![]() | 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 50 | ← | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | → | Archive 60 |
Hey everyone, I wanted to propose the idea of setting up quick result archives of wrestling TV programs such as TNA iMPACT!, TNA Xplosion, TNA Weekly PPV's, WWE RAW, WWE SmackDown!, WWE Velocity, WWE Heat, ECW on Sci Fi, ECW on TNN, Ring of Honor live events, WCW Monday Nitro, WCW Thunder, etc. Over the years I have collected this original data all on my own and I think it would be a great addition to Wikipedia.
It would look something like this for example:
TNA iMPACT!
October 1, 2005: Orlando, FL
• TNA X-Division Champion, AJ Styles defeated Roderick Strong, in a Non-Title Match.
• Monty Brown defeated Lex Lovett.
• Three-Way Match: Chris Sabin defeated Petey Williams and Alex Shelley.
• Jeff Hardy wrestled Rhino, to a no-contest.
Let me know what you all think. MC511 ( talk) 19:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I attempted to post a similar message above, but the very first comment of that discussion directed the discussion directly off track and left my request going un-noticed. My request asked for users (of this project) to do peer-like-reviews for December to Dismember (2006), and leave comments on the talkpage. It seems like it's going unnoticed that its currently undergoing an FAR, hence why I'm leaving a further comment to try and get you guys to comment on the article on the talkpage. D.M.N. ( talk) 07:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
By doing this...
I think that we should remove the "Pay-per-view chronology" and "Event chronology" from the infobox and into succession boxes. If we make the succession boxes, it would go in the external links section and look like this:
And the shortened infobox would look like this:
The Great American Bash (2005) | |
---|---|
Promotion | World Wrestling Entertainment |
Brand(s) | SmackDown! |
Date | July 24, 2005 |
City | Buffalo, New York |
Venue | HSBC Arena |
Attendance | 8,000 |
--
iMatthew
T.
C.
22:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
I hate to be the odd woman out, but I like having the last and next PPVs listed. As Darrenhusted said (somewhere), it is analogous to having all the episodes listed in the TV episode infobox. Removing the event chronology will make the infobox shorter, but I really think the other should stay. Nikki 311 01:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Well just and update on the FAC, no current votes of support of opposition, just comments on fixes, which is a good thing. But if we are going to do this, how are we going to apply this to future PPV events when their are IPs and Newbies always getting into a conflict over the consensus here. Suggestions?-- S R X 00:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Is the concern that people will create/expand new articles in a way other than the "consensus" here or that people will change articles that have been completed according to the "consensus"? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 19:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
How about we make a talk page banner and state the explanation of the new format and reference to WP:PW/MOS#PPV Guidelines or the New shortcut WP:PW/PPVG? S R X 03:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
We need an article page for TNA Spin Cycle. MC511 ( talk) 18:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
My bad. I misread your statement. I don't follow TNA (or current wrestling for that matter), but is this contest/segment/whatever really that notable? Fans submitting their own youtube videos?? -- Endless Dan 21:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not really active in this project anymore, but I do maintain my pet article Briscoe Brothers, and I've run into a problem with User:ROH Historian that....well, quite frankly, it's making me laugh my ass off (see his talk and mine {I've removed the comment, but it's in a past revision} for the lulz), but it's disruptive all the same. ROH Historian insists on the following text being in the article:
On August 1, 2008 in Manassas, VA The Briscoes defeated Sweet N'Sour Inc's Adam Pearce and Shane Hagadorn when Jay pinned Hagadorn following the Springboard Doomsday Device.
On August 2, 2008 in New York City they defeated The Vulture Squad (Ruckus and Jigsaw) when Mark pinned Jigsaw following the Springboard Doomsday Device.
Which is patently unnecessary and best covered by a single line referring to Mark's return to the active roster (which I've added......several times). User:Gavyn Sykes reverted ROH Historian once and included a comment tag discouraging the addition of the sort of material he was trying to put in, but obviously ROH Historian paid that no mind. He even called me editing out the above quoted text "vandalism," which is just sinfully hilarious.
Humor aside, this is still a problem that needs dealing with. Thanks for any help. Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 23:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Crap, look at his contributions. He's been doing this to easily a dozen different articles.
Tromboneguy0186 (
talk)
All right, I've trimmed down the excessive recentism that was in Kevin Steen and El Generico, Naomichi Marufuji, Claude Marrow, Go Shiozaki, Delirious (wrestler), Adam Pearce, Claudio Castagnoli (this article needs a lot of work, by the way, it is still heavily kayfabed-up), and Brent Albright. Other users had already done the same to Bryan Danielson, Larry Sweeney, Chris Hero, Austin Aries, and Motor City Machine Guns. These seem to be his targets. I did not edit The Age of the Fall, which similarly received attention from this goofball. I was unsure what, if anything, ought to be trimmed. Now, when/if this guy returns from his block, he's probably going to go right back to these articles. As I said at the top of this section, I'm not exactly active in this project any longer and to be a little blunt I don't particularly care to be. I'll be able to look after my own talk page (though thank you to the user who reverted the latest insane rantings the Historian posted there) and surely Briscoe Brothers, but if you don't want this sort of crap seeping into other WP:PW articles, you'd best keep an eye on the ones he's targeted, and probably more, to be frank. Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 03:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
....we incorporate the "defeated" parameter into the television programs under the Champions section? See here, here, and here.-- S R X 03:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The same user also made WWE Title Holders which has since been redirected, and TNA Champions which I have now redirected. Darrenhusted ( talk) 13:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been a vocal critic of the OOU style of writing but accepting it briefly, I'd just like to ask why every PPV article now contains (or will contain) "The event starred wrestlers from the Raw and SmackDown! brands: storyline expansions of the promotion where employees are assigned to wrestling brands under the WWE banner." I don't really see how the branding thing is a storyline. The wrestlers are assigned to brands and they do wrestle almost exclusively on them. Sure, which brand they are on is arbitrated and not lottery, but that doesn't stop them wrestling on that brand. Could we not put show or programme instead of brand and cut out the explanation. In fact, now that all PPVs are non-brand exclusive, why do we even bother to put that on there? It's like saying this WWE event features [unsurprisingly] WWE wrestlers from all WWE shows. Obviously it needs to be said for the 2002-07 PPVs. Tony2Times ( talk) 13:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The new guidelines should take effect beginning inSeptember. Currently their are GAN's that are written in-universe, which will be the last ones to be in that format. After September, articles that are not out of universe, should not be able to go to GAN or FAC. This gives the project some time to get articles in shape. If anyone disagrees, say it here, we can extend the time period or if there is anything else wanting to be discussed.-- S R X 02:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the changes for all GA PPV articles will be gradual, hell, it's not going to happen overnight, it's a process it will take a while (I've got five PPV articles at GA - but I don't really wish to feel like I'm in a rush to do it otherwise they'll get the chop). D.M.N. ( talk) 07:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm sticking to my belief that all of this is being pushed too quickly without sufficient thought put into it. The current style of "Per this edit at a peer review, all pay-per-view articles must be changed to include this" doesn't work. I don't mean to criticize the editors who are trying to make the changes, but a quick glance at a few articles shows me that there are numerous problems:
