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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
I've been working on several missing topics lists based on several of the websites most often used in wrestling articles and I thought they could be useful for a "requested articles" list. Although I am hesitant in creating a Obssessed With Wrestling list, as the notability of a large secion of its independent wrestlers is questionable, although this might serve to weed out such non notable wrestlers. I've also been working on a missing topics list for Gary Will's Wrestling Title Histories.
Also, I've recently finished the 2003 PWI Years as well. MadMax 10:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
This is my main reason for not creating an OWW-based list (as well the exclusion of the PWI 500 lists), however both SLAM! Wrestling and the Accelerator's Wrestling Rollercoaster are frequently used as references in Wikipedia's wrestling articles. The lists also would serve to provide a reference or external link for an otherwise unreferenced article. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on them, however many have typos and alternate spellings which contradict with Wikipedia and other wrestling websites, although I have a great deal of help from User:Nikki311. Admittedly, I havn't given much attention to the PWI 500 lists as a wrestlers inclusion doesn't nessessarily signify its notability. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that Oreal Perras should be renamed to Ivan Koloff, as he is much more well know by that name. Also, his article could use a little work. Kris Classic 22:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 01:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I seem to notice that the Pay-Per-View articles are often vandalized by people mid-PPV, while results are being posted. Most of these are by unregistered people. Suggestion: Should we automatically semi-protect Pay-Per-View articles maybe an hour before the PPV starts, keep it protected during the PPV and maybe for sometime after it, then unprotect it? Might cut down on the vandalism, it's starting to get very annoying. Trivialbass619 01:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I did some revising of the Nitro Girls article and I noticed a reference "Nitro Girls" by Richards & Southern, 1999. However, I'm unable to find any book by that name (the closest reference I could find being the 2001 Swimsuit Calender Special). Should this be removed ? MadMax 04:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The World Xtreme Wrestling article survived the Afd (good job), so now that it's a keeper we should get really serious about this article and add the following
Just cause it's not being deleted doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it, we should show that we're serious when we defend an article against deletion MPJ-DK 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Burntsauce is not affiliated with the current JB sock farm apparently, and since unblocked has immediately started up again as you can see here. SirFozzie 17:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The page has officially been locked because of the continued edit war between TJ Spyke and Maestro25. Sigh. Edwardtang 17:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I say straw poll, right here, right now on this page, both parties to agree with the result. It's bad enough Burntsauce keeps blanking Buff Bagwell, but an edit war over a dash. I vote "Fatal Four Way" as the four refers to the four people and neither the Fatal nor the Way. Darrenhusted 21:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Vote then. We'll count up the project votes on this. I'm already putting out fires on Buff Bagwell page where Burntsauce seems to imply this project is a joke. Let's end that. One vote "Four Way" one vote "Four-Way". Darrenhusted 21:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I refuse to vote in this, it doesn't matter which it is - why don't both of you pick a random number and the one that is closest to the NASDAQ on close of buisness Wednsday April 18th is the one we pick because there is no real differences between "Fatal Four Way" and "Fatal Four-Way", might as well let randomness settle this instead of a vote with subsequent arguing. MPJ-DK 04:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
This seems a lot like the American English vs. British English debate. Wouldn't it be simpler to keep whatever is consistant in any one specific article ? MadMax 06:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've brought up a discussion at the BLP Talk Page to try to get things a bit more settled. Right now, Burnt is saying that "letters from Jimbo" trump the written policy as it stands. I think we need to find out once and for all what defines contentious material, and then either apply the standard to all articles (my laugh test is what this "uber-BLP" policy would do to the Bill Clinton article, and yes, it fails that), or bring BLP back to sanity. SirFozzie 21:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems like, instead of beating your head against the Burntsauce wall, it might be less painful to simply find some sources for the blasted article. — Gwalla | Talk 03:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I notice Burtsause has stepped up his efforts in removing text from wrestling related articles. Has this issue been resolved ? If not, someone might want to ask Burntsause to refrain from removing content from wrestling articles until there is some resolution. MadMax 14:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
In theory, this gives a lot of free reign to vandals to partially blank pages. MadMax 17:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Your recent proposal for a new award for your WikiProject has passed. The discussion has been archived and the award added to the awards page here. Congratulations!
Things you can do:
Regards, Smomo 00:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 04:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Maryland Championship Wrestling was deleted yesterday under G1 as patant nonsence. while in my opinion this is certainly a notable regional promotion, does anyone know if there was a prod tag listed or if it had recently been nominated for deletion ? It should be taken into consideration that the article may have been blanked or vandalized with al the recent trouble lately. MadMax 06:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've taken the suggestion of several project members and made a sub page Wikipedia:Professional Wrestling Collaboration of the week which is where we can nominate and determine which wrestling related article should be our next "Collaboration of the Week". Yes I was inspired by WP:VG version of it. It's just a first draft so if something on the page needs fixing either fix it or leave a note here.
I also got the ball rolling with a nomination, hopefully others will follow suit MPJ-DK 19:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am working on sourcing Dennis Knight, Mark Canterbury and The Godwinns – I got their WCW days and their WWF days pretty well covered with the reliable sources I know off. But I can’t find any reliable, usable sources that can tell me anything about their days in the USWA as ”Tex Sallinger” (Knight) and ”The Master Blaster” (Canterbury) I only get stuff on forums that’s not really usable.
