![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
take a look at http://www.wwe.com/ and http://dictionary.reference.com/ and it will tell you that its Wrestlemania 25 25 year of Wrestlemania not 24 like so people have flase been saying although anyone that went to school know these —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
WOW do you need help understanding what a anniversary is I know what it is but hey you made wrestlemaina so we all wrong and you guys are right since you are the owner of WWE oh wait your not so could it be possible your wrong and guess what you are Not that hard to understand it 2009 its been 25 year since Vince made the PPV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 22:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Math not your strong point is it because you are wrong and see Im intend to fix it back to normal making it 25 anniversary since its been 25 years of Wrestlemania and since Wikipedia is 100 percent wrong I have every right to fix it [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 22:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC).
Wrestlemania 2 was not the first anniversary they did not take place on the same day —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.110.223 ( talk) 02:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's a possible explanation....When Hulk Hogan defeated The Iron Sheik to win the WWF World Title it kicked off a new era in professional wrestling. Thus "Wrestlemania" in this case may not be referring to the actual PPV event, but rather a more abstract idea such as "WWF Attitude". In early 1985 Hogan had been World Champion for a year or so, and the first Wrestlemania PPV was a celebration of one year of The Wrestlemania Era. Most wrestling historians(such as they are) tend to mark wrestling as pre- or post- Hogan's win over Sheik. It was probably the single biggest turning point in pro wrestling history. In the same way that the "Austin 3:16 says I just kicked your ass" speech began a new era, so did early 1984...the Wreslemania era. Of course this is pure speculation, and may be complete bs on my part... 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 07:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
well We have 10 website that prove that its the 25 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Dear God, this is the dumbest discussion we are having at the moment and that includes what we should name Christian's article. Spikemike or supermike whatever your name is, go up to your parents and ask them how long they have been married. What year they were married, and which anniversary they just celebrated and will. An anniversary is the celebration of a passed event. WWE are trying to re-write history. They figure it is more convenient to promote the 25th wrestlemania as an anniversary than doing it with wrestlemania 26 which wouldn't work in poor Vince's mind. WrestleMania 25 is the 25th WrestleMania, but not the 25th Anniversary of said event.-- Will C 21:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
I am the one who suggested the "25 years since Hogan..." I am not Supermike. Obviously it is the 24th anniversary, not the 25th. Someone asked Jim Ross about this, and he said "It's easier to market it this way". As for Mike, what year were you born? On your next birthday how old will you turn? Why? Maybe WWE did this deliberately to get people to talk about the event? Since nobody is talking about seeing HHH-Orton for the millionth time.... 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 08:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
PS. This does rather show up the flaws with wikipedia however. WWE themselves refer to it as the "25th Anniversary", loads of websites are referring to it as such, and people like supermike can link/source etc to dozens of respected and "Reliable" sources that use the "25th anniversary" tag. However, it obviously isn't the 25th anniversary. But are there any reliable sources as per WP:OR that could be included saying that it's NOT the "25th anniversary"? Remember, wikipedia is about sources, not facts! In this case, using wikipedia regulations to the detail, supermike wins, even though as anyone can work out by themselves, it's the 24th anniversary. But where is your reliable source? 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 08:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm sure that many people (myself included) ahve used that logic, only to be warned, or even blocked, when using common sense. And the person always says something to the effect of "Where is your source that states x?" There are numerous articles on wikipedia that state blatant bs, yet because someone has a link to a supposedly "Reliable" website, it stands as is. So you are now saying that common sense and logic is the final decider. Clearly that is not the case in general. Eg. the "bucket" example. A real discussion took place to the effect of this...
Person 1: If I told you I had a bucket, and I showed you the bucket, with the sales receipt, surely that would be sufficient to prove I had a bucket?
Wiki admin: NO! You would still need a reliable source stating that you had a bucket!
