![]() | 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 40 | ← | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | → | Archive 50 |
Please don't comment with personal opinions to this. I just wanted to let everyone know that User:CinnamonCrunchy has been proven by checkuser to be a sock of User:Hornetman16 and has been blocked indefinitely. Nikki 311 01:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
(De indent) Guys, are you kidding me? He's bragging about his ban on other wikipedia's (including the simple english one), and has been caught sockpuppeting by check user just last week. I think any discussion of an unban has to start with six months of NO SOCKPUPPETS whatso ever, and then we can discuss it then. SirFozzie ( talk) 16:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this article really necessary? Every WWE championship article lists whichever wrestler is the champion. Odin's Beard ( talk) 01:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Need to keep an eye on wm 24 article. due to his "injury" from last night on raw S-PAC 54 21:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
What does everyone think of List of professional wrestling stables and tag teams? I think it is pretty useless, as it doesn't define how long two people need to team together to be considered a "tag team" and more-or-less just reiterates what is already located in the various sub-cats of Category:Professional wrestling teams and stables. Anyone hopelessly attached to it or should I take it to AfD? This seems like another case of having a list for the sake of having a list. Nikki 311 04:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Nominated. Nikki 311 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Please add this to your watch lists as his middle name keeps getting changed from Alki to many different things. Skitzo ( talk) 21:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it ok if I nominate NWO again for FA status, it failed for no reason (mostly for no responses and the two oppositions did not make sense, and one we fixed what was required) And this time we need votes from the project, but I only insist on 2 votes, also List of WCW Hardcore Champions might not be raised to FL because of few responses, I fixed what the one person said, but no one else has replied, I also insist on 2 votes from the project, it doesn't matter if its opposition but we need some type of responses. Comments/Suggestions?-- TrU Co -X 14:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Touchy aren't we? All I said was be careful how you word it, the whole "Insisting" thing comes off as you canvassing for votes. Honestly to avoid any and all "canvasing" charges all that should be done here is announce that "Article X" is not nominated for FA/FL and then let people vote or not if they feel like it. That's how you avoid any controversy. And they think that when WP:PW memebers just vote "Yeah it's good, support" it's biased or due to canvassing, you may not think it but I'm trying to HELP the project here. no one benefits if the rule is once again "No WP:PW memebers can vote on FA/FLs" MPJ-DK ( talk) 06:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
No Way Out (2004) has been renominated for FA. TrU Co -X 14:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
is officially an ROH title. Should it be listed under that promotion (now/future winners/never)?
And no, I'm not back. Consider this part of my "edit or two here and there" :p Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 10:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Online Onslaught has gone dead, so none of the references to the site are working. I know that a lot of people (myself included) rely heavily on it as a source, so that makes for a lot of dead links. I'm trying to find out if Internet Archive will work, but it's not working for me right now. Web Cite doesn't have anything from Online Onslaught saved. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 23:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok sometimes it is hard to find TV reports for some of the PPV articles and not all of the sources we use have reports 100% of the time, so here is my question other than these 3 (that I know of), are there any other websites which have TV results (especially before 2002) and are considered reliable?
-- TrU Co -X 16:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I had an editor comment on SummerSlam (1994) today (no, not a review...that wait is at 46 days and counting). The editor suggested changing the name of one of the headings for pay-per-view articles. It was suggested that "Background" wasn't very descriptive and that "Background storylines" or something like that might be better. I thought it was worth asking about here. I can see a benefit in that it immediately clarifies that wrestling is scripted and cuts down on the need for "booked", "angle" and "storyline" repeated in the description of events when taking the article out of universe. What do people think? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 06:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Well to fit the other list of "things" in pro wrestling, why hasn't List of professional wrestling match types been moved to Professional wrestling match types? Can it be moved?-- TrU Co -X 17:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Jeff Money is creating a page in his userspace on a "wrestler" called Jim Samuel. Only problem is, looking at the article, I think it's entirely fictional! Can someone else have a look at it, and see if I'm correct. If so, it may need to go, even if it is in his userspace... (and these pages) D.M.N. ( talk) 21:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
This is crazy....the page in mainspace was created by User:Self Preteder. I looked through the deleted edits (which you can only see if you are an admin) and the page was originally created by User:Asadaleem12@hotmail.com, who if you look at his talk page has been blocked for sockpuppetry. I bet both Jeff Money and Self Preteder are sockpuppets of this original account. If anyone wants to help my with some research and add to the list of suspected puppets, I'll eventually take it to checkuser. Nikki 311 21:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Checkuser created: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Asadaleem12@hotmail.com if anyone wants to add anything. Nikki 311 22:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
The speedy tag for Jim Samuel was removed, so I guess someone should afd it. Looking over it, it's pretty funny. This guy supposedly was a regular challenger for various heavyweight titles (and was screwed out of winning many times) but never appeared in a pay per view and was apprantly interfered in the Flair/Steamboat match at WrestleWar 1989. -- Scorpion 0422 22:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
A user at 70.49.194.124 has been deleting and altering info related to kayfabe, including the main professional wrestling article. This is just silly; I don't know why anyone can't accept that the cat's out of the bag! It's not like it's going to stick. (Although I did notice a while back that someone deleted huge sections on kayfabe info, and it stayed that way for weeks.)