Anyone got a decent source for USWA results round 91-93?? MPJ-DK 19:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
To my recollection it was Tex Slazenger (Dennis Knight). Darrenhusted 22:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Since We're placing NWA championships into world, national, and regional subcategories, I'm curious as to what we should do regarding the NWA World Tag Team Titles. In the articles, the Mid-Atlantic version of the titles is basically represented as THE NWA World Tag Team Titles. However, the NWA Board didn't have or recognize any "world" tag titles until 1992. So, if that's the case, then shouldn't all of the reigns of this particular championship be subcategorized as regional rather than world? Just curious to know where everyone stands on that. Odin's Beard 00:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
From my observations of recent articles from TNAWrestling.com, it appears that TNA is phasing out the NWA name from their championships. This could mean the change in championships that was announced a while back. Just keep an eye out. Mshake3 00:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
TNA let the licence for the use of the words "NWA" about a month ago, they are slowly phasing them out. Politicalwatchmen 16:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
There isnt really much information about him on this page, like where he wrestled (im guessing WCW because of what it says about him on Batista's page). If there isnt any more information that can be added i dont see a need for the acrticle. Don.-.J 20:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
That's because people who for some reason are only targeting wrestling articles when it comes to this sort of thing are proclaiming violations of WP:BLP and WP:A on any unsourced material, and blanking it. We need to go through the edit history, source what we can so people wont blank it anymore. Bmg916 Speak Sign 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the info back if someone can find sources, the Louis Theroux program may be a good place to start, and the BBC website. Darrenhusted 22:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Burntsauce, again. The prize blanker is getting rid of everything on Chris Chetti so it read, dob, and he was a wrestler. We need sources to put a halt, luckily BS seems to have moved on to other groups of articles rather than just reverting PW articles. Darrenhusted 22:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Regardling this recent edit towards John Cena, does the actual name of a wrestler have to be sourced as well ? MadMax 03:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
At first glace, it does seem at least somewhat odd although I do understand the reasoning. Should this be standard for wrestling articles, such as referencing height, weight, birthday, hometown, etc., or is this an exception ? MadMax 08:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This has to be standard. The current stance on BLP enforcement seems to be (1) unsourced controversial/negative stuff is deleted (2) general unsourced stuff is tagged and then removed if not referenced. If we can source something then we have to. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 21:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
In regards to the current discussion at WP:BLP, I notice one major issue is the large number of articles which have had requests for references for at least several months. Perhaps some sort of alternate reference template to sort wrestling articles from the huge backlog at Category:Articles lacking sources and its subcategories might be helpful ? MadMax 08:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
wwe.com news on DSW, Deep South Wrestling has just been cut! Govvy 09:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Like daaa! That was a note for you all so you can monitor DSW. :/ Govvy 13:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
For such an important, and big article, History of professional wrestling has zero sources. Just letting y'all know. Kris Classic 22:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking about going for an AFD on that one. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
It is a very important article to our project, I think all it needs is a few sources. Kris Classic 23:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. But it will need a source for every single claim made on the article. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I noticed some questionable edits by User:Ancient Rocker (see: [4]). I note that the editor is newly registered fromm the time range of the last group of created sock puppets (April 11-12) and has removed content under claim of BLP. MadMax 05:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
This seems to be a non notable backyard wrestler, although I don't follow backyard wrestling. I can't find any reliable sources (with the exception of a MySpace page), however, does anyone want to take a look at this article or should it be nominated for deletion ? MadMax 06:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I assumed as much, unfortunatly. Wouldn't this constitute a speedy deletion, then ? MadMax 08:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
This is just a minor issue, but we might as well settle in once and for all since one user keeps changing it. Should we use the format we have always used for height and weight [5], or a height/weight template [6]? If so, one or both. My main objection is that altering a longstanding template like that should be discussed with the appropriate project. This has been brought up twice, but nobody actually decided anything. TJ Spyke 00:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
User:HBK4250 continues to add that Deuce 'N Domino won the Tag title today instead of 3 days ago on WWE Tag Team Championship and List of WWE Tag Team Championship reigns by length.-- bulletproof 3:16 02:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I was looking over the title histories for the current belts and I think several of them are close to being of FL status. That got me to thinking that perhaps if we could get the title histories of all 9 current titles to FL status, then we could submit them to be a featured topic under the topic of "Active WWE championship histories". It would involve some work, but in the end would have 8 more FLs than we previously had. -- Scorpion 02:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I got a couple of books that's good printed sources for the title pages. I also think that we could resolve the "Official date" Vs "Actual date" issue that plagues especially the WCW history by listing the official date on the "Date won" and in the notes say what day it was taped - with an explanatory text preceeding the actual list MPJ-DK 13:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on people. Just use the date that it actually happened. Why should a television airdate be given any kind of preference just because wrestling companies are too cheap to do a majority of their TV shows live? Mshake3 22:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I used WWE.com for both articles, WWA4.com ( Curtis Hughes training school) for Heath Miller and an archived OVW profile for Mike Sharrer. I would have sourced their title reigns, specifically Sharrer who was the first DSW tag team champion, however I'm not sure this has made a difference in the discussions.
Regarding PWI as a source, could I be able to use information from a PWI 500 listing if only to establish basic stats such as height, weight, debut, etc. or cite a biographical article (excluding interviews) ?