You can't have it both ways! Any fool can work out that WM XXV is the 24th anniversary of Wrestlemania, but wiki rules, re: sources and original research and what they are. You still have not provided a reliable source. Of course you are right, but the rules need to be uniform. 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 10:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Read Wikipedia:Use common sense.-- Will C 11:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it is false, but where is your SOURCE that says it's false? Also, who decides that this is a clear case for IAR, while another page may not be? I know this is the 24th anniversary, yet there does not appear to be a RELIABLE SOURCE to that effect. Thus, it counts as OR or POV in your part. Just saying. 41.245.174.79 ( talk) 15:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
This is going in circles. I never said this WAS the 25h Anniversary. I merely asked how and why you can decide when the "common sense" card can be played. Is it only for entertainment things like pro wrestling? CAn i go and edit political articles and then say "It's common sense"? I know this can't possibly be the 25th anniversary this year, I just want to know where the line is for "common sense". And can people use this discussion page and what you said as a precedent if they want to add "common sense" to other wikipedia articles? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is absolutely ridiculous. I mean people actually wasting their time to discuss such a nonsensical thing is just beyond me. I know its a free country and all that and people have the right to choose how they want to spend their time, but this is taking it too far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.232.66 ( talk) 18:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
THIS IS POINTLESS. LEAVE IT-- Falegas ( talk) 19:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Here a idea since its not the 24 nor the 25 Wrestlemania just take the whole thing out and just say its Wrestlemania —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree just take out that its the 24th anniversary of Wrestlmaina all it done is screw everything up and make everything completed the best thing to do is go bye what WWE is doing after all its their PPV [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 01:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
This coming from a Guy who can't escape that Wrestlemaina 25 is really Wrestlemaina 25 everyone one who a real wrestling fan know these even JR know these —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs)
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Okay guys, lets get our facts straight. For the ones who have a brain, it is all agreed it is the 24th anninversary. Also speaking to ones with brains, it is also the 25th WrestleMania. Alright now that is settled. This discussion is useless since we should all use the common sense God gave us and understand, this section is completely dumb and useless.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 02:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
You know what TJ spyke I know what a anniversary I also know what Slander is which is what these article is full with [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
How about we all get a third opinion before I nominate this discussion for Wikipedia:LAME.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 03:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Well Im saying you calling me a troll slander and im saying there slander in these article which is true Supermike ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
Way to feed the troll, guys. Way to feed the troll.-- ECWAGuru ( talk) 04:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey Supermike, read the article for anniversary, go to http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anniversary 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Supermike, please just shut up and quit debating us without looking at the definition. The original Wrestlemania was not the first anniversary Wrestlemania nobody knew that there world by a 2 until it was announced. Therefore, that made the second wrestlemania the first anniversary of Wrestlemania. Get over it. -- Super Silver 901 23:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
It should be listed as the 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania because, read closely..... that.... is..... the.... official.... name. You can note in the lead that the name is technically inaccurate (see Barting Over), but it's still the name. And before you say anything, "WrestleMania XXV", based on the commercials from a year ago, is the former name, and should be reflected as such. Mshake3 ( talk) 16:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Its not slander. your an idiot. read your stuff its idiotic. you idiot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.134.206.189 ( talk) 00:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Since we don't which former WWE diva will appear are we going to wait till the PPV to put them name in but from my understanding we won't know till then anyways Mike Mike 22:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Can someone make a column which lists the participants in the battle royal? Melina and Maryse have already been confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
She was on the graphic tonight on Raw, she is in it.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 07:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Heres the list of all of the divas that were confirmed in the graphic last night:
Candice Michelle might not take part in the Battle Royal due to an injury she suffered last year that is coming back, if Candice is not in the battle royal that could mean 6 past divas to take part instead of 5.
Gail Kim wasn't annonced on RAW that she will be in the battle royal. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
90.211.174.121 (
talk)
00:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Add them to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 11:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Do it yourself. And where is your source? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 13:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
How do I add them to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 00:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Is the official sponsor of RassleMania this year —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.8.77.104 ( talk) 01:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Am I mistaken or didn't the announcers mention JBL vs Rey Mysterio(as a WM25 match) on RAW? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually they did confirm it in the Smackdown Spoilers http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/stories/bSPOILERS_SD_Results_For_NEXT_Weekb.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.202.50.82 ( talk) 19:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Wrong they are official you just hate being Proven wrong again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.100.149 ( talk) 14:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
'
Oakster, I went to the link you provided. It talked about how Kozlov's match was shortened and how Hardy's promo was shortened. SO WHAT???? Did they ANNOUNCE a match and then edit out the announcement. That article was stupid. It's nothing new for smackdown to edit. That has nothing to do with the Intercontinental Title defense against Mysterio. But still, of course, it's not good to spoil things for people on Wikipedia. But that link proved nothing. 24.160.145.53 ( talk) 18:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
And SCCA, nobody in this DISCUSSION is worried about spoilers, I guarantee that. That's why it's talked about in here and not put up on the article right away.
