winners by province/region? anyone oppose it? Also, what about an indication as to who went on to win the World Championships that year? 99.248.53.179 (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2012)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 10:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Hortons Brier → The Brier – Following the move of "Rogers Cup" to "Canadian Open" at Tennis, I wanted to see how the community feels about moving this article to simply The Brier. The article encompasses the entire competition - including its stints as "MacDonald Brier" and "Nokia Brier". This means the article title, which is about the tournament itself (including those using past sponsorship names) is not reflective of its history, nor its common name. Colipon+(Talk) 01:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC) Although this has been discussed before, it has been over 5 years since last discussed. The name of this article should be simple "The Brier" or "Brier Cup". Although Tim Hortons is the current major sponsor, the article covers not only the Tim Hortons Brier but the Macdonald Brier, Labatt Brier, and Nokia Brier. So naming the article Tim Hortons Brier is incorrect as it covers more than the 7 years of Tim Hortons Briers. UrbanNerd (talk) 21:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brier Cup? And what pray tell is that? According to the Curling Wikiproject, it is appropriate to name articles with sponsor names if that event is widely known by its sponsor name. I think in this case, using "the" infront of Brier is not a very good way of starting the article title, and it has never been officially called "the Brier". It may be called "the Brier" more often than "Tim Hortons Brier", but calling it that is not some obscure officialism. And it is policy on Wikipedia, afiak to call sporting events by its current name. It's also common in sports like golf and tennis (which have many parallels to curling) to use sponsor names in the article titles. -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia WP:Policy is WP:UCN, see WP:OFFICIALNAME, where the common name is preferred over the official name. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 05:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support "The Brier" WP:COMMONNAME, and I have never seen "Brier Cup" where did that come from? -- 70.24.251.208 (talk) 05:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. "Tim Hortons Brier" is more common than "the Brier". You might call an event "the 2012 Brier", but never "2012 The Brier". Curling is one of those sports where the sponsor name is commonly used when naming the event. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:52, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That doesn't remedy the problem that prior to 2005, none of the Briers were known as "Tim Hortons Brier" and this article encompasses all Brier events in history. Colipon+(Talk) 18:50, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The sponsor name is the official name of the event, regardless of whether or not other sponsors previously supported the event. It is the same as biographies, for example Jane Smith gets married and becomes Jane Doe, the article referring to Jane Smith would be moved and listed as Jane Doe. Curling events treat naming different than other sports, and it's the same with curling events on the World Curling Tour, when sponsors change. Sirrussellott (talk) 20:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Brier Cup" will not be suitable in the slightest, and using "The Brier" is iffy at best. In referring to WP:COMMONNAME, it must be noted that the name of the article must reflect "the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." It seems that usage of the terms "Tim Hortons Brier" and "Brier" in curling articles is about the same, and that "Brier" is used as a shortened version of "Tim Hortons Brier" solely due to simplicity. "The Brier" can also refer to other subjects. Based on this, I would argue that of the two suitable names deemed suitable by reliable sources, "Tim Hortons Brier" and "Brier," the former is the better option in that it offers clarity and reflects the official name. If not, I would support "Brier" over "The Brier," since it is a more correct name, but, as mentioned in earlier discussions, this would lead to the use of a disambiguation tag which is not desirable. Prayerfortheworld (talk) 01:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is not used as a shortened version of the Tim Horton's Brier, since it's been in use for decades prior to the sponsorship of Tim Horton's, so cannot be a shortened version of something that did not exist yet. WP:OFFICIALNAME on "official names". 70.24.251.208 (talk) 03:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm sure that "Brier" was used as a shortened version of "Macdonald Brier," "Labatt Brier," and "Nokia Brier" as well, but that does not mean that the sponsors' names are nonconsequential in considering the name of the event. Also, this still does not address the fact that the use of "Tim Hortons Brier" is dominant over the use of "Brier" in the sense that the event is most often referred to as the "Tim Hortons Brier," not simply "the Brier" or "Brier." Prayerfortheworld (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also want to note that moving this page violates WP:CURLING which clearly states that this particular article should remain under its official name. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will also note, as it was mentioned in the 2006 request to move this page, and still stands true, anonymous IPs commenting to the contrary mean little to this discussion. Sirrussellott (talk) 23:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nominator's comment: As nom, I actually find the opposing arguments pretty convincing, so I won't push this case further, since my contentions and arguments have all been addressed. So unless other people have better arguments for the name "The Brier", we should close this debate soon. Colipon+(Talk) 02:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Prayerfortheworld (talk) 02:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 March 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Per consensus. – robertsky (talk) 23:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montana's Brier → The Brier – Per WP:COMMONNAME policy, as evidenced by the fact that The Brier has been a redirect to [sponsor] Brier since 2012. Wikipedia does not exist to promote corporate sponsorships (see: WP:NOTADVERT policy), while searches for "Brier" on Google return results which are entirely related to the Curling event. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  04:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for the same reasons stated the last time this was brought up in 2005 and 2012. The sponsor's name has been part of the Brier tradition since the very beginning, so including the sponsor name has always been part of the common name. Plus "The Brier" is an awkward as a title. It may be used in the body of text in sources, but is rarely used on its own as a title. You're just as likely to see "Brier" on it is own as a title, without "The".-- Earl Andrew - talk 14:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't going to bring this up, but since you have said your reasons for opposing are the same as they were both 12 and 19 years ago, it's fair game. In the 2012 discussion, you said that "I also want to note that moving this page violates WP:CURLING which clearly states that this particular article should remain under its official name." I would invite you to read up on current policy regarding local consensuses, which states very clearly "Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale." Community consensus is to make WP:COMMONNAME part of the Article Titles policy ("The Policy") and which says, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria listed [in The Policy] . When there is no single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by these sources, editors should reach a consensus as to which title is best by considering these criteria directly" (bolding mine).
So now that I've laid out that being the "official" title is mostly irrelevant, lets look at the sources. Since we've had a change in title sponsor in the years since the 2012 discussion, we should also look at the WP:NAMECHANGES part of The Policy. It says, "Sometimes the subject of an article will undergo a change of name. When this occurs, we give extra weight to independent, reliable, English-language sources ("reliable sources" for short) written after the name change." TSN/Bell Media has overwhelmingly used "Brier" this year, occasionally using "the Brier" and "Montana's Brier".[1][2][3][4][5][6] Global News uses "Brier" or "the Brier" in headlines and in all but two ctrl+f hits for "Brier" (appearing to use "Canadian men's curling championship" more often than "Montana's...").[7][8][9] The CBC uses "Brier" or "the Brier" only in headlines and also uses "Canadian men's curling championship" in article bodies more often than the sponsored name.[10][11] Various Postmedia outlets are also electing to use "Brier" in headlines, etc.
Looking at the five points listed on The Policy, the current sponsored title is not at all recognizable (as demonstrated above in the sources), natural, or concise. Only The Brier (which, again, already redirects here and has for 12 years, proving primary topic status) or Brier (curling) fit all five points. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  15:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support clear wp:commonname—blindlynx 19:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think we need to be a lot more clear, as discussed above, both CBC and TSN (in English), as well as Radio-Canada, RDS (in French), and other international organizations have been using the Brier or Brier for clarity and consistency. I also think we need to consider that the sponsorship of the Brier may change again, so we'd be having this conversation all over again. So, for players who have curled in the Tim Hortons Brier, as well as the now Montana's Brier, their wikipedia articles, as well as their medal counts, can get very confusing. I think we need to be realistic and just say that Brier is going to be the name, no matter who is the main sponsor. I think Wikipedia needs to align and reflect with what accredited journalists and media organizations report on and say as well. User_talk: Traveltheglobe 21:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support clearly not the common name. WP:OFFICIALNAME we do not use official names just because they are official. Wikipedia is not an advertising hub. The sponsor's name is not necessary when it makes it longer and less common and less recognizable. The current title fails WP:CONCISE and wP:COMMONNAME, being less common and longer --- It also suggests that this article is about a bonspiel in Montana, USA; perhaps the Montanan championship, and not one in Canada -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 06:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This article on French Wikipedia[edit]

The version of this article on fr.wiki, fr:Brier Montana's, needs fixing. Many of the bluelinks for curlers link to the wrong articles, and it should also probably be renamed to fr:Le Brier per this article's rename -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 21:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then fix it? This is the discussion for the English page, not the French.-- Earl Andrew - talk 13:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The fr.wiki article was mostly static from 2016 to 2024, so it's not likely French Wikipedians will correct it. Only the sponsor name change prompted a flurry of edits. Thus Canadian editors, who might be bilingual, and who appear here, might want to fix that, providing their French is sufficient, if more adjustments are needed to the text of the article, aside from the link. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 04:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Brier&oldid=1215108731"