Is there any way we can get key pages like professional wrestling, List of professional wrestling slang, kayfabe, sports entertainment, etc restricted from anonymous editing? TravelingCat ( talk) 08:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Since SummerSlam (1994) and Ricky Banderas are now the two oldest unreviewed Good article nominations, I am proposing that we review our articles (without bias), and ask a user outside of the project to review them (inorder to ensure that we reviewed without bias). Thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, –Cheers, L A X 15:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Moments ago, Ricky Banderas passed it's GA nomination. Congrats everyone! iMat thew 20 08 16:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
FINALLY, this article just passed it's GA nomination. Congrats GCF iMat thew 20 08 00:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, my name is Caden! I've just joined the WikiProject Professional wrestling as a member. I'm rather new as a Wikipedian so I still have much to learn about how the encyclopedia works. I will do my best to help out with edits just as soon as I feel more comfortable. I just thought I'd drop in and introduce myself. CadenS ( talk) 01:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering whether we should add or have examples on how to outline feuds in the BG section, how to write matches in the event, and how to write aftermath? Also I think the "reliable sources" should be updated..comments?-- TrU Co -X 03:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah. Just keep an eye out. Mshake3 ( talk) 14:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it safe to say that Big Show is the COTW for the next two weeks? iMat thew 20 08 16:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
If someone else wants to take care of adding the pruning notices, I don't mind updating the COTW every two weeks. I pretty much have been doing that for awhile now anyway. That way nobody else has to worry about it, of course, unless they really want to. Nikki 311 18:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
For some reason, I think that the COTW is getting us nowhere, because most people seem to think that the structure and organization of the COTW page is more important than actually collaborating. Feed back 16:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Can List of authority figures in professional wrestling be changed to Professional wrestling authority figures or Authority figures in professional wrestling?-- TrU Co -X 03:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the original FLC nomination for the Elimination Chamber, and the main problem was that it lacked references and that the article was poorly written, well I reworded the article a while back, and I added sources to the list, and added sources to the proses, so I would like to know if it's ready for FL?-- TrU Co -X 14:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Can some of you please make a quick check on this user's image contributions? I believe most (if not all) were taken from somewhere else, but he is licensing them as GDFL-self, I for one am sure that I have seen this image in the past, but am not sure about the others. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Why is it that in this archive page, this conversation is archived twice? Feed back 18:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
It sure would have been nice if anyone who was discussing this had thought about contacting us to let us know this was going on: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 March 4#Category:Pro wrestling alumni. I'm okay with losing a few of those, but some (like ECW alumni) were worthwhile categories. Is this worth going to a deletion review for some of them? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I noticed in the to do list section that one of the articles that had a request to be created was about Rikidozan. There's only one that I know of by that name and there appears to be an article already existing. If this is the same one, the spelling is different from what appears on the to do list page. On the to do list it is spelled Rikidozen. This is incorrect, as the proper spelling of his name is Rikidozan. Just throwing that out there for everyone. Let me know what you find. Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 22:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking, but I didn't want to make a move without people's input. -- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it ready for GA yet? What needs to be fixed. If anything, please state it, as I will probably nominate it two weeks from Monday. iMat thew 20 08 20:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
It was discussed here, but the discussion didn't really go anywhere. Can I please have feedback on the article. Thanks, Feed back 18:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought the article was so so. Even though there is sourcing and all it just feels as though it's missing something. The two matches that everyone talked about coming out of the event were Steamboat/Savage and obviously Hogan/Andre but I don't think the descriptions did the matches justice. -- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Has been listed for peer review, please comment in hopes of becoming a GA.-- TrU Co -X 22:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
-- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Which one is it? Cause, KingMorpheus redirected "Hawkins and Ryder" to Major Brothers. So, which one is it? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
This again? Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder is the way to go. Mshake3 ( talk) 00:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if it would be possible to create a list where people could list articles that they would like proofread, copyedited, looked over, etc. before nominating them for GA or FA status. I know that people list them on the project talk page, but I have a hard time keeping track. I've temporarily lost interest in writing and expanding articles, but I'm willing to do pre-GA reviews, etc. for editors who are looking for feedback. A few people asked me for help, but I took a few days off and then went on a short vacation and I can't remember who needed what. If there was a place that we used regularly, it would help keep all of this straight. The newsletter comes out every two weeks with a list of articles needing peer review (although the last list was outdated), but I would like something that we can see every day. Ideally, it could have sections for articles needing peer review, articles about to be nominated for GA, articles about to be nominated for FA, articles needing general suggestions on what is needed to get to GA level, etc. Alternatively, editors could just list articles and make a note of what is needed. Is there any chance we could do this in a well-traveled location (perhaps on the project's main page)? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Dc hannon - notable? worth cleaning up? -- Fredrick day 17:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Why was is chosen for "SmackDown" to replace "SmackDown!" for PPV articles after and including WrestleMania XXIV? Did any significant event/change occur before WM and after the previous PPV? -- 13 of Diamonds ( talk) 21:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please review this article, and possibly create a "To-Do" list, in hopes of it becoming a future GA. iMat thew 20 08 23:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
hey im adam and im doing a sandbox with Steelerfan-94 and i'd like to make sure it would stay this is it here User:Adster95/Sandbox Adster95 ( talk) 09:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
As many of you may or may not know, today, March 21, 2008 is the project's three year anniversary. The project has come a long way since the beginning. The project has welcomed new users, who have quickly became great editors. We have gained a few administrators. We have many Featured Articles, Featured Lists, and Good Articles, with the nomination list constantly growing. The professional wrestling project has been a great success, and the future is still looking great. My congratulations and thanks go out to all of the members of this project that are a part of it's three year anniversary. Cheers! iMat thew 20 08 12:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Excellent work everybody. Let's keep it up. I brought the champagne! ;) ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 17:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I leave it up to the masses--
Should Chavo Guerrero be part of the Edge/Ryder/Hawkins/Vickie stable?
I say yes because they all helped Chavo win the ECW Title, and WWE.com constantly refers to them as the Guerrero Family (see WWE.com's Wrestlemania's preview of the ECW Battle royal/Title match).
Ever since Chavo has been every bit the henchman for Edge like Hawkins and Ryder are.
Also remember the "one big happy family" deal when Chavo first started going after CM Punk?
Tell me what you think.