Actually I care very much about spoilers. Just because I want to help out WP:PW doesn't mean I don't still wanna enjoy the swerves and surprises of pro wrestling. Tony2Times ( talk) 11:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
This arguing is stupid. Everyone knows WWE pretapes some episodes of their programming, and it is usually proper to wait to post anything related to WWE or any active professional wrestling organization on Wikipedia until everyone who wasn't at the event can watch it on TV. Plus it's not cool to spoil it for everyone else who might want to watch to find out. Scca8704 ( talk) 17:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
JBL vs Mysterio has been confirmed: http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/matches/ it's also on WWE.COM's main page. Arbobug ( talk) 15:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes Yes Yes guys, mysterio WILL face JBL for the IC Title, but this announcement hasn't been aired on TV yet. And you know, if you even MENTION that in this discussion, smarks will chew your head off and lecture you about "reliable sources." YES WE KNOW, that's why it's a discussion. 24.160.145.53 ( talk) 18:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
But it is a primary source. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources. 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 12:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I heard Crash by Decyfer Down during the Matt vs. Jeff promo on Smackdown. Even though I do know that Youtube isn't a reliable source but check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umfUDwvJ974 it starts around 0:25. Super Silver 901 16:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
chris Jericho vs. Legends Handicap Match is deleted from www.wwe.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.14.80.137 ( talk • contribs)
Should we make mention of it in the production section since WWE recognizes it-- Super Silver 901 23:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
In the battle royal, would it not be good thing to list who the 25 women actually are going to be in it?
No since none of them seem to be appearing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Why? Why shouldn't the match participants be listed in the match section that otherwise lists...here's a shocker...the match participants!? Dahumorist ( talk) 02:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC) Because none of the diva has agree to be in the match Supermike ( talk) 02:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone think that we should have a table of all those being inducted into the hall of fame added to this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidbhoy2805 ( talk • contribs) 22:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I notice wrestler's real names have been added next to their wrestling alter egos, how come only half have been added though? CM Punk and Rey Rey's real names not listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.248.169 ( talk) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a problem if I take that back out so it just says "Lumberjack match"? The tag team part is not needed, and we don't include it in stuff like the ladder match at WrestleMania 2000 or in any TLC matches (i.e. we don't write "Tag Team Tables, Ladders, and Chairs match"). TJ Spyke 00:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
take a look at http://www.wwe.com/ and http://dictionary.reference.com/ and it will tell you that its Wrestlemania 25 25 year of Wrestlemania not 24 like so people have flase been saying although anyone that went to school know these —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
WOW do you need help understanding what a anniversary is I know what it is but hey you made wrestlemaina so we all wrong and you guys are right since you are the owner of WWE oh wait your not so could it be possible your wrong and guess what you are Not that hard to understand it 2009 its been 25 year since Vince made the PPV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 22:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Math not your strong point is it because you are wrong and see Im intend to fix it back to normal making it 25 anniversary since its been 25 years of Wrestlemania and since Wikipedia is 100 percent wrong I have every right to fix it [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 22:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC).
Wrestlemania 2 was not the first anniversary they did not take place on the same day —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.110.223 ( talk) 02:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's a possible explanation....When Hulk Hogan defeated The Iron Sheik to win the WWF World Title it kicked off a new era in professional wrestling. Thus "Wrestlemania" in this case may not be referring to the actual PPV event, but rather a more abstract idea such as "WWF Attitude". In early 1985 Hogan had been World Champion for a year or so, and the first Wrestlemania PPV was a celebration of one year of The Wrestlemania Era. Most wrestling historians(such as they are) tend to mark wrestling as pre- or post- Hogan's win over Sheik. It was probably the single biggest turning point in pro wrestling history. In the same way that the "Austin 3:16 says I just kicked your ass" speech began a new era, so did early 1984...the Wreslemania era. Of course this is pure speculation, and may be complete bs on my part... 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 07:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
well We have 10 website that prove that its the 25 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Dear God, this is the dumbest discussion we are having at the moment and that includes what we should name Christian's article. Spikemike or supermike whatever your name is, go up to your parents and ask them how long they have been married. What year they were married, and which anniversary they just celebrated and will. An anniversary is the celebration of a passed event. WWE are trying to re-write history. They figure it is more convenient to promote the 25th wrestlemania as an anniversary than doing it with wrestlemania 26 which wouldn't work in poor Vince's mind. WrestleMania 25 is the 25th WrestleMania, but not the 25th Anniversary of said event.-- Will C 21:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
I am the one who suggested the "25 years since Hogan..." I am not Supermike. Obviously it is the 24th anniversary, not the 25th. Someone asked Jim Ross about this, and he said "It's easier to market it this way". As for Mike, what year were you born? On your next birthday how old will you turn? Why? Maybe WWE did this deliberately to get people to talk about the event? Since nobody is talking about seeing HHH-Orton for the millionth time.... 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 08:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
PS. This does rather show up the flaws with wikipedia however. WWE themselves refer to it as the "25th Anniversary", loads of websites are referring to it as such, and people like supermike can link/source etc to dozens of respected and "Reliable" sources that use the "25th anniversary" tag. However, it obviously isn't the 25th anniversary. But are there any reliable sources as per WP:OR that could be included saying that it's NOT the "25th anniversary"? Remember, wikipedia is about sources, not facts! In this case, using wikipedia regulations to the detail, supermike wins, even though as anyone can work out by themselves, it's the 24th anniversary. But where is your reliable source? 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 08:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm sure that many people (myself included) ahve used that logic, only to be warned, or even blocked, when using common sense. And the person always says something to the effect of "Where is your source that states x?" There are numerous articles on wikipedia that state blatant bs, yet because someone has a link to a supposedly "Reliable" website, it stands as is. So you are now saying that common sense and logic is the final decider. Clearly that is not the case in general. Eg. the "bucket" example. A real discussion took place to the effect of this...