Also, it is conserning that there dosn't seem to be a general agreement on BLP guidelines. These recent edits have caused somewhat of a disruption, and without some attempt at a solution, the end result being a lot more work and unnessessary hostility for both sides. MadMax 03:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Near as I can tell TJ Spyke seems to have declared the ROH World Tag Team Championship no longer a world title as well as the World title a debatable world championship. Was there any discussion on this that I missed where this was decided upon? –– Lid( Talk) 10:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Well that's plain wrong. Both championships have been defended in Britain and Japan (several times in each). As far as I'm aware PWI (which for some reason seems to be the marker) considers both titles to be world championships. ROH has more right to give their titles "World" status than any other promotion in the world bar the WWE. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 12:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess the question is - what's the "Official WP:PW" stand on it? if we can agree to one or the other and then be consistent that'd be the best way to go. And IF we go with ROH as world titles there has to be some sort of date from where they're considered "world" so that champions before that date aren't listed in the "World champion" categories MPJ-DK 13:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
The accepted date amongst journalists for the ROH World Championship is May 17 2003 when Samoa Joe defended the title against Zebra Kid in York Hall, Bethnal Green at Frontiers of Honor. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 14:38, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Food for thought. The NWA World Heavyweight Title wasn't of "World title" status in PWI's view until a short time after TNA debuted on Spike TV. Mshake3 22:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I am saying the ROH titles are more legitimate than WWE. What the fuck is WWE? A bunch of steroid bitches throwing fake punches at each other? WWE/F hasn't defended against a non-payroll wrestler since Bob Backlund's days (i.e. pre Vincent K.). WWE titles are a joke. They created a "world title" out of the blue just to give to the boss' son-in-law. Get with the scene (i.e. don't believe the WWE propaganda) ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 00:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
This just isn't going to work. The only official source is PWI, and of course even that is questionable. To set our own definition of world title status is OR and wouldn't be allowed. My thought is that if the company says it's a world title, then it's a world title. Mshake3 01:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
All we need is a citation for the first defense outside of the promotion's home country. That makes them world titles by definition, regardless of what anybody calls them (PWI, ROH, or anyone else). — Gwalla | Talk 02:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
If we can establish the "PWI Criteria" we can get somewhere or some other credible criteria, otherwise to say that the ROH title is a world title is unfortunately "Original Research" in my mind. And consider this - "Defending it internationally" cannot be the only PWI criteria, the NWA title was defended internationally before TNA yet it wasn't listed as a "World" title. MPJ-DK 13:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry for my repeated use of expletives above. One day I really will learn never to go on the internet when blind drunk. Scrumpy and Jail Ale don't mix. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 16:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Since this project handles a bunch of biographical articles and they all have similar introductions can we formalize some of the language used? I'm mostly talking about WWE guys and naming the brand they work for. For example, I've seen the following used:
Etcetera. I just think it would be good to decide on one way of writing it and use that throughout. «» bd( talk stalk) 15:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
With the exception of manual of style and tone, wouldn't that make articles seem redundant ? MadMax 17:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Of course it doesn't matter, I was simply under the impression that having things look uniform between articles would make this project look like it's accomplishing something.«» bd( talk stalk) 12:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I was just looking at this article, is the picture in it allowed? Or is it against a copyright or policy? Govvy 15:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, not allowed. It is against a copyright, and a policy. Peace, The Hybrid 02:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I just want to remind everyone to come by the Collaboration of the week page. Voting on the first ever collaborative project ends around midnight EST tonight so come by and give your support :) MPJ-DK 14:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
What would we should say about the fact that the NWA are going to part ways with TNA and withdraw their World and Tag Team titles? I mean, some Internet PW are assuring that this stuff was confirmed, e.g. [8] and even on this site [9] they were promoting the beginning of a tournament for the NWA World title. Invitation to all the WP:PW members to saying something about this subject. Xbox6 14:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Going by WP:CRYSTAL we can't say what may or may not happen in the future. You could put on UCW's article (if they have one) that they are claiming they will be promoting a tournament in future. I've already put (with source) on American Dragon's article that he issued a video challenge for the NWA title. As far as TNA are concerned, we need a sourced official announcement from them or the National Wrestling Alliance. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 16:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Again we go at it with "what makes a title a world title" debate. This is a hard issue, but here are the facts.
Yes, there are holes in the logic above (if a source does publish their criteria, for example), but what else can we fall back on? Your thoughts?
kelvSYC 06:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the solution is to do away with all categories/lists relating to world titles/world champions etc. I think you've summed up the problems very well. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 12:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yup. There's no problem referring to a bio subject as a "former ROH World Champion" or a "former WWE World Champion" because it's simply referring to the title's given name. But if we eliminate World heavyweight championship, [[Category:World Champion professional wrestlers]], etc. etc. then we eliminate any arguments/controversy over what constitutes a "real" World Championship. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Should these articles not be of top importance articles?
