This article was nominated for deletion on 14 October 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Professional wrestling Low‑importance WWE Armageddon is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yeah, I don't know how to reference or whatever, or if this is enough, although it should be, but here's the match between Yang and Helms from Armageddon 2006, and as you can see it ends with Helms hitting the Double Knee Facebreaker. http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/Helms+Yang/video/x2vrhv_jimmy-wang-yang-vs-gregory-helms-cr_extreme —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.49.23 ( talk) 04:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Yes he did hit that move, but then he pinned Yang with a roll-up. So he won with the roll-up. TJ Spyke 04:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC) reply

No, he pinned him with that move. The only reason it was a roll up was because of the way they were positioned. He won the match with the facebuster, his finisher at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.49.23 ( talk • contribs)

He hit his move, but then used a roll-up yo win. Simple as that. We use the move they did to get the win. If he had gone for a regular pinfall attempt, then maybe. TJ Spyke 04:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia should start an article on Armageddon 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.198.244 ( talk) 00:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC) reply

Check out WP:PW. We only have so many volunteers, so it will take time to get them all. TJ Spyke 00:57, 8 February 2008 (UTC) reply

I'm going to include the Maven vs Matt Hardy match for 2003. It was an offical match!!! Batista was sick of losing the match so after Maven's entrance Batista attacked Maven, Hardy ran in and called for the bell, and pinned Maven. If anyone doesn't agree I saw the DVD so show me otherwise if it isn't a match. Meepboy ( talk) 00:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC) reply

There was no official match: [1], [2], [3]. That's like saying we should list Bischoff vs. McMahon from the time Bischoff challenged McMahon to show up in WCW. TJ Spyke 00:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC) reply

The last source you provided contradicts what you're saying since it says:

"Evidently Evolution wasn't watching Heat (like most people), because a match was set up between Maven and Matt Hardy and it's supposed to start right now."

Since the source does acknowledge that the Maven/Hardy match was set up during Heat, then it should, in my opinion, be counted as an official match (despite the fact that it never took place). -- Andresg770 ( talk) 00:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Yes there was a match that was SUPPOSED to happen, but it never did since Batista attacked Maven before it could. When the PPV gets expanded to its own article (which will happen eventually since we at WP:PW are slowly expanding individual PPV's), it will be mentioned. TJ Spyke 03:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Guess point taken. 76.116.191.171 ( talk) 19:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Woah Woah Woah wait a min, I got more sources link title, link title, The PWI Almanac+Book of facts that comes out every year, link title and there may be more just dont have time Meepboy ( talk) 00:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Why isn't there a listing for Armageddon 2009? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BBoy ( talk • contribs)

Because no 2009 event has been confirmed by WWE yet. And no, we are not gonna speculate that it will happen (like another user wanted us to put in a fake Judgment Day 2009 poster because WWE hadn't released the poster yet and they wanted a poster in the article even if it was fake). TJ Spyke 16:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC) reply

It should probably be at least noted that they haven't confirmed it yet then on the main Armageddon page. User:BBoy

Actually, no it shouldn't. That would be like saying "Why don't you note WrestleMania XXVI hasn't been announced". WWE hasn't even confirmed that there will be a Armageddon 2009. TJ Spyke 18:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Don't want to start a big fuss here, but on ticketmaster, the following is being advertised for 12/13/09 "WWE World Wrestling Entertainment - TLC: Tables, Latter, and Chairs". Here's the link to the page. And yes, it does indeed say "latter". http://www.ticketmaster.com/WWE-Fan-Axxess-tickets/artist/858575. Don't know what to make of it, just bringing it up.-- Lord Dagon ( talk) 23:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC) reply

WWE did do ANOTHER Survey thing and that must have won or something.I say wait until wwe.com changes it before changing it here. -- Forrestdfuller ( talk) 15:36, 6 September 2009 (EST) http://www.wrestleview.com/news2009/1251226228.php <-------- The Link. -- Forrestdfuller ( talk) 15:46, 6 September 2009 (EST)

Agreed, WWE hasn't even announced that such an event will happen. I've already had to request the page be semi-protected due to IP's. The only "source" that such a event will happen is Tickemaster (which lists a "Tables, Latters, and Chairs" event). TJ Spyke 19:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC) reply

go to http://www.wwe.com/schedules/ppv/ on the right, you will find the PPVCalendar with upcoming Pay-Per-Views. There you will find the Armageddon PPV listed for dec 13th. think wwe is a reliable source for that. Diivoo ( talk) 12:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC) reply

It's not listed on the wwe.com schedule though, instead WWE TLC is listed as taking place on December 13. [4] December 13 was the date originally listed for Armageddon, so it's pretty clear that the TLC event has replaced Armageddon. The only questionable thing now is whether or not it's part of the Armageddin history, or counted as an entirely new event. ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 13:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC) reply

On WWE.com it now says 11-22 TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs. But it also says 12-13 Armagdeddon, so I think Survivor Series has been replaced by TLC and Armageddon hasn't change for now. Y2J The Evil Twin ( talk) 16:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC) reply

But if you look at the links I provided above^^ you'll see it's Survivor Series in November and TLC in December. The ticket information from WWE is advertising Survivor Series for November 22, WWE TLC for December 13, and no Armageddon, indicating that Armageddon has been replaced. ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 16:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC) reply

WWE.com probaly just made a mistake and now fixed it.Besides,why would WWE get rid of one their biggest PPV in their companies history.-- Forrestdfuller ( talk) 17:40, 9 September 2009 (EST)

I asked the same thing when they retired King of the Ring. Seriously though, it's a month later and it seems pretty solid at this point that TLC is replacing Armageddon this year. It's not unreasonable to create a wiki page at this point for the event, (and for than matter, turning the redirect on Tables, Ladders & Chairs into a disambig) As to he histories, I highly doubt that this will be anything more than a one-off PPV, but unless they specifically claim a connection to Armageddon, we should probably treat it as a separate history -- RoninBK _{T C} 09:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC) reply

First, it's too early to create a article for the event. Second, we don't know yet if it shares the history of Armageddon or not, so you can't say it is replacing the event. Third, turning Tables, Ladders, and Chairs into a disambiguation page won't happen. There are only two article it would apply too, so a hatlink at the top of both pages is enough (i.e. something like "This article is about the match type, for the PPV see TLC:Tables, Ladders, and Chairs"). We will not treat it as a different event unless there is evidence from WWE stating it is new. TJ Spyke 15:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on WWE Armageddon. 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/20070319234707/http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2007/2007_03_14.jsp to http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2007/2007_03_14.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC) reply