A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 June 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada articles
Is it necessary to have that huge chart of the protected list in here? Doesn't appear to be the norm for past expansion draft articles, and maybe a citation that links to a published article is sufficient? Ultimately I would think that list of who IS drafted, and not who can't be, would be most important after results are announced. Echoedmyron (talk) 16:22, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the results of the expansion draft should be the focal point of this article, not the protection lists for the other NHL teams. Ho-ju-96 (talk) 07:00, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