I would of thought they are part of the core section of articles in the wrestling section, I was just surprised they aren't Top on the importance scale. Govvy 11:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
For those who haven't heard, Melina and Mickie James traded the Women's Championship twice at a house show. However, WWE.com has not featured the title change at all. I'm just wondering how's the best way to approach this? Completely ignoring it (which I've seen on Mickie's article), recognising it (which I'm seeing on the List of WWE Women's Champions article) or use a similar setup to the Bob Backlund/ List of WWE Champions situation? -- Oakster Talk 14:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
This has happened before with other stars in house shows, but we haven't ever record it previously, I for one feel that if wwe.com and the wwe aren't promoting the change, then you shouldn't record it. Govvy 14:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Just because WWE doesn't recognize it doesn't mean it didn't happen. If schools were to stop teaching about the holocaust, does that mean it didn't happen? The title still changed hands, and it should be recorded as such, but it should be mentioned that WWE does not recognize the switch. Kris Classic 18:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
It's different, WWE controls the belt, the schools don't control the holocaust, the WWE has every right to do what it wishes and if it isn't on the books, then it isn't classed as a record on wiki. Govvy 19:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
The general rule with WWE is that if it didn't happen on film, it didn't happen. There are "undefeated" wrestlers who lost at house shows before having their streaks broken on TV. The only time title changes at house shows were admitted in recent years were the Hardcore title changes in 2001-2002, which were acknowledged on WWE.com, and of course the Flair-Hart title change. Otherwise the rule of thumb is to ignore house shows. Darrenhusted 19:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Problem resolved. WWE has now confirmed the change. -- Oakster Talk 23:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I need some sources for the inducters at the List of members of the WWE Hall of Fame because I'm considering making a run for FL status with the page. Some of the inducters are listed at the official site and some are listed at a page at Obsessedwithwrestling, but the page still needs some sources. Also, I need some ideas for what I could put in the remarks section. -- Scorpion 15:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hulk Hogan: The Ultimate Anthology needs a lot of cleaning up. A lot of typos, and difference in explanation of matches. Kris Classic 02:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Jerrelle Clark has a signature move that's not listed in his article. It's called "Last Train to Clarksville," where he brings the opponent up like it's a powerbomb but then drops them head-first between his legs like a piledriver, all in one fluid motion. Sometimes it's preceded by Clark, still in power bomb position, flipping over the opponent and springboarding back against the ring ropes (for no apparent reason as far as I can tell).
I am not making this up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.7.37.69 ( talk) 11:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC).
Because I don't know how and I don't want to do it wrong.
I realyl feel this is an important article. Please vote to keep it. or if you feel otherwise, vote to delete it.
I noticed a fair number of wrestlers have the flagicon's after where they are from, born, ect. In the WP:BIO however they have been putting the flagicons before the name to do with how the information is aligned in the infobox. I feel we should be doing the same as it does look better aligned. I just thought I would bring this up for this project, so we can implement this straight away. Regards. Govvy 11:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I raised this issue some time ago - that of our fanboy friends perpetuating the vast accumulations of "signature" moves on bio articles. Judging by some articles it seems that various editors have decided that if a wrestler performs a move in a video game it achieves some form of inherent notability. I'd have to go with this definiton of "signature move" and would heartily like to blitz some articles, problem being that without some form of consensus or many sources my actions could be interpreted as original research. Of course the flip-side of the coin is that addition of "signature moves" without a source can equally be interpreted as original research. Any thoughts? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 14:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lanny Kean. One Night In Hackney 303 16:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think they are going to be huge sellers and not much information is needed for them, if you look at all the DVD articles that have been added on wiki for wrestling they really aren't that informative. I am starting to think that we need a new approach so I thought we should just keep it simple and have books and dvd's added under references like I have done for Hulk Hogan. The most popular certainly could have an article if explained right. So what do you lot think? Govvy 13:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I was going through the {{prowrestling-stub}} list and saw a bunch of articles that honestly do not meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia in my opinion, so I've prodded them - there are quite a few so I wanted to point out that it's not for nefarious reasons or to prove a point or be disruptive but because I believe they just don't fullfill the requirements for wikipedia inclusion.
the following articles have been prod'ed: AWA Brass Knuckles Championship, CWR Canadian Heavyweight Championship, All Star Wrestling, FMW The Legend Dawns, Far East Connection, Great Canadian Wrestling, High risk pro wrestling, International Wrestling Revolution Group, Montreal Wrestling Association, Pioneer Senshi, Professional wrestling school, Puerto Rico Wrestling Association, Pwx, Swiss Money Holding, Take home (professional wrestling), World Wrestling Association, Wrestling Organization Anti-Society MPJ-DK 07:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
It's been months now and after continuous warnings on his talk page he continues to make up names to wrestler moves that don't exist, make large changes to pages without discussion and completely ignore any person trying to get in contact with him. Something needs to be done. –– Lid( Talk) 07:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I reverted a number of his edits. Darrenhusted 12:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
A number of his edits are actually helpful contributions, and I have not seen many made-up move name edits in his recent contribution history. ProtoWolf 18:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
When the edit was helpful, then I left it, but some were not, and those were the ones that I reverted. Darrenhusted 21:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at some random pages (lets take Paul Diamond as an example) that just overcite every little thing. This example is pretty bad, there are like 20 references from the same website about ECW house show results. Having all these citations are not helping anything, it is just clutter and you don't have to cite every fact. Just cite quotes and parts that may be disputed or challenged, like backstage rumors and such. Results usually do not need citations. The overciting needs to be cooled down. Having more citations does not guarantee that it is a better article. If you've ever been to college, you'll understand that even a ten page report can easily get an A with only a handful of quality citations. Biggspowd 04:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I got no problem with overciting, the Paul Diamond article is really good, and the citations don't interfere with the reading of the article. I would much rather that all WP:PW articles looked like that than had no sources and kept being blanked. In fact I think Paul Diamond should be listed as an example of a good WP:PW article. Darrenhusted 12:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone here thinks its necessary?-- bulletproof 3:16 15:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Should the ECW Championship in Vince's wiki be under WWE titles, or ECW titles? Also, it says under C&A that he is current owner of WWE, while in real life he handed the company over to Linda. Should that be removed? Kris Classic 01:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
With a late period support rally Chris Benoit has been selected as this weeks Collaboration of the weekI hope as many people as possible will participate to make it a success. The Benoit article was nominated for "FA" status, check out the talk page to see the objections listed. Hopefully we can renominated it next Monday and get it approved. MPJ-DK 08:23, 30 April 2007 (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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
I've been working on several missing topics lists based on several of the websites most often used in wrestling articles and I thought they could be useful for a "requested articles" list. Although I am hesitant in creating a Obssessed With Wrestling list, as the notability of a large secion of its independent wrestlers is questionable, although this might serve to weed out such non notable wrestlers. I've also been working on a missing topics list for Gary Will's Wrestling Title Histories.