Vjmlhds 17:00 March 21, 2008 (UTC)
And I was wondering, when (if ever) should the stable get its own page? They've been around almost four months and have been appearing together on a weekly basis. It may not be very long, but we do have pages for relatively short lived stables that were around for about half a year like The Power Trip, Rated-RKO, The Un-Americans, Team McMahon, The New Breed, ECW Originals, The Mexicools and even Vince's Devils. The main problem is that they don't really have an official name, I think the "Guerrero Family" has been mostly used by WWE.com and I don't believe I've heard them use it on Smackdown (although I'll admit I don't watch it every week). -- Scorpion 0422 20:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, most of them were around 6 months or less, and Edge, Hawkins and Ryder have been allied quite a bit. -- Scorpion 0422 23:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
This isn't notice of an intention to nominate this article for GA status, but I was wondering if GA is a possibility for this article. After seeing some of the articles nominated for GA, size doesn't seem to be much of a requirement. This article is thoroughly referenced and covers the full history of the team. I would still like to tighten up the prose, expand the lead, and add an external links section. Subsections within the "Career" section would probably help as well. Does anyone think it would have a chance at GA? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 19:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
It might have a chance. I've been reviewing articles lately as well, and I have to agree that there are some short ones that get nominated and pass. As for Kendrick, it needs some general cleanup first. Nikki 311 22:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this going anywhere? iMat thew 20 08 20:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like some feedback about the article. I got some stuff that was left on the talk page, but I don't know if that's enough for the article to become a future GA. Anything is welcomed. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 01:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it worthy of being nominated for FL?-- TrU Co -X 03:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
is being nominated for GA next sunday by me. Look over it please, and comment on the talk page. I've taken care of everything on the to-do list, so that shouldn't be a problem. All opinions welcome. ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 20:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Anytime Nici ;) Ni mi Ti ze 23:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please review this article? All feedback is welcomed, maybe on a to-do list. Also, Nici and I have completed the to-do list for Brock Lesnar. I gave my notice yesterday (a few threads up). I will be nominating it next Friday or Saturday. iMat thew 20 08 11:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Today is supposed to be the day I nominate it for GA. Before I do though, can somebody give it a pre-GA review on it's talk page? It would be greatly appreciated! iMat thew 20 08 11:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I have a request for all members looking to keep pro wrestling topics in good health on Wiki. I have tried to create a page for the Bloodstained Memoirs documentary (starring Chris Jericho, Rob Van Dam, Mick Foley, Roddy Piper, Jimmy Snuka, Christian Cage, Ultimo Dragon, Great Muta, Molly Holly, Christy Hemme and more) Unbelieveably, user Brian Kendig has removed my page and put it as User talk:Commoncase/Bloodstained Memoirs, as he does not think the film is notible!?! Starring all those major names, he does not think it is notible!?!
In the page, I even listed several reasons for a lay peraon why it is notible (featured in nationwide magazines etc), but Jesus, I think it goes without saying (starring all those names) why it is.
I told him that he should research the subject, and see for himself why this is notible, but I don't think he cares. What can we do to put the page back up onto Wiki space?
Thanks. Commoncase ( talk) 13:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Guys, you know the business. My analagy was, if Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise made a film that was not released yet, are you telling me it would not be put on Wiki? The fact that all these wrestlers are together in a big budget project makes it notible in itself. Let alone the fact it has been featured in high street magazines, PowerSlam and FSM, as stated in the artcile??? Commoncase ( talk) 13:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