These are a few of the more obvious problems I've seen. I think some of the recent changes are for the better, but I think some thought still needs to go into how to implement all of it (or perhaps just some of it). I'm also not trying to point out problems without proposing solutions, so I'm willing to discuss this. I just think someone needs to say something before all of the articles are changed. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 14:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Well I am currently on vacation, just found a computer. I will be able to help make the change to our GA's when I get back. Without going into detail, I agree with GCF, and I'd have to say some of this is just being taken to far. -- iMatthew T. C. 14:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess my main problem with all these changes that have been proposed, and now apparently will be incorporated in the PPV articles (at first) is the fact that we feel the need to have a "disclaimer" of what professional wrestling is all about. I'm from the school that most everyone knows what professional wrestling is (staged athletic combat with pre-determined match outcomes). If we were to say, for instance, "SummerSlam was a professional wrestling pay-per-view event," and then link professional wrestling, that would suffice. If someone wanted to find out about professional wrestling, they would just click on the link. Think of it this way: Take for instance the page about the Chicago Bulls basketball team. The current version, as I write this, does not have an explanation of what basketball is. By your arguments for putting the "disclaimer" in (to explain what professional wrestling is and to make it conform to good article and feature article status), the same should apparently be true for articles about professional basketball teams (putting in a disclaimer of what basketball is, purportedly to "help" the reader understand what basketball is). Yet, I highly doubt that anyone with the NBA basketball project would agree to that. The same would be true for, say, an article about an episode of the TV series M*A*S*H — nobody would publish a "disclaimer" in each article stating that M*A*S*H was set in the Korean War and that it centered on the lives of the members of the 4077th. Most people who link onto one of the M*A*S*H articles probably have some idea of the show's general premise. I just have a hard time believing that a "disclaimer" would only be necessary for professional wrestling articles, and not any other pop-culture medium. Do we have enough Wiki readers who believe everything they see in professioanl wrestling is real, thus making it necessary to include the "disclaimer"? I ask that seriously, because it definitely seems to have affected the way we introduce professional wrestling-related articles. I do think this apparent decision to place disclaimers at the beginning of articles — if only to make them featured articles and good article candidates — has been made too hastily, and yes, I realize not everyone has had time to or decided to participate. Sorry for the rant, but I had to weigh in on this, even though the issue has apparently been decided. [[ Briguy52748 ( talk) 03:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)]]
Hey i was expanding this in my Sandbox for a while. I'd just like to see if you's think its ok before I move it into main space. here it is Adster95 ( talk) 10:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
An article has been created for this team. I believe that by now, notablity has been established and the article can remain. Thoughts? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 02:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
The WWE roster page is now located at list of World Wrestling Entertainment employees. As this is the same type of article and the template has been set I move for this page to be moved to list of Total Nonstop Action Wrestling employees or move the WWE one to include the current part. They should be consistent. Thoughts? JakeDHS07 20:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anybody know if WWE.com's List This is voted for by the fans or just made up by the writers? Nikki 311 20:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
This in currently undergoing an AFD, which looks like it'll end in keep. Now, I think this article should be split like what we've been doing with PPV's. For the original run, from 1985 to 1992, I believe some storylines built up to the SNME events, which means it'd be easier to put information in, of course, it may be a bit harder for the recent SNME events, but it is still "do-able". Of cause, we don't have to do it all at once, one at a time like with PPV's. But overall, I think it is a completely feasable option to split them into "PPV style" articles. Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 14:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've created the "!poll" to see what you guys think about splitting them into event articles like with PPV's. D.M.N. ( talk) 09:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I guess WWE wants to see what TNA is made of, they have changed their date for Armageddon (2008) to December 14. This is also the same day as Turning Point (2008), TNA's December ppv. Should we acknowledge this in the articles or just wait to see if WWE or TNA changes the dates of their ppvs? P.S. I hope they don't change anything.-- Will C 22:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
If the iMPACT vs ECWWE event was anything to go by, it's TNA PXK T /C 00:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Anyone got any article picture requests? PXK T /C 23:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Roxxi could use a pic of her bald. An in-ring shot of Abyss would be nice. A pic of Karen Angle that doesn't include Kurt. Tomko also needs a pic, but he may left the company. The ring announcer, Dave Penzer needs a pic, as does Hermie Sadler if he's there. The referee, Mark "Slick" Johnson as well. And a pice of Creed in TNA could work too. And a pic of Christopher Daniels as Curry Man would be great. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 00:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm going now, wish me luck (and look out for me, I'm the emo in the AJ Styles shirt and brown hoodie) PXK T /C 15:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
well that sucked. After I saved the second day of my pass for the iMPACT tapings, when I got in Studios they said its moved to tomorrow. This "free" TNA show is gonna cost me another 1 day, 1 park pass. PXK T /C 02:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I just read the Signpost's coverage of WikiProject Military History, and it mentioned their lead co-ordinator. I was just wondering if we have one, and if so, who it is. Thanks, Genius101 Wizard ( talk) 20:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm just wondering - how many people !vote on a specific article, but don't work on in? If someone supports a certain article, surely it means that they want it promoted to the COTW so that they can work on it? 6 people !voted for Gail Kim, yet only one of the six has made constructive edits to it, while 6 people !voted for The Kliq, yet only two of the six have made constructive edits to it. Out of everyone that is "voting" on the COTW's, only one user (who I'm not pointing out whom, because it's obvious from the article history) is trying to improve the articles (me also on the Kliq - I didn't vote for Kim because I'm not really interested in TNA). I think this is unfair, people are !voting for certain articles, yet don't actually contribute during the 2 weeks as COTW. I mean, what's the point of the COTW, if only one or two editors are going to work on in - it