Also, I've recently finished the 2003 PWI Years as well. MadMax 10:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
This is my main reason for not creating an OWW-based list (as well the exclusion of the PWI 500 lists), however both SLAM! Wrestling and the Accelerator's Wrestling Rollercoaster are frequently used as references in Wikipedia's wrestling articles. The lists also would serve to provide a reference or external link for an otherwise unreferenced article. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on them, however many have typos and alternate spellings which contradict with Wikipedia and other wrestling websites, although I have a great deal of help from User:Nikki311. Admittedly, I havn't given much attention to the PWI 500 lists as a wrestlers inclusion doesn't nessessarily signify its notability. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that Oreal Perras should be renamed to Ivan Koloff, as he is much more well know by that name. Also, his article could use a little work. Kris Classic 22:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 01:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I seem to notice that the Pay-Per-View articles are often vandalized by people mid-PPV, while results are being posted. Most of these are by unregistered people. Suggestion: Should we automatically semi-protect Pay-Per-View articles maybe an hour before the PPV starts, keep it protected during the PPV and maybe for sometime after it, then unprotect it? Might cut down on the vandalism, it's starting to get very annoying. Trivialbass619 01:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I did some revising of the Nitro Girls article and I noticed a reference "Nitro Girls" by Richards & Southern, 1999. However, I'm unable to find any book by that name (the closest reference I could find being the 2001 Swimsuit Calender Special). Should this be removed ? MadMax 04:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The World Xtreme Wrestling article survived the Afd (good job), so now that it's a keeper we should get really serious about this article and add the following
Just cause it's not being deleted doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it, we should show that we're serious when we defend an article against deletion MPJ-DK 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Burntsauce is not affiliated with the current JB sock farm apparently, and since unblocked has immediately started up again as you can see here. SirFozzie 17:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The page has officially been locked because of the continued edit war between TJ Spyke and Maestro25. Sigh. Edwardtang 17:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I say straw poll, right here, right now on this page, both parties to agree with the result. It's bad enough Burntsauce keeps blanking Buff Bagwell, but an edit war over a dash. I vote "Fatal Four Way" as the four refers to the four people and neither the Fatal nor the Way. Darrenhusted 21:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Vote then. We'll count up the project votes on this. I'm already putting out fires on Buff Bagwell page where Burntsauce seems to imply this project is a joke. Let's end that. One vote "Four Way" one vote "Four-Way". Darrenhusted 21:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I refuse to vote in this, it doesn't matter which it is - why don't both of you pick a random number and the one that is closest to the NASDAQ on close of buisness Wednsday April 18th is the one we pick because there is no real differences between "Fatal Four Way" and "Fatal Four-Way", might as well let randomness settle this instead of a vote with subsequent arguing. MPJ-DK 04:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
This seems a lot like the American English vs. British English debate. Wouldn't it be simpler to keep whatever is consistant in any one specific article ? MadMax 06:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've brought up a discussion at the BLP Talk Page to try to get things a bit more settled. Right now, Burnt is saying that "letters from Jimbo" trump the written policy as it stands. I think we need to find out once and for all what defines contentious material, and then either apply the standard to all articles (my laugh test is what this "uber-BLP" policy would do to the Bill Clinton article, and yes, it fails that), or bring BLP back to sanity. SirFozzie 21:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems like, instead of beating your head against the Burntsauce wall, it might be less painful to simply find some sources for the blasted article. — Gwalla | Talk 03:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I notice Burtsause has stepped up his efforts in removing text from wrestling related articles. Has this issue been resolved ? If not, someone might want to ask Burntsause to refrain from removing content from wrestling articles until there is some resolution. MadMax 14:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
In theory, this gives a lot of free reign to vandals to partially blank pages. MadMax 17:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Your recent proposal for a new award for your WikiProject has passed. The discussion has been archived and the award added to the awards page here. Congratulations!
Things you can do:
Regards, Smomo 00:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 04:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Maryland Championship Wrestling was deleted yesterday under G1 as patant nonsence. while in my opinion this is certainly a notable regional promotion, does anyone know if there was a prod tag listed or if it had recently been nominated for deletion ? It should be taken into consideration that the article may have been blanked or vandalized with al the recent trouble lately. MadMax 06:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've taken the suggestion of several project members and made a sub page Wikipedia:Professional Wrestling Collaboration of the week which is where we can nominate and determine which wrestling related article should be our next "Collaboration of the Week". Yes I was inspired by WP:VG version of it. It's just a first draft so if something on the page needs fixing either fix it or leave a note here.
I also got the ball rolling with a nomination, hopefully others will follow suit MPJ-DK 19:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am working on sourcing Dennis Knight, Mark Canterbury and The Godwinns – I got their WCW days and their WWF days pretty well covered with the reliable sources I know off. But I can’t find any reliable, usable sources that can tell me anything about their days in the USWA as ”Tex Sallinger” (Knight) and ”The Master Blaster” (Canterbury) I only get stuff on forums that’s not really usable.