But I have listed in the article, that the documentary has been covered in Powerslam magazine and FSM magazine multiple times. These are nationwide, high street magazines?? Commoncase ( talk) 14:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Pretty much every wrestling news site has mentioned it? But I dare say wrestling news sites would not be deemed "notible" enough. This is so laughable unfortunatly. Look at the names in the project!?! Commoncase ( talk) 15:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Even though I was not a fan of the old ECW, I will begin to look for sources, and make the article worthy enough for GA-status. (This is my first tag team article). Thanks, Feed back 19:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Just like Feedback and Truco, NiciVampireHeart and I will work on Rated RKO (another tag team), again in hopes of another GA. iMat thew 20 08 21:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I apologize for the multiple threads I've posted. For the COTW, is it possible that we can go back to choosing a COTW every week instead of every other week. We can ask Misza13 to deliver this message every week:
![]() |
Hello! The
Pro Wrestling Collaboration of the Week for March 16 - March 22 is
The Big Show. Please help to improve it to match the quality of an
ideal Wikipedia
professional wrestling related article. The next article for collaboration will be chosen on Sunday, March 23
|
iMat thew 20 08 12:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
So to summarize/confirm everything:
Just like Feedback will work on a tag team, so will I. I will work on the APA in hopes of it becoming a GA as well.-- TrU Co -X 21:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok before I nominate it for GA, I would like WP:PW members to review the article and point out anything and comment it on it here or on my talk page. Thanks.-- TrU Co -X 18:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm planning on nominating Triple H (Date not decided) for FA, if anyone has a suggestions for improvement, please say so (Refs, more sources, grammer, etc.) Ni mi Ti ze 01:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I made some changes and fixes in my sandbox to it. The setup right now makes some rows bigger than others (depending on the amount of users working on a project). In my sandbox, instead of separating user's names with <br>, I separated them with ";". It makes every row the same size, and makes the page smaller. Can I switch it over? iMat thew 20 08 12:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick note that this article passed its GA review this morning. Thanks to everyone who helped out. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 17:12, 24 March 2008 (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 40 | ← | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | → | Archive 50 |
Please don't comment with personal opinions to this. I just wanted to let everyone know that User:CinnamonCrunchy has been proven by checkuser to be a sock of User:Hornetman16 and has been blocked indefinitely. Nikki 311 01:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
(De indent) Guys, are you kidding me? He's bragging about his ban on other wikipedia's (including the simple english one), and has been caught sockpuppeting by check user just last week. I think any discussion of an unban has to start with six months of NO SOCKPUPPETS whatso ever, and then we can discuss it then. SirFozzie ( talk) 16:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this article really necessary? Every WWE championship article lists whichever wrestler is the champion. Odin's Beard ( talk) 01:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Need to keep an eye on wm 24 article. due to his "injury" from last night on raw S-PAC 54 21:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
What does everyone think of List of professional wrestling stables and tag teams? I think it is pretty useless, as it doesn't define how long two people need to team together to be considered a "tag team" and more-or-less just reiterates what is already located in the various sub-cats of Category:Professional wrestling teams and stables. Anyone hopelessly attached to it or should I take it to AfD? This seems like another case of having a list for the sake of having a list. Nikki 311 04:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Nominated. Nikki 311 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Please add this to your watch lists as his middle name keeps getting changed from Alki to many different things. Skitzo ( talk) 21:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it ok if I nominate NWO again for FA status, it failed for no reason (mostly for no responses and the two oppositions did not make sense, and one we fixed what was required) And this time we need votes from the project, but I only insist on 2 votes, also List of WCW Hardcore Champions might not be raised to FL because of few responses, I fixed what the one person said, but no one else has replied, I also insist on 2 votes from the project, it doesn't matter if its opposition but we need some type of responses. Comments/Suggestions?