Person 1: If I told you I had a bucket, and I showed you the bucket, with the sales receipt, surely that would be sufficient to prove I had a bucket?
Wiki admin: NO! You would still need a reliable source stating that you had a bucket!
You can't have it both ways! Any fool can work out that WM XXV is the 24th anniversary of Wrestlemania, but wiki rules, re: sources and original research and what they are. You still have not provided a reliable source. Of course you are right, but the rules need to be uniform. 41.245.157.51 ( talk) 10:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Read Wikipedia:Use common sense.-- Will C 11:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it is false, but where is your SOURCE that says it's false? Also, who decides that this is a clear case for IAR, while another page may not be? I know this is the 24th anniversary, yet there does not appear to be a RELIABLE SOURCE to that effect. Thus, it counts as OR or POV in your part. Just saying. 41.245.174.79 ( talk) 15:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
This is going in circles. I never said this WAS the 25h Anniversary. I merely asked how and why you can decide when the "common sense" card can be played. Is it only for entertainment things like pro wrestling? CAn i go and edit political articles and then say "It's common sense"? I know this can't possibly be the 25th anniversary this year, I just want to know where the line is for "common sense". And can people use this discussion page and what you said as a precedent if they want to add "common sense" to other wikipedia articles? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is absolutely ridiculous. I mean people actually wasting their time to discuss such a nonsensical thing is just beyond me. I know its a free country and all that and people have the right to choose how they want to spend their time, but this is taking it too far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.232.66 ( talk) 18:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
THIS IS POINTLESS. LEAVE IT-- Falegas ( talk) 19:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Here a idea since its not the 24 nor the 25 Wrestlemania just take the whole thing out and just say its Wrestlemania —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree just take out that its the 24th anniversary of Wrestlmaina all it done is screw everything up and make everything completed the best thing to do is go bye what WWE is doing after all its their PPV [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 01:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
This coming from a Guy who can't escape that Wrestlemaina 25 is really Wrestlemaina 25 everyone one who a real wrestling fan know these even JR know these —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs)
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Okay guys, lets get our facts straight. For the ones who have a brain, it is all agreed it is the 24th anninversary. Also speaking to ones with brains, it is also the 25th WrestleMania. Alright now that is settled. This discussion is useless since we should all use the common sense God gave us and understand, this section is completely dumb and useless.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 02:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
You know what TJ spyke I know what a anniversary I also know what Slander is which is what these article is full with [[User:Supermike|Supermike] ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
How about we all get a third opinion before I nominate this discussion for Wikipedia:LAME.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 03:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Well Im saying you calling me a troll slander and im saying there slander in these article which is true Supermike ( talk) 1 —Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC).