Anyone got a decent source for USWA results round 91-93?? MPJ-DK 19:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
To my recollection it was Tex Slazenger (Dennis Knight). Darrenhusted 22:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Since We're placing NWA championships into world, national, and regional subcategories, I'm curious as to what we should do regarding the NWA World Tag Team Titles. In the articles, the Mid-Atlantic version of the titles is basically represented as THE NWA World Tag Team Titles. However, the NWA Board didn't have or recognize any "world" tag titles until 1992. So, if that's the case, then shouldn't all of the reigns of this particular championship be subcategorized as regional rather than world? Just curious to know where everyone stands on that. Odin's Beard 00:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
From my observations of recent articles from TNAWrestling.com, it appears that TNA is phasing out the NWA name from their championships. This could mean the change in championships that was announced a while back. Just keep an eye out. Mshake3 00:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
TNA let the licence for the use of the words "NWA" about a month ago, they are slowly phasing them out. Politicalwatchmen 16:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
There isnt really much information about him on this page, like where he wrestled (im guessing WCW because of what it says about him on Batista's page). If there isnt any more information that can be added i dont see a need for the acrticle. Don.-.J 20:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
That's because people who for some reason are only targeting wrestling articles when it comes to this sort of thing are proclaiming violations of WP:BLP and WP:A on any unsourced material, and blanking it. We need to go through the edit history, source what we can so people wont blank it anymore. Bmg916 Speak Sign 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the info back if someone can find sources, the Louis Theroux program may be a good place to start, and the BBC website. Darrenhusted 22:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Burntsauce, again. The prize blanker is getting rid of everything on Chris Chetti so it read, dob, and he was a wrestler. We need sources to put a halt, luckily BS seems to have moved on to other groups of articles rather than just reverting PW articles. Darrenhusted 22:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Regardling this recent edit towards John Cena, does the actual name of a wrestler have to be sourced as well ? MadMax 03:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
At first glace, it does seem at least somewhat odd although I do understand the reasoning. Should this be standard for wrestling articles, such as referencing height, weight, birthday, hometown, etc., or is this an exception ? MadMax 08:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This has to be standard. The current stance on BLP enforcement seems to be (1) unsourced controversial/negative stuff is deleted (2) general unsourced stuff is tagged and then removed if not referenced. If we can source something then we have to. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 21:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
In regards to the current discussion at WP:BLP, I notice one major issue is the large number of articles which have had requests for references for at least several months. Perhaps some sort of alternate reference template to sort wrestling articles from the huge backlog at Category:Articles lacking sources and its subcategories might be helpful ? MadMax 08:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
wwe.com news on DSW, Deep South Wrestling has just been cut! Govvy 09:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Like daaa! That was a note for you all so you can monitor DSW. :/ Govvy 13:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
For such an important, and big article, History of professional wrestling has zero sources. Just letting y'all know. Kris Classic 22:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking about going for an AFD on that one. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
It is a very important article to our project, I think all it needs is a few sources. Kris Classic 23:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. But it will need a source for every single claim made on the article. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I noticed some questionable edits by User:Ancient Rocker (see: [4]). I note that the editor is newly registered fromm the time range of the last group of created sock puppets (April 11-12) and has removed content under claim of BLP. MadMax 05:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
This seems to be a non notable backyard wrestler, although I don't follow backyard wrestling. I can't find any reliable sources (with the exception of a MySpace page), however, does anyone want to take a look at this article or should it be nominated for deletion ? MadMax 06:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I assumed as much, unfortunatly. Wouldn't this constitute a speedy deletion, then ? MadMax 08:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
This is just a minor issue, but we might as well settle in once and for all since one user keeps changing it. Should we use the format we have always used for height and weight [5], or a height/weight template [6]? If so, one or both. My main objection is that altering a longstanding template like that should be discussed with the appropriate project. This has been brought up twice, but nobody actually decided anything. TJ Spyke 00:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
User:HBK4250 continues to add that Deuce 'N Domino won the Tag title today instead of 3 days ago on WWE Tag Team Championship and List of WWE Tag Team Championship reigns by length.-- bulletproof 3:16 02:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I was looking over the title histories for the current belts and I think several of them are close to being of FL status. That got me to thinking that perhaps if we could get the title histories of all 9 current titles to FL status, then we could submit them to be a featured topic under the topic of "Active WWE championship histories". It would involve some work, but in the end would have 8 more FLs than we previously had. -- Scorpion 02:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I got a couple of books that's good printed sources for the title pages. I also think that we could resolve the "Official date" Vs "Actual date" issue that plagues especially the WCW history by listing the official date on the "Date won" and in the notes say what day it was taped - with an explanatory text preceeding the actual list MPJ-DK 13:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on people. Just use the date that it actually happened. Why should a television airdate be given any kind of preference just because wrestling companies are too cheap to do a majority of their TV shows live? Mshake3 22:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I used WWE.com for both articles, WWA4.com ( Curtis Hughes training school) for Heath Miller and an archived OVW profile for Mike Sharrer. I would have sourced their title reigns, specifically Sharrer who was the first DSW tag team champion, however I'm not sure this has made a difference in the discussions.
Regarding PWI as a source, could I be able to use information from a PWI 500 listing if only to establish basic stats such as height, weight, debut, etc. or cite a biographical article (excluding interviews) ?