serves no point. If all the 6 users were going to edit it, fair enough but if only two editors are going to work on it; it's pointless, and unfair to the users in question who dedicate their time working while the other editors that supported the article don't contribute whatsoever to improve it. D.M.N. ( talk) 19:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Someone has decided to mark the article with WWE revisionism once again and claim that all reigns prior to Shane Douglas' throwdown of the NWA Title aren't recognized or official. TonyFreakinAlmeida ( talk) 20:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to know if we can not put the Wrestler's/Diva's real name in parenthesis inside the table for matches. I think it clutters it up and since we have to look in the Event Section to see how the match was won, we should just look in the Background/Event/Aftermath sections for their real names. Qwerty36095 ( talk) 20:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Right now there are two WWE Championships at ANC that have been on there for over a month now, and their is support for the move but their are votes for opposition (but less than support). So this can be fair, the survey needs more opinions before it's archive, I highly plead the project to vote in this survey. P.S. The renaming is for the World Heavyweight Championship (WWE) and World Tag Team Championship (WWE).-- S R X 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Somebody keeps adding an extra day to Mickie James' reign length. Camelglue22 ( talk) 20:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I got lots of pics to upload when I get home. Taylor, yup. Roxxi, wasn't there. Kong, the Camera guy got in the way. Abbys, I got a backstage pic of HIS REAL FACE! WIN! Brother Ray tried to steal my hat to throw away (Watch this part, the camera goes right close up) JJ, back stage pic.
LOOK AWAY NOW!
Matt Morgan and Abyss formed a team, AJ and Kurt had a match for the medal, when the ref got knocked out, Stings music hit and Angle had a bat (he took it from the ring post) when the blackout stopped. Then as he was about to hit this wrestler's music hit and a second blackout gave AJ his signature weapon. But the most important event was me donating a dollar to Sonjay's "Save your damn gimmick" fund. (as I called it) -- PXK T /C 01:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Even though there are many discussions about the opposition of the new out of universe pay-per-view (PPV) article format, If there are any members of the project that need help or need a copyedit to their PPV articles to remove wrestling jargon or to aid in rewording to avoid wrestling jargon, just drop a note on my talk page ;)-- S R X 00:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey I can't find anything to put in the reception paragraph for Vengeance 2002 I'm User:Adster95/sandbox nearly done though if anyone would like to help i'd much appreciate it! Adster95 ( talk) 14:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Any better? Adster95 ( talk) 18:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, we need to make a banner or something now to tell people to leave the lead and background on PPVs alone. I'm tired of people removing the stuff from the lead and background on Hard Justice (2008), I got so fed up with it I'm now working on it in my sandbox. Also their doing it to No Surrender (2008) and the build for it doesn't start till Thursday. We've had to protect SummerSlam (2008) and Hard Justice because of this. Unless we want to keep dealing with this for many more weeks or months, I suggest we make something that tells them to quit, because I've told a few about the changes and they go right on and remove it again.-- Will C 22:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, can someone please do a copyedit on Lockdown (2008), I haven't got alot of time to work on it much anymore. It is under GA review and if the problems aren't fixed on its talk page then it will fail and I don't want that. The problems are mainly the new out of universe thing and brung it too much into detail. Someone please help me out because I'm not good at explaining it shorter, I really hate the article now.-- Will C 19:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
[1]-- S R X 23:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to attempt to take Matt Sydal out of universe and have run into a snag. Two wrestlers mentioned on his page Delirious and Daizee Haze have no real known names. They are known only by their ring names and no reliable source I can find reports their actual names. So, what to do? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 02:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I know that per this, we are to name the events with the year in paranthesis, but in some article we only use that title in the infobox and the lead and thats it. After that we use the title without the paranthesis, like SummerSlam 2003. Then in other articles we mention other PPV events, we write them as SummerSlam 2003 and not SummerSlam (2003). So what's wrong here, the policy or the way it is written?-- S R X 13:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't you rate the article better than a Start rating? Govvy ( talk) 12:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I have mentioned it before and on it's talk page ages ago, but again, the references and external links are very poor and need fixing up for him. Govvy ( talk) 12:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah step by step, but when did we incorporate the consensus about the PPV box? No consensus was built on that. S R X 00:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
We could remove both chronology's, and add the PPV chronology to the "See also" sections. In SummerSlam (2008), the "See also" section would include links to: List of WWE pay-per-view events, SummerSlam, The Great American Bash (2008), and Unforgiven (2008). -- iMatthew T. C. 01:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
and have nothing in the info box. Like so=
Sacrifice (2008) | |
---|---|
[[File::TNA Sacrifice 2008.jpg|frameless|upright=1]] | |
Promotion | Total Nonstop Action Wrestling |
Date | May 11, 2008 |
City | Orlando, Florida |
Venue | Impact! Zone |
Attendance | 900 |
Tagline(s) | What Are You Willing to Sacrifice?" "Are You Willing to Give Up What Means The Most? |
It looks nice and doesn't distract from the page. That is what I'm for if no one knew already.--
Will
C
03:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if there was any interest here in having a project specific IRC channel so that we would be able to discuss project related things. Several other projects do have them, and if there is interest, perhaps we should have one. -- Scorpion 0422 00:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been noticing across a lot of biographies that the top of the infobox just above the picture is the name field. But with the wrestling articles a lot have the alias and not the real name of the person. Shouldn't it be the real persons name as there is a collection of aliases underneath? Govvy ( talk) 08:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say that this FLRC will probably be closed, soon. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone one else feel that these sections are meant for quick reference and thus should not be subjected to WP:OVERLINK much like PPV result tables? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 00:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Currently their is a proposal to add Wikipedia:Good topics as a policy, which is like Wikipedia:Featured topics, but instead of high/featured quality, they are of good quality, which can help the project with articles like WWE No Way Out and it's GAs, so I encourage the project to vote here in a straw poll.-- S R X 01:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
A little help, please? Talk:Glen Jacobs#Edit War. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 04:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