-- TrU Co -X 14:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Touchy aren't we? All I said was be careful how you word it, the whole "Insisting" thing comes off as you canvassing for votes. Honestly to avoid any and all "canvasing" charges all that should be done here is announce that "Article X" is not nominated for FA/FL and then let people vote or not if they feel like it. That's how you avoid any controversy. And they think that when WP:PW memebers just vote "Yeah it's good, support" it's biased or due to canvassing, you may not think it but I'm trying to HELP the project here. no one benefits if the rule is once again "No WP:PW memebers can vote on FA/FLs" MPJ-DK ( talk) 06:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
No Way Out (2004) has been renominated for FA. TrU Co -X 14:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
is officially an ROH title. Should it be listed under that promotion (now/future winners/never)?
And no, I'm not back. Consider this part of my "edit or two here and there" :p Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 10:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Online Onslaught has gone dead, so none of the references to the site are working. I know that a lot of people (myself included) rely heavily on it as a source, so that makes for a lot of dead links. I'm trying to find out if Internet Archive will work, but it's not working for me right now. Web Cite doesn't have anything from Online Onslaught saved. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 23:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok sometimes it is hard to find TV reports for some of the PPV articles and not all of the sources we use have reports 100% of the time, so here is my question other than these 3 (that I know of), are there any other websites which have TV results (especially before 2002) and are considered reliable?
-- TrU Co -X 16:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I had an editor comment on SummerSlam (1994) today (no, not a review...that wait is at 46 days and counting). The editor suggested changing the name of one of the headings for pay-per-view articles. It was suggested that "Background" wasn't very descriptive and that "Background storylines" or something like that might be better. I thought it was worth asking about here. I can see a benefit in that it immediately clarifies that wrestling is scripted and cuts down on the need for "booked", "angle" and "storyline" repeated in the description of events when taking the article out of universe. What do people think? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 06:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Well to fit the other list of "things" in pro wrestling, why hasn't List of professional wrestling match types been moved to Professional wrestling match types? Can it be moved?-- TrU Co -X 17:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Jeff Money is creating a page in his userspace on a "wrestler" called Jim Samuel. Only problem is, looking at the article, I think it's entirely fictional! Can someone else have a look at it, and see if I'm correct. If so, it may need to go, even if it is in his userspace... (and these pages) D.M.N. ( talk) 21:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
This is crazy....the page in mainspace was created by User:Self Preteder. I looked through the deleted edits (which you can only see if you are an admin) and the page was originally created by User:Asadaleem12@hotmail.com, who if you look at his talk page has been blocked for sockpuppetry. I bet both Jeff Money and Self Preteder are sockpuppets of this original account. If anyone wants to help my with some research and add to the list of suspected puppets, I'll eventually take it to checkuser. Nikki 311 21:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Checkuser created: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Asadaleem12@hotmail.com if anyone wants to add anything. Nikki 311 22:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
The speedy tag for Jim Samuel was removed, so I guess someone should afd it. Looking over it, it's pretty funny. This guy supposedly was a regular challenger for various heavyweight titles (and was screwed out of winning many times) but never appeared in a pay per view and was apprantly interfered in the Flair/Steamboat match at WrestleWar 1989. -- Scorpion 0422 22:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
A user at 70.49.194.124 has been deleting and altering info related to kayfabe, including the main professional wrestling article. This is just silly; I don't know why anyone can't accept that the cat's out of the bag! It's not like it's going to stick. (Although I did notice a while back that someone deleted huge sections on kayfabe info, and it stayed that way for weeks.)