Way to feed the troll, guys. Way to feed the troll.-- ECWAGuru ( talk) 04:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey Supermike, read the article for anniversary, go to http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anniversary 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Supermike, please just shut up and quit debating us without looking at the definition. The original Wrestlemania was not the first anniversary Wrestlemania nobody knew that there world by a 2 until it was announced. Therefore, that made the second wrestlemania the first anniversary of Wrestlemania. Get over it. -- Super Silver 901 23:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
It should be listed as the 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania because, read closely..... that.... is..... the.... official.... name. You can note in the lead that the name is technically inaccurate (see Barting Over), but it's still the name. And before you say anything, "WrestleMania XXV", based on the commercials from a year ago, is the former name, and should be reflected as such. Mshake3 ( talk) 16:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Its not slander. your an idiot. read your stuff its idiotic. you idiot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.134.206.189 ( talk) 00:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Since we don't which former WWE diva will appear are we going to wait till the PPV to put them name in but from my understanding we won't know till then anyways Mike Mike 22:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Can someone make a column which lists the participants in the battle royal? Melina and Maryse have already been confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
She was on the graphic tonight on Raw, she is in it.-- Will C---( What the F*** have you done lately???!!) 07:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Heres the list of all of the divas that were confirmed in the graphic last night:
Candice Michelle might not take part in the Battle Royal due to an injury she suffered last year that is coming back, if Candice is not in the battle royal that could mean 6 past divas to take part instead of 5.
Gail Kim wasn't annonced on RAW that she will be in the battle royal. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
90.211.174.121 (
talk)
00:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Add them to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 11:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Do it yourself. And where is your source? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 13:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
How do I add them to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.187.18 ( talk) 00:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Is the official sponsor of RassleMania this year —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.8.77.104 ( talk) 01:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Am I mistaken or didn't the announcers mention JBL vs Rey Mysterio(as a WM25 match) on RAW? 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 06:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually they did confirm it in the Smackdown Spoilers http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/stories/bSPOILERS_SD_Results_For_NEXT_Weekb.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.202.50.82 ( talk) 19:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Wrong they are official you just hate being Proven wrong again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.100.149 ( talk) 14:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
'
Oakster, I went to the link you provided. It talked about how Kozlov's match was shortened and how Hardy's promo was shortened. SO WHAT???? Did they ANNOUNCE a match and then edit out the announcement. That article was stupid. It's nothing new for smackdown to edit. That has nothing to do with the Intercontinental Title defense against Mysterio. But still, of course, it's not good to spoil things for people on Wikipedia. But that link proved nothing. 24.160.145.53 ( talk) 18:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
And SCCA, nobody in this DISCUSSION is worried about spoilers, I guarantee that. That's why it's talked about in here and not put up on the article right away.
Actually I care very much about spoilers. Just because I want to help out WP:PW doesn't mean I don't still wanna enjoy the swerves and surprises of pro wrestling. Tony2Times ( talk) 11:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
This arguing is stupid. Everyone knows WWE pretapes some episodes of their programming, and it is usually proper to wait to post anything related to WWE or any active professional wrestling organization on Wikipedia until everyone who wasn't at the event can watch it on TV. Plus it's not cool to spoil it for everyone else who might want to watch to find out. Scca8704 ( talk) 17:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
JBL vs Mysterio has been confirmed: http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/matches/ it's also on WWE.COM's main page. Arbobug ( talk) 15:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes Yes Yes guys, mysterio WILL face JBL for the IC Title, but this announcement hasn't been aired on TV yet. And you know, if you even MENTION that in this discussion, smarks will chew your head off and lecture you about "reliable sources." YES WE KNOW, that's why it's a discussion. 24.160.145.53 ( talk) 18:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
But it is a primary source. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources. 41.245.185.66 ( talk) 12:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I heard Crash by Decyfer Down during the Matt vs. Jeff promo on Smackdown. Even though I do know that Youtube isn't a reliable source but check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umfUDwvJ974 it starts around 0:25. Super Silver 901 16:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
chris Jericho vs. Legends Handicap Match is deleted from www.wwe.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.14.80.137 ( talk • contribs)
Should we make mention of it in the production section since WWE recognizes it-- Super Silver 901 23:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
In the battle royal, would it not be good thing to list who the 25 women actually are going to be in it?
No since none of them seem to be appearing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Why? Why shouldn't the match participants be listed in the match section that otherwise lists...here's a shocker...the match participants!? Dahumorist ( talk) 02:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC) Because none of the diva has agree to be in the match Supermike ( talk) 02:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone think that we should have a table of all those being inducted into the hall of fame added to this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidbhoy2805 ( talk • contribs) 22:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I notice wrestler's real names have been added next to their wrestling alter egos, how come only half have been added though? CM Punk and Rey Rey's real names not listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.248.169 ( talk) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a problem if I take that back out so it just says "Lumberjack match"? The tag team part is not needed, and we don't include it in stuff like the ladder match at WrestleMania 2000 or in any TLC matches (i.e. we don't write "Tag Team Tables, Ladders, and Chairs match"). TJ Spyke 00:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)