One user seems to have a thing for succession boxes. They have been added them for KOTR, GMs, RR winners and WWE Champions. As per consensus I have been removing them (as have others). But with so many other things up for discussion maybe now is the time to properly discuss them. I know the argument against them, and it seems to consist of "Jerry Lawler's page will be massive", or any other wrestler who has won twenty titles. And I'm not saying USWA reigns should be included, but if the list of successions was limited (to the top titles, WWE/WHC, Tag, IC/US, and Women's) then very few wrestlers' pages would be massive (Edge, Kane and Mick Foley would bloat because of Tag reigns). Or another alternative is the idea of a navbox with surnames, as an idea I offer these three pages. They all have massive succession boxes (15, 15 and 17) and also surname only navboxes at the foot. I would be in favour of some limited list of succession boxes but what do others think? Darrenhusted ( talk) 10:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I like them for commentator and for accomplishments like King of the Ring, Royal Rumble, Diva Search and Money in the Bank. But I don't think you should do it for titles. And Darrenhusted please sign your posts using 4~ thanks Adster95 ( talk) 10:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Surely IC and US aren't top titles, they're second tier? Anyhow, my feelings on succession boxes are ambivalent mainly because I see them for comics writers and you can never navigate your whole way through it. But if we were to have them, I wouldn't see a problem, like Adster said, for accomplishments like KoTR, Rumble and MiTB, perhaps King of the Mountain too, because they are annual events and thus the winners are limited, plus the winners are rarely repeated. Anyone who wrestled in the late '90s will have their page almost doubled in length. WWF Hardcore Champions tripled. Tony2Times ( talk) 21:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. Can you guys take a look at this thread on ANI, and maybe weigh in with your thoughts? I know that the editor in question was a member here, and that this whole issue revolved around the wikiproject here. Thoughts? - Alison ❤ 07:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The FAR was finished today, and I am happy to report that D2D is still an FA. D.M.N. ( talk) 15:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I strongly believe this article should be redirected to List of professional wrestling slang. It's just plain out of hand. The entire article is a series of point of view lists. This has encouraged other editors and IPs to add anyone who ever had a good (or bad) promo. All but one of the lists are also heavily skewed toward recent wrestlers. Nothing significant is actually stated in the article that isn't already included in entry for "promo" on the list of slang. Would anyone disagree with redirecting it? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 15:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
These two slang articles also seem unnecessary and could be merged into the slang list. Thoughts?-- Endless Dan 16:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
It strikes me that something like a promo is more significant than most of the terms in the list of wrestling slang. Could we not have a list of a wrestling slang, like there is, and then a seperate page or sub section, where the more common and frequently used terms, are elucidated. I don't know what the title of that article or sub section would be but I imagine it to read like the List of Professional Wrestling Match Types. Tony2Times ( talk) 21:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
What do you guys think of creating a HAU-like page for this project. For the same purposes, if users have questions and/or need help, we can point them to our own HAU list. If you guys think this might be a good idea, I created a list here of those who would probably be on the list. -- iMatthew T. C. 14:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
So does anybody have a problem with the establishment of a page like this? -- iMatthew T. C. 01:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Are these necessary? See: Elimination_chamber#Match_history, Iron_Man_match#Ironman_Match_history, Ladder match (most of the article is simply listing matches that have taken place for WWF/E, WCW, TNA and elsewhere), Ultimate_X_match#Ultimate_X_matches, these are just some examples. I would bet a majority of the match type articles list matches. I see this as both trivial and just clutter. I can understand an examples section, but a full on list isn't necessary. I'm not completely sure, but these might be violating Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory. RobJ1981 ( talk) 12:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I was thinking of whether this is a good idea? expanding over 20 years with over 100 celebs at the event, I think a list of them and their role and what they do could do good and then we can eliminate the horrible prose at WrestleMania#Celebrity involvement no?-- S R X 15:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Celebrity | Occupation | Appearance | Role | Refs |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aretha Franklin | Singer |
WrestleMania I WrestleMania 23 |
Sang renditions of " America the Beautiful" at both events. | [3][5][27] |
S R X 15:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I like this idea. It's definitely more information to add to the article, and since it branches outside of the PW industry, it could be considered quite notable. Hazardous Matt 16:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just opened up a new project subpage: Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Suggestions.
The page is for suggestions in improving the articles, and should be used for suggestions mainly about the new format. I mainly opened it to avoid the clutter on this talk page, and the constant repeated discussions. -- iMatthew T. C. 22:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Please somebody do something about this article. Glamarella. There is no way that this team is important yet. Also if it is because they won two belts to keep it then somebody better recreate Beer Money, Inc because they won the tag belts.-- Will C 03:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Evidently it has been deleted then recreated, I have redirected it but it could still be deleted. Darrenhusted ( talk) 15:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
After a request at RFPP, No Mercy (2008), Cyber Sunday (2008), Survivor Series (2008) and Armageddon (2008) have all been semi-protected till October 8th. D.M.N. ( talk) 07:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed a new layout for the commentators. To be frank, I hate the layout IMO. Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 16:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Commentary Team from Month Year to Month Year | ||
Play-By-Play | Color Commentary | Additional Commentary |
Vince McMahon | Rob Bartlett | Randy Savage |
Additional Information |
Why does this page lack an infobox. I attempted to create one, but could not get it right. I have the info saved (lightest, youngest, etc). If someone would be willing to add the infobox, let me know and I'll give you the info. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 04:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, guys can you possibly keep an eye on User:Samgibbs and his Anon IP... i have been trying to just take his edits as good faith and work wiht his changes to better the articles however it seem to be getting beyond a joke now he doesn't want to communicate (blanking talk page and not responding etc), he also seems to be working for Real Quality Wrestling.. mainly POV, removing of wikitags and references while performing other disruptive edits.. he seemingly wants to make the company and its sister promotions have a large presence on wikipedia with no regard for proper editing.. if some else could look into his actions it would be very much appreciated. --- Paulley ( talk) 08:46, 23 August 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 50 | ← | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | → | Archive 60 |
Hey everyone, I wanted to propose the idea of setting up quick result archives of wrestling TV programs such as TNA iMPACT!, TNA Xplosion, TNA Weekly PPV's, WWE RAW, WWE SmackDown!, WWE Velocity, WWE Heat, ECW on Sci Fi, ECW on TNN, Ring of Honor live events, WCW Monday Nitro, WCW Thunder, etc. Over the years I have collected this original data all on my own and I think it would be a great addition to Wikipedia.