Is there any way we can get key pages like professional wrestling, List of professional wrestling slang, kayfabe, sports entertainment, etc restricted from anonymous editing? TravelingCat ( talk) 08:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Since SummerSlam (1994) and Ricky Banderas are now the two oldest unreviewed Good article nominations, I am proposing that we review our articles (without bias), and ask a user outside of the project to review them (inorder to ensure that we reviewed without bias). Thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, –Cheers, L A X 15:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Moments ago, Ricky Banderas passed it's GA nomination. Congrats everyone! iMat thew 20 08 16:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
FINALLY, this article just passed it's GA nomination. Congrats GCF iMat thew 20 08 00:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, my name is Caden! I've just joined the WikiProject Professional wrestling as a member. I'm rather new as a Wikipedian so I still have much to learn about how the encyclopedia works. I will do my best to help out with edits just as soon as I feel more comfortable. I just thought I'd drop in and introduce myself. CadenS ( talk) 01:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering whether we should add or have examples on how to outline feuds in the BG section, how to write matches in the event, and how to write aftermath? Also I think the "reliable sources" should be updated..comments?-- TrU Co -X 03:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah. Just keep an eye out. Mshake3 ( talk) 14:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it safe to say that Big Show is the COTW for the next two weeks? iMat thew 20 08 16:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
If someone else wants to take care of adding the pruning notices, I don't mind updating the COTW every two weeks. I pretty much have been doing that for awhile now anyway. That way nobody else has to worry about it, of course, unless they really want to. Nikki 311 18:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
For some reason, I think that the COTW is getting us nowhere, because most people seem to think that the structure and organization of the COTW page is more important than actually collaborating. Feed back 16:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Can List of authority figures in professional wrestling be changed to Professional wrestling authority figures or Authority figures in professional wrestling?-- TrU Co -X 03:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the original FLC nomination for the Elimination Chamber, and the main problem was that it lacked references and that the article was poorly written, well I reworded the article a while back, and I added sources to the list, and added sources to the proses, so I would like to know if it's ready for FL?-- TrU Co -X 14:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Can some of you please make a quick check on this user's image contributions? I believe most (if not all) were taken from somewhere else, but he is licensing them as GDFL-self, I for one am sure that I have seen this image in the past, but am not sure about the others. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Why is it that in this archive page, this conversation is archived twice? Feed back 18:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
It sure would have been nice if anyone who was discussing this had thought about contacting us to let us know this was going on: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 March 4#Category:Pro wrestling alumni. I'm okay with losing a few of those, but some (like ECW alumni) were worthwhile categories. Is this worth going to a deletion review for some of them? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I noticed in the to do list section that one of the articles that had a request to be created was about Rikidozan. There's only one that I know of by that name and there appears to be an article already existing. If this is the same one, the spelling is different from what appears on the to do list page. On the to do list it is spelled Rikidozen. This is incorrect, as the proper spelling of his name is Rikidozan. Just throwing that out there for everyone. Let me know what you find. Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 22:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking, but I didn't want to make a move without people's input. -- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it ready for GA yet? What needs to be fixed. If anything, please state it, as I will probably nominate it two weeks from Monday. iMat thew 20 08 20:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