Also, it is conserning that there dosn't seem to be a general agreement on BLP guidelines. These recent edits have caused somewhat of a disruption, and without some attempt at a solution, the end result being a lot more work and unnessessary hostility for both sides. MadMax 03:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Near as I can tell TJ Spyke seems to have declared the ROH World Tag Team Championship no longer a world title as well as the World title a debatable world championship. Was there any discussion on this that I missed where this was decided upon? –– Lid( Talk) 10:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Well that's plain wrong. Both championships have been defended in Britain and Japan (several times in each). As far as I'm aware PWI (which for some reason seems to be the marker) considers both titles to be world championships. ROH has more right to give their titles "World" status than any other promotion in the world bar the WWE. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 12:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess the question is - what's the "Official WP:PW" stand on it? if we can agree to one or the other and then be consistent that'd be the best way to go. And IF we go with ROH as world titles there has to be some sort of date from where they're considered "world" so that champions before that date aren't listed in the "World champion" categories MPJ-DK 13:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
The accepted date amongst journalists for the ROH World Championship is May 17 2003 when Samoa Joe defended the title against Zebra Kid in York Hall, Bethnal Green at Frontiers of Honor. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 14:38, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Food for thought. The NWA World Heavyweight Title wasn't of "World title" status in PWI's view until a short time after TNA debuted on Spike TV. Mshake3 22:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I am saying the ROH titles are more legitimate than WWE. What the fuck is WWE? A bunch of steroid bitches throwing fake punches at each other? WWE/F hasn't defended against a non-payroll wrestler since Bob Backlund's days (i.e. pre Vincent K.). WWE titles are a joke. They created a "world title" out of the blue just to give to the boss' son-in-law. Get with the scene (i.e. don't believe the WWE propaganda) ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 00:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
This just isn't going to work. The only official source is PWI, and of course even that is questionable. To set our own definition of world title status is OR and wouldn't be allowed. My thought is that if the company says it's a world title, then it's a world title. Mshake3 01:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
All we need is a citation for the first defense outside of the promotion's home country. That makes them world titles by definition, regardless of what anybody calls them (PWI, ROH, or anyone else). — Gwalla | Talk 02:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
If we can establish the "PWI Criteria" we can get somewhere or some other credible criteria, otherwise to say that the ROH title is a world title is unfortunately "Original Research" in my mind. And consider this - "Defending it internationally" cannot be the only PWI criteria, the NWA title was defended internationally before TNA yet it wasn't listed as a "World" title. MPJ-DK 13:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry for my repeated use of expletives above. One day I really will learn never to go on the internet when blind drunk. Scrumpy and Jail Ale don't mix. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 16:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Since this project handles a bunch of biographical articles and they all have similar introductions can we formalize some of the language used? I'm mostly talking about WWE guys and naming the brand they work for. For example, I've seen the following used:
Etcetera. I just think it would be good to decide on one way of writing it and use that throughout. «» bd( talk stalk) 15:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
With the exception of manual of style and tone, wouldn't that make articles seem redundant ? MadMax 17:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Of course it doesn't matter, I was simply under the impression that having things look uniform between articles would make this project look like it's accomplishing something.«» bd( talk stalk) 12:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I was just looking at this article, is the picture in it allowed? Or is it against a copyright or policy? Govvy 15:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, not allowed. It is against a copyright, and a policy. Peace, The Hybrid 02:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I just want to remind everyone to come by the Collaboration of the week page. Voting on the first ever collaborative project ends around midnight EST tonight so come by and give your support :) MPJ-DK 14:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
What would we should say about the fact that the NWA are going to part ways with TNA and withdraw their World and Tag Team titles? I mean, some Internet PW are assuring that this stuff was confirmed, e.g. [8] and even on this site [9] they were promoting the beginning of a tournament for the NWA World title. Invitation to all the WP:PW members to saying something about this subject. Xbox6 14:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Going by WP:CRYSTAL we can't say what may or may not happen in the future. You could put on UCW's article (if they have one) that they are claiming they will be promoting a tournament in future. I've already put (with source) on American Dragon's article that he issued a video challenge for the NWA title. As far as TNA are concerned, we need a sourced official announcement from them or the National Wrestling Alliance. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 16:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Again we go at it with "what makes a title a world title" debate. This is a hard issue, but here are the facts.
Yes, there are holes in the logic above (if a source does publish their criteria, for example), but what else can we fall back on? Your thoughts?
kelvSYC 06:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the solution is to do away with all categories/lists relating to world titles/world champions etc. I think you've summed up the problems very well. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 12:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yup. There's no problem referring to a bio subject as a "former ROH World Champion" or a "former WWE World Champion" because it's simply referring to the title's given name. But if we eliminate World heavyweight championship, [[Category:World Champion professional wrestlers]], etc. etc. then we eliminate any arguments/controversy over what constitutes a "real" World Championship. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 23:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Should these articles not be of top importance articles?