It would look something like this for example:
TNA iMPACT!
October 1, 2005: Orlando, FL
• TNA X-Division Champion, AJ Styles defeated Roderick Strong, in a Non-Title Match.
• Monty Brown defeated Lex Lovett.
• Three-Way Match: Chris Sabin defeated Petey Williams and Alex Shelley.
• Jeff Hardy wrestled Rhino, to a no-contest.
Let me know what you all think. MC511 ( talk) 19:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I attempted to post a similar message above, but the very first comment of that discussion directed the discussion directly off track and left my request going un-noticed. My request asked for users (of this project) to do peer-like-reviews for December to Dismember (2006), and leave comments on the talkpage. It seems like it's going unnoticed that its currently undergoing an FAR, hence why I'm leaving a further comment to try and get you guys to comment on the article on the talkpage. D.M.N. ( talk) 07:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
By doing this...
I think that we should remove the "Pay-per-view chronology" and "Event chronology" from the infobox and into succession boxes. If we make the succession boxes, it would go in the external links section and look like this:
And the shortened infobox would look like this:
The Great American Bash (2005) | |
---|---|
Promotion | World Wrestling Entertainment |
Brand(s) | SmackDown! |
Date | July 24, 2005 |
City | Buffalo, New York |
Venue | HSBC Arena |
Attendance | 8,000 |
--
iMatthew
T.
C.
22:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
I hate to be the odd woman out, but I like having the last and next PPVs listed. As Darrenhusted said (somewhere), it is analogous to having all the episodes listed in the TV episode infobox. Removing the event chronology will make the infobox shorter, but I really think the other should stay. Nikki 311 01:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Well just and update on the FAC, no current votes of support of opposition, just comments on fixes, which is a good thing. But if we are going to do this, how are we going to apply this to future PPV events when their are IPs and Newbies always getting into a conflict over the consensus here. Suggestions?-- S R X 00:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Is the concern that people will create/expand new articles in a way other than the "consensus" here or that people will change articles that have been completed according to the "consensus"? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 19:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
How about we make a talk page banner and state the explanation of the new format and reference to WP:PW/MOS#PPV Guidelines or the New shortcut WP:PW/PPVG? S R X 03:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
We need an article page for TNA Spin Cycle. MC511 ( talk) 18:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
My bad. I misread your statement. I don't follow TNA (or current wrestling for that matter), but is this contest/segment/whatever really that notable? Fans submitting their own youtube videos?? -- Endless Dan 21:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not really active in this project anymore, but I do maintain my pet article Briscoe Brothers, and I've run into a problem with User:ROH Historian that....well, quite frankly, it's making me laugh my ass off (see his talk and mine {I've removed the comment, but it's in a past revision} for the lulz), but it's disruptive all the same. ROH Historian insists on the following text being in the article:
On August 1, 2008 in Manassas, VA The Briscoes defeated Sweet N'Sour Inc's Adam Pearce and Shane Hagadorn when Jay pinned Hagadorn following the Springboard Doomsday Device.
On August 2, 2008 in New York City they defeated The Vulture Squad (Ruckus and Jigsaw) when Mark pinned Jigsaw following the Springboard Doomsday Device.
Which is patently unnecessary and best covered by a single line referring to Mark's return to the active roster (which I've added......several times). User:Gavyn Sykes reverted ROH Historian once and included a comment tag discouraging the addition of the sort of material he was trying to put in, but obviously ROH Historian paid that no mind. He even called me editing out the above quoted text "vandalism," which is just sinfully hilarious.
Humor aside, this is still a problem that needs dealing with. Thanks for any help. Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 23:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Crap, look at his contributions. He's been doing this to easily a dozen different articles.
Tromboneguy0186 (
talk)
All right, I've trimmed down the excessive recentism that was in Kevin Steen and El Generico, Naomichi Marufuji, Claude Marrow, Go Shiozaki, Delirious (wrestler), Adam Pearce, Claudio Castagnoli (this article needs a lot of work, by the way, it is still heavily kayfabed-up), and Brent Albright. Other users had already done the same to Bryan Danielson, Larry Sweeney, Chris Hero, Austin Aries, and Motor City Machine Guns. These seem to be his targets. I did not edit The Age of the Fall, which similarly received attention from this goofball. I was unsure what, if anything, ought to be trimmed. Now, when/if this guy returns from his block, he's probably going to go right back to these articles. As I said at the top of this section, I'm not exactly active in this project any longer and to be a little blunt I don't particularly care to be. I'll be able to look after my own talk page (though thank you to the user who reverted the latest insane rantings the Historian posted there) and surely Briscoe Brothers, but if you don't want this sort of crap seeping into other WP:PW articles, you'd best keep an eye on the ones he's targeted, and probably more, to be frank. Tromboneguy0186 ( talk) 03:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
....we incorporate the "defeated" parameter into the television programs under the Champions section? See here, here, and here.-- S R X 03:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The same user also made WWE Title Holders which has since been redirected, and TNA Champions which I have now redirected. Darrenhusted ( talk) 13:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been a vocal critic of the OOU style of writing but accepting it briefly, I'd just like to ask why every PPV article now contains (or will contain) "The event starred wrestlers from the Raw and SmackDown! brands: storyline expansions of the promotion where employees are assigned to wrestling brands under the WWE banner." I don't really see how the branding thing is a storyline. The wrestlers are assigned to brands and they do wrestle almost exclusively on them. Sure, which brand they are on is arbitrated and not lottery, but that doesn't stop them wrestling on that brand. Could we not put show or programme instead of brand and cut out the explanation. In fact, now that all PPVs are non-brand exclusive, why do we even bother to put that on there? It's like saying this WWE event features [unsurprisingly] WWE wrestlers from all WWE shows. Obviously it needs to be said for the 2002-07 PPVs. Tony2Times ( talk) 13:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The new guidelines should take effect beginning inSeptember. Currently their are GAN's that are written in-universe, which will be the last ones to be in that format. After September, articles that are not out of universe, should not be able to go to GAN or FAC. This gives the project some time to get articles in shape. If anyone disagrees, say it here, we can extend the time period or if there is anything else wanting to be discussed.-- S R X 02:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the changes for all GA PPV articles will be gradual, hell, it's not going to happen overnight, it's a process it will take a while (I've got five PPV articles at GA - but I don't really wish to feel like I'm in a rush to do it otherwise they'll get the chop). D.M.N. ( talk) 07:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm sticking to my belief that all of this is being pushed too quickly without sufficient thought put into it. The current style of "Per this edit at a peer review, all pay-per-view articles must be changed to include this" doesn't work. I don't mean to criticize the editors who are trying to make the changes, but a quick glance at a few articles shows me that there are numerous problems:
These are a few of the more obvious problems I've seen. I think some of the recent changes are for the better, but I think some thought still needs to go into how to implement all of it (or perhaps just some of it). I'm also not trying to point out problems without proposing solutions, so I'm willing to discuss this. I just think someone needs to say something before all of the articles are changed. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 14:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Well I am currently on vacation, just found a computer. I will be able to help make the change to our GA's when I get back. Without going into detail, I agree with GCF, and I'd have to say some of this is just being taken to far. -- iMatthew T. C. 14:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess my main problem with all these changes that have been proposed, and now apparently will be incorporated in the PPV articles (at first) is the fact that we feel the need to have a "disclaimer" of what professional wrestling is all about. I'm from the school that most everyone knows what professional wrestling is (staged athletic combat with pre-determined match outcomes). If we were to say, for instance, "SummerSlam was a professional wrestling pay-per-view event," and then link professional wrestling, that would suffice. If someone wanted to find out about professional wrestling, they would just click on the link. Think of it this way: Take for instance the page about the Chicago Bulls basketball team. The current version, as I write this, does not have an explanation of what basketball is. By your arguments for putting the "disclaimer" in (to explain what professional wrestling is and to make it conform to good article and feature article status), the same should apparently be true for articles about professional basketball teams (putting in a disclaimer of what basketball is, purportedly to "help" the reader understand what basketball is). Yet, I highly doubt that anyone with the NBA basketball project would agree to that. The same would be true for, say, an article about an episode of the TV series M*A*S*H — nobody would publish a "disclaimer" in each article stating that M*A*S*H was set in the Korean War and that it centered on the lives of the members of the 4077th. Most people who link onto one of the M*A*S*H articles probably have some idea of the show's general premise. I just have a hard time believing that a "disclaimer" would only be necessary for professional wrestling articles, and not any other pop-culture medium. Do we have enough Wiki readers who believe everything they see in professioanl wrestling is real, thus making it necessary to include the "disclaimer"? I ask that seriously, because it definitely seems to have affected the way we introduce professional wrestling-related articles. I do think this apparent decision to place disclaimers at the beginning of articles — if only to make them featured articles and good article candidates — has been made too hastily, and yes, I realize not everyone has had time to or decided to participate. Sorry for the rant, but I had to weigh in on this, even though the issue has apparently been decided. [[ Briguy52748 ( talk) 03:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)]]
Hey i was expanding this in my Sandbox for a while. I'd just like to see if you's think its ok before I move it into main space. here it is Adster95 ( talk) 10:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
An article has been created for this team. I believe that by now, notablity has been established and the article can remain. Thoughts? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 02:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
The WWE roster page is now located at list of World Wrestling Entertainment employees. As this is the same type of article and the template has been set I move for this page to be moved to list of Total Nonstop Action Wrestling employees or move the WWE one to include the current part. They should be consistent. Thoughts? JakeDHS07 20:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anybody know if WWE.com's List This is voted for by the fans or just made up by the writers? Nikki 311 20:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
This in currently undergoing an AFD, which looks like it'll end in keep. Now, I think this article should be split like what we've been doing with PPV's. For the original run, from 1985 to 1992, I believe some storylines built up to the SNME events, which means it'd be easier to put information in, of course, it may be a bit harder for the recent SNME events, but it is still "do-able". Of cause, we don't have to do it all at once, one at a time like with PPV's. But overall, I think it is a completely feasable option to split them into "PPV style" articles. Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 14:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've created the "!poll" to see what you guys think about splitting them into event articles like with PPV's. D.M.N. ( talk) 09:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I guess WWE wants to see what TNA is made of, they have changed their date for Armageddon (2008) to December 14. This is also the same day as Turning Point (2008), TNA's December ppv. Should we acknowledge this in the articles or just wait to see if WWE or TNA changes the dates of their ppvs? P.S. I hope they don't change anything.-- Will C 22:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
If the iMPACT vs ECWWE event was anything to go by, it's TNA PXK T /C 00:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Anyone got any article picture requests? PXK T /C 23:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Roxxi could use a pic of her bald. An in-ring shot of Abyss would be nice. A pic of Karen Angle that doesn't include Kurt. Tomko also needs a pic, but he may left the company. The ring announcer, Dave Penzer needs a pic, as does Hermie Sadler if he's there. The referee, Mark "Slick" Johnson as well. And a pice of Creed in TNA could work too. And a pic of Christopher Daniels as Curry Man would be great. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 00:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm going now, wish me luck (and look out for me, I'm the emo in the AJ Styles shirt and brown hoodie) PXK T /C 15:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
well that sucked. After I saved the second day of my pass for the iMPACT tapings, when I got in Studios they said its moved to tomorrow. This "free" TNA show is gonna cost me another 1 day, 1 park pass. PXK T /C 02:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I just read the Signpost's coverage of WikiProject Military History, and it mentioned their lead co-ordinator. I was just wondering if we have one, and if so, who it is. Thanks, Genius101 Wizard ( talk) 20:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm just wondering - how many people !vote on a specific article, but don't work on in? If someone supports a certain article, surely it means that they want it promoted to the COTW so that they can work on it? 6 people !voted for Gail Kim, yet only one of the six has made constructive edits to it, while 6 people !voted for The Kliq, yet only two of the six have made constructive edits to it. Out of everyone that is "voting" on the COTW's, only one user (who I'm not pointing out whom, because it's obvious from the article history) is trying to improve the articles (me also on the Kliq - I didn't vote for Kim because I'm not really interested in TNA). I think this is unfair, people are !voting for certain articles, yet don't actually contribute during the 2 weeks as COTW. I mean, what's the point of the COTW, if only one or two editors are going to work on in - it serves no point. If