It was discussed here, but the discussion didn't really go anywhere. Can I please have feedback on the article. Thanks, Feed back 18:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought the article was so so. Even though there is sourcing and all it just feels as though it's missing something. The two matches that everyone talked about coming out of the event were Steamboat/Savage and obviously Hogan/Andre but I don't think the descriptions did the matches justice. -- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Has been listed for peer review, please comment in hopes of becoming a GA.-- TrU Co -X 22:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
-- Drunknesmonsta ( talk) 23:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Which one is it? Cause, KingMorpheus redirected "Hawkins and Ryder" to Major Brothers. So, which one is it? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
This again? Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder is the way to go. Mshake3 ( talk) 00:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if it would be possible to create a list where people could list articles that they would like proofread, copyedited, looked over, etc. before nominating them for GA or FA status. I know that people list them on the project talk page, but I have a hard time keeping track. I've temporarily lost interest in writing and expanding articles, but I'm willing to do pre-GA reviews, etc. for editors who are looking for feedback. A few people asked me for help, but I took a few days off and then went on a short vacation and I can't remember who needed what. If there was a place that we used regularly, it would help keep all of this straight. The newsletter comes out every two weeks with a list of articles needing peer review (although the last list was outdated), but I would like something that we can see every day. Ideally, it could have sections for articles needing peer review, articles about to be nominated for GA, articles about to be nominated for FA, articles needing general suggestions on what is needed to get to GA level, etc. Alternatively, editors could just list articles and make a note of what is needed. Is there any chance we could do this in a well-traveled location (perhaps on the project's main page)? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Dc hannon - notable? worth cleaning up? -- Fredrick day 17:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Why was is chosen for "SmackDown" to replace "SmackDown!" for PPV articles after and including WrestleMania XXIV? Did any significant event/change occur before WM and after the previous PPV? -- 13 of Diamonds ( talk) 21:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please review this article, and possibly create a "To-Do" list, in hopes of it becoming a future GA. iMat thew 20 08 23:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
hey im adam and im doing a sandbox with Steelerfan-94 and i'd like to make sure it would stay this is it here User:Adster95/Sandbox Adster95 ( talk) 09:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
As many of you may or may not know, today, March 21, 2008 is the project's three year anniversary. The project has come a long way since the beginning. The project has welcomed new users, who have quickly became great editors. We have gained a few administrators. We have many Featured Articles, Featured Lists, and Good Articles, with the nomination list constantly growing. The professional wrestling project has been a great success, and the future is still looking great. My congratulations and thanks go out to all of the members of this project that are a part of it's three year anniversary. Cheers! iMat thew 20 08 12:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Excellent work everybody. Let's keep it up. I brought the champagne! ;) ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 17:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I leave it up to the masses--
Should Chavo Guerrero be part of the Edge/Ryder/Hawkins/Vickie stable?
I say yes because they all helped Chavo win the ECW Title, and WWE.com constantly refers to them as the Guerrero Family (see WWE.com's Wrestlemania's preview of the ECW Battle royal/Title match).
Ever since Chavo has been every bit the henchman for Edge like Hawkins and Ryder are.
Also remember the "one big happy family" deal when Chavo first started going after CM Punk?
Tell me what you think.