I would of thought they are part of the core section of articles in the wrestling section, I was just surprised they aren't Top on the importance scale. Govvy 11:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
For those who haven't heard, Melina and Mickie James traded the Women's Championship twice at a house show. However, WWE.com has not featured the title change at all. I'm just wondering how's the best way to approach this? Completely ignoring it (which I've seen on Mickie's article), recognising it (which I'm seeing on the List of WWE Women's Champions article) or use a similar setup to the Bob Backlund/ List of WWE Champions situation? -- Oakster Talk 14:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
This has happened before with other stars in house shows, but we haven't ever record it previously, I for one feel that if wwe.com and the wwe aren't promoting the change, then you shouldn't record it. Govvy 14:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Just because WWE doesn't recognize it doesn't mean it didn't happen. If schools were to stop teaching about the holocaust, does that mean it didn't happen? The title still changed hands, and it should be recorded as such, but it should be mentioned that WWE does not recognize the switch. Kris Classic 18:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
It's different, WWE controls the belt, the schools don't control the holocaust, the WWE has every right to do what it wishes and if it isn't on the books, then it isn't classed as a record on wiki. Govvy 19:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
The general rule with WWE is that if it didn't happen on film, it didn't happen. There are "undefeated" wrestlers who lost at house shows before having their streaks broken on TV. The only time title changes at house shows were admitted in recent years were the Hardcore title changes in 2001-2002, which were acknowledged on WWE.com, and of course the Flair-Hart title change. Otherwise the rule of thumb is to ignore house shows. Darrenhusted 19:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Problem resolved. WWE has now confirmed the change. -- Oakster Talk 23:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I need some sources for the inducters at the List of members of the WWE Hall of Fame because I'm considering making a run for FL status with the page. Some of the inducters are listed at the official site and some are listed at a page at Obsessedwithwrestling, but the page still needs some sources. Also, I need some ideas for what I could put in the remarks section. -- Scorpion 15:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hulk Hogan: The Ultimate Anthology needs a lot of cleaning up. A lot of typos, and difference in explanation of matches. Kris Classic 02:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Jerrelle Clark has a signature move that's not listed in his article. It's called "Last Train to Clarksville," where he brings the opponent up like it's a powerbomb but then drops them head-first between his legs like a piledriver, all in one fluid motion. Sometimes it's preceded by Clark, still in power bomb position, flipping over the opponent and springboarding back against the ring ropes (for no apparent reason as far as I can tell).
I am not making this up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.7.37.69 ( talk) 11:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC).
Because I don't know how and I don't want to do it wrong.
I realyl feel this is an important article. Please vote to keep it. or if you feel otherwise, vote to delete it.
I noticed a fair number of wrestlers have the flagicon's after where they are from, born, ect. In the WP:BIO however they have been putting the flagicons before the name to do with how the information is aligned in the infobox. I feel we should be doing the same as it does look better aligned. I just thought I would bring this up for this project, so we can implement this straight away. Regards. Govvy 11:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I raised this issue some time ago - that of our fanboy friends perpetuating the vast accumulations of "signature" moves on bio articles. Judging by some articles it seems that various editors have decided that if a wrestler performs a move in a video game it achieves some form of inherent notability. I'd have to go with this definiton of "signature move" and would heartily like to blitz some articles, problem being that without some form of consensus or many sources my actions could be interpreted as original research. Of course the flip-side of the coin is that addition of "signature moves" without a source can equally be interpreted as original research. Any thoughts? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ Speak 14:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lanny Kean. One Night In Hackney 303 16:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think they are going to be huge sellers and not much information is needed for them, if you look at all the DVD articles that have been added on wiki for wrestling they really aren't that informative. I am starting to think that we need a new approach so I thought we should just keep it simple and have books and dvd's added under references like I have done for Hulk Hogan. The most popular certainly could have an article if explained right. So what do you lot think? Govvy 13:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I was going through the {{prowrestling-stub}} list and saw a bunch of articles that honestly do not meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia in my opinion, so I've prodded them - there are quite a few so I wanted to point out that it's not for nefarious reasons or to prove a point or be disruptive but because I believe they just don't fullfill the requirements for wikipedia inclusion.
the following articles have been prod'ed: AWA Brass Knuckles Championship, CWR Canadian Heavyweight Championship, All Star Wrestling, FMW The Legend Dawns, Far East Connection, Great Canadian Wrestling, High risk pro wrestling, International Wrestling Revolution Group, Montreal Wrestling Association, Pioneer Senshi, Professional wrestling school, Puerto Rico Wrestling Association, Pwx, Swiss Money Holding, Take home (professional wrestling), World Wrestling Association, Wrestling Organization Anti-Society MPJ-DK 07:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
It's been months now and after continuous warnings on his talk page he continues to make up names to wrestler moves that don't exist, make large changes to pages without discussion and completely ignore any person trying to get in contact with him. Something needs to be done. –– Lid( Talk) 07:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I reverted a number of his edits. Darrenhusted 12:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
A number of his edits are actually helpful contributions, and I have not seen many made-up move name edits in his recent contribution history. ProtoWolf 18:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
When the edit was helpful, then I left it, but some were not, and those were the ones that I reverted. Darrenhusted 21:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at some random pages (lets take Paul Diamond as an example) that just overcite every little thing. This example is pretty bad, there are like 20 references from the same website about ECW house show results. Having all these citations are not helping anything, it is just clutter and you don't have to cite every fact. Just cite quotes and parts that may be disputed or challenged, like backstage rumors and such. Results usually do not need citations. The overciting needs to be cooled down. Having more citations does not guarantee that it is a better article. If you've ever been to college, you'll understand that even a ten page report can easily get an A with only a handful of quality citations. Biggspowd 04:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I got no problem with overciting, the Paul Diamond article is really good, and the citations don't interfere with the reading of the article. I would much rather that all WP:PW articles looked like that than had no sources and kept being blanked. In fact I think Paul Diamond should be listed as an example of a good WP:PW article. Darrenhusted 12:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone here thinks its necessary?-- bulletproof 3:16 15:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Should the ECW Championship in Vince's wiki be under WWE titles, or ECW titles? Also, it says under C&A that he is current owner of WWE, while in real life he handed the company over to Linda. Should that be removed? Kris Classic 01:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
With a late period support rally Chris Benoit has been selected as this weeks Collaboration of the weekI hope as many people as possible will participate to make it a success. The Benoit article was nominated for "FA" status, check out the talk page to see the objections listed. Hopefully we can renominated it next Monday and get it approved. MPJ-DK 08:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)