all the 6 users were going to edit it, fair enough but if only two editors are going to work on it; it's pointless, and unfair to the users in question who dedicate their time working while the other editors that supported the article don't contribute whatsoever to improve it. D.M.N. ( talk) 19:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Someone has decided to mark the article with WWE revisionism once again and claim that all reigns prior to Shane Douglas' throwdown of the NWA Title aren't recognized or official. TonyFreakinAlmeida ( talk) 20:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to know if we can not put the Wrestler's/Diva's real name in parenthesis inside the table for matches. I think it clutters it up and since we have to look in the Event Section to see how the match was won, we should just look in the Background/Event/Aftermath sections for their real names. Qwerty36095 ( talk) 20:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Right now there are two WWE Championships at ANC that have been on there for over a month now, and their is support for the move but their are votes for opposition (but less than support). So this can be fair, the survey needs more opinions before it's archive, I highly plead the project to vote in this survey. P.S. The renaming is for the World Heavyweight Championship (WWE) and World Tag Team Championship (WWE).-- S R X 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Somebody keeps adding an extra day to Mickie James' reign length. Camelglue22 ( talk) 20:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I got lots of pics to upload when I get home. Taylor, yup. Roxxi, wasn't there. Kong, the Camera guy got in the way. Abbys, I got a backstage pic of HIS REAL FACE! WIN! Brother Ray tried to steal my hat to throw away (Watch this part, the camera goes right close up) JJ, back stage pic.
LOOK AWAY NOW!
Matt Morgan and Abyss formed a team, AJ and Kurt had a match for the medal, when the ref got knocked out, Stings music hit and Angle had a bat (he took it from the ring post) when the blackout stopped. Then as he was about to hit this wrestler's music hit and a second blackout gave AJ his signature weapon. But the most important event was me donating a dollar to Sonjay's "Save your damn gimmick" fund. (as I called it) -- PXK T /C 01:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Even though there are many discussions about the opposition of the new out of universe pay-per-view (PPV) article format, If there are any members of the project that need help or need a copyedit to their PPV articles to remove wrestling jargon or to aid in rewording to avoid wrestling jargon, just drop a note on my talk page ;)-- S R X 00:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey I can't find anything to put in the reception paragraph for Vengeance 2002 I'm User:Adster95/sandbox nearly done though if anyone would like to help i'd much appreciate it! Adster95 ( talk) 14:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Any better? Adster95 ( talk) 18:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, we need to make a banner or something now to tell people to leave the lead and background on PPVs alone. I'm tired of people removing the stuff from the lead and background on Hard Justice (2008), I got so fed up with it I'm now working on it in my sandbox. Also their doing it to No Surrender (2008) and the build for it doesn't start till Thursday. We've had to protect SummerSlam (2008) and Hard Justice because of this. Unless we want to keep dealing with this for many more weeks or months, I suggest we make something that tells them to quit, because I've told a few about the changes and they go right on and remove it again.-- Will C 22:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, can someone please do a copyedit on Lockdown (2008), I haven't got alot of time to work on it much anymore. It is under GA review and if the problems aren't fixed on its talk page then it will fail and I don't want that. The problems are mainly the new out of universe thing and brung it too much into detail. Someone please help me out because I'm not good at explaining it shorter, I really hate the article now.-- Will C 19:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
[1]-- S R X 23:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to attempt to take Matt Sydal out of universe and have run into a snag. Two wrestlers mentioned on his page Delirious and Daizee Haze have no real known names. They are known only by their ring names and no reliable source I can find reports their actual names. So, what to do? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 02:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I know that per this, we are to name the events with the year in paranthesis, but in some article we only use that title in the infobox and the lead and thats it. After that we use the title without the paranthesis, like SummerSlam 2003. Then in other articles we mention other PPV events, we write them as SummerSlam 2003 and not SummerSlam (2003). So what's wrong here, the policy or the way it is written?-- S R X 13:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't you rate the article better than a Start rating? Govvy ( talk) 12:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I have mentioned it before and on it's talk page ages ago, but again, the references and external links are very poor and need fixing up for him. Govvy ( talk) 12:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah step by step, but when did we incorporate the consensus about the PPV box? No consensus was built on that. S R X 00:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
We could remove both chronology's, and add the PPV chronology to the "See also" sections. In SummerSlam (2008), the "See also" section would include links to: List of WWE pay-per-view events, SummerSlam, The Great American Bash (2008), and Unforgiven (2008). -- iMatthew T. C. 01:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
and have nothing in the info box. Like so=
Sacrifice (2008) | |
---|---|
[[File::TNA Sacrifice 2008.jpg|frameless|upright=1]] | |
Promotion | Total Nonstop Action Wrestling |
Date | May 11, 2008 |
City | Orlando, Florida |
Venue | Impact! Zone |
Attendance | 900 |
Tagline(s) | What Are You Willing to Sacrifice?" "Are You Willing to Give Up What Means The Most? |
It looks nice and doesn't distract from the page. That is what I'm for if no one knew already.--
Will
C
03:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if there was any interest here in having a project specific IRC channel so that we would be able to discuss project related things. Several other projects do have them, and if there is interest, perhaps we should have one. -- Scorpion 0422 00:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been noticing across a lot of biographies that the top of the infobox just above the picture is the name field. But with the wrestling articles a lot have the alias and not the real name of the person. Shouldn't it be the real persons name as there is a collection of aliases underneath? Govvy ( talk) 08:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say that this FLRC will probably be closed, soon. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone one else feel that these sections are meant for quick reference and thus should not be subjected to WP:OVERLINK much like PPV result tables? Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 00:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Currently their is a proposal to add Wikipedia:Good topics as a policy, which is like Wikipedia:Featured topics, but instead of high/featured quality, they are of good quality, which can help the project with articles like WWE No Way Out and it's GAs, so I encourage the project to vote here in a straw poll.-- S R X 01:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
A little help, please? Talk:Glen Jacobs#Edit War. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 04:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