Vjmlhds 17:00 March 21, 2008 (UTC)
And I was wondering, when (if ever) should the stable get its own page? They've been around almost four months and have been appearing together on a weekly basis. It may not be very long, but we do have pages for relatively short lived stables that were around for about half a year like The Power Trip, Rated-RKO, The Un-Americans, Team McMahon, The New Breed, ECW Originals, The Mexicools and even Vince's Devils. The main problem is that they don't really have an official name, I think the "Guerrero Family" has been mostly used by WWE.com and I don't believe I've heard them use it on Smackdown (although I'll admit I don't watch it every week). -- Scorpion 0422 20:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, most of them were around 6 months or less, and Edge, Hawkins and Ryder have been allied quite a bit. -- Scorpion 0422 23:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
This isn't notice of an intention to nominate this article for GA status, but I was wondering if GA is a possibility for this article. After seeing some of the articles nominated for GA, size doesn't seem to be much of a requirement. This article is thoroughly referenced and covers the full history of the team. I would still like to tighten up the prose, expand the lead, and add an external links section. Subsections within the "Career" section would probably help as well. Does anyone think it would have a chance at GA? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 19:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
It might have a chance. I've been reviewing articles lately as well, and I have to agree that there are some short ones that get nominated and pass. As for Kendrick, it needs some general cleanup first. Nikki 311 22:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this going anywhere? iMat thew 20 08 20:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like some feedback about the article. I got some stuff that was left on the talk page, but I don't know if that's enough for the article to become a future GA. Anything is welcomed. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 01:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it worthy of being nominated for FL?-- TrU Co -X 03:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
is being nominated for GA next sunday by me. Look over it please, and comment on the talk page. I've taken care of everything on the to-do list, so that shouldn't be a problem. All opinions welcome. ♥ Nici♥ Vampire♥ Heart♥ 20:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Anytime Nici ;) Ni mi Ti ze 23:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Can somebody please review this article? All feedback is welcomed, maybe on a to-do list. Also, Nici and I have completed the to-do list for Brock Lesnar. I gave my notice yesterday (a few threads up). I will be nominating it next Friday or Saturday. iMat thew 20 08 11:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Today is supposed to be the day I nominate it for GA. Before I do though, can somebody give it a pre-GA review on it's talk page? It would be greatly appreciated! iMat thew 20 08 11:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I have a request for all members looking to keep pro wrestling topics in good health on Wiki. I have tried to create a page for the Bloodstained Memoirs documentary (starring Chris Jericho, Rob Van Dam, Mick Foley, Roddy Piper, Jimmy Snuka, Christian Cage, Ultimo Dragon, Great Muta, Molly Holly, Christy Hemme and more) Unbelieveably, user Brian Kendig has removed my page and put it as User talk:Commoncase/Bloodstained Memoirs, as he does not think the film is notible!?! Starring all those major names, he does not think it is notible!?!
In the page, I even listed several reasons for a lay peraon why it is notible (featured in nationwide magazines etc), but Jesus, I think it goes without saying (starring all those names) why it is.
I told him that he should research the subject, and see for himself why this is notible, but I don't think he cares. What can we do to put the page back up onto Wiki space?
Thanks. Commoncase ( talk) 13:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Guys, you know the business. My analagy was, if Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise made a film that was not released yet, are you telling me it would not be put on Wiki? The fact that all these wrestlers are together in a big budget project makes it notible in itself. Let alone the fact it has been featured in high street magazines, PowerSlam and FSM, as stated in the artcile??? Commoncase ( talk) 13:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
But I have listed in the article, that the documentary has been covered in Powerslam magazine and FSM magazine multiple times. These are nationwide, high street magazines?? Commoncase ( talk) 14:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Pretty much every wrestling news site has mentioned it? But I dare say wrestling news sites would not be deemed "notible" enough. This is so laughable unfortunatly. Look at the names in the project!?! Commoncase ( talk) 15:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Even though I was not a fan of the old ECW, I will begin to look for sources, and make the article worthy enough for GA-status. (This is my first tag team article). Thanks, Feed back 19:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Just like Feedback and Truco, NiciVampireHeart and I will work on Rated RKO (another tag team), again in hopes of another GA. iMat thew 20 08 21:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I apologize for the multiple threads I've posted. For the COTW, is it possible that we can go back to choosing a COTW every week instead of every other week. We can ask Misza13 to deliver this message every week:
![]() |
Hello! The
Pro Wrestling Collaboration of the Week for March 16 - March 22 is
The Big Show. Please help to improve it to match the quality of an
ideal Wikipedia
professional wrestling related article. The next article for collaboration will be chosen on Sunday, March 23
|
iMat thew 20 08 12:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
So to summarize/confirm everything:
Just like Feedback will work on a tag team, so will I. I will work on the APA in hopes of it becoming a GA as well.-- TrU Co -X 21:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok before I nominate it for GA, I would like WP:PW members to review the article and point out anything and comment it on it here or on my talk page. Thanks.-- TrU Co -X 18:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm planning on nominating Triple H (Date not decided) for FA, if anyone has a suggestions for improvement, please say so (Refs, more sources, grammer, etc.) Ni mi Ti ze 01:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I made some changes and fixes in my sandbox to it. The setup right now makes some rows bigger than others (depending on the amount of users working on a project). In my sandbox, instead of separating user's names with <br>, I separated them with ";". It makes every row the same size, and makes the page smaller. Can I switch it over? iMat thew 20 08 12:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick note that this article passed its GA review this morning. Thanks to everyone who helped out. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 17:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)