One user seems to have a thing for succession boxes. They have been added them for KOTR, GMs, RR winners and WWE Champions. As per consensus I have been removing them (as have others). But with so many other things up for discussion maybe now is the time to properly discuss them. I know the argument against them, and it seems to consist of "Jerry Lawler's page will be massive", or any other wrestler who has won twenty titles. And I'm not saying USWA reigns should be included, but if the list of successions was limited (to the top titles, WWE/WHC, Tag, IC/US, and Women's) then very few wrestlers' pages would be massive (Edge, Kane and Mick Foley would bloat because of Tag reigns). Or another alternative is the idea of a navbox with surnames, as an idea I offer these three pages. They all have massive succession boxes (15, 15 and 17) and also surname only navboxes at the foot. I would be in favour of some limited list of succession boxes but what do others think? Darrenhusted ( talk) 10:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I like them for commentator and for accomplishments like King of the Ring, Royal Rumble, Diva Search and Money in the Bank. But I don't think you should do it for titles. And Darrenhusted please sign your posts using 4~ thanks Adster95 ( talk) 10:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Surely IC and US aren't top titles, they're second tier? Anyhow, my feelings on succession boxes are ambivalent mainly because I see them for comics writers and you can never navigate your whole way through it. But if we were to have them, I wouldn't see a problem, like Adster said, for accomplishments like KoTR, Rumble and MiTB, perhaps King of the Mountain too, because they are annual events and thus the winners are limited, plus the winners are rarely repeated. Anyone who wrestled in the late '90s will have their page almost doubled in length. WWF Hardcore Champions tripled. Tony2Times ( talk) 21:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. Can you guys take a look at this thread on ANI, and maybe weigh in with your thoughts? I know that the editor in question was a member here, and that this whole issue revolved around the wikiproject here. Thoughts? - Alison ❤ 07:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The FAR was finished today, and I am happy to report that D2D is still an FA. D.M.N. ( talk) 15:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I strongly believe this article should be redirected to List of professional wrestling slang. It's just plain out of hand. The entire article is a series of point of view lists. This has encouraged other editors and IPs to add anyone who ever had a good (or bad) promo. All but one of the lists are also heavily skewed toward recent wrestlers. Nothing significant is actually stated in the article that isn't already included in entry for "promo" on the list of slang. Would anyone disagree with redirecting it? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 15:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
These two slang articles also seem unnecessary and could be merged into the slang list. Thoughts?-- Endless Dan 16:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
It strikes me that something like a promo is more significant than most of the terms in the list of wrestling slang. Could we not have a list of a wrestling slang, like there is, and then a seperate page or sub section, where the more common and frequently used terms, are elucidated. I don't know what the title of that article or sub section would be but I imagine it to read like the List of Professional Wrestling Match Types. Tony2Times ( talk) 21:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
What do you guys think of creating a HAU-like page for this project. For the same purposes, if users have questions and/or need help, we can point them to our own HAU list. If you guys think this might be a good idea, I created a list here of those who would probably be on the list. -- iMatthew T. C. 14:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
So does anybody have a problem with the establishment of a page like this? -- iMatthew T. C. 01:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Are these necessary? See: Elimination_chamber#Match_history, Iron_Man_match#Ironman_Match_history, Ladder match (most of the article is simply listing matches that have taken place for WWF/E, WCW, TNA and elsewhere), Ultimate_X_match#Ultimate_X_matches, these are just some examples. I would bet a majority of the match type articles list matches. I see this as both trivial and just clutter. I can understand an examples section, but a full on list isn't necessary. I'm not completely sure, but these might be violating Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory. RobJ1981 ( talk) 12:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I was thinking of whether this is a good idea? expanding over 20 years with over 100 celebs at the event, I think a list of them and their role and what they do could do good and then we can eliminate the horrible prose at WrestleMania#Celebrity involvement no?-- S R X 15:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Celebrity | Occupation | Appearance | Role | Refs |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aretha Franklin | Singer |
WrestleMania I WrestleMania 23 |
Sang renditions of " America the Beautiful" at both events. | [3][5][27] |
S R X 15:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I like this idea. It's definitely more information to add to the article, and since it branches outside of the PW industry, it could be considered quite notable. Hazardous Matt 16:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just opened up a new project subpage: Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Suggestions.
The page is for suggestions in improving the articles, and should be used for suggestions mainly about the new format. I mainly opened it to avoid the clutter on this talk page, and the constant repeated discussions. -- iMatthew T. C. 22:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Please somebody do something about this article. Glamarella. There is no way that this team is important yet. Also if it is because they won two belts to keep it then somebody better recreate Beer Money, Inc because they won the tag belts.-- Will C 03:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Evidently it has been deleted then recreated, I have redirected it but it could still be deleted. Darrenhusted ( talk) 15:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
After a request at RFPP, No Mercy (2008), Cyber Sunday (2008), Survivor Series (2008) and Armageddon (2008) have all been semi-protected till October 8th. D.M.N. ( talk) 07:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed a new layout for the commentators. To be frank, I hate the layout IMO. Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 16:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Commentary Team from Month Year to Month Year | ||
Play-By-Play | Color Commentary | Additional Commentary |
Vince McMahon | Rob Bartlett | Randy Savage |
Additional Information |
Why does this page lack an infobox. I attempted to create one, but could not get it right. I have the info saved (lightest, youngest, etc). If someone would be willing to add the infobox, let me know and I'll give you the info. Gavyn Sykes ( talk) 04:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, guys can you possibly keep an eye on User:Samgibbs and his Anon IP... i have been trying to just take his edits as good faith and work wiht his changes to better the articles however it seem to be getting beyond a joke now he doesn't want to communicate (blanking talk page and not responding etc), he also seems to be working for Real Quality Wrestling.. mainly POV, removing of wikitags and references while performing other disruptive edits.. he seemingly wants to make the company and its sister promotions have a large presence on wikipedia with no regard for proper editing.. if some else could look into his actions it would be very much appreciated. --- Paulley ( talk) 08:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)